I just focused on the me part there, but the worst part of Young’s piece is this:

Amidst such hysteria, is it any wonder that some champions of “life” are making death threats against judges and legislators who have ruled or voted the “wrong” way?

Since when is having a strong opinion inciting violence? Mark Levin got this treatment from Jeff Rosen in the Washington Post re: his judge book this weekend. I happen to believe we are nearing a turning point in our history, as I’ve expressed here before (and folks like Jonah and Derbyshire, who don’t agree with me on all of the specifics have as well). Technology is outpacing our “ethics.” Or, rather, bioethicists, are talking themselves into circles making life-and-death decisions evermore muddled. Cloning, end of life, beginning of life…these are big issues. And they are ones that we have to get right now, before we rush into things and dive too deep. So we’re going to keep talking about these issues. And we’ll debate them here, as we have. But we’ll also be coming from a clear position on many of these, as NR has. Does Cathy Young, rather than debate, want us just to shut up because some lunatics happen to agree in part with us?

That doesn’t seem to jive with her libertarianism. AAACK….Libertarianism is cracking up!!