cdesign proponentsists
The Dallas Morning News Religion blog gave a heads-up about "Judgment Day", an episode of the science show Nova about the Dover, Pennsylvania court case over teaching intelligent design. As expected, the show was one-sided. But I expected that because Nova is a science show after all. Moreover, the creationist Discovery Institute did not participate, so their spin was not going to get any air time. But what I was surprised to learn was that the creationist side wasn't just refuted on the science argument. The Dover case revealed dishonesty on the part of the creationists as well. Google "cdesign proponentsists" for a hilarious example of a transitional fossil that creationists deny exists! And Google "Dover Buckingham perjury" for the story of the creationists on the Dover school board lying in sworn affidavits. The show was one-sided alright, but for good reason. The facts of this particular court case were themselves overwhelmingly one-sided -- in favor of science. Two big (panda) thumbs-up for this show.
Are there Special Skills for Driving Drunk?
Mark Davis offers a very reasonable explanation why abstinence-only sex education is flawed. Unfortunately, he fails to point out the flaw in one commonly used analogy:
"We don't tell kids how to drive drunk," a local school board official once told me. "We tell them, 'Don't do it.'" That made sense to me for a while.In fact, we do teach kids how to drive safely. Safe driving is taught to every new driver. The techniques are useful even if you are driving drunk. That does not mean that driver's ed classes are an encouragement to drive drunk. Likewise, safe sex education is not an encouragement to engage in sex. Mark Davis eventually figured this out. Better late than never in his case. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for some of the kids denied a comprehensive sex education in Texas schools.
Dogs In Heat? Her Words, Not Mine
Dallas Blog publishes a long screed by Donna Garner attacking comprehensive sex education. To be honest, I couldn't get past the opening paragraphs, in which Garner puts up an outrageous straw man misrepresenting what comprehensive sex education is all about. For example, she says, "[Douglas] Kirby and his crowd believe that since teens cannot possibly control their sexual urges (in essence, comparing teens to dogs in heat), then we must give all teens contraceptives."
I'm interested in reading reasoned arguments against comprehensive sex education, but Garner's ain't it. Being in favor of comprehensive sex education does not mean you believe that teens are like dogs in heat or that condoms should be passed out in schools like hard hats in an air raid. If Garner represents Texas' approach to sex ed, I'll choose California's.
When do Human Clones get a Soul?
The Dallas Morning News Religion blog cites an MSNBC story on cloning monkey embryos, telling us not to worry. Not to worry? I was excited.
What worries some is the prospect of thousands or millions of cloned humans walking around. We don't need any more humans walking around, so that's not going to happen. Britain has even outlawed the implantation of cloned human embryos in a woman's womb.
Others are concerned about the use of human embryos for purposes like stem cell research. Something about the destruction of human embryos being murder. Ironically, implantation in a woman's womb is the only hope for survival for these embryos, so Britain's law is a death sentence for them. An example of the law of unintended consequences, that.
But if the human embryo is grown from a clone, is it really a separate human being with a soul? The pro-life side argues that human life begins when the sperm fertilizes the egg. With clones, that's not the way it works. Maybe a cloned human embryo is nothing more than cultured human tissue, like skin or blood. For that tissue, grow it, harvest it, destroy it, God doesn't mind. Are we sure He minds when a human embryo is used for stem cell research?
Dallas' own Weekly World News
Dallas Blog continues to headline its irrelevance with stories on New York's pigeon tsar, the plans to build an Islamic car with built-in compass to find Mecca, some oil sheik's flying palace jet and a lurid tale of Boy George chaining a male escort to the wall. All of these were presented as straight news pieces, not a snarky comment in sight. I guess every city needs a local edition of Weekly World News, especially now that the real thing has closed. Dallas Blog is staking its claim to be ours.
Uncle Sam Doesn't Play Overseas
The Dallas Morning News' Bruce Tomaso bemoans Paramount's plans to bring GI Joe to the big screen stripped of any identification as a Yank. He predicts "a bomb." Don't be too sure. More and more of the movie take is from the overseas box office. And American jingoism is poison overseas. Movies like "Lions for Lambs" and "Redacted" might not play well in American theatres, but they tend to do surprisingly well overseas.
Proportional Representation Undemocratic?!?
Some more thoughts on DallasMorningViews' Rod Dreher's campaign against single member voting districts in Irving. He considers it rigging the system to ensure minority representation on the City Council. Nonsense. The US Congress has 435 single member districts. The US Senate has 50 two-member districts. The Electoral College has 50 districts with a different number of members in each. The Texas Supreme Court has nine members chosen at large. The Texas House and Senate have single member districts. There are lots of ways to do this, all more or less democratic, some better, some worse at achieving representative results. So, why would a system of single member districts in Irving be a violation of democratic principles? It wouldn't. If you think having an all-Anglo council in a city with sizable minority populations is detrimental to civic health, then change the system. If you're happy with the unrepresentative results the current system in Irving achieves, then join Rod in his fight to keep it.
Finally, a big hello to Frontburner readers. Whatever they're paying Trey Garrison, it isn't enough! ;-)
2 comments:
Who loves ya, Ed? [two thumbs] This guy. Now keep us honest and keep updating.
Yes, sir!
Post a Comment