Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you saying that if the free choice of American parents results in a generation that is born 75% female and 25% male, that you would have no problem with that? (And women say that they can't find any good men today!) And that this would not be an appropriate area for public intervention? Massive straw man, unworthy of reply. See Charlie's posts on the subject. I don't think that calling my argument a straw man contributes to positive debate on this subject. I believe that Charlie's point is that such a situation would be unstable in the long run. If a generation of people comes out disproportionately female, then this would create an incentive to produce male children. This perhaps may be true - but doesn't do any good for the people who were born in the disproportionate generation. Secondly, the point doesn't consider the possibility of misaligned incentives. There may be many reason why parents perceive children of one sex to be more desireable than those of another - and those reasons might have nothing to do with adulthood. For instance, parents may perceive that they will enjoy playing games with a female child more than a male child, or that a female child is easier to manage while growing up than a male child, etc. These sorts of cultural perceptions could easily result in misaligned sex ratios persisting into the long term. It also raises the question of what rights do unborn children have. Are you o.k. with parents aborting children that will have a tendency towards homosexuality? Or of only selecting embryos for implantation that have blond hair or above-average intelligence? Or what about only selecting embryos that have below-average intelligence? We're talking a major expense, John, so the number of procedures is likely to be limited to either wealthy people or people that are desperate for a child of a certain sex (not because we favor one sex over the other but because they have trouble conceiving one or the other) or want to avoid a child with a debilitating birth defect that they may be prone to. Leaving aside the number of people doing this because of a birth defect, you do realize that you are essentially arguing that this practice is o.k., so long as only rich people do it? The expense of the procedure shouldn't affect the morality of this procedure. If the procedure is moral and sensible for a few rich people to engage in, then it should be moral and sensible for everyone to engage in - should they have the opportunity. The ironic thing is that I just received word today that the pro- choice government of Tony Blair is moving today to ban gender- selection abortions in the UK. But I guess that that the UK wasn't founded on freedom of choice, eh? (Magna Carta and John Locke anyone?) To me, its a shame that the pro-choice extremists in this country have turned the United States into a place where the Chinese come to engage in a practice that even the communists have banned back in their own country... We weren't discussing abortion. Yes we are. We are talking about conceiving a number of children, and eliminating the children of the undesired sex. I would have much more trouble with abortion along these lines. In fact I would object to it altogether. I can only hope that you get the opportunity to join me in supporting a ban on sex-selection abortions. Let me ask you again. Do you think we should tailor our laws to remedy the shortcomings of the Chinese social system? I still have no idea what you mean by this. I merely think that if the Chinese Communists think that a certain procedure is too gruesome to allow in their own country, that should be a strong tipoff that we shouldn't be allowing it in our own country either. JDG ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 15/07/2006, at 3:43 PM, jdiebremse wrote: We weren't discussing abortion. Yes we are. We are talking about conceiving a number of children, and eliminating the children of the undesired sex. As I pointed out elsewhere, this is the main assumption of difference. If you regard an undifferentiated pre-implantion ball of cells as a child, then of course you're going to have a different view to those who think humanity and sentience and so on are sliding scales (that an adult has more rights than a child has more rights than an infant than a foetus than an embryo than a zygote than an ovum). A blastocyst is not a child to most people, John. Many, possibly most according to some studies, zygotes *fail to implant* and die in the toilet or soaked up in a panty-liner. The wastage is naturally huge. Clearly, until they're able to implant, they're disposable, *biologically* speaking. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 15/07/2006, at 3:43 PM, jdiebremse wrote: I would have much more trouble with abortion along these lines. In fact I would object to it altogether. I can only hope that you get the opportunity to join me in supporting a ban on sex-selection abortions. Of course most of us would support a ban on self-selection abortion. But PGD is not abortion, unless you have a really bad understanding of developmental biology. Let me ask you again. Do you think we should tailor our laws to remedy the shortcomings of the Chinese social system? I still have no idea what you mean by this. I merely think that if the Chinese Communists think that a certain procedure is too gruesome to allow in their own country, that should be a strong tipoff that we shouldn't be allowing it in our own country either. They're not banning it because it's gruesome, they're banning it because they're worried it'll skew their already skewed gender-bias even further. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 7/15/06, jdiebremse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We weren't discussing abortion. Yes we are. We are talking about conceiving a number of children, and eliminating the children of the undesired sex. Personally, I think it's ridiculous for someone to go through the pain, expense and hassle of IVF just to ensure the desired sex for their child, particularly when there's a way to at least raise the odds without doing all that. Many fertility centers won't accept patients that have gender selection as their only reason. But I'm curious about your opinion here So your problem here is with IVF in general then? Because the general practice with IVF is to fertilize many eggs (15-20) and then just implant a small number of them (2-6). (The original article link is down, so I don't know if the article goes into the details at all). As I understand it, the sex selection is just another criteria for deciding which ones get implanted - either way, a bunch of embryos are eliminated. (Though, potentially they can be frozen and used at a later time). What if the abortion factor was eliminated? Right now, they can use sperm spinning to get about an 80% accuracy in selecting for boy or girl sperm which can be used in a more tradtional way that doesn't generate unwanted embryos. Lets say that they find a way to get this to 100% accuracy. Do you stil have the same objections? -bryon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
JDG wrote: Let me ask you again. Do you think we should tailor our laws to remedy the shortcomings of the Chinese social system? I still have no idea what you mean by this. I merely think that if the Chinese Communists think that a certain procedure is too gruesome to allow in their own country, that should be a strong tipoff that we shouldn't be allowing it in our own country either. This logic is false. Chinese Communists [I would not call them Commies, but Extreme-Corporate-Capitalists - China seems like a huge Capitalist Corporation to me :-)] think lots of other things gruesome - like making movies that mock their CEOs or Directors - so this should not be a parameter to evaluate the gruesomeness of anything. What if China bans breasts implants? [*] Alberto Monteiro [*] I am aesthetically biased against breast implants, except in a few cases of females that are extremely mammalially challenged, but I would never think that the desire to have artificial breasts should be prohibited. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Bigotry is evil, why it must be eradicated
Bernardo, 6 years old, examining a magazine about the countries that took part in the world cup. This one is horrible, this is where terrorists live Can you guess which one was that? :-) Alberto I didn't teach this! Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 15/07/2006, at 6:08 PM, Bryon Daly wrote: On 7/15/06, jdiebremse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We weren't discussing abortion. Yes we are. We are talking about conceiving a number of children, and eliminating the children of the undesired sex. Personally, I think it's ridiculous for someone to go through the pain, expense and hassle of IVF just to ensure the desired sex for their child, particularly when there's a way to at least raise the odds without doing all that. A number of ways. Timing is one, as well as centrifugation as you mentioned. The most reliable is, of course, infanticide... ;-) Or just swap them about in the maternity ward. Worked in The Omen... Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
At 10:18 AM Saturday 7/15/2006, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: JDG wrote: Let me ask you again. Do you think we should tailor our laws to remedy the shortcomings of the Chinese social system? I still have no idea what you mean by this. I merely think that if the Chinese Communists think that a certain procedure is too gruesome to allow in their own country, that should be a strong tipoff that we shouldn't be allowing it in our own country either. This logic is false. Chinese Communists [I would not call them Commies, but Extreme-Corporate-Capitalists - China seems like a huge Capitalist Corporation to me :-)] think lots of other things gruesome - like making movies that mock their CEOs or Directors - so this should not be a parameter to evaluate the gruesomeness of anything. What if China bans breasts implants? [*] Then their stock will be flat. --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: Bigotry is evil, why it must be eradicated
