Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [OT] political action call

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Neil Stevens <address@hidden>

    > On Tuesday June 22, 2004 1:53 am, Tom Lord wrote:
    > > And, if any of you have any insight into what early 20th century
    > > intellectuals in Germany should have done to prevent the establishment
    > > and multi-year operation of a facist state, please give me a clue.
    > > I'm sure that this minor post isn't the most effective alternative.
    > > Maybe within 10 years it will mean my death.

    > If you're going to compare anyone with the Nazis, try the Democrats, who 
    > insists that we must kill our young in the name of "science" and "a 
    > woman's right to choose."

Congratulations.  You have correctly identified some "wedge issues" in
USian politics.  From this, any of us may correctly infer that you
either watch tv, read the newspaper, listen to the radio, or are
connected to a community of discourse that is concerned with those
issues.   

The popular media blathers incessantly about those issues and, indeed,
it is _on_the_basis_ of stem-cell issues and abortion issues that many
voters will decide their votes.  Not that they will vote consistently
with their value systems --- by no means --- but that they will
naively see the presidentail choices as a black and white issue,
decidable on the basis of those issues, with no other issues being
worth considering.

Let's please try to skip a long debate on the issues of small clusters
of cells that might or might not turn into a human being.  I would
agree with you this far: those are complicated issues invoking genuine
moral concerns.  Sometimes abortion is wrong.  Sometims stem-cell
resarch is wrong.  Both are very serious actions that should not be
taken lightly.  But please note this:

You may be opposed to stem-cell research and to some or all forms of
abortion.  Yet, are you willing to create a truly facist state to
enforce your beliefs on those issues?  Aren't you concerned about
collateral damage?  People who are polarized by the issues you cite
are fools because, once those issues are settled, they are the next in
line for gov'tal abuse.  Have you considered that, regardless of your
beliefs about where to draw the line on those issues, perhaps the
federal gov't of the U.S. is _not_ the right forum in which to resolve
them?  That's the only right answer: it's none of the fed's damn
business except for their power to assert that it's not the states'
business either.

Are you aware, btw, that the "founding fathers" of the U.S. lived in a
society that had abortion technologies?  Do you think that they were
not aware of that?  Why do you suppose they were silent on the issue?
Was it only because women were effectively chattel from the federal
perspective and, hence, their owner-husbands could control "the
abortion problem"?  Or was it, rather, that abortion has been a
millenium-long part of human culture and, thus, was presumed to be a
fundamental aspect of life, hardly worth noticing?


    > If you're going to cmpare anyone with Hitler, try Saddam Hussein, who 
    > attempted genocide on the Kurds and Marsh Arabs of Iraq.

I'm sorry you are such an incompetent debater --- otherwise I would
give you more uptake.

You are trying to imply, without having to own up to saying, that I am
an apologist for Saddam Hussein.  Given your insanity, I'm sorry, but
I can't help you.


    > If you're going to compare anyone with the Nazis, try the radical 
    > Islamofascists, who divide up the world into humans and sub-humans 
    > (including Jews) just as the Nazis did.

Well, gosh, if I am, in your view, to be a defender of Islamic
fundamentalists, simply because I reject the current USian admin's
take on domestic civil rights, what then are you who would happily
sacrifice domestic liberty to further impose your agenda?

Godwin was wrong,
-t