On Against Our War in Libya
Not all the rebels wanted foreign help. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/03/billboard-of-the-day.html
And yes you can criticize the Iraq War and deplore people who fought on the opposite side. I'm against the idea that we always and everywhere must take a side in foreign conflicts. And I am also against euphemisms for bombing people like "get our hands dirty."
0
On Against Our War in Libya
Yeah. Societies that are tribal in character do not easily become rights-respectin' democracies. That is not to say that people in tribes have less dignity than non-tribal peoples, it is not a slur - just an assertion.
And yeah- my line of thinking condemns "damn near every war we've ever been involved in"
And I'm not sure I buy that we aren't 'fighting for them' - Cameron and Obama have both indicated that Qaddafi must go - ergo we our intervening to help the rebels accomplish their political ends, even if the U.N. resolution narrowly words this as if it were about protecting civilians only.
And I'm not indicating that just because some Libyans volunteered to fight our soldiers in Iraq that we should exact some kind of revenge on them. I'm trying to say that we do not know the people we are (implicitly) fighting for in this civil war, that they may not be naturally or uniformly sympathetic to the rule of law and democracy, or all that better than Qaddafi.
0
On Against Our War in Libya
The parallel is this: Iraq and Libya are unnecessary wars of choice against nations that did not attack us. Also, yes, they are Muslim nations that have no history of liberal democratic government and many societal handicaps in developing one quickly.
For most people the important part in thinking about this is "Is the president a member of the party to whom I'm more culturally sympathetic?" Unfortunately bombs explode the same way no matter what the commander thinks about school prayer - or whatever.
0
On Old Christian Videos: Amy Grant's "Lead Me On"
On the all-time Christian pop list, I'll throw on Jennifer Knapp, which accidentally came on an old friends Itunes the other night - taking us back to the days when we hung out in youth groups.
And All Together Separate, who had some pretty respectable jamming skills, but absolutely mediocre lyrics.
Anyway, I loved this piece.
0
On Odd Man Rush: The Kid And The Caveman
I love what the Awl is doing here.
I'm with Ovechkin. He's similar to LeBron James in that he's just unbelievably fast and nimble for a guy his size and power.
0
On Why I Did It: How I Came to Write a Comic Book About an Aborted Fetus
No problem. Also, my views are my own. And probably don't reflect the views of most pro-lifers- who are "right to lifers"
I really think the debate is going to change a lot as viability inches earlier into pregnancy and chemical abortions become more effective and advanced.
0
On Why I Did It: How I Came to Write a Comic Book About an Aborted Fetus
I'm not pro-life, I'm anti-abortion. It sounds like splitting hairs, but there is a difference. My view isn't that an unborn child has a right to life, but that it's parents have ordinary responsibilities to it - to feed, clothe, nourish, and educate it. Anyway...
My guess is that the anti-abortion side would have to build a much larger and firmer consensus about the moral status of a fetus, that it is in fact of more moral concern than a fingernail. If that was done, society would stigmatize abortion more - greatly reducing it. Without this step, laws criminalizing abortion would have perverse effects.
But if we can win hearts and minds, abortion should be considered a "malo in se" - a wrong in itself, something in between child abandonment and manslaughter. Mothers who do this to their unborn child should face fines. Doctors who cooperate should face fines, and possibly a suspension or revocation of their license to practice medicine.
My prediction is that this won't happen anytime soon. Instead, as chemical abortions become more common, surgical abortion will be stigmatized as a "disgusting" option for irresponsible and poor people. Eventually it will be seen as barbaric compared to chemical abortions.
0
On Why I Did It: How I Came to Write a Comic Book About an Aborted Fetus
Well, you're welcome to your personal beliefs. But let's say that viability keeps creeping back earlier, as it's been doing the past three decades? Does that change the moral status of the fetus for you?
I would reiterate that a pre-viable fetus is different from an appendix, because it is rapidly becoming a viable fetus, and then a child - and it has a unique DNA. Science, and all that.
Anyway, since this fetus has DNA made up partially of it's mother's DNA, and it's fathers- both the mother and father have responsibilities to it - like the ones recognized in paternity lawsuits. When people aren't planning on getting an abortion, they tend to do stuff like buy things for their unborn child, like cribs, or start 529 accounts. So while baby-talk might be weird. Most people who aren't considering abortions treat their first-trimester fetus like its something important worth planning for - not like a nose-hair to be plucked.
I also strongly believe that no child should enter this world unwanted. We want to get there in different ways! Yours involves really sharp instruments.
0
On Against Our War in Libya
Yes, it should matter because we are being sold on the idea that this civil war can be easily divided into good and bad guys. Most wars don't align so neatly.
And yes- the assertion about tribal societies is based on the evidence that advanced liberal democracies require wider social trust than is unavailable in tribal societies.
And the "easily" part is aimed at the idea that we can involve ourselves in a civil war and be out "in a matter of days" - again, the world doesn't work this way. I seem to remember predictions about Iraq like '5 weeks, 5 days, 5 months, but not longer than that."