"If you haven't got your health, you haven't got anything." Remember that quote from the movie The Princess Bride? You haven't seen that movie, yet? Go rent it! That is probably my most favorite movie of all time, which likely explains a lot about me.
A British article about the flu and how it's transmitted mostly from kids to the rest of the population is very fitting nowadays, with people getting hit with late winter flus in the US and the bird flu showing its ugly head in France. If you don't have good hand washing habits, its never too late to start! Set a good example for yourself and for those around you to wash hands frequently, especially after coughing or sneezing, and when you use a tissue. And for gosh sakes, cover your coughs and sneezes!
Make sure that you speak with the school your children attend and ask if they are taking advantage of the programs the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta have put together to help kids understand the importance of good hygiene. These programs are helpful to keep kids and schools healthy, and are really a vital way to keep the flu and other viruses at bay. Develop your children into Germ-stoppers! (Or Germbusters!)
http://www.cdc.gov/germstopper/resources.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/school/
Monday, February 27, 2006
Thursday, February 23, 2006
O'Reilly Says Let's Cut and Run--Oh, Really?!
Bill O'Reilly, host of the O'Reilly Factor on Fox News Channel, claimed in his radio show that Iraq is full of nuts and "the only solution to this is to hand over everything to the Iraqis as fast as humanly possible. Because we just can't control these crazy people." Oh, Really?!! When'd ya figure that out?
So, what happened to the pep rally that this is a war we must win??? Mid-term elections starting to knaw at you? Or are you just going crazy?
I will stand by my previous statements that if we are truly there to liberate the Iraqis, then this is a war for the Iraqi people to win. This is not a victory the United States should be flaunting.
Oh, well, we are a land of arrogant people, aren't we. Calling the Iraqis crazy and gettin' the heck out of Dodge, or Baghda--Fallujadad, as fast as we can, well that is just a funny way of saying "cut and run." Funny, isn't it?!
So, what happened to the pep rally that this is a war we must win??? Mid-term elections starting to knaw at you? Or are you just going crazy?
I will stand by my previous statements that if we are truly there to liberate the Iraqis, then this is a war for the Iraqi people to win. This is not a victory the United States should be flaunting.
Oh, well, we are a land of arrogant people, aren't we. Calling the Iraqis crazy and gettin' the heck out of Dodge, or Baghda--Fallujadad, as fast as we can, well that is just a funny way of saying "cut and run." Funny, isn't it?!
A Little Wine With Your Port?
"Bush Defends Port Deal" reports the VOA. "This deal would not go forward if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America," stated President Bush. So, does that mean that President Bush is not concerned about the security here? The president notes that he will quickly veto anything that will delay or disrupt this port deal with the United Arab Emirates. So, why is this deal to hand over major US ports to UAE so vital to President Bush? Things that make you go... hmmmmm.
In the Forbes article on "Senator Challenges Ports Deal Procedure" they quote President Bush saying, "The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and approved by my government," Bush said, "the more they'll be comforted that our ports will be secure." Umm... Since when did this country go from our government to your government, President Bush? Semantics, I know.
It seems that the last time something major changed hands, within a couple of months devastating events happened. Let's see here... Let me look into my crystal ball and see... Oh, my. April and May look to be active months. The beginning two weeks of each month seems to show major events happening. Oh, dear. It's clouding over now. It's turning blue. Is it Windows 2000 for crystal balls acting up again? Oh, it's turning red now. This isn't good. Is this thing even on the right year?
In the Forbes article on "Senator Challenges Ports Deal Procedure" they quote President Bush saying, "The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and approved by my government," Bush said, "the more they'll be comforted that our ports will be secure." Umm... Since when did this country go from our government to your government, President Bush? Semantics, I know.
It seems that the last time something major changed hands, within a couple of months devastating events happened. Let's see here... Let me look into my crystal ball and see... Oh, my. April and May look to be active months. The beginning two weeks of each month seems to show major events happening. Oh, dear. It's clouding over now. It's turning blue. Is it Windows 2000 for crystal balls acting up again? Oh, it's turning red now. This isn't good. Is this thing even on the right year?
Determining Value of Life
Let me preface this post by saying that I believe that certain events, though unrelated, happen because they are trying to tell us something. They are signs.
"A long way from the gallow"as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle about the ethical issues surrounding postponement of Michael Morales' execution.
"S. Dakota targets abortion ruling" reported by Indianapolis Star regarding South Dakota's passing a law banning virtual all abortions, with the exception to save the mother's life. This story basically kicked yesterday's story about the ban on partial-birth abortion into dead news space. Although, they are, in a way, similar and both tie in with the death penalty issue.
I believe these two unrelated news stories are really related in a factually abstract way. "Fabstractually" if you will. No, wait. "Factstractually." There's a difference. Fabstractually, would be an abstract fabrication, something George W. Bush would say if he were talking about WMDs in pre-war Iraq.
