It’s hard to believe, as an undergraduate in Biology, that there is even a debate today on whether or not ‘Intelligent Design’ should be mentioned – let alone taught - in schools in the U.S.A. There should be no debate what-so-ever and the whole “teach the controversy” saying is nothing more than propaganda for a religious agenda. It can be summed up briefly in two reasons that leave no room for debate.
1) The First Amendment to the Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” This amendment has been interpreted to mean a separation between church and state (meaning government and all public/ state run establishments including schools). ‘Intelligent Design’ is a faith based idea. In other words, it is a religious believe and therefore, has no business in public schools in any way, shape, or form.
2) To address and subsequently ‘prove’ the underlined statement above, I will give the definition of Science. According to Merriam-Webster science is: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method. In order to fully understand this definition one must know what scientific method is (also according to Merriam-Webster): principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses. According to these definitions ‘Intelligent Design’ is NOT SCIENCE. In order for it to be science it must be observable, testable, and found true with evidence or falsified with evidence. Since a faith based idea, which is what ‘Intelligent Design’ is, can in NO WAY be tested or falsified then it is NOT SCIENCE.
I’m not concerned with what you or I believe, I’m just proving that a faith based idea such as ‘Intelligent Design’ does not belong in schools or any other public/ government/ or state run institution in the United States. You can not prove that an intelligent creator exists and that it created life as we know it, which makes ‘Intelligent Design’ a faith based religious belief that belongs in churches and out of the public school system. In contrast, scientist are proving every day the evolutionary link between all the organisms on this planet and common ancestors that link us back to the very first life forms. This idea, nay, this truth has hard evidence to back it up and more flows in every time the genetic code is sequenced for another of Earth’s creatures. Let us teach Science in school and let us keep Science pure!
Monday, February 21, 2011
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
A Sure Way to Hold Congressmen Accountable
The banning of earmarks and politician’s beloved pork seems to be eminent and this is making some Democrats and Republicans very nervous. The extended and perhaps even permanent ban of earmarks could change the face of politics as we know it, especially in the realm of campaign financing. Without pet projects to entice the pocketbooks of contracting companies, lobbyists, and other interested parties; congressmen may have to begin considering the transparency of their votes.
As shown in our previous unit’s discussion, many representatives’ contributing constituents have a direct correlation with the committees the representatives sit upon and are involved with. This allows the representative to “slip in” funding bills for pet projects onto legislation being reviewed and edited in the committees before going to the floor for a vote. Much of the “pork” associated with a bill is completely irrelevant to the topic and means of the original legislation, so the “price-tag” of the bill is hidden in the small print and details. The votes of the representative often align more with the “stuffing” of the bill than the actual bill itself. Meaning, without the added incentive of pork, representatives will have to vote according to the “money” to secure the favor and benefits of their supporting constituents and not necessarily what the people want. With this continued and possible permanent banning of earmarks, it will be much easier to compare the voting record of the delegate to their financing record in order to find where the true loyalties of the representatives’ votes lie.
The other benefit of the ban is to cut frivolous and unchecked spending allowing congress to be more cognoscente of spending. This continued awareness of where the money is going will hopefully allow congress to stick to their budget goals. In fact, your representative’s vote on this ban will let you know exactly where your delegate’s loyalties lie: in the pocket books of campaign funding lobbyists and constituents or with the transparency and good of America. Write your congressman today to let them know you would like him/her to start being held accountable for their votes, campaign financing, true loyalties and that America supports and will benefit from a permanent ban on earmarks!
As shown in our previous unit’s discussion, many representatives’ contributing constituents have a direct correlation with the committees the representatives sit upon and are involved with. This allows the representative to “slip in” funding bills for pet projects onto legislation being reviewed and edited in the committees before going to the floor for a vote. Much of the “pork” associated with a bill is completely irrelevant to the topic and means of the original legislation, so the “price-tag” of the bill is hidden in the small print and details. The votes of the representative often align more with the “stuffing” of the bill than the actual bill itself. Meaning, without the added incentive of pork, representatives will have to vote according to the “money” to secure the favor and benefits of their supporting constituents and not necessarily what the people want. With this continued and possible permanent banning of earmarks, it will be much easier to compare the voting record of the delegate to their financing record in order to find where the true loyalties of the representatives’ votes lie.
