In my mind, the bigest sticking point in the abortion discussion has been when and how a fetus counts as being human and alive.

For the moment a fetus is more than an elaborate fingernail, abortion becomes active involutary euthanasia, which most would regard as murder.

Now there is more is more evidence that fetuses are capable of things that we normally associate only with living adults: reproduction.

Imagine this macabre scene: soon after an irresponsible evening, a young woman finds she is pregnant. She doesn't want to be a mother, but feels guilty about ending the pregancy, so she delays. In the fifth month, she finally decides to have an abortion. In all the forms, there is one she signs that allows the fetus to be used for scientific research.

A second couple has been trying to have a child unsucessfully for years. They are ready to try anything, and they do. The ovaries of the aborted fetus are removed and the eggs are extracted, then implanted in the barren woman's womb.

Fetuses are aborted every day and can legally be aborted because the courts have believed the scientists who have said that the fetuses are not viable. But who is more viable? The barren woman or the fertile fetus?

Also interesting is the article's mention of fetuses who are aborted because of severe deformations: they also appear to be fertile.

This is in response to MsGeek's recent "Liar, Liar..." journal entry on slashdot. I would have placed it as a comment in her journal, but she's disabled it to block the junk. I thought about emailing her this response, but then I decided it was better suited to a journal entry of my own.

I disagree with MsGeek's conclusion that Bush and Clinton have made equally reprehensible fabrications.

First, while it is clear that Clinton knew that his statements about sex were patently false, it is not clear at this point that Bush sought to deceive with his comments.

If indeed it does come out later that Bush knew that there likely were no weapons of mass destruction and sought to convince the country to go to war anyway, then I would definitely support the impeachment of Bush.

There are however many possible explanations for why Bush may have said what he did. Here are a few I have conjured up. I'm sure you can think of more.

1. Bush advisers are involved in a plot to take down Sadaam at all costs and lied to Bush.
2. Bush administration was deceived by informants who were funded by enemies of Sadaam.
3. Bush administration was not deceived, but came to a conclusion too early and then fashioned the evidence to support their early conclusion without looking for contradictory evidence.

Now let me say that even though I voted for Bush and am mostly in agreement with the Republican Party, given the information that came out publicly, I did not think going to war was a good idea. I believe that a country, just like an individual, should be able to own whatever weapons it sees as necessary for its own defense. Furthermore, this designation of "weapons of mass destruction" is artificial and disingenuous. More destruction can be caused by a conventional bomb dropped in a big city than by most biological weapons. I did not believe that Sadaam was ever a clear and present danger or that the risk of Al-Quaeda stealing weapons from Sadaam was ever very high. They would have better luck stealing from Russia.

So why did Bush go to war? I don't know. I'm convinced it wasn't oil. We get 1% of our oil from Iraq and 6% from Venezuela. It would be far more advantageous to send our troops there to end the strike and regain that 6%.

I did support the impeachment of Clinton. A president that has no problem lying to the American people (whether the lie is about something important or inconsequential) is a threat to democracy and has no business being the leader of the free world. But it was more than lying. We had a president who was a lawyer and knew the importance of truthful witnesses who had no qualms about subverting that system and perjuring himself in court. A habitual liar who perverts our justice system has no business being the chief law enforcement officer.

I have been subpoenaed.

Some Columbus city plough truck ran into my parked car a few weeks ago. He's trying to contest the "failure to control" charges in court.

This isn't the first time he's been charged for this. There is also a case from 1999 on record. The case was dismissed, but I can't help but wonder why it was dismissed and whether there were any merits to the case.

The present case is set to convene on Thursday, March 13.

I don't know what good I could possibly do as a witness. I wasn't there; I was at work. The car is already sold, and I already have the money from the insurance.

I was trying to decide between selling and repairing the car because 3rd gear was bad. It's a manual transmission, so still drivable without 3rd. I finally decided to sell and put an ad in the paper and it sold very quickly. I was surprised that anyone would actually buy it with high miles, broken airconditioning, bad transmission as well as several small dents (including the one from the plough). It sold for $500. Repairing or replacing the transmission would have been at least $800.

It was only a small dent on one door, and I only got about $180 from insurance (almost the amount of the lowest estimate - $220). Of course, the city is under sovereign immunity, so my insurance had to cover the damage.

I also managed to get a parking ticket out of the deal. I was parked the wrong direction. I live in a court, and have been parking that direction for years without any problems. People all over my neighborhood park funny directions in courts. I just happened to get ticketted because I was involved in an accident (even though my direction was in no way germane to the accident).

At the least, this experience should be educational. I have never been subpoenaed before, and the only other time I went to the courthouse was in highschool for a fieldtrip.

-----

On a different note, I still haven't recieved any satisfactory answers to the question posed in my last journal entry. So if anyone knows the answer, I'd like to hear it.

When I was in third or fourth grade and learning multiplication tables, someone brought in a record of some songs to help us learn the tables. someone else made a tape of the whole thing and gave it to each of us to practice at home.

Now I am wanting to buy a recording of these songs (any media, but CD preferred). The problem is, I have no idea where these songs came from. I don't know who is singing/talking, who is playing the instruments, what the title of the thing was or anything.

Hopefully you can help. I have made mp3s from the tape and put them on my website. Listen to them and comment below with anything that might help.

Here are the links:
Each group does A times 1 through A times 12, where A is 2 through 12. I have titled the links by A.
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Seven
Eight
Nine
Ten
Eleven
Twelve