The death penalty and abortion issues are about the value of life. These issues will be the proving ground for George W. Bush's stance on life. Whose existence is worth continuing? Whether it be a fetus in the womb, a brain-dead woman on life support, an Iraqi insurgent, a combat soldier, or a man convicted of murder on death row, there are philosophical and ethical questions about the value of life that we as a society must face and solidify in our thinking and in our laws.
When does an individual existing become a true, bonafide human? When does an individual's existence cease? Those are existence issues. Sure, a fetus exists. But, when does it achieve rights and responsibilities of a human existence? How do we define a human? When a fetus completely exits the mother's womb? When the fetus is viable outside the womb? When the fetus takes its first breath?
Then, when it takes its first breath, how do we as a society value that life through the years? What is the true value of its life? How do we define the value of a life? How do we react and respond to that life? We do place value on the lives of others daily in our own lives by the way we react and respond to the lives around us.
We devalue people when we offer devaluing comments to them, do mean and spiteful acts against others, and ignore those who most need our attention. In a way, our devaluing is a way to kill the value of another's life and we are extinguishing a bit of that life by every act or negligence we place on that individual.
Does devaluing others' lives by the act of murder, devalue the life of the murderer as well? To the point that the murderer's life is no longer valued by society? That is how our society views it today. Should those who devalued the murderer before he committed his crime be held to be devalued in society as well? Our society places great value in those who can strategically manipulate and devalue others while being able to assert and persuade that they are doing the right thing.
Life as we know it has various levels of value or worth. Many of us see our worth in our paychecks and/or benefit plans at our places of work. Some of us see our worth in our families and how they appreciate our existence and contributions that we make as a member of the family. Some of us see our worth in other social or working groups that make us feel our existence is valued and in some ways justified. In most cases it is what we do that gives us our personal sense of worth, and also a social sense of worth, as well. (And in my case, my true worth far exceeds the amount of my paycheck, as many others could also claim, too.)
Some lives find value, satisfaction, and justification by devaluing other lives. Should we continue to value that individual, even if they devalue us?
When a devaluing person is punished for a crime, what is cruel and unusual punishment for any crime? Is confining a criminal in jail cruel? Is detaining someone without judgment unusual? Is execution by injection cruel? What did they mean when they wrote cruel and unusual punishment in the Constitution?
Then, we have other circumstances where a human life has declined by physical or mental decay. These lives may continue to bring value to others, even if they do nothing but exist. But when do we say that life fails to provide value or worth and should not truly exist?
When should ideals and ideology trump life itself? What is worth losing a life? What is worth taking a life? Is life really worth living?
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When does life take a back seat to liberty or the pursuit of happiness? These are the tough questions.
We think it is the courts, and especially the Supreme Court that should answer these questions. No, these are definitions that need to be answered by our legislators both at the state and Federal level. These are definitions that we need to answer to our legislators so they can do their jobs and write (or rewrite) legislation according to our definitions of life that can be applied, enforced, judged and upheld.
"A long way from the gallow"as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle about the ethical issues surrounding postponement of Michael Morales' execution.
"S. Dakota targets abortion ruling" reported by Indianapolis Star regarding South Dakota's passing a law banning virtual all abortions, with the exception to save the mother's life. This story basically kicked yesterday's story about the ban on partial-birth abortion into dead news space. Although, they are, in a way, similar and both tie in with the death penalty issue.
I believe these two unrelated news stories are really related in a factually abstract way. "Fabstractually" if you will. No, wait. "Factstractually." There's a difference. Fabstractually, would be an abstract fabrication, something George W. Bush would say if he were talking about WMDs in pre-war Iraq.
The death penalty and abortion issues are about the value of life. These issues will be the proving ground for George W. Bush's stance on life. Whose existence is worth continuing? Whether it be a fetus in the womb, a brain-dead woman on life support, an Iraqi insurgent, a combat soldier, or a man convicted of murder on death row, there are philosophical and ethical questions about the value of life that we as a society must face and solidify in our thinking and in our laws.
When does an individual existing become a true, bonafide human? When does an individual's existence cease? Those are existence issues. Sure, a fetus exists. But, when does it achieve rights and responsibilities of a human existence? How do we define a human? When a fetus completely exits the mother's womb? When the fetus is viable outside the womb? When the fetus takes its first breath?
Then, when it takes its first breath, how do we as a society value that life through the years? What is the true value of its life? How do we define the value of a life? How do we react and respond to that life? We do place value on the lives of others daily in our own lives by the way we react and respond to the lives around us.
We devalue people when we offer devaluing comments to them, do mean and spiteful acts against others, and ignore those who most need our attention. In a way, our devaluing is a way to kill the value of another's life and we are extinguishing a bit of that life by every act or negligence we place on that individual.
