Reason Roundup

Who Deserves Custody of an Embryo?: Reason Roundup

Plus: Massachusetts legalizes sex outside marriage, judge punts on FOSTA ruling, and Trump goes tariff mad.

|

L. SOUCI / BSIP/Newscom

Divorcing couple can't use their frozen embryos but someone else can, says judge. A new law in Arizona says that in embryo custody disputes, decisions must be made based on which party is most likely to have them "develop to birth." This first-of-its-kind measure—signed in April and taking effect this month—portends an expanding front on the pro-life battleground: the fight over frozen embryos.

Slate takes a look today at the law firm and group of activists trying to secure more rights for the excess embryos created as part of in vitro fertilization procedures, and to establish preferential legal treatment for parties who want to see more of them become babies. At the forefront is the Thomas More Society, which represents people in frozen-embryo custody disputes. In Slate's words, the group "argues that embryos should not be treated as pieces of jointly owned property because they have a right to life that supersedes an adult's right not to reproduce."

The Thomas More Society helped get Arizona's new embryo law passed, in part as a response to the situation between Ruby Torres and John Joseph Terrell. After they dated for a few months, Torres was diagnosed with cancer. The couple

created seven embryos before Torres went through cancer treatment. Later, during the couple's divorce proceedings, she said she wanted to keep the embryos for possible use since she probably couldn't get pregnant without them. Terrell said [he] didn't want his genetic material to be involved in Torres' hypothetical pregnancy at all. An Arizona Superior Court judge ruled that Torres couldn't make a baby with the embryos without Terrell's consent.

But, the judge added, the embryos shouldn't be destroyed—they must be donated, offered up to infertile people who can't make embryos themselves.

From the pro-life perspective, this is the second-best outcome: The woman who wants to bring the embryos to life doesn't get to keep them, but they still stand a chance of becoming children. For pro-choice observers, however, it's a disturbing decision. Why should a stranger have the right to use Torres and Terrell's embryos when neither of them approved that option? If Terrell's argument was compelling enough for the judge to deny Torres possession of the embryos, why wasn't it enough to keep the embryos out of a mass donation bin, forcing him to have biological children he still doesn't want?

Embryo custody battles are increasingly coming before courts, which have ruled in both directions but typically err on the side of not allowing the fertilized eggs to be used unless both parents consent.

"Judges have often—but not always—ruled in favor of the person who does not want the embryos used," notes The Washington Post, "sometimes ordering them destroyed, following the theory that no one should be forced to become a parent. Arizona, however, is taking the opposite approach."

FREE MINDS

Massachusetts repeals old sex laws. It took a few hundred years, but Massachusetts legislators have finally declared it legal to have sex outside of marriage, to distribute information about abortion, and to prescribe birth control to single women. The Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young (NASTY) Women Act would "repeal a number of archaic laws, some dating back to the 1600s, 1700s and 1800s," reports the Springfield Republican's Shira Schoenberg:

These include laws punishing adultery and fornication; criminalizing abortion and distributing information about abortion; requiring abortions be performed in a hospital; and prohibiting doctors from prescribing contraception to unmarried women.

Of course the laws aren't enforced any longer—as Schoenberg notes, "most of the laws are unconstitutional and unenforceable under other state and federal laws." But "this is an important moment to shore up all of our rights here in Massachusetts," Rebecca Hart Holder, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, tells the paper, noting the possibility that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade.

That's the sort of stuff that makes good fundraising fodder for NARAL. But one needn't believe we're on the fast track to A Handmaid's Tale to support the repeal of outdated and authoritarian laws.

The measure was approved by both houses of the Massachusetts Legislature this week and sent to Republican Gov. Charlie Baker.

FREE MARKETS

Tax all the things!

FOLLOW-UP

No ruling on FOSTA injunction. "Judge Richard Leon of United States District Court in Washington D.C. made no ruling on [the Woodhull Freedom Foundation's] request for a preliminary injunction" that would block enforcement of the anti-prostitution law until the case is resolved, "nor did he announce a date when he would issue a ruling," reports AVN.

QUICK HITS

Forbes sorts through various crypto regulation proposals.

• A win for gun rights in California.

• Rape kit backlogs are a real problem. This has nothing to do with the solution.

• On algorithms, information asymmetry, and regulation.

• "I bought the Chicagoist just to run you racist bitches out of business."

• The Pennsylvania Supreme Court just upheld Philadelphia's soda tax.

