Something to ponder for the fetal defenders

I wonder more and more about the lunacy of the so-called right to life movement. These fetal defenders argue that human life begins at the moment of conception, and that any developing human, from embryo to birth, deserves protection against things like abortion.
The question I would pose to such zealots is this - assuming a belief in an omnipotent, omniscient God, what do they have to say about "natural" loss of fetal life, in the form of miscarriage and stillbirth?
Whenever a woman has a miscarriage or stillbirth, she has lost a "human life" by the definitions of the fetal defenders. Admittedly, many of these natural miscarriages and stillbirths occur due to severe genetic abnormalities or defects in the fetus that are not compatible with life, yet there are many of these pregnancies that might have developed into normal children. Realize that by the nature of our "design" humans will have natural pregnancy loss. When this happens, do the fetal defenders shake their fists at God and curse him, or expain such losses as the work of Satan or demons? How "sacred" can a fetus be if so many die in development in the first place?? What kind of "holy" design in humans is this? The harsh rules of nature should not be forgotten by those who feel we were magically created in a fantasy garden.
Those with a reasoned, non-fantasy approach to human life would recognize that fetal loss is a normal part of human existance. There is nothing unholy or immoral with chosing an abortion for medical reasons, especially if a human life, ie the mother, is at risk. Clearly, there are circumstances where the open choice for abortion is abhorrent - the case of gender selection, for instance, where healthy female fetuses might be aborted due to cultural preference for boys, should be outlawed. The basis for such outlawing does not have to require invoking any religous text, however.

The Death of Reason in America

It is astounding how reason and logic have been laid to rest in America.

A recent poll described here finds 51% of Americans surveyed reject the scientific theory of evolution, favoring the idea that a supernatural God created human beings.

It is no wonder that the same populous that embraces the fantasy of creation as described in Genesis would accept the contrived and flimsy arguments that Iraq was behind 9/11, that Saddam Hussein's regime held weapons of mass destruction, and that a leader like George Bush who touts his "gut instinct" over a reasoning mind would be allowed 8 years of executive leadership of this nation.

It almost makes one want to pray for reason and logic to be resurrected and walk again among the people.

Lessons from the Art of War

Sun Tzu, in his seminal treatise the Art of War written in the 6th century BC, offers advise that rings true today as much as it has through the centuries. Perhaps our current political leadership would take heed of such matters with respect to the "war on terror" and the quagmire in Iraq.
"When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength.
Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain."
"There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare."
"In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns."
"Thus it may be known that the leader of armies is the arbiter of the people's fate, the man on whom it depends whether the nation shall be in peace or in peril."

For those who wish to read for themselves the timeless advise of Sun Tzu in matters of war:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War

Woe to those who fail to learn the lessons of the past on these matters, and suffer the consequences of such ignorance.

Let sycophants rejoice

It seems as though President GW Bush's recent Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers is drawing boos from his conservative base. One thing appears clear in Bush's behavior in this nomination and with his administration - the rewarding of unwavering devotion and sycophancy with promotion. To have a brown nose in this administration is a key to advancement, it appears. Anyone who dares a voice of dissent or to stand up for what is right, rather than what the administration feels is right, is shown the door.
When Bush hooked his arm around former FEMA director Michael Brown and said "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job!" He must have meant "Brownie" as a term of endearment for one who owes his job to being a sycophant, aka brownie nose.
What kind of message does this send to our nation? When did merit lose out over blind loyalty? Will we ever live in a country where hard work is recognized, rewarded, and viewed as a requisite for important jobs, rather than requiring groveling towards authority as a primary factor in promotion?