1. Really? I've met some right-wing Christians who told me they voted for Bush because they felt he was a war-monger who would start a war so great that it would destroy the world, thereby bringing about The End of Days. Then when that happened, these Christians said they would experience The Rapture.
(Personally, I am not for the end of Western Civilization.)
And then when I let on to them that I did not accept JC as my lord and savior they told me that I was not a Christian and I was going to burn in hell.
The Christian right means well, do they?

The Goddess Athena at 2:38PM on Jan 30th 2008

2. Bring on the rapture ASAP and get rid of these RepubliCon taliban........

Larry at 3:52PM on Jan 30th 2008

3. Hmmm. I am reminded of the inquisitor, Bernardo Gui in "The Name of the Rose." "We will torture you until you admit that you are a heretic, then we will burn you at the stake to save your soul."
Gui did not stop at waterboarding, he broke limbs.

Steve Seivers at 3:01PM on Jan 30th 2008

4. This blog sounded a lot like when Bill O'Reilly was amazed that black people act normal.

Really, listen to it. It assumes an image of conservatives as people who are trying to take rights away, and then expresses surprise that they have real heartfelt conviction about it. Believe it or not, but your enemies think that they are doing the right thing, too. In some cases, I don't really think there are "right" answers. Take abortion. Neither side is on firm ground. Conservatives are trying to equate a non-sentient lump of cells with a human, and liberals are trying to justify destroying that life because it is inconvenient. It comes down to a matter of what we think is better for the functioning of a healthy society, which isn't something that can be answered objectively. Cenk's amazement sounds terribly naive.

AndrewV at 3:19PM on Jan 30th 2008

5. No doubt about the sincerity of fundamentalist christians. Lots of people are sincerely crazy.

I have no doubt that Dick and the Neocons (sounds like a 50's 'doo wap' group) are sincere in their belief that the U.S. has to dominate the planet at the point of a gun.

I sure wish the "reasonable" Christians would stop enabling the crazy ones. Christians should clean their own house if they don't want to be lumped in with the most vocal and evil Christians.

Captain Negative at 3:52PM on Jan 30th 2008

6. #5 - Captain Negative - Thanks.

alan at 3:54PM on Jan 30th 2008

7. Cenk,

I have trouble understanding some peoples points of view on abortion. I don't know what your point of view is completely, but you said you are "pro-choice". I have trouble with that term. Getting a tattoo is a choice. Ending a human life is something else. Like I said, I'm not going to try to characterize your position, because I don't know what it is in entirety, but I have heard some arguments or reasons from other sources in favor of abortion that I don't agree with:

1. "It is a woman's own body and the government shouldn't tell her what she can or cannot do with it." Well it also involves the life (or death) of another human being. I've personally known women who have had abortions simply because they had a nice figure and didn't want to ruin it.

2. "A fetus isn't a human being yet, therefor it's not murder." How can we define "human" or "life" then? By definition life is "an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction." I'm also sure that an embryo possesses all the genetic traits of a human the instant the cell divides.

3. "It would be a financial burden for the mother bear." I'm in a financially burdened state right now. Would it legally or morally be an option for me euthanize my children to attempt to resolve that issue? If they were unborn still, would that take away from the fact that they are still my children?

4. "The world is over-populated." First, no it's not. Second, that's what certain programs, like planned parenthood, are for. Also the option for adoption are always available. There are plenty of loving and deserving people that cannot conceive that would love to adopt your child if you so wish to give it up for adoption. Also, the most effective way of preventing becoming pregnant, thus adding to the populous, is abstinence.

5. "What if there is a possibility of an un-healthy child." My wife had an ultrasound when she was pregnant with our second child. After examining the fetus, the doctor determined that our child was probably going to have downs syndrome. She immediately referred my wife to an abortion counselor without my knowledge. Long story short, our baby was born healthy. We would have readily accepted a baby with downs into our home anyway. I understand that there will always be circumstances to this situation, but I would also hope that other doctors would not be so quick to make abortion the solution to the problem.

6. "The mother was raped (or also in the case of incest). Carrying full term would be traumatic." I have mixed thought over this one. I would hope that counseling would at least be the very first option in this case.

8. "What if the health of the mother is in jeopardy." I have to be honest. If it was determined that the life of the mother was at stake due to the pregnancy I would have to say that abortion would be an option, but I can't help but to think about how easy it is to make a mistake. If the doctor made a mistake by determining our baby is going to have downs, is it possible to make a mistake in other areas?

9. Some single young women might consider abortion an option because they are scared. They don't want to tell their parents that they are sexually active. They might be afraid that they aren't capable to raise a child by themselves. They might fear the repercussions of raising a child without a father. They might be afraid of the lifestyle change (sleepless nights, less social life, reduced ability to complete school). Keep in mind that these are consequences for performing procreative activities. Once again abstinence would have been a good choice or those that didn't intend to conceive. And also once again, adoption is also a choice as well.