• Trump's military parade is slated to cost $12 million—about double that of the South Korean "war games" the president has panned for being too "tremendously expensive."

Advertisement

NEXT: Fed Chair: Cryptocurrency Investors Are 'Unsophisticated'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. A win for gun rights in California.

    Has to be the independent state of North California.

    1. Hello.

  2. Any now you know why they want 4 year olds to be legally able to pick their ‘gender’:

    TEDx speaker says, ‘pedophilia is a natural sexual orientation’

    1. Not sure how you got from the one to the other there.

      1. Zeb, it states that premise in the article he linked to.

        1. Have you guys heard of any good pizza joints?

          I want to believe!

        2. I’m not seeing it. No mention of gender identity at all.

          1. “According to current research, pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation,” Heine argued.

            Some people use ‘sex’ in place of ‘gender’.

            The TED talker claim did seem to be more about sexual preference, like homosexuality.

            1. …wow. WOW.

              The retarded here, it’s immense. All encompassing.

              If the retarded in this post was personified, when it sat around the house, it’d sit around the house. When it died, it would feed all of Africa for a year. When it walked down the street, people would yell “Run! Godzilla!”

              I’m serious, Longtorso sent you a quick pass of retardedness, and you decided to slapshot it into the net. The net of RETARDATION.

            2. Yes, but no one uses “sexual orientation” in place of gender.

              1. Yes, but no one uses “sexual orientation” in place of gender.

                For some the distinction smacks a bit of esoteric discussions of (Trinitarianism vs.) Binitarianism vs. Monarchianism vs. Modal Monarchianism (except much more shallow, contemporary, and self-centered).

                No one uses the Holy Ghost in place of Jesus, everybody knows that!

                1. For some the distinction smacks a bit of esoteric discussions of (Trinitarianism vs.) Binitarianism vs. Monarchianism vs. Modal Monarchianism (except much more shallow, contemporary, and self-centered).

                  For some morons, maybe. Do you think there’s anything interchangeable about saying “I’m a man” and “I’m heterosexual”?

                  1. Do you think there’s anything interchangeable about saying “I’m a man” and “I’m heterosexual”?

                    Do I think that? No, of course not. Am I convinced that the SJW Gender Warriors don’t think that? Not even vaguely.

              2. Zeb, you are probably correct.

      2. Not sure how you got from the one to the other there.

        Well, if you mean from one link to the next then this makes sense, but if you’re saying how you can’t see how having toddlers pick their own ‘gender’ from the lists of genders we all get to use now then you’re being obtuse.

        The list of genders includes various sexual presentations, preferences and paraphilias. Making toddlers aware enough of human sexuality that they can actively choose among them is massively sexualizing children.

        And sexualized children is something pedophiles really, really want.

  3. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court just upheld Philadelphia’s soda tax.

    Speaking of places that should break off and make their own state.

  4. The Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young (NASTY) Women Act

    Hahaha, oh shit.

    1. “NASTY Women Act”? Is that really what they wanted it to be called? Couldn’t find an acronym that spells “SLUTTY”?

      1. Was Casey Affleck somehow involved in drafting the law? “Fackin’… whateveh, kid.”

      2. WICKED and PISSA are out of date now unfortunately.

        1. Not here in Massatwoshits they aren’t!

          1. Well, I guess I don’t get out east enough. Nobody uses them inland.

      3. I could see it taking a few hundred years to come up with an acronym that awful.

  5. Trump’s military parade is slated to cost $12 million?about double that of the South Korean “war games” the president has panned for being too “tremendously expensive.”

    But with fewer china-men and right here on main street USA so we can all watch. Details.

    1. What’s the point of a display of force if there isn’t the threat of instigating nuclear war?

      1. You must have had an interesting physics teacher. Jesuit school?

    2. Come on, man. There’s no hyphen in “Chinamen”.

      1. The hyphen makes it more offensive. It’s an old timey slight

        1. When I was in college there was a bit of a controversy and editorial fight in the student newspaper over whether “Asian American” ought to have a hyphen or not. People were passionately making the case on both sides. Some utterly convinced that putting the hyphen in there was the most offensive thing in the world and others claiming the complete opposite. It was something.

          1. I’m so glad that we subsidize colleges where they wrestle with the tough questions

            1. Careful. Wrestling with the tough questions is a Title IX violation if you don’t get consent forms signed and notarized beforehand.

