A.P. Lawrence Personal Weblog

A.P. Lawrence Personal Weblog

This is my personal Blog. My Unix/Linux Tech Blog doesn't have this kind of nonsense in it.

I am a libertarian, card-carryng aclu, humanistic atheist. For some (like Bush senior), people like me shouldn't be allowed to vote. Isn't that nice?

If this doesn't make you hate me, try Other Dangerous stuff.

Comments

Fri, 10 Jun 2011

./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="tourture">Torture is OK by him</a> Here is a real problem (from <a href="http://waste-bin.blogspot.com/2004/12/in-defense-of-torture.html">http://waste-bin.blogspot.com</a>) <pre> The Left is once again hyperventilating over the maltreatment of prisoners in U.S. custody. Frankly, I don't understand what all the fuss is about. Do I care if the occasional al-Qaeda member is roughed up by the CIA? Not particularly. If it takes a few genital shocks to convince a terrorist to divulge information about an attack, then so be it. The war against terrorism is an unconventional conflict, which, I'm sad to say, will sometimes require us to use unconventional -- and unsavory -- methods of interrogation. Basically, as long as the "torture" in question isn't gratuitous or sadistic -- as it was in the case of Abu Ghraib -- as long as it is done for clear intelligence-gathering purposes, and as long as it is absolutely necessary, I have no problem with it. The way I see it, the world is a nasty place filled with shadowy, bloodthirsty terrorists who are bent on destroying civilization and committing mass-murder against Americans. And sometimes, in order to stop these people, you have to take off the gloves and get your hands dirty. </pre> Of course, he is a Republican.. but even Republicans should realize that there is ALWAYS a reason to use torture. Justification is always simple. The people beheading folks in Iraq think they are just doing what they have to do, too. People like this scare me. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="snow">Snow</a> The new neighbors are cute. I don't know where they are from, but it might be from somewhere snow is less common. He's standing in the back yard with a shovel. "Look how deep it is!" he marvels as his wife snaps pictures from their back porch. Yeah, deep. A whole ten or eleven inches. Wait till February when he's tossing it up over the six foot plus pile from shoveling the other storms. We'll see how cheery they are then :-) </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="xmas">No Christmas without Christ?</a> I call B.S. The Winter Solstice holiday was observed for untold centuries before the Chrstians usurped it for the purported birthday of their favorite over-acheiver. Further, millions of unbelievers celebrate something they are apt to call Xmas, replete with the same decorative trappings that the Christians want to call their own. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="tsunami">Insanity</a> I was just listening to some tsunami survivors explaining that the people who were killed had "done something bad", either in this life or some other (these were Buddhists). Just goes to show that Buddhism is no more intelligent than any other religion. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="religionvssci">Religion vs.Science</a> Reproducing some comments from <a href="http://aplawrence.com/Blog/B1171.html">http://aplawrence.com/Blog/B1171.html</a> <pre> --December 10, 2004 It's because the mind/brain is part of the physical manifistation of the physical body. Without it you cannot function properly in this world. Everything you see and experiance is due to interpretations that you mind makes on the enviroment, it controls everything you know, everything you see. To you your brain is the only reality that you experiance. Now outside your mind/brain there is a real world, but we are fundamentally limited by our own physical bodies. Your brain is like your computer to the internet. If your OS is screwed up (analogous to your emotions) then the likely hood that your going to be able to properly render a web page is comprimised. You know that the reality of the electrical signals that make up the internet is vastly different media then what you experiance when you view your web page, but your web page (or other protocols) is the only access you have to data that exists out there. If you damage your mind you can color your emotions, it can change how you see things, how you experiance things. Why does it seem to so many people that thru damaging the functions of their brain temporarially seems like a spiritual experiance? That's also why you have one of the major tenets of chistianity is that you cannot judge a person. Now a lot of people do it and they call themselves christians, and it also doesn't mean that you can't make judgements (like handing your kid over to a convicted child molester is a realy bad idea, even if he was a priest). Fundamentally you can never have access to that person's private reality that is created by their brains and their minds. The spiritual eliment is something seperate and the only person who can make a fundamental final judgement is God himself, since he was one that designed how the universe works in the first place and has ultimate understanding. Your