and Happy Boxing Day!
"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich." - 2 Corinthians 8:9
My many musings
"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich." - 2 Corinthians 8:9
On Wednesday, Mayor Ray Nagin offered the most startling estimate yet of the magnitude of the disaster: Asked how many people died in New Orleans, he said: "Minimum, hundreds. Most likely, thousands." The death toll has already reached at least 126 in Mississippi.Wow. I thought it was bad when Katrina went through Florida as a Category 1 hurricane on her way to the Gulf of Mexico and killed 7 to 11 people, depending on which news source you read. To see the pictures of the hurricane's aftermath is amazing. The before and after satellite pictures of New Orleans are incredible.If the estimate proves correct, it would make Katrina the worst natural disaster in the United States since at least the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire, which was blamed for anywhere from about 500 to 6,000 deaths. Katrina would also be the nation's deadliest hurricane since 1900, when a storm in Galveston, Texas, killed between 6,000 and 12,000 people.
No matter how much it is discussed, I believe that abortion is still an issue that is very much overlooked by many people. The basic question behind the debate of whether abortion is right or not and whether it should be kept legal is: "What exactly are the unborn?” Are they individual human beings from the time they are conceived with a life worth protecting and preserving? Or are they simply a small mass of tissue that is part of the mother's body, and thus up to her whether to let it live and develop or to have it killed? It is a question that needs to be answered.
Biologically, the fetus is unique from the moment of conception from any other human being, including its mother, with its own distinct DNA. In fact by about day 22 the heart starts beating and moving blood around the little body which is often of a different blood type than that of the mother. Its brain waves begin at around forty days of gestation.
Being a tiny mass of cells does not make the fetus any less a person since size is not a criteria for being considered a human being. We don't say that Michael Jordan, being as tall as he is, is any more human that a small child--he is merely at a different stage of growth and development. Neither does that level of development determine how "human" a person is. In fact, people are continually developing and changing both mentally and physically. Does that mean that a twenty year old is any less a person than a sixty year old? No, just different.
An individual's location and environment do nothing to change his or her personhood. Where someone is does not determine what they are. A person is the same regardless of whether they are in the middle of the
How dependent a person is on others to survive does not make any impact on whether or not they are an individual human being, either. There are people in nursing homes and hospitals throughout the world who could not survive except through the help of other people, yet their humanity is not questioned. Being independent is not a criterion for being human.
An infant, no matter how small, is an individual human being with a life worth preserving, and needs to be recognized as such. The right to life is not something that is given by the choice of any human being, association, or government, it is a natural right endowed upon all of us by our Creator. Abortion is one thing that should not be overlooked by anyone. Fetuses are more than a debate; they are individual, unique people.
"When in doubt, Merriadoc Brandybuck, always follow your nose." -Gandolf the Grey ; )
When was the last time that you ate a gummy bear, teddy graham, or gingerbread man without slowly dismembering him by biting off his head, arms, legs, or ears first? Most people enjoy doing so to their sweets, yet do not go out and do so to actual, living animals. Chocolate Easter bunnies receive similar treatment, as their ears are usually the first part to go, yet there are thousands of rabbits hopping around with their ears still intact. Even worse, the candy Sour Patch Kids are little gummies in the shape of, that's right, kids, and yet nobody compains about those being sold and eaten. What makes this any different than eating a animal-shaped candy that is already dead (although roadkill candy does not sound very appetizing)? I do not think that people will be influenced by their candy to out driving for the soul purpose of running over snakes and squirrels, much less to pick up dead animals lying by the side of the road and eating them. Most people would never think of it."It sends the wrong message to children, that it's OK to harm animals. And that's the wrong message, especially from a so-called wholesome corporation like Kraft," said society spokesman Matthew Stanton.
The biggest challenge to the space elevator has been developing a cable tough enough to extend 62,000 miles without breaking. This, Edwards explained will be solved with carbon nanotube composites - tiny bundles of carbon weaved together to form a ribbon that will be stronger than steel. His startup company, Carbon Designs, Inc., is currently focused on developing this technology.Is this really possible? Would the design really work without defying the laws of physics? Would the coreolis effect have an influence on it? There are probably a lot of skeptics out there (like me) who think that this is too weird to actually work, but then there were most likely a lot of skeptics about the ability of airplanes to fly, when they are obviously much heavier than air and, according to normal human reasoning, would never get off the ground. There were probably also a lot of people who were unsure of the idea of sending people up beyond the confines of our atmosphere into space in a rocket. The sky is no longer the limit. You never really know what might happen next. It will be interesting to see what develops, if anything, from Edward's proposition.
Well, that is the view from one side of the political spectrum. What is the other? hmmmmmm..."Students should be free to give their opinion without fear of retribution," said Ohio GOP State Sen. Larry Mumper.
According to Mumper, professors in the Buckeye State are discriminating against students who don't hold the same political views, and the bias is usually a liberal one. He points to a recent study by a Santa Clara University researcher that found Democrats outnumber Republicans eight to one among social science and humanities faculty as evidence of the left slant.
One side says that there is not an ability to discuss all opinions and views while the other says that there is a "free market system of ideas" with "open debate." Is the latter in denial and blind to the fact that people are not always allowed to express what they think? This bill sounds nice doesn't it? Universities would finally have to be "fair" in their dealings with their students, faculty, and the world at large and open debate would be a reality.Opponents say the legislation amounts to unnecessary meddling.
"We shouldn't limit discussion, open debate, and limit our universities from having ... what I believe is a free market system of ideas," said Ohio Democratic State Sen. Teresa Fedor.