Does devaluing others' lives by the act of murder, devalue the life of the murderer as well? To the point that the murderer's life is no longer valued by society? That is how our society views it today. Should those who devalued the murderer before he committed his crime be held to be devalued in society as well? Our society places great value in those who can strategically manipulate and devalue others while being able to assert and persuade that they are doing the right thing.
Life as we know it has various levels of value or worth. Many of us see our worth in our paychecks and/or benefit plans at our places of work. Some of us see our worth in our families and how they appreciate our existence and contributions that we make as a member of the family. Some of us see our worth in other social or working groups that make us feel our existence is valued and in some ways justified. In most cases it is what we do that gives us our personal sense of worth, and also a social sense of worth, as well. (And in my case, my true worth far exceeds the amount of my paycheck, as many others could also claim, too.)
Some lives find value, satisfaction, and justification by devaluing other lives. Should we continue to value that individual, even if they devalue us?
When a devaluing person is punished for a crime, what is cruel and unusual punishment for any crime? Is confining a criminal in jail cruel? Is detaining someone without judgment unusual? Is execution by injection cruel? What did they mean when they wrote cruel and unusual punishment in the Constitution?
Then, we have other circumstances where a human life has declined by physical or mental decay. These lives may continue to bring value to others, even if they do nothing but exist. But when do we say that life fails to provide value or worth and should not truly exist?
When should ideals and ideology trump life itself? What is worth losing a life? What is worth taking a life? Is life really worth living?
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When does life take a back seat to liberty or the pursuit of happiness? These are the tough questions.
We think it is the courts, and especially the Supreme Court that should answer these questions. No, these are definitions that need to be answered by our legislators both at the state and Federal level. These are definitions that we need to answer to our legislators so they can do their jobs and write (or rewrite) legislation according to our definitions of life that can be applied, enforced, judged and upheld.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Headlines: What is this World Coming To?
"Blast destroys dome of Shiite shrine in Iraq", says the headline from MSNBC. Revenge, thy name is apparently Muslim, as many protesters shout "Rise up Shiites! Shiites take revenge!" I guess they don't want to listen to clerics who are asking their Shiite and Sunni followers NOT to follow up with violent attacks and protests. But this hit a raw nerve in the Muslim world. How raw? Just look at raw backwards... Civil war come to mind? (Speaking of civil war, isn't that an oxymoron? What's so civil about any war, anyway?)"3 Charged with Planning to Attack Troups," declares Forbes. But read on, and find out that these suspects are just ordinary U.S./Jordanian citizens. One man was attending college to learn how to be a computer guru, another was a car salesman, and the third liked to play with his children in his yard. But the headline says they allegedly were planning an attack on our troups. I know, a paradox of sorts, and so is the article, too. Because after the first paragraph, there's no mention of attacking troups. The list of charges are a bit interesting, and could possibly be innocently explained away. Let me try. 1) They went to a shooting range together regularly and tried to get government funding for their training. Easy, they have had several incidents with car/deer accidents on the road and know the dangers posed by deer overpopulation, so they wanted to get people to train and be able to hunt deer better. 2) They were apparently distributing information on how to make a bomb out of household items. Uh, well, not really a bomb, per se... do you know what Meth is? 3) Suicide bomb vest? Oh, no, that was his Simplicity pattern he was converting to make a computer techie vest out of. 4) One man is accused of wanting to kill President Bush... I can't explain away that one. Another surprising tidbit from the article is that after police officials ransacked their places, they found money, two pieces of paper and a paintball gun. That's hard evidence for ya. The only piece of evidence that I think might convict them (not necessarily of the current charges): "Whenever he goes out at night, he always calls my mom to let her know where he's at and what he's doing," a 14-year-old sister of one of the accused said. Sounds like someone paranoid about getting taken out.
"Brosnan sympathy for new Bond", says RTE Entertainment. When I first read this, I thought the new Bond, Daniel Craig, died. Maybe Brosnan will come back?? But, nopers. The new James Bond got banged up pretty bad in a stunt scene, loosing a few teeth in the process. Hey, what's wrong with the new Bond looking like a hockey player? In actuality, the article was more a plug for what the old Bond is up to nowadays. A bit of a distasteful publicity stunt. Shame on Brosnan's PR people. By the way, Pierce Brosnan, are you looking for a better PR staff?
"Make your own Mardi Gras", encourages Mercury News. Yes, Lent is just around the corner and we are less than a week from Fat Tuesday, the Super Bowl of overindulgence. Who's going to win this year's overindulgence feast? Probably not New Orleans. Hey, that means your community could step up and take over for New Orleans. Just rename your town Newer Orleans and ham it up!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