On 15/07/2006, at 6:28 PM, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: Bernardo, 6 years old, examining a magazine about the countries that took part in the world cup. This one is horrible, this is where terrorists live Can you guess which one was that? :-) Brazil? There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures... and the Dutch. - Nigel Powers, _Goldmember_ Charlie ___ 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 jdiebremse Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 7:43 AM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex Leaving aside the number of people doing this because of a birth defect, you do realize that you are essentially arguing that this practice is o.k., so long as only rich people do it? The expense of the procedure shouldn't affect the morality of this procedure. If the procedure is moral and sensible for a few rich people to engage in, then it should be moral and sensible for everyone to engage in - should they have the opportunity. If it is a question of inherent morality/immorality, then I agree with your point. Some things are wrong, even if they only happen a few times. But, there are other areas where ethics is consequence based. For example, a rich people often use resources, such as fossil fuel, at a rate that would be horrific if everyone used them at that rate. Think of the increase in fuel usage if everyone in the world had a private plane to travel where they wish. Yet, I don't think this means it is inherently immoral for someone to have a private jet. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: WTC Redux
On Jul 14, 2006, at 1:53 PM, Charlie Bell wrote: On 14/07/2006, at 11:31 PM, Dave Land wrote: For me, questions that compare the official report's explanation of the attack and its aftermath with the major common elements of the top couple of conspiracy theories (how is it that WTC 1 2 fell at very near free-fall-in-a-vacuum speeds; Estimates range from 8.4 to 15+ seconds. That's a huge range, and if you take anything in the upper half of that range, it's not even vaguely mysterious. And watching it again on some program the other night, it definitely wasn't anywhere near the lower estimates. what _exactly_ was the mechanism by which WTC 7 fell -- a building which did _not_ have thousands of gallons of burning Jet-A in it; and so forth Mechanism? For goodness sake. It had a burning 400+m tower collapse about a hundred metres away - and WTC6 was destroyed during the collapse. Surrounding buildings had to be condemned too. So /you're/ Gautam's liberal-democrat-female friend? Since you presumed to answer the questions I wrote to Dan for her, you must want us to think so. I think we've already heard quite enough from those who have read a couple of web sites and seen a couple of videos (yes, and in some cases, posses doctorates in physics and so forth). The purpose of Gautam's kind offer through Dan was to learn from someone who was not the dilettante that the rest of us are. I am not going to debate this with you. I /am/ interested in hearing the informed conclusions of a person who was on the panel that actually wrote the report. Dave Who Asked You Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Sudoku beats Tabloids
On 15 Jul 2006, at 12:58AM, David Hobby wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: AOL Sudoku: I average 9 minutes for level 1 Level 9 took me 97 minutes. Only time I finished it so far. At 9, I'd really like a move number count and a backup button. Vilyehm Vilyehm-- Not to brag, but level 1 took me 4 minutes. With a bit of practice, one gets quicker at things like seeing which of the 9 digits is missing from a set of digits, and so on. The interface of the AOL sudoku online was a bit strange at first, but then I saw that it actually fit quite well with how I do most of the squares. I go through and place all the 1s I can, then place all the 2s, and continue until I get stuck. At the lower levels, one completes the game first. But for harder levels, there is a point in the middle where thought is required. My own private rule is that I'm not allowed to backtrack; every digit placed must be deduced. (I'm sure that a computer algorithm to do the puzzle would just do backtracking, trying a 1 in the first open square, and so on. So I refuse to do it that way, because it seems too boring.) Those interested in Sudoku might try looking at this http://www.madoverlord.com/projects/sudoku.t free (donationware) program for Mac, Windows and Linux. It can display the remaining possibilities for each square in several ways, making it easier for you to see the patterns that are the key to solving tough puzzles. You can add and remove possibilities as you make inferences about the puzzle. It can hilight 14 different simple and advanced Sudoku patterns. Everything from simple forces and pins up to mega-expert techniques like forcing loops and chains. It can give you hints on how to proceed, or solve the puzzle by human- style logic, with detailed explanations of the steps. No known puzzle can stump the Susser's heuristic deduction engine. Other features: You can drag Sudoku graphics from just about any webpage and they'll be scanned and loaded into the application. Instant download of new puzzles from the Menneske.no Sudoku archive (and other popular puzzle sources) Extensive help, hint and hilighting features show you the logical structures in the puzzles. You can manage, rename, reorder, and print out your Sudokus. You can drag them out of the app as graphics or in a variety of text formats. Undo and redo are fully supported. Many sample puzzles to get you started. Comprehensive manual gives detailed explanations of all the advanced solving methods the program can use. -- 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: Sudoku beats Tabloids
William T Goodall wrote: ... Those interested in Sudoku might try looking at this http://www.madoverlord.com/projects/sudoku.t ... William-- Thanks, it looks like an interesting program. I have a lot of tricks for solving sudoku, but have no idea what they're called. So comparing with the techniques in the program should be informative. ---David ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Introductions (Was:Re: SCOUTED: ...