            2. And that was 20 years ago. I can’t imagine what new stupid crap they’ve come up with since then.

              1. You don’t have to imagine. Just read Robby’s Title IX reports.

              2. And that was 20 years ago. I can’t imagine what new stupid crap they’ve come up with since then.

                Using anything other than a tilde (“Asian~American”) is literally genocide.

          2. Zeb was also involved in a spirited editorial fight as to whether Indian Pale Ale should have a hyphen in it.

          3. Retard-American.

            Retard American.

            Discuss.

            1. You don’t get to use that phrase, you Canadian.

              1. “Canadian~American”?

                1. Rufus is more American than some of the Tony’s on here.

                  I would gladly sponsor that Canadian bastard if he would accept the star ‘n stripes instead of his Maple leaf.

        2. Just call them what they really are – celestials

            1. Oh shit, wait, is Middle-Earth some kind of allegory for China?

              1. It’s what they were called in the late 1800s west.

                Damn, didn’t you watch Deadwood?

            2. +1 Middle Earth

    3. Also, Dude, China-man is not the preferred nomenclature…

      1. The China-man is not the issue here.

        1. Forget it, Jake-man, it’s China-town.

  6. Sen. @RandPaul: “Trump derangement syndrome has officially come to the Senate. The hatred for the President is so intense that partisans would rather risk war than give diplomacy a chance.”

    I look forward to the eventual inclusion of TDS in the DSM-6.

    1. TDS or not, pushing against a narrative beloved by the intelligence community is actually brave. There is so few of that in Washington

      1. I go by how people react to things too.

        The Lefties and the Deep State are so against oversight of the US Intel service that I think there is fire where there is smoke.

    2. Of course, no mention of Obama derangement syndrome either. Or Bush before that. Or Clintholio even further back.

      As to Rand, who I gienerally like, he is being a dipshit here. There’s not going to be any war with Russia because Russia is not equipped militarily or economically to fight a war against anyone larger than.. Crimea. In fact, if anything might lead to a war it is condoning, through action or passivity, Russian meddling and aggression.

      I do hope Rand remembers all his lofty words when the bombs are dropping on Persia.

      1. As is pointed out below, history began in 2016. Mostly because scrolling any further back on Twitter takes forever.

        1. I look forward to some elementary history teacher in the future saying “Kids, for tomorrow, please read all of Donald Trump’s tweets from October 2016.”

          1. Future history classes are gonna be dumb as hell.

      2. “There’s not going to be any war with Russia because Russia is not equipped militarily or economically to fight a war against anyone larger than.. Crimea.”

        Are you not familiar with Syria?

        “I do hope Rand remembers all his lofty words when the bombs are dropping on Persia.”

        Did you get this talking point from Think Progress? Are you not familiar with Paul’s opposition to pulling out of the Iran Deal?

        http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09…..eal-242945

        1. Calling Rand a hypocrite on intervention overseas is probably one of the more ignorant positions that one can take. Rand may not be his father, but he’s been fairly consistent on this point

      3. “”There’s not going to be any war with Russia because Russia is not equipped militarily or economically to fight a war against anyone larger than.. Crimea. “”

        Maybe. Have you seen their 3m22 Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles? One can possibly take out a US Carrier.

        I haven’t heard of a US hypersonic cruise missile. Perhaps we have some and they are classified.

      4. “There’s not going to be any war with Russia because Russia is not equipped militarily or economically to fight a war against anyone larger than.. Crimea. In fact, if anything might lead to a war it is condoning, through action or passivity, Russian meddling and aggression.”

        This is the kind of progressive/neocon/globalist carelessness that leads to tragedy.

        “Don’t poke the bear. I’m telling you, you need to stop poking the bear. If you keep poking it, the bear’s eventually gonna get pissed.”
        “Come on, that bear’s not gonna do anything. I’m just gonna keep poking it.”

        Then Werner Herzog makes a documentary.

  7. The Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young (NASTY) Women Act

    You can’t fool *me*, Elizabeth. That’s from The Onion!

  8. It took a few hundred years, but Massachusetts legislators have finally declared it legal to have sex outside of marriage…

    “Well, now we don’t even want to anymore.”

    (But said with that hideous accent.)

  9. NASTY Women Act

    Take that, Trump!