The other benefit of the ban is to cut frivolous and unchecked spending allowing congress to be more cognoscente of spending. This continued awareness of where the money is going will hopefully allow congress to stick to their budget goals. In fact, your representative’s vote on this ban will let you know exactly where your delegate’s loyalties lie: in the pocket books of campaign funding lobbyists and constituents or with the transparency and good of America. Write your congressman today to let them know you would like him/her to start being held accountable for their votes, campaign financing, true loyalties and that America supports and will benefit from a permanent ban on earmarks!
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Are Political Leaders to Blame for Hate Crimes?
Critique of Editorial #1
This editorial article asserts that: the politicians in this country, which oppose gay marriage and gay rights, are gay bashing and therefore contributing to hate crimes against homosexuals on a national level. The author also hints that the demoralization of the homosexual lifestyle by political leaders is causing increased teen suicides of troubled homosexual youths across the country. Unfortunately, the article is scarce and the author does not back up any of his claims with facts and figures (such as the percent of gay vs. regular teen suicides). He focuses mainly on one incident that occurred recently in New York’s Bronx area where two teens and one adult male were kidnapped and sexually tortured yet hate crimes of this sort have been happening for years the world over. The author does make a good point in holding political leaders responsible for the effect their words have on the public; one reason why the President must be so careful and well worded. But truly, are political leaders the main ones to blame? Studies have shown that family, community, and peers have a greater effect on the opinions and morals of individuals. The real culprit of the hate crimes is society in general, the churches, and schools for not properly educating children on the complexities of sexuality and equal rights for all American citizens free from prejudice of any kind.
Personally I blame the Christian philosophy of “righteousness,” and heavenly superiority that is abundant in many Christian teachings. From the day they can understand their parent’s words, children in fundamental Christian households are taught that they are better than the average human being because they are “going to heaven.” Because being “chosen by God” or “made in God’s image” is clearly better then not for all the other poor saps are “sinners” and are “going to Hell.” Children are taught that any one different from them are in danger and in need of “saving.” Goddess forbid if any one of these “sinners” openly rejects the teachings of these fundamentalists because then they are pegged as “evil” and therefore must be “cast out in the name of God.” It is a simple equation of: gay = sinner, sin = Satan, therefore gay = Satan. These perpetrators/ torturers in the Bronx were only doing a civic duty and ridding the world of sin, making the streets of New York safer for the rest of Christian society. Who can blame them, really?
Monday, October 4, 2010
States denying basic human rights to citizens
The following article posted on NPR's web site August 17, 2010 brings to light a very important case/ law that is denying basic human rights to citizens http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129259161&ft=1&f=1001 . This legal battle may soon be brought to the Supreme Court (in 2012) and we can only hope that the highest of courts in this country will recognize the prejudice and religious persecution of individuals effected by the proposed law.
On the road to “Life and the pursuit of happiness,” basic human rights outlined in the Declaration of Independence, lies marriage. Marriage is an expression of Love, a uniting of lives in a spiritual (for some) and legal bond, which we sometimes choose to do in this life. Marriage can also become a large part of our happiness. A couple things our country was founded on are:
On the road to “Life and the pursuit of happiness,” basic human rights outlined in the Declaration of Independence, lies marriage. Marriage is an expression of Love, a uniting of lives in a spiritual (for some) and legal bond, which we sometimes choose to do in this life. Marriage can also become a large part of our happiness. A couple things our country was founded on are:
#1 freedom of religion (including Separation of Church and State)
#2 basic human rights.
Prohibiting consenting adults from the right to marry based off of race, religion, sex, or sexual preference is unconstitutional. The people of this country must put aside their religious or prejudice views to embrace this equality for ALL consensual adults! Because in this country there is a separation of church and state; because in America there is freedom of religion; because in the United States of America we respect and honor basic human rights and strive for “all (people) are created equal” is why same-sex marriage should be allowed in this country.
