http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2013/01/creationism-commotion-five-states-have-anti-evolution-bills-in-play/
Whatever happened to separation of church and state? Doesn't my federally provided public education follow this rule? I'm fairly sure it does. So why then, are people still attempting to ram down bills that attempt to do the exact opposite?
I'll let Bill Nye answer some of it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/bill-nye-creationism-science_n_1908926.html
Creationism is religious in nature. It is not science. Of this, one cannot deny. You can view evolution whichever way you want and you can choose to believe in creationism or not, but you cannot claim it to be secular and fit for public schooling. That is what baffles me. I have yet to see a single sane person claim creationism to be not religious in nature. If anything, most of it's proponents are often seen quoting verses from the Bible in its defense.
Yet state legislatures are attempting to rephrase it as "biological intelligent design," and other poor rephrasings in order to force them into the public school systems. If we were to teach creationism as a science, we would have to give other theories of creation equal treatment. Possibly we can possibly teach the ancient Greek theory that all of existence came into being from Chaos. Teaching creationism, as said by Bill Nye can only hurt American science. It isn't science. So why then, should it receive the exact same treatment as a science?
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Partisan Pizza
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/03/papa-johns-obamacare_n_2233525.html
I'll be quite frank, I find this quite saddening. These CEO's and business men have made pizza and chicken wings a partisan choice. They have every right to state their opinions and have every right to believe whatever they want to believe. The fact that they are voicing it is simply poor sense.
They have alienated a great deal of their customer base. They are attempting to serve a side of politics along with their food on the table. It's polarizing and not good for their business at all. It frustrates me as to why they would do so. Politics itself is inherently a highly polarizing topic, why bring it to the dinner table?
Casual diners want just that, a casual dining experience without anything being marketed to them aside from maybe an extra side dish. They don't want politics. This shows in how consumers began rating the companies where such CEO's made statements much worse after they made their stance on controversial topics, such as Obamacare and gay-rights. When I go to Papa John's, Denny's or Applebee's, I don't want to fret over whether or not my money is going to a cause I don't support, or even oppose. When I go eat at Chik-fil-a, I don't want my money to go to anti-gay programs that I am unaware of. Partisan pizza isn't something that sounds appetizing, nor healthy for consumers and politics on a whole.
I'll be quite frank, I find this quite saddening. These CEO's and business men have made pizza and chicken wings a partisan choice. They have every right to state their opinions and have every right to believe whatever they want to believe. The fact that they are voicing it is simply poor sense.
They have alienated a great deal of their customer base. They are attempting to serve a side of politics along with their food on the table. It's polarizing and not good for their business at all. It frustrates me as to why they would do so. Politics itself is inherently a highly polarizing topic, why bring it to the dinner table?
Casual diners want just that, a casual dining experience without anything being marketed to them aside from maybe an extra side dish. They don't want politics. This shows in how consumers began rating the companies where such CEO's made statements much worse after they made their stance on controversial topics, such as Obamacare and gay-rights. When I go to Papa John's, Denny's or Applebee's, I don't want to fret over whether or not my money is going to a cause I don't support, or even oppose. When I go eat at Chik-fil-a, I don't want my money to go to anti-gay programs that I am unaware of. Partisan pizza isn't something that sounds appetizing, nor healthy for consumers and politics on a whole.
Monday, December 31, 2012
An Outrage
http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=213&articleid=20121230_213_G1_CUTLIN298777
Religion in schools and public spaces is a touchy topic.
I do agree with the author of the above article though. It is baffling to believe that simply bringing religion into schools could have any affect what-so-ever on such terrible events. Believe it or not, people have different beliefs from another.
Schools should not have a mention of religion anywhere outside of a purely academic context. Schools should be places of secular learning. Yes. Secular. Worldly and temporal. As it should be in a country founded on the tenement of religious freedom. Yet some people, more accurately some politicians utter the word, "secular," and "atheist," as if it were some pox upon the world.
As the author of the article says, feel free to pray over your food, in private or among like-minded peers. Just don't force it upon those with different or no association with religion.
What I find particularly disturbing is that some people would use the school shooting as an excuse to push for more religion in schools, a place where religion is supposed to be nothing more than a day or two of study and mention in history class. I personally believe the usage of such an event to voice such an unfeasible and frankly nonsensical idea upon children to be somewhat in poor taste.
