ChrisWWW,

Israel could claim global recognition but until they have the full recognition of their neighbors, they will be forced to think of themselves as 'us vs. them' and I believe that actually slows the process of diversification.

Mark,

I'm not sure this point is completely relevant but in college I claimed in a lot of history papers that WWI and WWII were crucial to the U.S. moving from Teddy Roosevelt's 'hyphenated-Americans' to a more unified populace. I don't know how that lesson is applicable to Israel...but it's what moved us along.

Yglesias' commenters are some mean S.O.B's for the most part. It reminds me of the reasons I left chat boards for the blogging world. I will say that I never leave comments anywhere that requires a registration (Ezra Klein) and I prefer not to leave them where they are aren't published right away.

I also really like the feature you all have where you can see what your comment will look like before you post. It gives poor typists like myself a chance to occasionally catch a spelling or grammar error.

The point I guess i am trying to make is that your comments section has all the elements I find enjoyable.

From Jaybird:

Eh, my solution to the problem would be to find a sufficiently large Indian Reservation with a decent river running through it here in the US (Wyoming, perhaps), kick all of the Indians off of it (send them to Montana or something) and move all of the Israelis there. Make them a sovereign country with their own borders and everything (if being landlocked is a problem, give them Oregon or something).

I'd much rather give them Florida.

The state must rise from some sort of shared identity. For Israel it was their religious identity. Once the state is established, in most cases it begins to diversify. If you look at the earlier United States it was a pretty homogenous group of people. Mostly white (not counting slaves who had no say in the matter), mostly with roots in Britain, mostly Christian, etc. I'm not suggesting Israel will ever reach the level of diversity that the US and other Western nations have, but once its statehood is secured permanately (with global recognition of their right to exist), I think they will be a bit less interested in religous integrity.

E.D. - I used to reread it to kick off every summer when I was younger. Haven't picked it up in 5 years or so. Thank god I avoided the movie. I hear it's pretty bad.

We LOVE our local public library and use them regularly. The fact that my kids would often love nothing better than to spend a good chunk of our Saturday there makes me a proud parent.

I failed to contribute to the list so let me do so now. I would HIGHLY recommend Susan Cooper's Dark is Rising Series. It ties together the King Arthur legends, magic, etc beautifully. For readers i would recommend starting with Over Sea, Under Stone which is technically outside the series but introduces several of the main characters. Then proceed on with Dark is Rising, Greewitch, The Grey King and Silver on the Tree. I loved the series so much that I memorized the poem that framed it when I was in 8th grade (yes, I was that big of a dork):

When the Dark comes rising, six shall turn it back;
Three from the circle, three from the track;
Wood, bronze, iron; water, fire, stone;
Five will return, and one go alone.

Iron for the birthday, bronze carried long;
Wood from the burning, stone out of song;
Fire in the candle-ring, water from the thaw;
Six Signs the circle, and the grail gone before.

Fire on the mountain shall find the harp of gold
Played to wake the Sleepers, oldest of the old;
Power from the green witch, lost beneath the sea;
All shall find the light at last, silver on the tree.

I thought it was a pretty good speech and a bit more aggressive than I thought it would be. One place I think it will get good play is in Iran.

Cascadian,

Echoing Mark's remarks about a sad situation and not wanting to pry, I find it hard to understand how an assumingly mid-to-late term fetus couldn't be delivered through medically-induced labor, which is a common method for dealing with those situations, or through a C-section which is more invasive, but equally effective. Unless every medical show, article, etc I have ever read was off-base, having a dead fetus inside the mother for too long puts her at serious risk for infection, especially if the baby was mid-to-late term.

Mark - you are correct. That was just the first case that popped into my head.

Re-reading Megan's remarks I think what she was saying is that it's not that Roe is untouchable it's that we need a huge swing in the courts to make it happen. But doesn't having Roberts in charge give conservatives a leg up in the sense that he controls the cases they review and can select ones that would aid a conservative agenda?

Kyle,

While I liked almost everything Megan said, I don't know if I'm willing to accept that the lack-of-recourse-will-lead-to-more-violence suggestion. If that is the case we could name any one of hundreds of issues that the Supreme Court 'closed the book on' so to speak. Take the Kelo v. City of New London eminent domain case from a few years ago. Are we to believe that as more cities grab land for the purposes of increasing their tax base we will see people with no recourse reacting in violent ways?

I think the point I'm making is that there is always hope for another case to come down the pike which changes things. McArdle seems to suggest the 'supreme court guerilla war' of the last 30 years is a holding action designed to preserve Roe. My gut tells me that the court would be willing to re-litigate it under the right circumstances.

Great analysis Mark. I must say I just read through all of Megan's posts earlier today and I realy wish I could articulate things as well as she does (which is probably why I quote her so often). I agreed with about 99.9% of the stuff she said.

For me I agree that it all comes down to the definition of personhood and you are right to point out this line was drawn without any real guidance from the Constitution. My favorite part of Megan's posts was when she correctly pointed out that RvW was the first time in a long time we actually contracted the definition of personhood.

A couple of the most joyous moments I have had as a father were waiting in line at midnight with my oldest daughter for the last two Harry Potter books to be released, then racing home to see who could finish them first.

I respect he hell out of what he's trying to do. Sandra Day O'Connor has been doing something similar with a website. Again, when I hear about this it makes me that much more keen for a national curriculum, especially in civics. As a history major I am very depressed by how little real civics instruction my kids get at school. I am forced to do a lot of the supplimental at home, which I love doing, but I know other kids don't get that.

Civics is what makes us good citizens. It is, in a very real sense, the most practical subject to prepare us for adulthood.

It only gets more fun E.D. Just wait until they are old enough that you can show them your favorite movies and warp them with your tastes in music. I think my kids (10 and 14) are the only ones in their schools that know about The Goonies and The Go-Gos.

I also hope my dear mother is wrong about dogs not going to heaven. I can't imagine anything more sad than that.

E.D. I was aware that the Church had revisited the issue, I just failed to look up the statement before I made that comment. I have one of those Catholic mothers who claim to quote Church doctrine frequently and then under scrutiny you find their statements are like Swiss cheese. Unfortunately I must have drawn from the wrong well.

Catholic teachings would place the soul of a miscarried fetus in pergatory.

Alia,

No. A woman seeking an abortion is just as guilty as the doctor performing it.

Don’t you think that in most cases, the government should stay out of the business of criminalizing personal moral choices like this?

I think they stay out of the business of criminalizing adultry...sort of. As far as other 'moral' issues...the laws are filled with moral judgements. We shouldn't pretend that they aren't.

I don't personally care for laws prohibiting victimless crimes. Since I don't consider abortion to be a victimless crime i wouldn't lump it in with tobacco or alcohol.

I think yes, as a society we try to stop things that we perceive to be wrong. And that perception is constantly changing so the laws change with it. I've got no problem with that process.

Every law we have is an attempt to stop a wrong. Some just disagree about how wrong abortion is.

Let's rephrase that then: should we as a society not try to stop things we perceive as wrong?

From Jaybird:

My problem with abortion is that it is wrong.
My problem with the idea that police ought to be used to prevent abortion is that it is wronger.

Are we as a society not allowed to enact laws to stop things we perceive to be wrong?

I don't see any useful reason to release these photos. They are guaranteed only to get more US soldiers killed.

From Jaybird:

For the record, I very, very, very much dislike imprisonment.

The Panopticon does not work. I have no idea why it is seen as humane. I’d prefer whipping. Just get it over with and put the person back in society.

I'm kind of with you there - though I think imprisonment is supposed to be about rehabilitation ( in theory).