States that deny same-sex couples from expressing their love and happiness in a legal union is the same as denying couples this right because they have brown hair or green eyes; because they are black or a Jew; or because they make less than $30K a year. Prejudice is prejudice no matter what flavor, print, or color you choose to paint it.
Some Americans like to spout about “family values” in this argument but that is all a matter of opinion again painted in prejudice. I can just as well say that blacks should not be allowed to marry because they listen to rap music and that has a negative effect on children. How about, Christians cannot marry because of their belief in Hell and that sets a scary family environment full of tyranny that is not conducive to a positive childhood? These are examples of opinions based on personal and/or religious views. In other words – Prejudice.
Prejudice – Pre-judgment – a pre-conceived opinion.
I ask you now… how can anyone in American base a law, concerning the basic human rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, off of an opinion?
Banning same-sex marriage because the majority population is afraid of difference or has a difference in opinion is the same as:
- denying a person the right to vote based off their race or sex
- throwing a person into the shackles of slavery because of the color of their skin
- murdering millions of humans because of their religious affiliations (i.e. holocaust/ witch trials)
Same sex-couples are being robbed of their “pursuit of happiness,” their "(liberty) of religion," and the “life” they want to live. It is time for this country to do away with religious persecution and prejudice and look to the ideals of America – we are ALL created equal and deserve equal rights no matter the color of your skin, your religious beliefs, your sex, or your sexual preferences! Lord and Lady, Bless America!
See article: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129259161&ft=1&f=1001 for reference.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Why Eat Organic? It's easy to forget.
I was cooking Tequila chicken and while peeling the skin from the flesh of those ten thighs, I realized, “Shit! That's a lot of chicken! In fact, that was five chickens that underwent life as food: born, raised, and fed just to be slaughtered in a chaotic, hateful environment where their care takers treated them like food or even less than that; simply objects with no regard to life what so ever. All so I could have chicken on my plate at the discount price of $1/ lb."
It was then that realized: I have not been true to myself these past few years. I have compromised my being and am not living impeccably. There was a time when I only shopped at organic food stores (in bulk when I could, in order to reuse my own containers) and only bought my meat from small farms that respected the life of the animals they were raising for food. There is something on a fundamental level that tells me: eating meat from a negative source is bad for you.
It's funny how the inner and outer rationalizations of life convinced me otherwise, made me forget this part of myself. I can pinpoint the course of action that allowed the rationalization to win. It was when I read that Bruce Ames (the Ames test) stated, "everything gives you cancer, the best thing you can do to prevent it: eat fruits and vegetables... it doesn't even matter if they are organic or not because the benefit that you receive from eating fruits and veggies out-weighs any negative aspect of the pesticides." (not a direct quote, just paraphrased from memory)
What happened then? How did that thought supersede my spiritual beliefs? It's because at this point in my rationalization, I only thought about me. I forgot that the reason for eating organic vegetables and meat (even though they are more expensive) was for the Earth, for the wellbeing of this planet that supports us and for all the creatures that sacrifice themselves like we also do, so that another being might live. We are all - every single living being on this planet is equal and we need each other to live. The cycle of life, the food web, the energy flow... call it what you will but that is the reason we eat organic food. It is our blatant selfishness that has made us forget this important aspect. Why are the bats all dying of this strange/ new fungus? Because we dumped pesticides into those regions to kill the mosquitoes that carried the West Nile virus and this pesticide has negative effects on the bats' hormones ( http://www.motherearthnews.com/nature-and-community/white-nose-syndrome-z10m0rog.aspx ). How much do you want to bet that something similar is hurting the bees?
We need to stop fighting the planet and other living things. Killing and poisoning everything around us for our own convenience without respect or regard for life... this is what causes cancer. It is a disease that mirrors our own actions and attitude towards the Earth - our life, our body. The cancer kills its own environment and then dies along with it. Sure it may not happen in your lifetime but it is that attitude that starts the disease. Why don't you start being a cure instead of a symptom?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)