Re: Look on my works, ye mighty...
Dave said: Shelly apparently wrote this poem in a kind of competition with poet Horace Smith, whose poem covers the same colossal wreck with nothing of Shelly's mystery and mastery. As an aside, Ozymandias is a corruption of Usermaatre, one of the names of Ramesses II, the Great. The image of the statue and the quote attached to it derive from the description of the statue at Ramesses' mortuary template on the west bank at Thebes by Diodorus Siculus. (Shelly was probably inspired to write the poem by seeing a smaller head of Memnon [a name erroneously applied to Ramesses] that had recently arrived in Britain, and by modern descriptions of Ramesses' temple which had started to arrive from travellers to Egypt.) Ironically, ancient Egypt, despite some periods of political disunity, never suffered from a Diamond-style collapse and endured for over three thousand years. It took a further thousand years of foreign domination by Persians, Greeks and Romans for its culture to be gradually eroded, and then finally finished off by the onslaught of the Christians. Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RIP Aku
http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=170988 - Respect is fine, but actually I've always wanted to be feared. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Charlie Bell wrote: Very easily. _Homo technologia_ could be the next step, if they form a separate breeding group from baseline humans. Yes, and this separate breed will have no males :-P Species change and branch and fade. That's how it is. Ok. We're not any different, No, we _are_ different. nor are we subjected to different biological or physical laws to any other animal. Physical, yes. Biological, no. The evolutionary pressure on humans - despite some heroes that get the Darwin Award - is quite low. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 26/07/2006, at 8:42 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Charlie Bell wrote: Very easily. _Homo technologia_ could be the next step, if they form a separate breeding group from baseline humans. Yes, and this separate breed will have no males :-P Species change and branch and fade. That's how it is. Ok. We're not any different, No, we _are_ different. Species change and branch and fade, including us. nor are we subjected to different biological or physical laws to any other animal. Physical, yes. Biological, no. Huh? Do you mean what you said, or do you mean Physical, I agree, Biological I don't. The evolutionary pressure on humans - despite some heroes that get the Darwin Award - is quite low. It may be low (although I'd like to see some science backing up that assertion), but it's precisely the same process and principle. We obfuscate it, and we use technology to help people survive who would not have, but that doesn't say anything about selection pressure. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Charlie Bell wrote: We're not any different, No, we _are_ different. Species change and branch and fade, including us. nor are we subjected to different biological or physical laws to any other animal. Physical, yes. Biological, no. Huh? Do you mean what you said, or do you mean Physical, I agree, Biological I don't. Yes - but I think I said that. Didn't I? What did I say? The evolutionary pressure on humans - despite some heroes that get the Darwin Award - is quite low. It may be low (although I'd like to see some science backing up that assertion), but it's precisely the same process and principle. We obfuscate it, and we use technology to help people survive who would not have, but that doesn't say anything about selection pressure. If Biological Law is the survival of the more fit, then we don't obey this Law. Sometimes, what happens is the survival of the _less_ fit. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Alberto said: If Biological Law is the survival of the more fit, then we don't obey this Law. Sometimes, what happens is the survival of the _less_ fit. In particular situations that's always been the case: sometimes the fitter get unlucky and sometimes the less fit get lucky. It's all a matter of probabilities. But more importantly, it's really better to talk about more adapted and less adapted. What's happening is that human society is part of the environment against which genes are selected, and recently that particular part of the environment has changed in ways which change what it means to be well or poorly adapted. There's no absolute, environment-independent set of characteristics that define fitness, and this is more obvious when using the language of adaptation. Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Richard Baker wrote: If Biological Law is the survival of the more fit, then we don't obey this Law. Sometimes, what happens is the survival of the _less_ fit. In particular situations that's always been the case: sometimes the fitter get unlucky and sometimes the less fit get lucky. It's all a matter of probabilities. Yes, but in the long run, etc. But more importantly, it's really better to talk about more adapted and less adapted. What's happening is that human society is part of the environment against which genes are selected, and recently that particular part of the environment has changed in ways which change what it means to be well or poorly adapted. There's no absolute, environment-independent set of characteristics that define fitness, and this is more obvious when using the language of adaptation. So you seem to imply that the positive selective pressure that tends, nowadays, to favour sociopathic and ecocidical behaviours is just the selection of the more adapted? Which means that we are converging to a future with a totally different culture, one where everybody will use all means - including murder or destruction of the environment - to get a chance to reproduce? Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 26/07/2006, at 9:06 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Physical, yes. Biological, no. Huh? Do you mean what you said, or do you mean Physical, I agree, Biological I don't. Yes - but I think I said that. Didn't I? What did I say? I wasn't sure, that's why I asked. The evolutionary pressure on humans - despite some heroes that get the Darwin Award - is quite low. It may be low (although I'd like to see some science backing up that assertion), but it's precisely the same process and principle. We obfuscate it, and we use technology to help people survive who would not have, but that doesn't say anything about selection pressure. If Biological Law is the survival of the more fit, then we don't obey this Law. Sometimes, what happens is the survival of the _less_ fit. That's not what I mean by biological laws. I mean the total sum of biological principles that make up biology. Including evolution. We're just as subject to selection, it's just the fitness criteria that change. Survival of the fittest is a glib soundbite that utterly fails to capture what evolution really is. It's like saying metal woman when you're talking about the Statue Of Liberty (either of them). Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Look on my works, ye mighty...
Dave Land wrote: ... The above quote is from Shelly's poem Ozymandus: ... Forgive an old English major a moment with one of my favorite works... ... The words, stamp'd on these lifeless things, are an aside. The line says that the sculptor well read the passions that have survived both the hand of the sculptor which captured them and the heart of the ruler that fed them. Damn, Shelly was good. Good post. Yes, I like Shelly too. ... In Egypt's sandy silence, all alone, Stands a gigantic Leg, which far off throws The only shadow that the Desert knows: — I am great OZYMANDIAS, saith the stone, ... Ouch! This one strains to rhyme so much it hurts to read it. ---David Roses are red Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: RIP Aku
The Fool wrote: http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=170988 Not to mention Uncle Iroh, the coolest old guy in cartoon history. Jim Firebending Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] So souls can be combined as well as created? Or do identical twins share a soul? The ones I have met have each had their own soul, and from all accounts, that's even true of conjoined twins. The rule may be, one soul per functioning head. Pat ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Pat said: The ones I have met have each had their own soul, and from all accounts, that's even true of conjoined twins. The rule may be, one soul per functioning head. How can you tell the difference between something that looks like a person and has a soul and something that looks like a person and doesn't? Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
Old news, unfortunately... Damon. Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: Trumpeter's Marder I auf GW 38(h) Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. -Original Message- From: Gary Nunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 22:38:26 To:Brin Mail List brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low. It's with a heavy heart that I must report the SciFi Channel has sunk to a new all time low. I can only guess that SciFi Channel felt as if they had to do one worse than Tremors: The Series, and Scare Tactics. [Deep sigh here] As I type this, the SciFi Channel is showing professional wrestling. Gary Who just doesn't have the heart to create a witty closing line after this traumatic event. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
AFAIK ECW was a spur-of-the-moment thing, and the only network that had an open slot was Sci-Fi. It instantly became one of (if not THE) top-rated show... Damon. Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: Trumpeter's Marder I auf GW 38(h) Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. -Original Message- From: Matt Grimaldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 21:58:12 To:Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low. How about a little pure speculation? Maybe an executive, knowing he was about to get canned at TNT, quickly transferred to SciFi and took his pet show(s) with him. It must be a consipriacy between the professional wrestlers and the Who wants to be a superhero show. I'm shocked and amazed that they somehow roped Stan Lee into the whole tawdry affair. -- Matt - Original Message From: Gary Nunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Brin Mail List brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 7:38:26 PM Subject: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low. It's with a heavy heart that I must report the SciFi Channel has sunk to a new all time low. I can only guess that SciFi Channel felt as if they had to do one worse than Tremors: The Series, and Scare Tactics. [Deep sigh here] As I type this, the SciFi Channel is showing professional wrestling. Gary Who just doesn't have the heart to create a witty closing line after this traumatic event. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Off-Topic: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
[WARNING: OFF-TOPIC ALERT!!! - SEE BELOW AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!] Pat wrote: The ones I have met have each had their own soul, and from all accounts, that's even true of conjoined twins. The rule may be, one soul per functioning head. Experiences with people who have the two brain hemispheres separated suggest that there are two souls for each head - whatever that means :-) [WARNING: OFF-TOPIC ALERT!!!] Kiln People has some nice discussions about the uniqueness of the soul Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
From: Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pat said: The ones I have met have each had their own soul, and from all accounts, that's even true of conjoined twins. The rule may be, one soul per functioning head. How can you tell the difference between something that looks like a person and has a soul and something that looks like a person and doesn't? Rich That gets us into defining the difference, if any, betweem :soul, personality, and mind. Does a lifebonded soulmate type married couple have one soul between them? All I can say is that thet were all very clearly different individuals to me. As for the something that looks like a person and doesn't have a soul, I think the answer would have to be if they are capable of making a free moral choice, even on the level of a small child. This is, of course, absent coercion, which introduces other factors. You read about the sort of sociopath who appears to have no understanding whatsoever of morality. And please let's not digress into the various forms of morality or contrasting morality = 'following the rules' vs 'what's moral when the rules are wrong' unless you want to terach a graduate level course in ethics here! Let's say, no understanding of either rules *or* toddler-level human kindness. At any rate, these sociopaths are often said to be soulless. People with mental or neurological disabilities and differences that keep them from understanding ordinary morality almost certainly have souls, because when they can be brought to understand, and/or to the extent that they can understand, they show the sort of feelings ordinary people have, which gets us into the insanity defense and what happens when the person (for example) goes back on their meds. Or why, when the child understand that kitty is hurting just like you do when someone pinches you, they rush to hug and kiss and apologize to kitty. In fact, some people in that position have more tender souls than the rest of us! I'm going to go with a definition that starts with free will (understanding always that it is never 100% and always modified by external factors) and a sense of how one does or does not treat one's fellow human beings. I was going to say 'fellow sentient beings but that involves a level of understanding usually informed by culture. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
Damon Agretto wrote: AFAIK ECW was a spur-of-the-moment thing, and the only network that had an open slot was Sci-Fi. It instantly became one of (if not THE) top-rated show... So the same guys who used to make fun of and/or beat up your average SciFi Network viewer is now tuning in? It is truly the end of days... Jim Apocalypse Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Charlie Bell wrote: On 26/07/2006, at 3:05 PM, PAT MATHEWS wrote: From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:15:19 +1000 On 26/07/2006, at 11:43 AM, jdiebremse wrote: And a chimera? One soul, or two? Unless the person with the chimera genes has dissociative identity disorder a.k.a. multiple personality, one soul. So souls can be combined as well as created? Or do identical twins share a soul? Charlie Theology 101 Maru Identical twins do not share a soul. Leastways, that's the conclusion I draw from having met a number of pairs of them. There's no special thing that they each only have half of that others of us have all of. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
On 7/25/06, Gary Nunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's with a heavy heart that I must report the SciFi Channel has sunk to a new all time low. I can only guess that SciFi Channel felt as if they had to do one worse than Tremors: The Series, and Scare Tactics. [Deep sigh here] As I type this, the SciFi Channel is showing professional wrestling. Gary Who just doesn't have the heart to create a witty closing line after this traumatic event. How I love my Tivo. I can just cherry pick the science fiction channel movies that I want to watch and never even see the other crap. I don't even know how I watched TV before I had a Tivo. I've quit renting from Blockbuster or Netlflix. I don't buy DVDs anymore. I just keep trying to watch the stuff I've already recorded on the Tivo. And because I would much rather spend my time on the Internet anyway, I can never catch up. -- John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Do you play World of Warcraft? Let me know. Maybe we can play together. *** All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
At 11:22 AM Wednesday 7/26/2006, John W Redelfs wrote: On 7/25/06, Gary Nunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's with a heavy heart that I must report the SciFi Channel has sunk to a new all time low. I can only guess that SciFi Channel felt as if they had to do one worse than Tremors: The Series, and Scare Tactics. [Deep sigh here] As I type this, the SciFi Channel is showing professional wrestling. Gary Who just doesn't have the heart to create a witty closing line after this traumatic event. How I love my Tivo. I can just cherry pick the science fiction channel movies that I want to watch and never even see the other crap. I don't even know how I watched TV before I had a Tivo. Some of us look in the program guide¹ ahead of time and make decisions for ourselves . . . :) ¹Not _TV Guide_. Since the time they changed their internal format (the change _before_ changing from digest-size to magazine-size), they are no more useful in figuring out what is on than what comes free each week in the local newspaper. Used to be they would give capsule descriptions of old movies and syndicated shows so you could tell if you had seen that movie or episode before or not. Now you are lucky if they just list the name of the show. Of course, it may have something to do with the fact that stations show fewer and fewer such shows these days, having replaced them with infomercials. (If I get bored during a 2-minute commercial break, what makes you think I want to see a 30-minute commercial?) --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Yes - I'd want abortion to be replaced with transfer of the foetus to the artificial womb. In fact, if technology progressed so far, I suspect many people would avoid the risk of pregnancy and childbirth altogether. This seems to be an entirely male perspective. I wonder how a woman would respond...I'm at work and there are no women that - could ask that wouldn't be creeped out (and some think I'm wierd enough for posting on DGs with my crackberry...) Damon. Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: Trumpeter's Marder I auf GW 38(h) Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Weekly Chat Reminder
As Steve said, The Brin-L weekly chat has been a list tradition for over six years. Way back on 27 May, 1998, Marco Maisenhelder first set up a chatroom for the list, and on the next day, he established a weekly chat time. We've been through several servers, chat technologies, and even casts of regulars over the years, but the chat goes on... and we want more recruits! Whether you're an active poster or a lurker, whether you've been a member of the list from the beginning or just joined today, we would really like for you to join us. We have less politics, more Uplift talk, and more light-hearted discussion. We're non-fattening and 100% environmentally friendly... -(_() Though sometimes marshmallows do get thrown. The Weekly Brin-L chat is scheduled for Wednesday 3 PM Eastern/2 PM Central time in the US, or 7 PM Greenwich time. There's usually somebody there to talk to for at least eight hours after the start time. If you want to attend, it's really easy now. All you have to do is send your web browser to: http://wtgab.demon.co.uk/~brinl/mud/ ..And you can connect directly from William's new web interface! My instruction page tells you how to log on, and how to talk when you get in: http://www.brin-l.org/brinmud.html It also gives a list of commands to use when you're in there. In addition, it tells you how to connect through a MUD client, which is more complicated to set up initially, but easier and more reliable than the web interface once you do get it set up. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ This message was sent automatically using cron. But even if WTG is away on holiday, at least it shows the server is still up. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Look on my works, ye mighty...
On Jul 25, 2006, at 11:44 PM, Richard Baker wrote: As an aside, Ozymandias is a corruption of Usermaatre, one of the names of Ramesses II, the Great. Anyone who's seen Egyptian statuary (or read the Wikipedia entry) knows that the faces of Remesses and other Pharaohs do not have wrinkled lips or sneers of cold command -- they look pretty damn mellow, actually. On Jul 26, 2006, at 5:05 AM, David Hobby wrote: ... In Egypt's sandy silence, all alone, Stands a gigantic Leg, which far off throws The only shadow that the Desert knows: — I am great OZYMANDIAS, saith the stone, ... Ouch! This one strains to rhyme so much it hurts to read it. It makes me wonder if Smith was a kind of Salieri to Shelly's Mozart. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Damon wrote: This seems to be an entirely male perspective. I wonder how a woman would respond... For me, it would depend on the number of offsprings I plan on having. The first time around, I'd definitely want to do it myself. Just to see what the experience is like. Having experienced it, I'd almost certainly go for the out-of-my-body pregnancy, *if* the risk to the baby is zero. I think Y'see, my youngest is almost 18 months old now and the memories of the discomforts, aches, pains, terrors etc have receeded to the point where I find myself getting all misty-eyed over the notion of another pregnancy and childbirth. But he is still young enough for me to recall that I was terrified and terribly uncomfortable through most of my second pregnancy. Hmm, hard to say really, for it might be different for those who grew up with the idea that one can safely transfer the foetus to an artificial womb...I also find myself wondering if women who want to bear their own children would be considered the ideal women, or if people would start finding them weird/crazy. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Look on my works, ye mighty...
Dave said: Anyone who's seen Egyptian statuary (or read the Wikipedia entry) knows that the faces of Remesses and other Pharaohs do not have wrinkled lips or sneers of cold command -- they look pretty damn mellow, actually. I'd characterise many of them as stern and imperturbable, with exceptions for the likes of Akhenaten and many Late Period pharaohs. By the way, the appropriate quote from Diodorus Siculus' first century BC histories is -- Beside the entrance are three statues, each carved from a single block of black stone from Syene. One of these, which is seated, is the largest of any in Egypt, its foot alone measuring over seven cubits... it is not merely for its size that this work merits approbation. It is also marvellous because of its artistic quality and excellent because of the nature of its stone, since in a block of so great a size there is not a single crack or blemish to be seen. The inscription on it runs: King of Kings I am, Ozymandias. If anyone would know how great I am and where I lie, let him surpasss my works. -- (quoted second hand from Tyldesley's biography of Ramesses) In any case, Shelley was a poet and not a historian, and I prefer his version to Diodorus'. Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
On 7/26/06, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How I love my Tivo. I can just cherry pick the science fiction channel movies that I want to watch and never even see the other crap. I don't even know how I watched TV before I had a Tivo. Some of us look in the program guide¹ ahead of time and make decisions for ourselves . . . :) I used to try an avoid the crap using the TV Guide, but it was so much work compared with doing the same thing with Tivo that I rarely made the effort, and I ended up watching whatever was on whenever I felt like watching TV, which isn't all that often. Now, whenever I feel like watching, there is something waiting on the hard drive that I really wanted to see. And I don't have to do a lot of research or remember when it comes on and all that bother. -- John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Do you play World of Warcraft? Let me know. Maybe we can play together. *** All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
At 02:30 PM Wednesday 7/26/2006, John W Redelfs wrote: On 7/26/06, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How I love my Tivo. I can just cherry pick the science fiction channel movies that I want to watch and never even see the other crap. I don't even know how I watched TV before I had a Tivo. Some of us look in the program guide¹ ahead of time and make decisions for ourselves . . . :) I used to try an avoid the crap using the TV Guide, but it was so much work compared with doing the same thing with Tivo that I rarely made the effort, and I ended up watching whatever was on whenever I felt like watching TV, which isn't all that often. Now, whenever I feel like watching, there is something waiting on the hard drive that I really wanted to see. And I don't have to do a lot of research or remember when it comes on and all that bother. But you may also miss things that you might have chosen for yourself . . . 0 --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: SciFi Channel sinks to all new low.
On 7/26/06, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But you may also miss things that you might have chosen for yourself . . . 0 Huh? Maybe you don't know how Tivo works. I give them a wishlist of films I want to see based upon category, director, actor, or keyword, and then it computes a list to choose from of everything coming up in the next two weeks on all the channels I receive. I get to review the list with complete information available for every program, and schedule each one that I want for being automatically recorded when it comes on. They it just does its thing, and I end up with dozens of films and programs that I wanted to see and that I chose myself. They are already on my hard drive so I can watch them whenever I want. And being able to skip the commercials is just frosting on the cake. The fact is, I get to watch what I wanted and picked myself, and I get to watch it from the beginning of the show, and I get to watch it whenever I feel like sitting down to watch TV. --JWR ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: RFK Jr. interview
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Pensinger Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 2:21 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: RFK Jr. interview Dan wrote: Have you looked at the poll RFK refered to? [http://astro.berkeley.edu/~aleroy/Report10_21_04.pdf] That link is broken, Try this. http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/pipa.html but I've seen polls that indicate that sort of denial of facts by Republicans. I also have seen it by Democrats. Can you show me one. I haven't seen anything like this poll. I admit that this is the first poll I've seen where questions of fact are asked on a party basis. I've seen a number of polls, though, that indicate a denial of facts that fall in line with arguments by Democratic politicians. The classic one I recall was a poll on the profit per gallon of gasoline made by oil companies in the '90s. The majority thought that it was in the 20c/gallon range. But, at that time, oil was at about $18/barrel, unleaded gasoline spot price was about $0.50 gallon, and oil companies were making about 6% of sales as profit. Translated into a per gallon price, it was $0.03 cents. Another recent one that comes to mind is the fraction of people who believe that the oil companies have major responsibility for the change in the price of gasoline and crude oil over the last few years. 63% think oil companies such as Exxon or Mobile have a great deal to do with the rise in price, while only 30% think it's normal supply and demand. I'd be very curious to see that broken down by party, but I think it is reasonable to assume that more Democrats blame oil companies for problems than Republicans. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: RFK Jr. interview
Dan Minette wrote: Translated into a per gallon price, it was $0.03 cents. .03 cents or $0.03? Sorry, pet peeve, alongside ATM machine and PIN number. :-) Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charlie Bell Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 10:15 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex The pro-choice axiom is that, before birth, there are no human rights, and after birth a full set. Which is clearly bollocks. There's a huge range of views across the spectrum, and this pigeon-holing into pro-choice or pro-embryo or whatever tag one chooses is not actually useful. Actually talking through differing viewpoints and trying to understand why other people think as they do, even if you disagree with them, can only help. There's a positive comment about you by JDG that reflects on thisparaphrasing him, you're arguments are fairly unique and more thoughtful than any that he's seen in discussing this issue with folks he differs with. Indeed, if you go back and see the statement I made above in the context in which it was written, I was decrying the state of the debate I've heard over the last 30 years, and hoping for a discussion of the basis people have for understanding. While I see some difficulties with parts of your argument, what you've written on this topic is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind when I wrote this post. In short, you put forth some of the issues that I'd like to see discussed, instead of the same old back and forth I've seen for years. I also think that the idea that many people have views somewhere between the pro-choice set of axioms and the pro-life set of axioms is fairly valid. The debate I've seen doesn't reflect this. Most of it is between people who know their axioms are correct, and thus see how unreasonable the others are. Indeed, I find the type of discussions we've seen in this thread raremost people I've come in contact with don't want to examine their views. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 3:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - I'd want abortion to be replaced with transfer of the foetus to the artificial womb. In fact, if technology progressed so far, I suspect many people would avoid the risk of pregnancy and childbirth altogether. This seems to be an entirely male perspective. I wonder how a woman would respond...I'm at work and there are no women that - could ask that wouldn't be creeped out (and some think I'm wierd enough for posting on DGs with my crackberry...) Just had a chat about this with my (female) other half... Some people have c-sections because they can schedule them round their yoga, or because they need to fit childbirth into a certain period of the financial year for tax or government incentive reasons, or to replace the uncertain risks of childbirth with the calculated risks of an operation. Given reliable artificial womb technology financially on a par with or not substantially more than the cost of childbirth, the risks and convenience mean that it would be taken up. How many, not sure, but it would be widespread. Wonder if there are any surveys on this. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 7:05 AM, Dan Minette wrote: I also think that the idea that many people have views somewhere between the pro-choice set of axioms and the pro-life set of axioms is fairly valid. The debate I've seen doesn't reflect this. Most of it is between people who know their axioms are correct, and thus see how unreasonable the others are. Indeed, I find the type of discussions we've seen in this thread raremost people I've come in contact with don't want to examine their views. Many people refuse to examine their views, but they're worried that any ground they give will be swarmed over by the other side. That's what I was saying about the debate being *so* polarised. It would be easy for me to parody the pro-life position, by saying that they act as if the right to life begins at conception and ends at birth... But I won't. ;-) Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Charlie Bell wrote: Some people have c-sections because they can schedule them round their yoga, or because they need to fit childbirth into a certain period of the financial year for tax or government incentive reasons, The above reasons do not exist - at least here. or to replace the uncertain risks of childbirth with the calculated risks of an operation. Yes, this is the major (logically justifiable) reason for so many C-sections here in Brazil. The other half is that C-sections optimize the doctor's times, both the obstetrician and the pediatrician - and this is a scarce resource, worth optimizing! Given reliable artificial womb technology financially on a par with or not substantially more than the cost of childbirth, the risks and convenience mean that it would be taken up. How many, not sure, but it would be widespread. Specially if gay men decide to have children. So, maybe we will have the hellish opposite scenario of the lesbian utopia: a world where most people are gay men :-/ Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 8:02 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Charlie Bell wrote: Some people have c-sections because they can schedule them round their yoga, or because they need to fit childbirth into a certain period of the financial year for tax or government incentive reasons, The above reasons do not exist - at least here. Not yet. But apparently UK, USA and Australia they do. Odd, isn't it. or to replace the uncertain risks of childbirth with the calculated risks of an operation. Yes, this is the major (logically justifiable) reason for so many C-sections here in Brazil. The other half is that C-sections optimize the doctor's times, both the obstetrician and the pediatrician - and this is a scarce resource, worth optimizing! Yes, important to make sure they can fit a whole round of golf in. ;) Given reliable artificial womb technology financially on a par with or not substantially more than the cost of childbirth, the risks and convenience mean that it would be taken up. How many, not sure, but it would be widespread. Specially if gay men decide to have children. So, maybe we will have the hellish opposite scenario of the lesbian utopia: a world where most people are gay men :-/ LOL Or we'll just have a 50:50 world, where 10% of people are homosexual. As we do now. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Charlie Bell wrote: Specially if gay men decide to have children. So, maybe we will have the hellish opposite scenario of the lesbian utopia: a world where most people are gay men :-/ LOL Or we'll just have a 50:50 world, where 10% of people are homosexual. As we do now. 10%? I think this number is inflated. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 8:20 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Charlie Bell wrote: Specially if gay men decide to have children. So, maybe we will have the hellish opposite scenario of the lesbian utopia: a world where most people are gay men :-/ LOL Or we'll just have a 50:50 world, where 10% of people are homosexual. As we do now. 10%? I think this number is inflated. Rounded for pithiness. As I rounded the 50:50... it should be 51.5:48.5, and 9.13% combined total of people that have had an extensive homosexual encounter at some time... Lifelong exclusive homosexuals are a lower percentage, but lifelong exclusive heterosexuals are less common than you'd think, as a many people (most adolescent boys, indeed) have a phase of having a crush on an older person of the same gender, even though only a few actually follow up on this. It seems to be a normal part of growing up. That's apes for you. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 26/07/2006, at 10:43 PM, PAT MATHEWS wrote: From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] So souls can be combined as well as created? Or do identical twins share a soul? The ones I have met have each had their own soul, and from all accounts, that's even true of conjoined twins. The rule may be, one soul per functioning head. So, souls are linked to minds? And the head ceasing to function (say, severe brain trauma, leading to brain death and persistent vegetative state) equates to loss of the soul? I'm just trying to follow this line of thinking. Because if, like Rich and myself, one doesn't believe in souls, only in minds, then the end result is the same. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 26 Jul 2006, at 11:20PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Charlie Bell wrote: Specially if gay men decide to have children. So, maybe we will have the hellish opposite scenario of the lesbian utopia: a world where most people are gay men :-/ LOL Or we'll just have a 50:50 world, where 10% of people are homosexual. As we do now. 10%? I think this number is inflated. I think it's vastly underestimated. Look at football - that's gayer than a pink tutu and yet most men seem to find nothing more exciting than watching a bunch of men in shorts playing with a big ball. And the hugging and kissing! And the bursting into tears! I prefer to watch WTA tennis myself. _That's_ a man's sport. Knickers Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 26 Jul 2006, at 11:15PM, Matt Grimaldi wrote: Wasn't there a Sci-fi book about that? Yes, there was. The main character had to go find out what happened to his planet's shipment of artificial wombs that hadn't arrived, so his adventure took him into the great wide galaxy... _Ethan of Athos_ by Lois McMaster Bujold. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons. - Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
http://idiotgrrl.livejournal.com/ From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 09:22:29 +1000 On 26/07/2006, at 10:43 PM, PAT MATHEWS wrote: From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] So souls can be combined as well as created? Or do identical twins share a soul? The ones I have met have each had their own soul, and from all accounts, that's even true of conjoined twins. The rule may be, one soul per functioning head. So, souls are linked to minds? And the head ceasing to function (say, severe brain trauma, leading to brain death and persistent vegetative state) equates to loss of the soul? I'm just trying to follow this line of thinking. Because if, like Rich and myself, one doesn't believe in souls, only in minds, then the end result is the same. Charlie I wish you hadn't asked me that. I had a long-time friend who has been in the hospital with a massive stroke for some time now. The person in her body is like a sweet, passive small child with amnesia. I have finally got a gut feeling for the term mind-wipe. I honestly feel as if it were a different soul there. Pat ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 10:04 AM, PAT MATHEWS wrote: I wish you hadn't asked me that. I had a long-time friend who has been in the hospital with a massive stroke for some time now. The person in her body is like a sweet, passive small child with amnesia. I have finally got a gut feeling for the term mind-wipe. I honestly feel as if it were a different soul there. Sorry to impinge on your grief. It's something I've had to wrestle with myself with my grandpa with a series of strokes - each a little worse, and each of which took a little more of him away -and my great- aunt with Alzheimer's. You've summed it up so well. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - I'd want abortion to be replaced with transfer of the foetus to the artificial womb. In fact, if technology progressed so far, I suspect many people would avoid the risk of pregnancy and childbirth altogether. This seems to be an entirely male perspective. I wonder how a woman would respond...I'm at work and there are no women that - could ask that wouldn't be creeped out (and some think I'm wierd enough for posting on DGs with my crackberry...) There's things about pregnancy that are good for the mother. Plus, pregnancy is how the body knows how to lactate. I'm all for lactation. Lactation is wonderful for everyone involved. I'm incredibly in favor of lactation. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
How many pregnancies are planned, and how many are accidental? I guess it would all depend on the technology. But whether people plan their pregnancies around the tax season or their new-age hippie health classes is irrelevant to the question: creating a system of artificial iron wombs eliminates the emotional effects for a woman of having a baby growing inside of them. Some may be totally skeeved by this idea; my fiancee (we have a baby, BTW -- she's 6mo old, 7 in early August) however commented that she misses things like the kicks, the movement, etc. Of course I cannot relate to that on any level; being a male I have nothing in my life experiences to compare it to. And to get proper feedback, that question should be postulated to both pre-pregnancy, and post-birth women. I also think the idea of iron wombs cheapens the enture reproductive process. That is my purely emotional hippie liberal opinion... Damon. Some people have c-sections because they can schedule them round their yoga, or because they need to fit childbirth into a certain period of the financial year for tax or government incentive reasons, or to replace the uncertain risks of childbirth with the calculated risks of an operation. Given reliable artificial womb technology financially on a par with or not substantially more than the cost of childbirth, the risks and convenience mean that it would be taken up. How many, not sure, but it would be widespread. Wonder if there are any surveys on this. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
From: Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] I also think the idea of iron wombs cheapens the enture reproductive process. That is my purely emotional hippie liberal opinion... Damon. My parents' generation was all for bottle feeding and canned goods because they were clean, modern, sanitary, and efficient. The postwar generation grew up to loathe the entire idea - they wanted heartfelt, natural, and organic. A much-needed corrective if I do say so myself. But when the values of clean, modern, sanitary, and efficient or their equivalent roll around again (as a much needed corrective to heartfelt, natural, and organic? And the balance of the wheel goes round and round ... say I, daughter, mother, and now grandmother) we'll get uterine replicators. For the attitude described above, check any of the Vorkosigan Saga by Lois McMaster Bujold. And then we'll go back to batural childbirth and breast feeding. For that, see Robert Heinlein's Beyond This Horizon, though her never had a child in his life. Much to his sorrow, I think. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
In a message dated 7/25/2006 11:08:02 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My point, though, was simply that at that point they would clearly no longer be human they would be something else, by definition. One of the problems with your mode is thinking is the by definition part. This is way we used to think about species before Darwin. They were thought of as having some essential essence unique to them. However we now we define species in a variety of functional ways. The definition I gave (interbreding populations) was developed by Dobninsky and Mahr. (ok I probably spelled these names wrong). Whatever definition one uses species are real but they are natural things with blurry margins not philosophical things (with distinct essences). So the something else that HeLA cells would be would still be human in some ways and maybe not human in others. In some circumstances they would be separate species and in other circumstances they would not be. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Darwin exhibit
Just a note. The Darwin exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History in New York is nearing the end of its run. If it comes to a museum near you (or you will be in NY before the end of the summer) I urge all of you to see it. The most amazing part of the exhibit are the transmutational notebooks that Darwin used to record is thinking about evolution written between 1836 to 1838. The actual notebooks where Darwin comes up with evolution by natural selection. The actual notebooks where a theory that changed the world was born. You can see it and you can almost touch it. Notebook B is opened to the page where Darwin draws the tree of life - the connection between all living creatures for the first time. It is right there in front of your eyes. The exhibit also documents Darwin's life - for the great satan he lived the most moral and exemplary life. He was a devoted husband and loving father. A man of incredible personal honesty integrity and modesty - ambitious yes - but honest. See the exhibit if you can ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
In a message dated 7/26/2006 7:06:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If Biological Law is the survival of the more fit, then we don't obey this Law. Sometimes, what happens is the survival of the _less_ fit. Biologic laws are not like the laws of physics (at least not superficially). And by the way it is not really survival of the fittest in any narrow sense. It is the survival of those individuals whose traits allow them to produce the most offspring who themselves have offspring. Simply producing a lot offspring doesn't help unless one's offspring also reproduce. So the key is how many grandchildren one produces ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 10:49 AM, Damon Agretto wrote: How many pregnancies are planned, and how many are accidental? I guess it would all depend on the technology. But whether people plan their pregnancies around the tax season or their new-age hippie health classes is irrelevant to the question: creating a system of artificial iron wombs eliminates the emotional effects for a woman of having a baby growing inside of them. Some may be totally skeeved by this idea; my fiancee (we have a baby, BTW -- she's 6mo old, 7 in early August) however commented that she misses things like the kicks, the movement, etc. Of course I cannot relate to that on any level; being a male I have nothing in my life experiences to compare it to. And to get proper feedback, that question should be postulated to both pre-pregnancy, and post-birth women. I also think the idea of iron wombs cheapens the enture reproductive process. That is my purely emotional hippie liberal opinion... I didn't say I thought it was a good idea. Just that other people probably will. Takes all sorts. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
In a message dated 7/26/2006 8:46:20 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How can you tell the difference between something that looks like a person and has a soul and something that looks like a person and doesn't? Oh my god the philospher's zombie just showed up. There are millions of words wasted on this concept. A creature that looks and acts like a human being but has no soul or mind. Now since this creature must act like a person it must think it has a soul but really it does not. It has no internal life even though it acts like it does. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
In a message dated 7/26/2006 10:15:35 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So souls can be combined as well as created? Or do identical twins share a soul? In addition the twining process does not take place at inception so if one has identical twins when was the second soul created? Getting a headache? Here is the simple but painful cure. There is no such thing as the soul or mind as some sort of non-corporeal thing. The soul or mind is the action of the human brain. So to the extent that there are two individual brains there will be two souls. One brain one soul. Since a natural explanation will always allow for odd cases and exceptions in certain circumstances (unlike an essentialist explanation) even multiple personalities may not be a problem. To the extent that a brain can be in a state where it is unaware of other aspects of its consciousness it can have more than one mind or soul. Of course the pain that this view causes is that we cease to have immortal souls or immortal anything. I can live (and die) with that ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 11:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One of the problems with your mode is thinking is the by definition part. This is way we used to think about species before Darwin. ...and a long way after. The Biological Species Concept was developed through the mid-1900s, with much of the argument in the 50s. Of course, gene sequencing in the 80s and on has thrown more mud in the waters, as if it needed it... The concept of kinds was pretty prevalent right into the 1900s, but it no longer survives in science as a useful concept. They were thought of as having some essential essence unique to them. However we now we define species in a variety of functional ways. The definition I gave (interbreding populations) was developed by Dobninsky and Mahr. (ok I probably spelled these names wrong). Dobzhansky and Mayr, but I got who you meant. Good call. :-) Mayr only died last year, by the way, just short of his 101st birthday. He saw quite a few changes in the field of biology during his loong career. Anyway, the Biological Species Concept, as with every single other way of defining species, has weaknesses. With this one, it's that it assumes sexual reproduction, so asexual organisms are hard to classify using it. Ultimately, in defining species, biologists use a combination of the various methods, tailored to the situation. Whatever definition one uses species are real but they are natural things with blurry margins not philosophical things (with distinct essences). So the something else that HeLA cells would be would still be human in some ways and maybe not human in others. In some circumstances they would be separate species and in other circumstances they would not be. Indeed - what way you look at them defines what they are, not what you call them. Names are just labels, they're not what things are. Living things are named and renamed, classified, shuffled. That's science - as we get new information, we refine the knowledge base. Names impose borders where there really aren't any. There may be gaps, but there are no sharp lines. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
But whether people plan their pregnancies around the tax season or their new-age hippie health classes is irrelevant to the question: Yoga is a new-age hippie health class? Since when? One of the biggest reason for C-sections over here is to ensure the time of birth. So that the kid's horoscope is auspicious Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 1:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But whether people plan their pregnancies around the tax season or their new-age hippie health classes is irrelevant to the question: Yoga is a new-age hippie health class? Since when? One of the biggest reason for C-sections over here is to ensure the time of birth. So that the kid's horoscope is auspicious And there you have it. :-) Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Charlie said: One of the biggest reason for C-sections over here is to ensure the time of birth. So that the kid's horoscope is auspicious And there you have it. :-) The prize for silliest possible reason? ;) Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 27/07/2006, at 2:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charlie said: One of the biggest reason for C-sections over here is to ensure the time of birth. So that the kid's horoscope is auspicious And there you have it. :-) The prize for silliest possible reason? ;) LOL I'm sure I can think of sillier. No, the prize for more evidence that people will do all sorts of weird artificial things for weird reasons. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But whether people plan their pregnancies around the tax season or their new-age hippie health classes is irrelevant to the question: Yoga is a new-age hippie health class? Since when? The only 2 yoga instructors I know personally are new-age hippy types. Well, new-age, anyway. Dunno if doing crazy things with fire lets you qualify as a hippy. :) (Many of my more interesting RL friends do interesting things with fire. I'm mildly pyrophobic, and I hang with pyromaniacs. Go figure.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - I'd want abortion to be replaced with transfer of the foetus to the artificial womb. In fact, if technology progressed so far, I suspect many people would avoid the risk of pregnancy and childbirth altogether. This seems to be an entirely male perspective. I wonder how a woman would respond...I'm at work and there are no women that - could ask that wouldn't be creeped out (and some think I'm wierd enough for posting on DGs with my crackberry...) Julia wrote There's things about pregnancy that are good for the mother. Plus, pregnancy is how the body knows how to lactate. I'm all for lactation. Lactation is wonderful for everyone involved. I'm incredibly in favor of lactation. Speaking as a woman who hasn't felt the quickening and is currently experiencing misbehaving parts, I would conceptuallly opt for storks, cabbage patches or artificial wombs. but that being said, I would want to be able to watch things progress. Dee ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
At 11:24 PM Wednesday 7/26/2006, Julia Thompson wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But whether people plan their pregnancies around the tax season or their new-age hippie health classes is irrelevant to the question: Yoga is a new-age hippie health class? Since when? The only 2 yoga instructors I know personally are new-age hippy types. Well, new-age, anyway. Dunno if doing crazy things with fire lets you qualify as a hippy. :) (Many of my more interesting RL friends do interesting things with fire. I'm mildly pyrophobic, and I hang with pyromaniacs. Go figure.) Which reminds me of something I thought of the other day: when are we going to get to see some pictures of you playing with fire? --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Ronn!Blankenship wrote: At 11:24 PM Wednesday 7/26/2006, Julia Thompson wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But whether people plan their pregnancies around the tax season or their new-age hippie health classes is irrelevant to the question: Yoga is a new-age hippie health class? Since when? The only 2 yoga instructors I know personally are new-age hippy types. Well, new-age, anyway. Dunno if doing crazy things with fire lets you qualify as a hippy. :) (Many of my more interesting RL friends do interesting things with fire. I'm mildly pyrophobic, and I hang with pyromaniacs. Go figure.) Which reminds me of something I thought of the other day: when are we going to get to see some pictures of you playing with fire? I don't play with fire. :) I just hang with crazy people who do. I haven't even played soccer with the burning toilet paper roll. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