    1. Oh, I think I get it now. It’s about his comment about Hillary. That’s fucking lame.

      1. That is the least interesting possible explanation for that particular acronym. What a disappointment.

        1. How was it not incredibly obvious? They “took back” “nasty” like two years ago now.

          1. That’s about how long ago i quit Facebook and stopped keeping up with the latest developments in dumbass hysteria, so the timing checks out.

  10. But one needn’t believe we’re on the fast track to A Handmaid’s Tale to support the repeal of outdated and authoritarian laws.

    I believe a ban on indoor bathtubs is still on the books here in Virginia.

    1. It is. We can smell Virginians all the way in Georgia.

      1. Alas for your attempt at an interstate burn, “on the books” is not at all the same thing as “enforced” or “followed by anyone ever.”

        1. Not sure how that refutes the point that Virginians are a smelly people by disposition

          1. If lc1683 can’t appreciate a hard-working manly musk, that’s not my problem.

            1. ‘manly musk’ is Virginian for stank?

              Now I know.

                1. O….kay Citizen. I will accept your word for it.

          2. What state are you in, anyway? I bet it doesn’t even have a coastline.

      2. How can you smell anything in Georgia over the aroma of burnt Waffle House bacon and that white stuff on top of chicken shit.

        1. There are not Waffle Houses in every town and Buttplug keeps to his task of cleaning up chickenshit with post- haste.

  11. The Seven Stages of a Woman’s Scorn
    When I got to the hotel, I locked myself in the bathroom, and out of spite, I did as much blow as I could and superficially cut my wrists for attention.

    I was torn between wanting him to feel bad if I died, but also not wanting his sorry ass to be the reason I killed myself. Those stupid cuts would land me in the psych ward when I went to check myself into rehab seven days later.

    1. For me personally, it’s an ugly, spiteful, nasty side of myself that I hate to confront. I resort to name-calling and running passive-aggressive commentary. I aggressively attack everything else he holds dear???e.g., his hobbies, his mother, his best friends and his sports team.

      But while I’m projecting my rage outward, I’m really furious at myself. I’m furious he didn’t capitulate to my sexual charms and complete me. I’m furious I couldn’t bully or manipulate him into loving me. I’m angry that I slept with him???again.

      I’ll say things like: “You’re the worst thing that ever happened to me,” and “I can do so much better.” I’ll make a fool of myself in the process. Like the time I called my ex lover, Ryan, and told him, “Let me know when your wife’s family makes you get rid of all your tattoos because you’re a SELLOUT.” I made his wife cry. I then had to go directly to a BBQ where he and his wife were in attendance. I didn’t stop there either. I proceeded to do a bunch of blow and make amends with his wife with cocaine in my nostrils.

        1. I understand she’s dead.

          1. But her blog will live forever.

      1. Women like this make me wish sexuality really was something you could pick.

  12. We are moving toward a society controlled by algorithms, but very few of us actually understand how they work. This asymmetry of information is a recipe for disaster.

    That’s why writing a simple computer program (say, compute and print out the first 10 prime numbers) should be a prerequisite for voting.

    1. Being able to program a woodchipper.

      1. “Digits first!”

  13. Of course the laws aren’t enforced any longer

    Well that’s obviously not true. The public reading of the scarlet letters is still mandated in many schools.

    1. It’s better than passing out condoms, isn’t it?

  14. “[The] decisive ruling offers renewed hope for tens of thousands of Philadelphia children and families who struggle for better lives in the face of rampant poverty,” Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney said in a statement

    “We want to make the right choice the easy choice,” he added, just because he felt his original statement wasn’t smug asshole enough.

    1. Unbelievable. It’s hard to imagine how a person can contain so much self satisfied smuggery in one brain.

  15. embryos should not be treated as pieces of jointly owned property because they have a right to life

    Then why aren’t *all* embryos raised to adulthood?

    1. If embryos have a right to life, then abortion should be illegal.

      1. I have to admit, if you start giving embryos legal rights you are in dangerous territory for then saying its no problem killing the embryos.

        Its like the state laws that add charges for battery to pregnant mothers because embryo but other mothers can kill those embryos if they want.

      2. That would certainly be the logical conclusion.

        Hell, those things are probably stopped at the “just fertilized” stage.

        If those are “embryos” with a “right to life” then even the morning after pill would be a violation of that.

        I’m not saying I actually agree with these positions, but they are definitely the logical follow through.

