These days they are calling them "stem cell tissue resources" and hey, they were going to be thrown out as medical waste anyway, so why not use'em?



heck, why not cook them on a grill, its just protein

Just read this on my computer screen:

ERROR 4838: Debate on abortion will cause system instability. Process canceled.

Hmm. Oh well.

I doubt all this joke cracking will spontaneously turn into a debate. That's like a riot spontaneously erupting nto a hockey game.

To get things back on track, I've also been reading the NY Times 2004 Almanac. I try to make it a point to by a different almanac each year. Last year I got the Britannica 2003. But its getting to the point where almanacs, dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc are almost not worth the paper they are written on. Google is just 10X faster in answering most questions. I'll say this for books, they are more fun to page flip and browse.

[throws]Can you look up how many abortions we had in this country last year?[/gasoline]

2004 almanac lists only up to 1998, in which 884,273 abortions were performed in the US, down from a million plus in 1997 and each year back until 1980. I wonder if the number has gone down because of the abortion pill not being listed as an actual abortion procedure. - Edit- I just noticed that 1998 data did not include AK, CA, NH, and OK. I bet California alone would make the final number break the one million mark.

Hmm, yes, under Internet, the number one visited website is Yahoo, with a listed audience of 87,895,000. I wonder where Cellar would fall on that list.

Oh, nice weather we are having, no?

Whoeee! Someone other than me who read the book instead of just seeing the movie!

Pretty please ...

Take the abortion debate to it's own thread, don't fuck up a perfectly good book discussion ...

There is a movie?????

Yup.

We're just screwin' with yah.

There's a book??!!!!!

books you are currently reading
 

Hi MrNoodle,
Since we were kind of discussing cowboys, I ran across this joke. Have a great day.
A successful rancher died and left everything to his devoted wife.
She was a very good looking woman, and determined to keep the ranch,
but knew very little about ranching, so she decided to place an ad in the
newspaper for a ranch hand.
Two men applied for the job. One was gay and the other a drunk.
She thought long and hard about it, and when no one else applied, she
decided to hire the gay guy, figuring it would be safer to have him
around the house than the drunk.
He proved to be a hard worker who put in long hours every day
and knew a lot about ranching. For weeks, the two of them worked, and the ranch was doing very well.
Then one day, the rancher's widow said to the hired hand,
"You have done a really good job and the ranch looks great. You
should go into town and kick up your heels."
The hired hand readily agreed and went into town one Saturday night.
However one o'clock came and he didn't return. Two o'clock and no hired hand. He returned around two-thirty and upon entering the room,
he found the rancher's widow sitting by the fireplace with a glass of wine
waiting for him.

She quietly called him over to her.

"Unbutton my blouse and take it off," she said. Trembling, he
did as she directed.

"Now take off my boots." He did as she asked, ever so slowly.

"Now take off my socks." He removed each gently and placed them neatly
by her boots.

"Now take off my skirt." He slowly unbuttoned it, constantly watching her
eyes in the fire light.


"Now take off my bra." Again with trembling hands he did as he was
told and dropped it to the floor.

Now," she said, "take off my panties." By the light of the fire, he
slowly pulled them down and off.

Then she looked at him and said, "If you ever wear my clothes
into town again,
I'll fire you on the spot."

I've read both the original, Hugo Winning novella and the expanded novel.

I remember liking the novella a lot better ... the story was tighter and most of the added stuff for the book was clearly padding to make it salable as a corollary product for the movie.

Michael Sheremer: TheScience of Good and Evil

From Booklist
The source of morality is the topic under discussion in Shermer's latest book to champion rationalism. Religion received a critique in How We Believe: The Search for God in an Age of Science (1999) and does so again as Shermer offers propositions on the origin of our ordinary, innate sense of right and wrong. Disposing of religion's rival, moral relativism, Shermer dedicates his effort to convincing readers that his thesis, labeled "provisional morality," makes more sense. What that means is that ethical rules are accepted conditionally and are as falsifiable as any scientific theory. Shermer takes this precept into the realm of evolutionary psychology, drawing applied ethics from such drastically different sources as anthropological field studies in Amazonia and the TV show The Honeymooners. Contending that the source of ethics is solely evolutionary, Sherman conducts his argument in an assertive but not gratuitously aggressive fashion. This stance as well as his populistic bent should earn him the hearing that he clearly hopes believers in God will give him. Gilbert Taylor
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...books&n=507846