brain, your mind, your body is somethng that is fundamentally seperate from your spiritual element. Of course your brain is a machine, of course it can be analized to find your emotions (like your programming. If it wasn't for emotions and instincts our brains would be VERY inneffient and it would be much harder to survive in the real world.) You can see the chemicals react and guide your desicions. It is completely responsable for everything you see, feel, touch, smell, hear. Everything. However non-the-less your brain is not you. It's only a part of you. And like any other machine it can be replicated and improved on. Now of course if their is no soul to hook it up too then it even a improved version can't ever be human. Your brain and your body isn't YOU as much as this text message isn't ME, although that's all you can currently perceive me as. That and the image your mind creates for you so you can have somebody to interact with. Mind + Body (which your brain is a part of) + Soul = you. Mind != you Body != you Soul != you Of course your soul can have a different body, but unfortunatly your memories and current emotions/insticts won't survive the final reformat. :P --Drag ---December 10, 2004 I'm sorry. I understand you believe in some "soul" thing, and I respect your right to do so, but the belief itself is nonsense. Human beings are biological machines. There is nothing else. Duplicate the biology, and you duplicate the human. As I said in the first paragraph, if you have these religious beliefs, of course you will think that no machine can ever attain human intelligence. You are sadly wrong, but nothing I can say will show you that, because you WANT to believe it. And because you do want to believe, I have no real desire to take that away from you even if I could. If it makes you happy, I'm all for it - just stay out of AI research for your own good :-) --TonyLawrence ---December 11, 2004 Who said anything about AI? Of course machines can be very intellegent. I am not going to feel threatened by a lump of silicon, even if it is smarter then me. The body is a machine, it can be replicated, human thought can be replicated, memories and emotions can be replicated. But that's what makes sceince so cool, becuase you can slice and dice the brain, figure out to the microscopic level every inate functioning of every part of the brain, and you know what? It's still going to leave people with more questions then answers. --Drag ---December 11, 2004 Well, that's where we have to disagree. There are more questions than answers NOW,but that will change. It's going to be difficult socially because of religious beliefs, but that's always been the case: science pushes religion back, and religion becomes more and more mystical. We started with sun gods and storm gods, and science destroyed that. We had gods creating the Earth, and science took that away. The same thing will eventually happen with "souls", and of course that takes care of the "afterlife", which leaves religion with not much to offer. The "slice and dice" comment is a favorite one today, but it's only valid in the same sense that you could let most of the world take apart a computer and they wouldn't understand it. We WILL understand organic intelligence and WILL duplicate it. It is inevitable. But that's a long, long time away, most likely. --TonyLawrence ---December 11, 2004 Good luck then! So you think that someday science will provide you answers for everything, eh? That's some faith you got there. The problem is that when it all finishes up and science will provide you with the answers everybody is looking for then are you going to be suprised when the answers they find are very similar to what I beleive? It's not like I wasn't a athiest for a long time, you know. But sometimes a person has to question what they beleive. --Drag ---December 11, 2004 Depends on what you mean by "answers:. Yes, I believe science is always improving, and that we will have intelligent theories about everything. In some sense, nothing is ever 100% certain - even if you can demonstrate the creation of a universe, and have a complete theory that covers all of physics with no contradictions or problems, you can't absolutely be sure that you are right. The religious love to hang their god-stuff on that nail, but it's like saying the earth is round and orbits a star in a circular orbit: that's wrong, but it's a helluva lot closer to truth than saying it's a shield supported by a giant turtle. That's the goal of science: to move closer to truth. Religion is stagnant - it's always "god did it". Useless answer, and we keep driving it back - no, god isn't a thunder cloud, no the sun isn't a god, no, god didn't create humans out of clay, etc. Again: evolution doesn't show us the complete lineage of human development and may have errors in particulars, but it is closer to the truth than creationist nonsense. Faith that science moves us closer to the truth is not the same as faith that some invisible god-thing rules the universe. Science allows for testing and progress forward, religion doesn't test, doesn't advance, always has the same silly answers. --TonyLawrence </pre> </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="nurse">Nursing Homes</a> There was