10. "We were utilizing birth control that failed." Try abstinence, I can only recall one circumstance that this method resulted in a pregnancy. If you want to have sex without becoming a parent, a hysterectomy or vasectomy is an option.

11. "Some people lack the education to effectively utilize birth control." Since when has education been a factor in arguing a crime? Could a lack of education be an argument for legalizing say... robbery?

12. "If we make abortion illegal, desperate women will perform 'coat hanger' abortions." Should we legalize professional robbery because desperately poor people would take the matters into their own hands anyway?

These are just a few arguments I have heard in the past. I would like to hear your ideas.

marc at 4:47PM on Jan 30th 2008

8. FUNNY HOW JEWS GET TO BE CRITICAL OF CHRISTIANS BUT NEVER VICE VERSA.
THERE IS CRITICISM OF ISRAEL-RELATED STORIES SO I THEIR PERSECUTION OF PALESTINIANS AND LEBONESE - MANY OF WHOM ARE CHRISTIANS: A RECENT ISRAELI REPORT FOUND THEY ARE DOING NOTHING WRONG IN ATTACKING LEBENON OR DENYING FOOD TO PALESTINIAN. THE US IS ALWAYS SILENT.

WOW - THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT DID A REPORT ON ITSELF AND FOUND NOTHING REALLY BAD WAS BEING DONE IN A RELIGIOUS STATE THAT THE US FUNDS TO THE HILT. NO BIAS THERE.

WHEN WILL THE AP STOP INSULTING OUR INTELLIGENCE AND TURN THE SAME CRITICAL EYE TOWARDS ISRAEL THAT THEY PUT ON THE REST OF THE WORLD? PROBABLY WHEN THE US JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STARTS QUESTIONING WHY JEWISH BIAS IN HIRING AND PROMOTION STILL GOES ON IN HOLLYWOOD & THE MEDIA EVEN THOUGH IT IS ILLEGAL AND BANNED BY THE 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.

taylor at 4:55PM on Jan 30th 2008

9. liberals are trying to justify destroying that life because it is inconvenient. AndrewV
________________
I have to disagree with you on this (like I did on the other blog). This is a misrepresentation of the pro-choice stance. Even under a pro-choice view, abortion is not taken lightly and certainly not regarded as a first resort.
Upholding pro-choice legislation has nothing to do with convenience.
Our constitution clearly separates church and state. Legislators cannot answer the question of when life begins in any context other than a religious or philosophical one. The lack of a clearly defined premise (when is a life a life?) would lead to laws based on religious opinions.
So it is not a matter of convenience, but of constitutionally afforded rights.

emma at 5:26PM on Jan 30th 2008

10. #7. Scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the link to ANY Dinesh D'Souza blog.

There you will find almost NOTHING BUT discussions on "abortion vs. choice" and when life begins.

Oh wait. You've just wandered off your patch. This is the equivalent of directing a cop to a doughnut shop. Pardon me.

Captain Negative at 5:27PM on Jan 30th 2008

11. emma @ 9 "life" is defined by Merriam-Webster's dictionary as "an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction" This is a scientific process to determine what "life" is. It has nothing to do with religion.

marc at 5:31PM on Jan 30th 2008

12. # 10 I'm seriously having trouble determining what point you are trying to make. Are you just attempting to be disrespectful?

marc at 5:35PM on Jan 30th 2008

13. I've been fairly critical of "The Young Turds" in the past due to the typical whacked out point of view on most any subject spoken about here, BUT I saw somewhat of a minor miracle here today. More than one minute of video played without this talking head not being obviously insulting, beligerent, condecending, or mean spirited toward someone who doesn't have the same views as Cenk Uygar. A civil discussion. What a novel consept.

Justincase at 5:36PM on Jan 30th 2008

14. 12. # 10 I'm seriously having trouble determining what point you are trying to make. Are you just attempting to be disrespectful
----------------------------------------------------

No. I'm attempting to escape the fundies!

Captain Negative at 5:37PM on Jan 30th 2008

15. "A fetus isn't a human being yet, therefor it's not murder." How can we define "human" or "life" then? By definition life is "an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction." I'm also sure that an embryo possesses all the genetic traits of a human the instant the cell divides.
______________________________________
Your definition is only one of many. It is the scientific definition that applies as much to bacterial cells as it does to human cells.
This false premise compromises your argument.
The question "When is a life a life?" is of purely philosophical nature and can have answers ranging from predestination to autonomy.
What you are trying to protect is the POTENTIAL of a cell to become a human and we clearly cannot base legislation on that.

emma at 5:40PM on Jan 30th 2008