Robert G. Seeberger wrote: Howdy Chris! Don't feel like the Lone Texas RangerG snip I'm an irregular regular - depends on how often I get to the office or library, which has not been for a while now, or how busy I am with the horses (very!). I'll be 46 (!?!) this month, live in the foothills of Denver, CO, teach horsebackriding, and do medical-legal research/consultation. I am (annoyingly?) lead mare-ish, also go with my gut, but do look critically at the numbers, especially in medical matters. First SF book: _Breed To Come_ by Andre Norton, read back when I was in 6th or 7th grade. Favorite SF authors: Brin (but of course!), Vinge (V and J both), Kagan. Fave Fantasist: P. McKillip. Hobbies: hiking, horses, reading, horses, cat-watching, horses...and so on. ;-) Debbi Heretic Lutheran Gaian Deist Maru __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Introductions (Was:Re: SCOUTED: Bush is Not Incompetent)
Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim Sharkey wrote: Ronn!Blankenship wrote: What about the Irregulars? I don't know about the rest of you, but I make sure I have a couple of big salads with dark, leafy greens and a few whole grain breads a week so I don't have that problem. Jim Truly regular Maru Drinking a fair amount of water helps with that, as well, I've found. Oh, dear - as usual, I should have read further before posting... Debbi Legumes And Coffee Maru :) __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Sudoku beats Tabloids
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Julia wrote I understand it's important. And I'm grateful that I'm not subjected to details of the French soccer player's live, unlike those of Angelina Jolie, Paris Hilton, J-Lo and Jennifer Anniston. Oh, and I am SICK of Tom Katie. And my favorite grocery store isn't putting very many Sudoku books at the checkout line for me to try to distract myself with. :( I wasn't going to get hooked, but found Sudoku is a great way to pass a few minutes without getting a long term project. I kept saying I would buy a book, but my mom sent me a hand held (made by Kid Galaxy) and I am pretty content in airport lines now :-) I understand in many places the demand for books is outstripping production. I've gotten hooked on Kakuro now. Those books are harder to find I need to find a good website for printing free puzzles. Or start ordering from amazon.com. For Sudoku, www.websudoku.com is great for doing it online and printing it out to take with you. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: WTC Redux
On 15/07/2006, at 10:44 PM, Dave Land wrote: So /you're/ Gautam's liberal-democrat-female friend? Since you presumed to answer the questions I wrote to Dan for her, you must want us to think so. Uh-huh. Yes, I'm clearly impersonating Gautam's friend. Or maybe I'm pointing out problems with your questions. I think we've already heard quite enough from those who have read a couple of web sites and seen a couple of videos (yes, and in some cases, posses doctorates in physics and so forth). The purpose of Gautam's kind offer through Dan was to learn from someone who was not the dilettante that the rest of us are. Sure. Does that suddenly exclude the rest of us from pointing out that we think the premise of your question is deeply flawed, and would be wasting the time of a professional who has heard these same things over and over? I am not going to debate this with you. I /am/ interested in hearing the informed conclusions of a person who was on the panel that actually wrote the report. Then do so. But stop being a primadonna. Anything you post onlist is up for discussion. You choose not to debate it further with me, that's your choice. But don't try to pull some sort of only certain people can talk about this shit, 'cause that's what that is: shit. If you really think your first question, that is easily refuted, is worthy then fine. I think you're wrong to ask it, and have said so. I do think your second question is interesting, but the way you framed it isn't. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