      3. If embryos have a right to life, miscarriages should be investigated for negligent manslaughter.

    2. I am just glad this whole thread didn’t turn into an abortion shitstorm.

      1. Could be a slow burn. Eddie’s not here yet, so give it time.

  16. Massachusetts repeals old sex laws. It took a few hundred years, but Massachusetts legislators have finally declared it legal to have sex outside of marriage, to distribute information about abortion, and to prescribe birth control to single women. The Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young (NASTY) Women Act would “repeal a number of archaic laws, some dating back to the 1600s, 1700s and 1800s,” reports the Springfield Republican’s Shira Schoenberg:

    Wait. Bill Weld didnt do this when he was in charge?

    I though Reason considers him Libertarian.

  17. From the pro-life perspective, this is the second-best outcome: The woman who wants to bring the embryos to life doesn’t get to keep them, but they still stand a chance of becoming children.

    I wonder why this is only “second-best” for pro-lifers. Why would they care if Torres kept them or not as long as they’re alive? Couldn’t they basically grow up in Matrix-style pods and live their whole lives without ever waking up and it would pretty much be the same to pro-lifers?

    1. You seem to really have a firm grasp on the pro-life position. I’m sure they would make just as coherent of an argument as you did about them.

      1. I didn’t make an argument. I asked a couple of questions. But since the general gist of their position is to value life regardless of its quality, I’m curious.

        1. Some of your questions were disingenuous.

          It would be like a pro-life person saying: “So if only sentient life has value then it’s OK to kill someone in a temporary a coma?”

          1. But, agree to disagree


        2. I didn’t make an argument. I asked a couple of questions.

          Didn’t work for Socrates, also won’t work for you.

    2. I wonder about that too. Why is it second best? I consider myself legally pro-choice and morally pro-life, but to me that just means that instead of abortions, unwanted kids should be given up for adoption. Why is this second-best if the point is for the kids to live?

      1. Yes, the obvious question is, “is adoption second-best?”

        I mean, maybe from a pro-family perspective, it is second-best, but from a purely pro-life perspective, why would it be?

        1. That’s a good point

    3. I wonder why this is only “second-best” for pro-lifers.

      Reconciliation followed and a happy home is right out!

  18. Those who support the tax say it is better for people’s health, particularly those from low-income backgrounds who often buy soda because it is affordable.

    As opposed to, say, tap water?

    1. Funny that it never occurs to them that maybe their subjects just don’t care about “health” in the same way that rich politicians do with their yoga classes and stationary bikes.

      1. “with their yoga classes”

        You’re dangerously close to mocking yoga pants. And I won’t have that.

        1. I did, indeed, almost go there.

          1. Tread lightly my friend. Don’t ruin this for men everywhere. The yoga pants trend is the best thing to happen to us since that brief thong craze in the early 2000’s

            1. Rhywun prefers dudes, so he may not fully get the importance of yoga pants to us breeders.

              1. Oh yeah. Good point. But guys wear yoga pants too

                1. I would assume

                  1. But guys wear yoga pants too … I would assume

                    Not really. A bit impractical, I would think.

                    1. A roomful of dudes in yoga pants would be like a FedEx distribution center – packages visible EVERYWHERE.

                    2. Rhywun would absolutely, positively be there overnight. /999,999 left

            2. Oh yeah. Watching 300-pound women strut around in pants stretched so far they’re see-through is the highlight of my day.

              *barf*

              1. I don’t know where you live, but it sounds terrible

                1. @Just Say’n: Buddy, he lives in America. Now you take that back.

                  1. Never

                2. $park? lives in a display shed in the Walmart garden center.

                  1. $park? lives in a display shed in the Walmart garden center.

                    It wouldn’t be unfair to call the city I live in a giant, outdoor Walmart in terms of the people who live here.

              2. Like all things, yoga pants are a mixed blessing at best.

                1. Like all things, yoga pants are a mixed blessing at best.

                  Like fire, a dangerous servant and a terrible master.

                  1. But like most dangerous things, the rewards are worth the risk.

                  2. Like alcohol, the cause of, and solution to all of life’s problems.

    2. How else are municipalities supposed to poison you, via tap water like in Flint, if you drink soda?

      1. “It’s my little way of sticking it to The Man.”

  19. FREE MARKETS
    Tax all the things!

    Most everything in the USA is taxed already. Pre-Trump even.

    More nonsense from Reason about free markets in a vacuum.

  20. “BREAKING: Trump says he’s ‘ready’ to put tariffs on all $505 billion of Chinese goods imported to the US”

    Looking forward to the argument that the GATT exemption for national defense doesn’t apply because China is totes an ally.

