Mary Cheney Gives Birth to Baby Boy

WashPost ^ | Wednesday, May 23, 2007; 5:36 PM | Staff

[Esther Ruth]

Mary Cheney Gives Birth to Baby Boy

By Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts

Washington Post Staff Writers

Wednesday, May 23, 2007; 5:36 PM

Mary Cheney gave birth today to perhaps the most anticipated baby in contemporary U.S. politics -- her first child, Samuel David Cheney, whom she will raise with her longtime partner Heather Poe.

The 8-pound, 6-ounce boy is the sixth grandchild for Dick Cheney.

[cammie]

Are you seriously comparing adoption by single women to adoption by pedophiles? If so, you need your head examined.

[cammie]

Nothing like unbiased sources...citing NARTH to prove the dangers of homosexuality is like citing NAMBLA to prove that pedophilia is harmless.

[ahayes]

No, it’s different because drinking excessively is not analogous to being homosexual. *sigh*

[Mr. Know It All]

Its in the old and new Testament.

Nowhere in either the Old or New Testament is there an admonition against lesbianism. Nowhere.

The authors were inspired by God in what they wrote so it is what God intended.

...and unless you can read Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, you are reading a non-divinely-inspired translation of what God wanted written. In God's original words, there is no admonition of lesbian acts. None. Zip. Nada.

[ahayes]

An animal caught in the jaws of a predator feels pain, too. So what? There is no morality associated with it.

Because the two are not moral agents and have no understanding of the other nor themselves. People are different. We are conscious of ourselves, and we are conscious of others as individuals like ourselves.

Nevertheless I think morality demands we treat lesser animals humanely.

How does an impersonal universe produce something, anything, "wrong" with itself?

You're assuming the universe is producing this. The universe is not. People are producing this, by being conscious of themselves and others and by being social beings.

Where does the prior moral rule come from that one should treat others as one would like to be treated?

I can't believe I have to explain the Golden Rule to Christians. :-D

I'll try to explain this again.

1. Every human believes they should be treated well.
2. As human beings, none of us is inherently more valuable than another any more than one E. coli bacterium is more valuable than another.
3. If we are all the same in value, other human beings deserve the same sort of treatment we would desire for ourselves.

You see morality is something that emerges from the human species as we become more intelligent and more socially adept (our emotions become more complex). The universe goes on in the same mechanical way it always has. Moral laws do not apply to animals because they do not have the same level of understanding as ourselves. However, we can start to see some level of morality emerging in the more intelligent social animals, such as chimpanzees, where we see altruism, reciprocity, and revenge (which comes from an animal's realizing it has been wronged, which is the first step in developing morality).

You see morality as something that comes from outside the human species, I see it as emerging from inside.

[ahayes]

I hope you do not interpret what I have said to mean that I don't believe that you have a sense of morality.

I'm glad to see you realize that, so many times I feel like I am expected to be out looting and pillaging (which disturbs me because I wonder, would this Christian saying so be out looting and pillaging if he lost his belief in God?)

I just think that your sense of morality is tacit evidence of your knowledge of God, which you suppress. You do not acknowledge Him or give Him thanks, but you have a sense of morality because you were made in His image and likeness.

I realize that is the Christian position, but you can hardly expect to convince non-Christians of this.

I just think that every time you think your life has meaning you are being inconsistent with your own Godless presuppositions.

Once again, you're not going to convince me. :-D

I have not yet seen how or why you expect a purely material universe to generate moral obligation, and what sense it makes to expect mere physical forces to be moral and rational.

As I explained, it is generated within.

[IslandJeff]

Thanks, but it wasn’t my wit - it was LV’s.

[and the year should be 2060 or 2064]

[cubreporter]

No matter...it was lighthearted and I liked it. And...who knows???? :)

[cubreporter]

The point is the baby is here and he is welcome.

[Shyla]

So true.

[Front 242]

elite micro ...

The only thing that I fear is that when the time comes in the scientific community due to the pressures of the liberals / humanists / freethinkers / athiests and agnostics / and the whole group of people who hold God’s Teachings in contempt and disdain, what will happen when they are able to convince the masses (i.e. the media, the public, the government, the medical industry, and some of the weaker churches / faiths into being bamboozled into believing in the sactity of potential cloned human beings.

It is only a matter of time, and if I had my druthers, I would almost expect that this has been going on for some time behind very closed doors. We’ve seen it done with sheep, goats, dogs, cats, mice, rats, foodstuffs (corn/wheat)etc. The ethical question thus arises ... will the human clone then contain a soul? Or will it be a automatron in every human genetic and biological trait of it’s original cloned source ... a carbon copy if you will?

My opinion would be that if this did indeed occurr, the human doppleganger would be considered a non-human sans a God-Given soul and would be worth of termination at any cost (without the ramifications of legal action). A single soul cannot inhabit two bodies ... nada. And for man to meddle in this process is an EXTREMELY HIGH AFFRONT to God’s Divine Will ... I’m talking like major retrobution here as a possibility. What that retrobution would entail is anybody’s guess, but I would highly consider breaking out the sackcloth and ashes in huge quantities. Lets just hope that the scientifice community doesn’t cave into the liberals screaming for this perverse option based upon their cries for fetal stem cell experimentation or the harvesting of organs, or even as I heard this week, in Great Britian, they are considering giving the green light to the testing of human + animal hybrid embryos as a source of new stem cell lines. Makes me want to puke.

Front 242

[cubreporter]

and may God keep him from all of those that will want to constantly bring up his background.

[cubreporter]

Again... it is NOT my business. All I know is the baby is here and he is sweet, innocent, a gift from God and deserves to live his life without all the outside interference.

[Democratshavenobrains]

Is a lesbian relationship really any more dysfunctional than the Clinton marriage?

[Democratshavenobrains]

The Gay Agenda doesn’t exactly revere Mary Cheney. Despite the fact that Dick Cheney is as pro-gay as Barney Frank, they think being VP under Bush makes him Hitler.