« Illustration Gig | Main | A Look Back, #2 (May, 2005) »

A Look Back, #1 (May, 2005)

05.05.26.CultureClub-X.jpg

The next several posts will be a stroll through Cox and Forkum land while I'm away on vacation. Hope you enjoy looking back.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.johncoxart.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1376

Comments (14)

Jewels:

and here we are, 5 years later. Embryonic stem cell research has progressed through private funding and has gone on to create.... tumors. Fabulous.

Meanwhile, ADULT stem cell research has helped reverse type 1 diabetes, cure skin diseases, rebuilt immune systems for Crohn's sufferers, and also plumped the skin for aging celebrities hoping to retain that youthful glow! ;)

I do miss these old Cox and Forkum cartoons. Could never understand why you guys weren't in every newspaper.

Jewels:

and here we are, 5 years later. Embryonic stem cell research has progressed through private funding and has gone on to create.... tumors. Fabulous.

Meanwhile, ADULT stem cell research has helped reverse type 1 diabetes, cure skin diseases, rebuilt immune systems for Crohn's sufferers, and also plumped the skin for aging celebrities hoping to retain that youthful glow! ;)

I do miss these old Cox and Forkum cartoons. Could never understand why you guys weren't in every newspaper.

Cowboy:

Jewels is correct. Embryonic stem cell research has shown little to no promise, while adult stem cell research has produced a lot of promise. Notice how the left and the liberal dominated establishment mass media always just say "stem cell research"...

I'm getting angry again so will go home now!

Tom Wms.:

A childhood friend of mine is a highly respected oncologist throughout this country and much of the world. He went on a high charged rant when "W" didn't sign the bill a few years ago. He blamed the Christian right, conservatives, moderates, right-to-life people, religion in general – basically anybody who had an opinion different from his own. I responded which resulted in a mini-blog fight. It is safe to say we are probably not friends any longer. I wonder what he has to say today.

Tom Wms.:

By the way, John, have a great and well deserved vacation. Thanks for giving us something to do with our free time.

I love your guy's stuff, and John I'm glad you're still around to poke fun at the donks... but time and scientific research have proven you got this one wrong. Considering everything else the left gets wrong, you shouldn't be surprised.

Good for you Jewels, for being the first post.

Kevin[0]:

Bon Voyagee, John!

Terwiliger:

Good point JEWEL.

Embryonic stem cell research is LEGAL. If it holds so much promise, there should be enough incentive for corporations to pony up their own research funding.

About the only thing "Dubya" got RIGHT was not signing a bill that would permit the seizure of property from private citizens to (1) promote feticide; & (2) dump truckloads of money down yet another hole of specialized corporate interests.

“With regard to the freedom of the individual for choice with regard to abortion, there’s one individual who’s not being considered at all. That’s the one who is being aborted. And I’ve noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born.” – Ronald Reagan

There have been more than 50 million abortions since 1973. (Fewer than 1% are because of rape &/or incest, & more than 97% of abortions were to women who had more than one abortion.)

I wonder if if Billy would be willing to trade his wheelchair for a poison I.V., death by dismemberment, or having his brain sucked out of his head through a giant needle rammed in the base of his skull.

I'll even put faith & religion aside on this one. What is the only feasible evolutionary purpose for sex? Reproduction & the continuation of species. I wonder how many of those 50 million feticides were performed on genetically superior specimens who never got the chance to participate in the survival of the fittest, thus subverting the evolution of the human race.

On a positive note, if those 50 million people were in the job force right now, the unemployment rate would be about 39% (the real rate being over 45%).

Anonymous:

T:

50 M abortions in the U.S. alone since 1973.

China does more than 13 M a year. India does more than 11 M a year. Abortion has been legal in Russia since 1920, where they reported 2.7 M last year, 5.6 M in 1964, their "record" year. No doubt way more than the U.S.

Europe, Mexico, and Southeast Asia pump them out too.

Liberals like to go on about speaking for the voiceless. On this topic the silence is deafening.

Terwiliger:

Ditto the Goethe quote from the July 31 thread.