    Maybe….there should be not national defense exemption. Crazy- I know

      1. Peter Suderman assures me that anyone who questions the FBI or the intel community is a traitor.

      2. China’s intelligence success is due in part to … its capacity to take a patient, long-term view.

        As opposed to optimizing results for the Quarter, the way God intended.

        1. OUr intelligence agencies take the long view. The people who run them do so with an eye towards getting a high paying job and easy retirement working for a Chinese funded think tank.

            1. That’s a Japanese racist insult, you racist!

              1. Are you sure its not Japan-ese?

        2. The “patient, long-term view” is a pretty accurate description of how we wound up with the Deep State swamp. The left has absolutely perfected that technique.

          1. Yes they have, although lately they seem to have lost their patience and are dropping the mask before they have control of the government.

          2. It’s more than just “left” and “right”.

            Am I the only one who remembers the lead-up to the Iraq War?

            1. Before they rewrote history, the left was pretty down with the Iraq war. They were also pretty down with the Vietnam war. Bush and Johnson have a lot of things in common. One of them is that the very people who cheered them on when they went to war later turned on them and acting like it was all their idea.

              1. Yes. Because “war” is a bipartisan goal. The last time it wasn’t, Robert Taft was running for president.

                1. And Wilson was lying his ass off about staying out of war in Europe.

                  1. So did FDR. FDR was itching to help the Commies destroy the Socialist Nazis.

                    I would bet money that FDR would have gotten the US involved in Europe during WWII, even if Germany had not declared war on the USA.

  21. http://www.npr.org/2018/07/20/6306593…..um=twitter

    “Something must be done!”

    “What?”

    “Something!”

    “You’re talking about war?”

    “Oh my God, what a straw man. We’re talking about SOMETHING!”

    1. Yes! Offer to deliver our ambassador into custody!

    2. On NPR this morning, Mara Liasson was doing a narrative about the Helsinki summit. She said, ‘Trump was breaking from the intelligence community by saying he wouldn’t trust Putin… or rather… that he *would* trust Putin.’ It was funny, you could almost hear the “Fuck!” in her head over the radio.

  22. Massachusetts legislators have finally declared it legal to have sex outside of marriage, to distribute information about abortion, and to prescribe birth control to single women

    They didn’t declare it legal, they stopped declaring it illegal. There’s a difference, Blondie.

  23. Trump says he’s ‘ready’ to put tariffs on all $505 billion of Chinese goods imported to the US

    Whatever happened to Trump’s concern about the Japanese screwing us on trade so bad?

  24. For years, these terms and approaches have been guiding myriad choices in our lives, yet the vast majority of us have just had to accept these decisions at face value because we don’t understand the science behind them.

    But Consensus!

    1. Then you won’t mind explaining how your car’s air-conditioner works, right?

      1. That’s easy. Hot air goes in and rubs against a cold element then comes out cold.

        1. This also serves as an explanation of how your marriage works. Ba dum TSSHHH

          1. [golf clap]

      2. How much detail do you want?

  25. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..rmany.html

    Another dreamer in Germany lives out his dream.

    1. Just think, if they had the second amendment there, he could have killed those 14 people! FREEDOM!!!

      1. Or those people could have defended themselves and he would have ended up bringing a knife to a gun fight. Those people were defenseless and died so that jackasses like you could feel better about themselves.

        1. Obviously you didn’t read the article, jackass.

          Nobody died.

          Even if someone was armed, if the attacker had a gun, he likely would have gotten off a number of rounds and the injuries would have been more serious or fatal. Because jackasses like you could enjoy your Rambo fantasies.

          1. GUNS! Makes America great!

    2. How that fat, ugly, potato-sack looking hausfrau Merkel is still hanging onto her job is beyond me.

  26. From WaPo:

    “The Justice Department plans to alert the public to foreign operations targeting U.S. democracy under a new policy designed to counter hacking and disinformation campaigns such as the one Russia undertook in 2016 to disrupt the presidential election.

    The government will inform American companies, private organizations and individuals that they are being covertly attacked by foreign actors attempting to affect elections or the political process.

    “Exposing schemes to the public is an important way to neutralize them,” said Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, who announced the policy at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado, according to prepared remarks. “The American people have a right to know if foreign governments are targeting them with propaganda.”