a report this morning of a nurse who was shot by an 87 year old man. I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often. Seriously. I'm not excusing it, condoning it or anything else. Murder is always the wrong answer for a problem. But I know from personal experience that dealing with nursing homes can be maddening. Literally. My wife's dad is in a home, and some of the staff have a personal dislike for my wife and her sister. Both can be a bit demanding, but their complaints aren't unjustified. Yes, the home is understaffed, overworked, and we all understand that, but just not caring about problems of comfort and health isn't going to make family members happy. Worse, deliberate actions to intimidate and harrass visitors who make any complaint add to the unpleasantness. Some of the staff have been outright rude, have openly laughed at my wife while she struggled with some problem like trying to adjust her dad's wheelchair, and have even done childish things like hiding her coat or her dad's food tray. Her sister has suffered similar treatment. The administration turns a blind eye to this and simply refuses to discuss anything. Now imagine if an older person was being treated like my wife is. In fact, there is such a person who visits her Alzheimer's husband at the same home. She herself has cancer, and is very distressed at the thought of dying and leaving her husband with no one to care for him. The same nurses and aides who dislike my wife also show callous disrespect and malicious behaviour toward this poor woman. I think you could easily see how such a person could be driven beyond the edge of sanity. It would be easy to convince yourself that since your life is ending soon anyway, you might as well visit "justice" upon the nursing home staff who has belittled and tormented you. Nurses, staff and the administration should think about this. No doubt most people won't slip into this kind of madness no matter how much they are provoked, but why would you want to take the chance? A little common human kindness, a little human sympathy is all that is probably necessary to prevent it. Is that too much to ask? </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="why">Sexual Freedom</a> I ran across a blog called <a href="http://edensalley.blogspot.com/">Eden's Alley</a>. There was a story there about a woman having a sexual encounter with her accountant while her husband or boyfriend watched. Let me ask a serious question. While this blog could be total fiction, in fact there are people who live the life it describes. And lots of people hate them. I can understand part of it. The accountants wife, for instance, may have her own opinions of the assault. That I can understand, if for no other reason than it's not right for him to bring home an STD present. I can understand not wanting to participate. Personally, I'm scared to death of the current crop of STD and AIDS possiblilies and have lost almost all interest in random sexual activity. Well, I would hope not to lose *interest*, but I've no interest in practicing the lifestyle. But why the vituperative hatred of people who are sexually free? Why do people who are otherwise tolerant and intelligent have really awful things to say about swingers, poly-folk, etc? Even people who are themselves victims of societal discrimination: my wife and are are nudists, and a depressingly large number of nudists just detest swingers and other free-living folk. There has to be something basic here - it's not all jealousy and fear, is it? Is it just social conditioning? OK, then how did some of us escape it? Why don't I hate "sluts", ethical or otherwise? </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="disgust">I'm disgusted</a> I'm disgusted by the Peterson death sentence. First, sure, he's probably guilty. But it is all circumstantial, so there is some small possibility that he's actually innocent. Put him in jail for life and there is at least some chance that a possibly innocent man won't be killed. But what disgusts me more is the cheering of the crowds when this was announced. This isn't something to cheer about, even if the guilt is documented and admitted to. No matter what, taking someone's life should be a matter of sadness, not joy. I'll certainly make allowances for the victims family. It's still disgusting, but I'll accept it. Random crowds cheering are just showing themselves for what they are: ignorant savages. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="sab">Bible Nonsense</a> The <a href="http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/">Skeptic's Annotated Bible</a> is a great work that points out how ridiculous bible-thumpers really are. But even more funny are the attempts to refute it: <a href="http://www.tektonics.org/sab/sabgen.html"> http://www.tektonics.org/sab/sabgen.html</a>. Now THAT is funny. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="soul">Souls</a> I have an article at <a href="http://aplawrence.com/Blog/B1171.html">http://aplawrence.com/Blog/B1171.html</a> that addresses Artificial Intelligence. A reader comment expresses the thought that humans have "souls" and therefore are not machines. I hate to be direct here, because I understand why people want to believe this. It is nonsense, but it's their belief, and if it causes no harm, I don't feel like attacking it. But it IS utter nonsense. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="nh">Is this Abuse?</a> Father in nursing home, partially aphasic. Can answer simple questions, but probably not 100% competent. Not 100% out of it either. Mother of 4 siblings dead, father had remarried several years ago, before stroke that put him in home. Pre-nup agreement keeping assets separate. Deeded home to children before nursing home, wiith life estate right to leave in home, no right to partition. Step mother wants to sell house to pay legal bills she incurred to protect her own property. Two siblings don't want to do this, don't want house sold, don't want money paid to step mother. Other two want the money and want to pay her. Step mother is Power of Attorney and Health Care Proxy. She has had nursing home restrict visits of the two unwilling siblings only, no restrictions on other two. The first restriction was simply time: only can visit between 4 and 6 PM. A few months later, she demanded money again, these two still refused. More restrictions added: unable to visit him in his room, can only eat in dining room with the "crazies" (loud people, babbling, he hates it). Again, no restrictions on other siblings. Then, two months ago, more demands (even more money now), still refused, and now these two cannot shave him or brush his teeth (nursing home says the brush his teeth but do not, and cut him when they shave him). Nursing home says he is incompetent and that POA/HCP proxy has right to do this. Will not show proof that he is incompetent, refuses to discuss this in any way. Attorney also asked to meet with them, was refused, says nothing more he can do. Is this immoral? Is it illegal? Is there truly nothing that can be done? He may be incompetent to enter into a contract, but he certainly knows that he wants his children to visit and he knows he wants his teeth brushed, doesn't like being cut when they shave him, doesn't like the small dining room (gets to eat in other room when other siblings visit of course but they won't shave him or brush his teeth - they COULD, but they don't want to). </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="slice">Slicing and dicing</a> Favorite quote of the religious: "You slice and dice the brain, figure out to the microscopic level every inatte functioning of every part of the brain, and you know what? It's still going to leave people with more questions then answers" Funny. If you take apart a computer, and have the proper equipment to test with, you can understand the function of not only every chip, but the machine as a whole. Understand it, and predict its behavior. Yes, human brains are much more complex, but the concept is the same. We don't have the skills or the tools to do it now, but we will. There are no souls, there are no gods, and I'm sorry that people seem to so desperately need to believe otherwise. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="five">Five Bucks</a> I had to take the train in town the other day. On the return trip, a woman with a bunch of bags sat next to me. She seemed to be sleeping or close to it most of the ride, but when the conductor came around for tickets, she couldn't find hers. He said he'd be back in a minute. The train was pulling into my stop and this woman was pawing through her bags, becoming more and more agitated. She asked me if I had a cell phone she could use. I said I did, but the train was now stopped, people were walking toward the exits, and I had to get off. "I've lost my wallet", she said, "I have to call my husband". She was obviously very upset, but I had to get off. I opened my wallet and offered her five dollars - unfortunately I only had eight dollars in total. She didn't want to take it, but I insisted. Pay for the ticket anyway or get change so she could call her husband. At least have SOMETHING. I hope she made out all right. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="higherpower">Higher power</a> It's common for those arguing against separation of church and state to point out the various refences to "God" and "Creator" in various documents. I suggest they read The Treaty of Tripoli: A good overview is at <a href="http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/buckner_tripoli.html">http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/buckner_tripoli.html</a> but it specifically states: “As the government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian Religion” That was signed by John Adams and published in major newspapers in full. There’s no record of any disagreement with that sentiment. It’s true that some of the founding fathers had religious beliefs, though not necessarily Christian. Some were, some were simply Deists (believed that a god created everything long ago but is no longer active in human affairs - which is perhaps a “Higher Power” but not one necessary to pray to or be concerned about) and some were atheists. Religious references of course abound - then, as now, most people at least held some religious belief, and many were quite religious. But most were very fearful of religion mixed with government, because they were well aware of the terrible discrimination this caused in other countries. If you don’t know this much, you just don’t know history. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="letter">Letter to George</a> Found this on the net: <pre> Dear President Bush, Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. As you said "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? (I'm pretty sure she's a virgin). 3. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? 4. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? How can I help you here? 5. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Aren't there 'degrees' of abomination? 6. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here? 7. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? 8. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? 9. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. It must be really great to be on such close terms with God and his son, ... even better than you and your own Dad, eh? </pre> </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="longlife">Long life</a> There are any number of life expectancy calculators out there on the web. They ask various questions about lifestyle and diet, and come up with an expected lifespan. I took one such test recently, and it informed me that my expected life span was 105 years, but that there was "room for improvement". Ahem. I'm sure there is. But the tests aren't all that well done. For example, they ask about alcohol intake, with the choices usually being "none", "1-2 drinks a week", "1-2 day" or "more". Well, I drink about 12 beers, 3 or 4 glasses of wine and 4 or 5 bourbon shots every year. That's not "none", but it isn't any of the other answers either. Then there is vitamin pills: "Do you take a vitamin E every day?". Well no, but I do take one every three or four days. There were other questions that were hard for me answer honestly. Frankly, given the lifestyles I observe in acquaintances, I'm surprised that most of them aren't dead already. But if you take a test like this and come up short, hey, go back and lie to it. Why not? You'll feel better immediately. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="liberal">Liberals and Conservatives</a> I'm not sure I like the whole “Liberal” label. I certainly can agree that I’m liberal on many issues, but I’ve talked to many people who identify themselves as Conservatives (with the big “C”) and often we find ourselves in agreement on many things. Of course we disagree on other things, but my point is that if either of us only had a listing of the others opinions, we could easily mischaracterize how the other person labels themself. As to the smear tactics from both sides, I hate it. I’m generally anti-Republican, and it disgusts me when some pro-Republican group makes an unfair charge about a Democrat. But it disgusts me even more when a Democrat says something equally stupid about a Republican, I know it’s too much to hope for, but I’d like to see honesty on both sides. Not every conservative idea is automatically wrong, and not every liberal idea means the end of civilization as we know it. I’d like to see intelligent discussion without all the nonsense. I realize that can be difficult. Abortion is a great example - there is precious little middle ground here. The role of religion in government is another area where feelings run very high (though it’s interesting that some conservatives see that trend as dangerous and some more liberal seem to want to embrace it). We do have very difficult issues that divide us, and it may be that there really is no solution. Maybe all the Blues should move to more liberal countries and leave the rest of you to your own happiness, but that does seem extreme (yet not so extreme that more and more of us aren’t talking about it). How do we have meaningful dialog when we are so far apart? </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="exit">If we all leave..</a> We have semi-seriously talked about talked about leaving the United States. I'm not sure where we'd go, which is why it's only semi-serious right now, but we're not happy with the right wing shift and the increasing presence of religion in government. Interestingly, I've talked to other people with the same feelings. It's not that we're definitely giving up, it's not that we feel totally helpless yet, but there's a definite feeling that things at least could get bad enough to push us out. So what happens if a lot of the non-Jesus-land people start bailing out? Well, obviously the country gets even more right-wing, and that could accelerate the number of people wanting to leave. At some point the right-wing folks notice (they aren't, after all, completely stupid) and take action. One of the things that would probably happen very quickly is restrictions on how much money you'd be allowed to take with you. There would also be political pressure on other countries not to make things easy for Americans wanting to leave, and taxation if you tried to cover your bets by retaining citizenship. No doubt there would be even uglier things done by individuals to discourage or punish the folks who had finally swallowed all they could. But the most important thing to remember is this: if all the liberal folks leave, the right wing nut-cases left behind have all the nuclear weapons. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="religion">Religion in Government</a> It's easy enough to point out the dangers of religion invading government. If you understand why it is harmful to both government and religion, there's no point in my rehashing it here, and if you don't understand, well, nothing I can say is likely to help you. Instead, I want to talk about the futility of trying to keep religion out of government. As I see it, the problem is that religious belief is so entrenched in society that it can't be avoided. We try: the U.S. founding fathers knew the dangers, but even they couldn't avoid religious language creeping in to the Bill of Rights and Constitution. Even among thinking people, well aware of the dangers and opposed to strong infilitration, a "little" religion is seen as harmless. This often comes up in discussions of the "In God We Trust" that was plastered onto our coinage in 1864 (our original coins expressed Liberty as their only theme). "It doesn't hurt anyone" is a common response. And indeed, if you are a person with religious belief, it doesn't. The "God" is seen as generic, a placeholder, your God, his God, my God. No attempt to force a specific God, so "harmless". That of course completely ignores atheists and polytheists, but even some other religions have to realize that it is not really a placeholder at all: that "God" is assuredly Christian. But, because the majority is Christian (or at least have a Christian background - the Judea-Christian heritage), it's unimportant. Much the same thing is heard about the "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. I'm old enough to remember when it was added, and didn't like it then, but most people probably think it was originally written that way, and even if they are aware that it was not, they think that it is "harmless". Again, there is not much point in me arguing that it isn't harmless at all. You either already know that or probably never will. Religion will find its way into government. It's impossible to stop it. What is perhaps more frustrating for those of us without gods cluttering our minds is that the influx is usually used to justify intolerance and interference. God forbids homosexuality, God doesn't want abortions, and so on. We can look at the Christian religion and say that their own prophet expresses tolerance, doesn't have anything to say about abortion, and generally seems to advise his followers to mind their own business and not judge others, but none of that matters. Religion will be used to justify intolerance and interference, even when the actual religion itself seems to demand the opposite. How do you fight that? </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="fbi">Faith Based Initiative</a> Bush’s Faith Based Initiative has already started trying to force people to profess certain beliefs: <a href="http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=print&stitle=363">http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=363</a> (hope that link comes through - if it doesn’t, Google for " Catholic Man Punished for Refusing Conversion to Pentecostal Faith") Technically, the rules wouldn't permit this to happen. But realistically, what will stop it? You have religious nuts given money to help people, this is the kind of thing they'll do. Most of the people affected will just keep their mouths shut, and even if they don't, I'm sure the providers won't be punished. My bet is that nothing whatsoever happens to this judge and that the religious group doesn't lose its grants. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="lungs">Good for the heart?</a> I walked up to the Post Office this morning. Had to return a check to a customer because they had forgotten to sign it. That was doubly annoying because the payment had been two weeks late already, not because of anything deliberate, just a stupid series of events that had conspired against my money getting to my pockets. Usually I take the side streets as far as I can. This morning, distracted by thoughts of cash unhappily unable to enter its proper resting place, I thoughtlessly turned up the main street and was well along before I remembered how unpleasant that is. The noise of the cars, the smell of exhaust - this walk may be good for my heart and legs, but I doubt it is doing my lungs any good. After reaching the Post Office, I mailed the check, and ducked across to a less traveled street to return home. Almost immediately, a large, noisy truck rumbled by me, spewing black smoke. How pleasant I wonder if someone was transported from a few hundred years back how they'd react to typical suburban air quality today. Would they gasp for breath? Would their eyes stream tears? Yes, I know that wood and coal smoke in cities and larger towns had to be pretty bad too, but I wonder how much of that people really put up with. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="fortyeight">Forty eight percent think humans created a few thousand years ago</a> I've had it. I know, we're supposed to be polite and respect other folks religious beliefs. Well, not any more. When it reaches the point where 48% of Americans are so incredibly stupid that they think this, it's time to stop being respectful. I am an atheist. You can also label me as a secular Humanist if you want. I have no religious belief, and although I was brought to churches as a child, I never have had any religious belief. I thought it was nonsense the first time I heard it and I still think so today. While any particularly egregious religious foolishness can provoke me into nastiness and ridicule, for the most part I'm willing to adopt a "don't ask, don't ridicule" policy. If you have any religious belief at all, I think you aren't approaching the idea intelligently, but I do understand that you may not WANT to approach it with reason at all, that your beliefs may comfort you, may be so much a part of your life that you can't unwind them no matter what evidence is against them. That's fine: most people I know have a very fuzzy religious belief that is fairly unimportant in their own daily lives and certainly doesn't affect others. I have no problem with that. I may privately think you should wake up to reality, but I certaintly don't want to interfere with your happiness, so I keep it to myself. If you aren't harming anyone, I can "respect" your beliefs at least enough to leave you alone with them. And while I know very well that kindness, self-sacrifice, and charity aren't the soul province of religion, I also recognize that some people are motivated to be better humans because of their beliefs. So I am not "anti-religion". I wouldn't want to live in place where religious belief was prohibited or restricted. But these religious literalists are just idiots, and it's time to start saying that out loud. Not just because they are beyond stupid, but because they are dangerous. Because they are affecting the education of children, because they are electing other idiots to government offices. You can't deal with these people at the level of "I think some privatization of social security is good and you don't". These aren't political disagreements, this is religious insanity and it is way past time to start saying so. Again, I'm not talking about prohibition or restriction: just public recognition that this is beyond reason and should not be part of government or education no matter how many fools there are who believe it. Yes, this is disrespectful of their beliefs. I'm sorry, but some ideas just do not deserve respect. I will respect and defend your right to have such beliefs, but I will not stay silent about my opinion of this nonsense when you try to impose it on the rest of us. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/story.html</tite></head><body>  <a name="annual">Annual Physical</a> I have an annual physical coming up early next month. The "annual" part of that is a lie - I usually let five years or more pass between them because, hey, I'm immortal, and doctors are idiots, and I feel fine. Why waste time with some quack who doesn't even have a StarTrek Tricorder? I usually only go at all because my wife has nagged me into it or made the appointment for me without telling me. Sneaky woman, she is. But this time, I actually am looking forward to it because I have some "issues" to discuss. First of all, these headaches. Oh, they aren't migraines. I've never had migraines, though my father and one of my sisters have. When I was much younger, I would now and then get these incredible flashes of pain along one side of my head, just behind the temples, drop to your knees in agony kind of thing, but they lasted mere seconds and I haven't had one of those in forty years. No, this is a very mild, just on the edge of awareness headache centered in my forehead. My sister, the same sister who says she used to get migraines, claims to have had a similar headache her entire life. Mine just started a few months ago, and while I wasn't exactly worried, I did plan on mentioning it to my doctor if I still have them when the physical rolls around. And I guess I still will, but.. Two weeks ago, I did something stupid. I say that as though an act of stupidity is something generally absent from my life; that's not actually the case, but this particular act was more stupid than most. What happened was that I dropped a napkin, and had bent over to pick it up. At that moment, my wife called to me for some reason and I stood up quickly, turning my head sharply toward her voice, and smashed my forehead into a door jam. I do mean smashed - down on my knees, semi-conscious, room-spinning, tears streaming from eyes smashed. It took me a few minutes just to feel well enough to stand up, but there wasn't any visible bruise and just the teeniest bit of swelling, so it can't really have been as bad as it felt. And of course I still have the mild headaches. But now I don't know if these are residue from smacking my head or if they are the same headache I first noticed at the end of summer. Or both. If it weren't so hard to get medical appointments, I'd cancel this one and reschedule for next month. But that is, of course, impossible. This appointment was made more than six months ago; I need to keep it. </body></html> <html><head><title>./www/data/blosxom/foot.html</tite></head><body>  <a href="http://aplawrence.com/cgi-bin/wiki?edit=PersCommentsBlog"> Comments</a> </body> </html> </body></html>