That's all I have to say on that matter.
Re: A Controversial Position
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/opinion/lets-give-up-on-the-constitution.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
Now, time to hear about and opinion about an opinion.
While I agree the current situation in DC is aggravating, I believe simply abandoning our Constitution is not the right course. Yes, there were times in the past in which the Constitution is bent or even outright ignored, and we see such cases as justified and right, affording us the life style we have today. But I believe we should simply follow this model of bending when needed. No need to eliminate or nullify the Constitution and follow its law through respect as the sole binding factor.
When should we bend and ignore the Constitution? When the people's will demands it. If people want something, even if it flies in the face of the Constitution, they should get it. Of course, several portions of the Constitution must remain constant, such as several of the amendments. On a whole, I agree more with the author's idea that "if we are not to abandon constitutionalism entirely, then we might at least understand it as a place for discussion, a demand that we make a good-faith effort to understand the views of others, rather than as a tool to force others to give up their moral and political judgments."
I would rather we not worship the Constitution as holy scripture, the end all in all argument, but use it as a guideline for our democracy, shaping and forming our government, rather than constraining and restricting.
Now, time to hear about and opinion about an opinion.
While I agree the current situation in DC is aggravating, I believe simply abandoning our Constitution is not the right course. Yes, there were times in the past in which the Constitution is bent or even outright ignored, and we see such cases as justified and right, affording us the life style we have today. But I believe we should simply follow this model of bending when needed. No need to eliminate or nullify the Constitution and follow its law through respect as the sole binding factor.
When should we bend and ignore the Constitution? When the people's will demands it. If people want something, even if it flies in the face of the Constitution, they should get it. Of course, several portions of the Constitution must remain constant, such as several of the amendments. On a whole, I agree more with the author's idea that "if we are not to abandon constitutionalism entirely, then we might at least understand it as a place for discussion, a demand that we make a good-faith effort to understand the views of others, rather than as a tool to force others to give up their moral and political judgments."
I would rather we not worship the Constitution as holy scripture, the end all in all argument, but use it as a guideline for our democracy, shaping and forming our government, rather than constraining and restricting.
Over the Cliff We Go
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20877375
Working as intended indeed.
Well, it looks like we're going over the cliff. I can't honestly say I didn't expect this to happen. There is some good news though. The parties will compromise soon after. They must. I doubt any of the two parties are so bull-headed so that they would allow the US to fall into recession once again. Even though some may argue that going over the cliff is the best long term remedy to the ailing economy, we will be popping some pills to relieve the pain momentarily.
So what's going to happen now? Not much. Not really. Technically we will be experiencing higher taxes and major cuts. In reality, those won't be hitting us until Wednesday, and won't adversely affect the majority of the public until people get their January pay-checks.
Seeing as how I'm typing this up right at the moment of negotiations among the parties in DC (as a side note, procrastination isn't a good thing kids, for both students and congress), a deal could be struck up right now for all I know. Point is, we'll fall off the cliff but we won't feel the impact.
Obama probably won't be getting his single, comprehensive plan for reducing the deficit and reforming what needs to be reformed, but we'll avert the worst for now as we chug into this new year.
Happy new years everyone.
Working as intended indeed.
Well, it looks like we're going over the cliff. I can't honestly say I didn't expect this to happen. There is some good news though. The parties will compromise soon after. They must. I doubt any of the two parties are so bull-headed so that they would allow the US to fall into recession once again. Even though some may argue that going over the cliff is the best long term remedy to the ailing economy, we will be popping some pills to relieve the pain momentarily.
So what's going to happen now? Not much. Not really. Technically we will be experiencing higher taxes and major cuts. In reality, those won't be hitting us until Wednesday, and won't adversely affect the majority of the public until people get their January pay-checks.
Seeing as how I'm typing this up right at the moment of negotiations among the parties in DC (as a side note, procrastination isn't a good thing kids, for both students and congress), a deal could be struck up right now for all I know. Point is, we'll fall off the cliff but we won't feel the impact.
