McCain chooses Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska

[cxt]

Jason

I love Hitchens.

I like Slate in general.....often disagee with what I find there, but its good discussion all around.

[AAAhmed46]

Jason

I love Hitchens.

I like Slate in general.....often disagee with what I find there, but its good discussion all around.

He says some pretty crazy stuff though huh?

I once heard him quoted that if he finds out someone has a religious belief, he loses alot of respect for them.

Some of the smartest people Ive met are Christians and Muslims and people with spirituality. And of course, Ive met smart people with no faith. Belief is not a sign of intelligence.

I think he writes great columns though, and well thought out and well researched.

[AAAhmed46]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYqcngB2k8Y

This is pointless but entertaining.

[IJ]

If I may speak for Hitchens (and Dawkins), they don't believe that people who hold religious beliefs are automatically dumb. First, they exclude those broadly spiritual people who don't actually envision a God tinkering with the world (eg, sports results). Einstein was among these. He had quite a different God in mind than most when he said "God doesn't play dice," etc.

Beyond that, it isn't a matter of IQ, it's a matter of what they see as gullibility and the willingness to make huge assumptions and decisions without evidence. For example, