quick thoughts

[hubidajubidaba]

On Science Friday this morning, Ira had Lester Brown talking about environmental policy and such(link). He supports the idea of a carbon tax (as opposed to cap-and-trade), saying that we (the US) could reduce income tax and replace that revenue with carbon tax. But say that actually works, and carbon output goes way down. Then the carbon tax

Comments

[muddbstrd]

Luckily, the President has zero power when it comes to making amendments to the Constitution. Therefore, all of what he's saying is a bag of hot air. Part of me wonders if that's deliberate. He's said something that he has no power to actually do, so it gets him the following of the religious right (which until Huckabee came along had no real candidate to rally behind). Chances are that, at least within the Republican primary, the people that would be scared off by such a comment wouldn't have been behind a minister as a candidate to begin with.

However, it is still scary to have someone like him with the power of the Presidency, especially after how much power Bush has consolidated into the position during his two terms in office. It hasn't helped that Chief Justice Roberts seems to be deliberately sabotaging the Court's power by giving it cases which have a much lower impact on American society than those taken by the Rehnquist court. Add to that a Legislature which has been impotent and lazy for the last three terms and you have a horrifying amount of Executive power.

[hubidajubidaba]

Unfortunately i wouldn't say zero power...constitutionally speaking sure, but we have certainly learned the hard way how presidents can gain undue influence. Even shit like Supreme Court appointments that every prez salivates over, the rulings may not be constitutional amendments but they can still go a long way. And i totally agree that he can't honestly believe he can change the constitution like that- just because several states are banning gay marriage doesn't mean you can get away with that bullshit nationwide. Plus things like Roe v. Wade, which is huge right now with the (terrible but very clever) attempt to get fertilized eggs defined as people- worrisome since the Supreme Court has been far more amenable to "chipping away" at Roe v. Wade rather than outright overturn such a huge precedent case. I feel like that was kind of a non-sequitur...i've been doing cell culture pretty much non stop for the last 4.5 hours and i'm fried.

[bloodyaussie]

When does a fertilised egg become a person, according to Roe v. Wade and/or Evan? (Just curious.)

[hubidajubidaba]

i'm trying to take my time answering this question. sorry for taking so much :)

[hubidajubidaba]

do you like how long i've been avoiding this? haha.

so i actually tend to agree more or less with Roe v. Wade, which says abortions should be okay for any reason until the fetus is viable. from what i've read/heard, viability (according to a few internet sources and my GYN Pathologist boss) is generally 24 weeks which includes full NICU support (i'm sure you know more about this than i do, feel free to correct me/fill me in). that dovetails somewhat with my general inkling of the third trimester being the point for embryo vs fetus/person.

a lot of it is (very loaded) semantics, and even much of what isn't is still quite subjective. i can say a fetus is a person when it's viable but what does that mean? even a full-term baby can't really survive on its own, so maybe you're not a person until you're an adult? even different religions have different ideas (ie hardcore Christian says a fertilized egg is a person, Jews say it's at 40 days, Muslims say anywhere from 8wk-4mo). if you take the Christian perspective, what about all the fertilized embryos that never implant or spontaneously abort?

as you can see i'm a bit conflicted. i'd like to think my lack of religion helps me be objective, but whoever can be completely objective about little babies probably has no soul. personally i'm uncomfortable with the whole thing, and have no idea what i'd do if it became an issue for me personally. even so i don't think it should be illegal, except in the late term.

[bloodyaussie]

I'm impressed. That's a whole lot more thought than most people seem to put into it!

Now I can't even remember why I asked, except that part of it was because I couldn't be bothered looking up Roe v. Wade. :D