Obama probably won't be getting his single, comprehensive plan for reducing the deficit and reforming what needs to be reformed, but we'll avert the worst for now as we chug into this new year.
Happy new years everyone.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Some Considerations
On to a more touchy topic now.
So apparently most Americans would believe any drone attacks by a foreign power on American soil to be a terrorist attack. As most of you know, the US military regularly conducts strikes of their own on foreign soil, and Americans may wring their hands or cheer on depending on their viewpoint. They may be outraged at the fact the strikes are killing civilians or may be cheering on the death's of the nation's perceived foes. Personally, I have yet to hear a person call such strikes an act of terrorism on our part. Perhaps it has been said before, but it definitely isn't said enough for it to be a mainstream opinion. They are the terrorists if they do it to us, we aren't if we do it to them.
I'm fairly sure a person can pick out the hypocrisy using the above information. So is it an act of terrorism in both cases then? Or is something else entirely?
Some believe such a strike on American soil would be considered an act of war. We would then, once again, hear the tramp of boots and the roll-out of vehicles. If it were an act of war, there are some considerations to be had here.
If as a method of war-waging, the drone is simply a new weapon. It kills people as any weapon does. It kills combatants, and civilians. All weapons are capable of doing so. War in general is reprehensible and I am not defending the act of killing or war, but one must take into consideration the fact that the drone is a weapon and a tool. Weapons have been killing for a long time, all of them.
This post was made to address those who view drone strikes as an act of war. As an act of terrorism, well, I don't have much of an opinion on that.
So apparently most Americans would believe any drone attacks by a foreign power on American soil to be a terrorist attack. As most of you know, the US military regularly conducts strikes of their own on foreign soil, and Americans may wring their hands or cheer on depending on their viewpoint. They may be outraged at the fact the strikes are killing civilians or may be cheering on the death's of the nation's perceived foes. Personally, I have yet to hear a person call such strikes an act of terrorism on our part. Perhaps it has been said before, but it definitely isn't said enough for it to be a mainstream opinion. They are the terrorists if they do it to us, we aren't if we do it to them.
I'm fairly sure a person can pick out the hypocrisy using the above information. So is it an act of terrorism in both cases then? Or is something else entirely?
Some believe such a strike on American soil would be considered an act of war. We would then, once again, hear the tramp of boots and the roll-out of vehicles. If it were an act of war, there are some considerations to be had here.
If as a method of war-waging, the drone is simply a new weapon. It kills people as any weapon does. It kills combatants, and civilians. All weapons are capable of doing so. War in general is reprehensible and I am not defending the act of killing or war, but one must take into consideration the fact that the drone is a weapon and a tool. Weapons have been killing for a long time, all of them.
This post was made to address those who view drone strikes as an act of war. As an act of terrorism, well, I don't have much of an opinion on that.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
The Financial Cliff: Some Notes
Well now. I may be a little in covering this story, but I believe there are somethings to be said about this topic.
A rundown of situation.
A rundown of situation.
Shortly after election season ended, all talk shifted to this looming disaster. The financial cliff, a term coined by Ben Bernanke, chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, is a series of deadlines and end dates all coming together in one massive economic blow. Tax cuts will end. Taxes will rise. Spending will be slashed. The deficit will be cut down tremendously in a short amount of time, but at the cost of causing a depression within the country. In other words, a deal must be made in congress, a compromise on how to deal with such an fiscal cliff.
Now congress must decide whether or not to raise taxes for and end tax cuts for the rich, a plan favored by the Democrats, or to lower taxes and prop up tax cuts for the rich and middle class, a plan favored by the Republicans. Whatever happens next, the following I believe will occur in some shape or form.
1. If congress misses the deadline for solving the problem, the financial cliff will not set in immediately.
It will take some time for the measures found in the financial cliff to manifest themselves. Congress has until then to bicker among themselves and find compromise, so that they may appease a fearful citizenry and outraged economy. With those two groups preemptively knocking on the door, congress will be much more likely to pass a compromise then, a month or so after the deadline set, as some project.
2. If the US goes off the financial cliff, people will blame the GOP more.
53% of people counted on the poll would view the GOP unfavorably while 45% say all the blame would go on the GOP. There is more to the story than I can cover at this time, go here to read more.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)