Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
virginia mom
Published Letters: 19
Martha's right. Stop beating up on the Democrats.
Anyone who thinks that supporting the right to choose is an all or nothing proposition is either or both of (1) a knee-jerk idealogue; (2) ignorant of biology. I also might add (3), not a mother.
I am a mother who subsequently chose abortion because of life circumstances. Obviously, I support the right to choose for whatever reason -- but, at the risk of echoing the reasoning of the hapless and maligned old men who did the best they could in Roe v. Wade, the timing really does make a difference. At X weeks, you are talking about an insensate cluster of cells. At X+Y weeks, you are talking about something with head, limbs, and vital organs. At some point, you ARE talking about an actual baby.
I don't know where the line should be drawn. All I know is, there is one.
I agree 100% with those who have written that the opportunistic scum that rule this country couldn't give two s**ts about life of any kind other than their own and (speaking of parasites) the teeming carcasses of corruption that sustain it. I also, and most wholeheartedly, am disgusted beyond expression by their indifference to the suffering of living, breathing children everywhere. Finally, I agree that if you apply any kind of principled priority to the mess we are in, abstract discussions about when life begins is low on the list.
My point is just that we can't, as rational beings, dismiss abortion as a moral issue on the ground of political expediency. If we do, we are no better than they are.
That gracious little turn of phrase speaks volumes about the quality of "reporting" set forth in this article.
Shame on you, Salon.
I meant to say that heddache1 is totally right. Stop attacking this woman who is in so much pain for (from what appears) no other reason than that she's a human being who made human choices. Have a little kindness.
That, or go drink yourselves a pint of blood -- some of you sound really thirsty.
This race ain't been run. Some of us who live in Virginia care passionately about the outcome, and wish you didn't sound quite so much like your money's on George.
This account of the conversation is not completely accurate. See the front page of today's Washington Post for Webb's rejoinder, "That's between me and my boy, Mr. President."
Webb ROCKS.
you've said it all. How dare ANYONE judge these people, who has not been in their position of lifelong responsibility for a helpless child.
P2P is copyright infringement under the applicable federal statute. No one except the copyright holder (c-o-p-y-r-i-g-h-t) has the right to copy or distribute.
None of the other major movie studios (besides Disney) will sell a digital download to anything other than a proprietary box, i.e., a set-top (cable) box.
Artist generally do not own the copyright -- the record label does. None of the major labels are asking for DRM-free, because that would detract from their sales. It is true that artists, especially new artists, crave DRM-free, because it would be free distribution of their music to make them famous. However, once they sign with a major label (another indicia of success), the label generally owns the copyright and therefore calls the shots.
Re "roach hotel" -- when you copy from a CD to iTunes, you still own the CD.
Copyright law gives the copyright holder the right to grant or deny any terms for copying to anyone (subject to fair use rights). Therefore, if a record label negotiates a condition with a distributor, such as Apple, that condition is enforceable as a matter of contract law.
Finally, request support for the assertion that music purchased from Microsoft for playing on the Zune can also be played on other players.
Not to mention that jaw dropping barrage of Rovian dreck about the Libby case that appears on the editorial page today.
Yes, we remember Sadam -- the "crazy guy" that these people sucked up to back in the days when he was useful to them. They rushed him into a hangman's noose precisely in order to prevent history from being written.
was by those crazed "base" zealots who wouldn't let poor little Harriet on the Supreme Court where she belonged. That would've kept her out of trouble.
please, PLEASE take that horrible face off the front page.
Thank you for pointing out that the Democrats are not bloody MAGICIANS with respect to passing legislation. Of course they don't have the numbers to pass anything controversial, and I am sick and tired of that point being ignored.....especially by Republicans who accomplished less than zero of the "people's business" in six years of solid control.
is SO screwed by Iraq. And he knows it. There is just a real poetic beauty in the way his suck up to this administration on his hoped-for way to the white house is ultimately going to doom his candidacy.
No, not bothered --outraged. Be very f****g outraged.
This may seem like a trivial thing to some, but Jane Austen was one of the greatest women writers who ever lived. It's absolutely deplorable for anyone to try to market her as some 18th century Jackie Collins.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