    1. This is normal and most definitely won’t be abused.

      1. [IMG this_is_fine.jpg]

          1. I was going for the implication.

            1. This is the Reason comments section! Without PM Links, we can’t be expected to pick up on implications any more!

              L0W3R J00R FUCK1NG $?4ND4RD$

              1. My comments not necessarily meant for mass consumption.

            2. Since we can’t embed gifs or jpegs, a written out name of a meme can be funny when done correctly, as Citizen X did here.

              1. See? Chipper gets it. [weeps softly]

    2. So the government is now going to be in the business of calling political speech and activity agents of foreign influence. What could possibly go wrong?

      1. Just wrap yourself in the flag and rock back and forth chanting: “The intelligence community is good. What happened to the DNC is most definitely unprecedented. History began in 2016. The US is never the aggressor in the world. David Frum, Max Boot, and Bill Kristol are reasonable conservatives.”

        If you do that you should be fine.

        1. The DNC and Jon Podesta are America. Reading their emails and exposing them to the world was just like Pearl Harbor. Just like it!! We are at war man.

          The campaign medal for the coming war against Russia will have a think tank guy typing on a computer on the back of it.

          1. Theft is good!
            Receiving stolen materials is good!

            1. Its reprinting is covered by the 1st Amendment.

              Thank God too or Trump would never have won against Hillary. Hahaha.

    3. Y’know, I’m not convinced that “The dirty laundry of the DNC’s that was aired… that was stolen from them by foreigners, so you just ignore it, now” is going to work so well.

      1. If DNC and Podesta emails were hacked by at least one American and ‘x’ number of Russians, would that have changed this narrative at all?

        I don’t think so.

  27. Two comments before reading other comments.

    Is it not possible that the prospective father does not wish to be saddled with 20+ years of child support and college tuition? Why not just tell the prospective mother that she is on her own financially? Of course this presumes future judges and legislators would be bound by that decision.

    They really called that legislation the NASTY Women Act? How dumb are these people?

    1. I would imagine that is exactly what is going on. If you are going to claim a legal right to abortion, then you can’t treat embryos outside of the womb as human beings. In the case of an ordinary pregnancy, the women necessarily have the power of decision because I don’t think anyone has the right to force someone to get a medical procedure, which is what an abortion is. But in this case, destroying the embryo doesn’t require forcing the woman to get a medical procedure. So, I think the husband has a right to have it destroyed right up until the woman has it implanted. Once it is implanted, the husband should be out of luck. But before that, he should have just as much right to order it destroyed as the woman does.

      1. Silly rabbit, men don’t have any rights in the reproductive sphere.

    2. Reading the bit about that, it seemed not impossible that the father came to the conclusion that he didn’t want to saddle children with the genes for a pre-disposition to cancer.

      Which I’m pretty sympathetic to, given my personal decision not to breed due to juvenile onset rheumatoid arthritis. I would presumably like a child of mine, and I really wouldn’t want to inflict this on anyone else, especially someone I liked.

      1. Interesting aspect I should have guessed at, and maybe next time I’ll RTFA.

        Ha ha, just kidding! But thanks.

      2. That is a very good point. Or, perhaps he is an anti-natalist, like Nikki (who is still the worst), and believe that bringing a child into the world is morally wrong. There are many reasons someone could believe that, from being an anti-overpopulation zealot, to a Buddhist who believes life is suffering, to someone who simply sees that most people are unhappy more often than they are happy and does not wish to impose unhappiness on others.

  28. Who Deserves Custody of an Embryo?

    “Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.” – William Munny

  29. “BREAKING: Trump says he’s ‘ready’ to put tariffs on all $505 billion of Chinese goods imported to the US”

    Everything Trump says seems to be an existential threat to civilization.

    Is the left fundamentally opposed to Trump slapping China with tariffs in reality? Or are they just against what he says?

    Are libertarians of the Reasonoid/social justice persuasion willing to give Trump credit for deregulation, etc. in spite of what he says?

    As much as I oppose trade barriers, unions, etc. that are so popular in the rust belt, I’m starting to wonder if the white, blue collar, middle class of the Midwest are the only rational group of people of any size left in the United States of America. They may be wrong, but at least they’re reasonable.

  30. Why would you create an embryo without an intent to have a child??? Shouldn’t either potential parent have thought of that BEFORE jointly creating an embryo? I don’t see how it is either fair or just to deny either the right to parentage of an embryo after it’s been created. There is an investment and in the case cited above, a permanently lost opportunity if denied this right.