Really, even if one considered a fetus an actual human being (it isn't: it's a more-or-less developed ball of cells), the only real approximate to an unwanted fetus in a woman's body would be an unwanted burglar in a man's house... in both cases, you throw them out, and if necessary, kill them. A fetus has no right to steal your life essence (because that's the only thing they do: being a parasite) just as a burglar has no right to steal your silverware.

Naturally, if anyone WANTS a baby, then that's completly up to them, as much as it is their choice to reverse that deciscion at anytime.

Terwiliger:

I've heard those lame "arguments" a million times over from dogmatic, non-thinking people who obtain their opinions second-, third- or more- hand. They don't know why they believe what they believe, but they think being thoughtful is conforming to the opinion of a group they agree with (never mind the fact they're regurgitating 100+ year-old tripe from the eugenics movement).

How is a fetus tantamount to a burglar? It does not INVADE a woman's body, it is there (more than 99.99% of the time) due to a voluntary interaction that any thinking person knows is a reproductive act. People reproduce people, so what is a fetus if not a developing human being?

By the same token, a fetus is not a parasite. A fetus is immobile--much like an infant is practically immobile for the first year or so of it's life. If it's immobile, can not reproduce, & can not create itself, it surely can not be a parasite. It is not a foreign, non-human invader. It originates from a union of reproductive biological material supplied by a male & a female (material that is not produced anywhere but inside of human beings by human reproductive organs).

Analyze the DNA of that "ball of cells" & tell me what kind of DNA it is. (HINT: It's human--& it's alive; otherwise, it could not grow--whether it is dependent for sustenance or not.) If "dependence for sustenance" is the test for determining whether a human is a parasite, theoretically about half of the world's population would be candidates for execution.

The "pleasure response" is a secondary characteristic assigned to the sex act through billions of years of evolution to drive species to want to reproduce; however, Anthony Flew, former top atheist theologian, might disagree with the evolutionary aspects of sexuality--as would the vast majority of people who would rather ignore that fact & think of sex as purely recreational (albeit for widely varying reasons).

I agree that people have a right to choose whether or not to have a baby. However, if they engage in the act they know exists for the perpetuation of species & a life results, they have exercised their choice. If people don't want children, they should abstain, sterilize themselves, or put their unwanted children up for adoption.

Looking at it from a purely evolutionary perspective, abortion violates the scientific principles & the natural code of our very survival. Bring ethics & morality into it, & unrestricted abortion-on-demand is far, far worse.

Anonymous:

I knew T. couldn't last long without doing another screed. John may bust your nuggets, but I think this one was justified. YWHS, T.

Terwiliger:

Thanks.

However, I see where John is coming from. I like what I write, & I hope the rest of you do as well (whether you agree or not).

However, I've noticed that as I get more intense, participation in general goes down. There are a number of folks who don't post as much as they used to, & there are some that no longer post at all (some of whom I really miss, namely Joan of Arghhh: she was really sharp--I hope you're doing well, Joan).

For what John is trying to accomplish, my participation is detrimental to the site.

So... I'm announcing my "retirement" as a "political commentator" on this site.

This is my favorite web site on the Internet, & it's the one I check most often. I want to see it grow; I want to see it expand; I want to see it thrive.

I'll still be hanging around & reading what you folks have to say, but I'm limiting my participation to "Say Whats" & brief, mostly non-political wisecracks.

I'm working on an avenue for my political/philosophical/intellectual/expository writing where I can really open up & not feel like I have to hold back (yeah, that's right--as intense as my screeds have been, I've been holding back A LOT).

Have fun, guys.

John: My apologies.

Godspeed.

T.

About

John Cox is a painter, cartoonist, and illustrator for hire. For information about purchasing existing work or commissioning new work, contact him by e-mail at john555cox [at] hotmail.com.

About This Page

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on July 29, 2010 9:00 AM.

The previous post in this blog was Illustration Gig.

The next post in this blog is A Look Back, #2 (May, 2005).

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.


Powered by
Movable Type 3.35