    It’s basically tantamount to forcing her to go through an abortion because the father had regrets after impregnating her.

  31. Remember “my body, my choice”? If the embryo is in your body, went the argument, you should be able to kill it.

    Now these “excess” embryos (chilling term) are not in someone’s body, but in a lab. So “my body, my choice” doesn’t seem to apply.

    The “prochoice” side has also, in this context, also abandoned the idea that they are simply acting based on their deep caring about women’s rights. The’d like either parent – even the dad – to have the “excess” embryos killed.

    The way to avoid having all these “excess” embryos is not to kill them, but for infertile couples to adopt children who already exist instead of creating new ones, who will be branded “excess” and disposable.

  32. Rand Slams Brennan: ‘Most Biased, Bigoted ? Hyperbolic, Unhinged Director of the CIA’ Ever
    ‘John Brennan started out his adulthood by voting for the communist party presidential candidate’

    Rand Slams Brennan

  33. BREAKING: DNC/Clinton lawyers were old friends with former FBI Director Bob Mueller’s computer forensics analyst. That’s why they hired him and his firm CrowdStrike to run forensics on alleged Russian hacking of DNC system. Voila! The analyst quickly concluded it was the Russians

    Clinton campaign counsel Marc Elias hired CrowdStrike to write the unusual public report blaming Russia for hacking the DNC in June 2016 ? the same month Elias hired Fusion GPS & Steele to write the dossier pinning the hacking on not just Russia but also Trump campaign

    The CrowdStrike analyst who ran the forensics on DNC servers worked for Mueller at FBI and in fact was personally promoted by Mueller

    If this is true, big trouble for Mueller and Deep State narrative.

    1. The Trump Campaign and NRCC also hired Crowdstrike.

      They are probably better equipped to respond than the FBI.

      1. Also, Fusion GPS was hired by the Democratic law firm because they had already started the investigation for the Free Beacon. The law firm took over the payments after the Free Beacon stopped.

      2. Crowdstrike is a tool of the FBI and NSA.

        Shawn Henry, a former FBI manager, was hired to lead Crowdstrike’s push to grab business within the US government.

        I would not be surprised at all to learn that Crowdstrike is partly responsible for the cross-campaign computer security issues of 2016.

        1. In December 2016, CrowdStrike released a report[22] stating that Russian government-affiliated group Fancy Bear had hacked a Ukrainian artillery app. They erroneously concluded that Russia had used the hack to cause large losses to Ukrainian artillery units.
          Crowdstrike blog- Ukrainian artillery units

    2. Ahh, Gateway Pundit. Famous for “The Vegas shooter was a Democrat!” and “The Charlottesville attacker was an anti-Trump protestor!” and “Soros is paying anti-Trump protestors $50/hour!”.

      No wonder you didn’t link to your source.

      1. Hey, that’s pretty good Chanandler Bong. You really got upset on this .

        Wrong source and “It was unclear whether or not the hackers actually gained access to campaign computers.[…]
        The Trump campaign has hired security firm CrowdStrike, which also is assisting the Democratic National Committee, according to one person briefed on the matter. The company declined to comment.A different outside security firm was hired to examine software the Trump and Clinton campaigns use to manage mailings, electronic outreach and other campaign efforts, another person who was briefed on the issue said.A spokeswoman for Trump’s campaign declined to comment. A spokesman for the Republican National Committee could not immediately be reached for comment. “

        Notice that nobody at Trump’s campaign, RNCC, or Crowdstrike would confirm the Reuters claim?

        1. Luckily it’s public record.

          Looking for the 2016 expenditure reports (Crowdstrike wasn’t a top vendor, so isn’t easy to find on opensecrets).

          1. opensecrets is pretty good for finding info on which cronies are giving to the DNC.

            Where does it state what Crowdstrike was hired for?

            Where does it state that Trump hired Crowdstrike?

            Yeah, big gap in your fever dreams.

  34. I think planned parenthood should be given custody. They clearly know how to deal with unruly embryos, and how to monetize the aftermath.

  35. Embryo*s*
    plural

    Why wouldn’t you split them up, and flip a coin for the last one?

  36. Shop http://www.moschinoonlinesale.com Moschino Outlet Store, Buy Moschino McDonald Small Leather Bag Red with Big Discount, Fast Delivery and Free Worldwide Shipping…
    moschino purse

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.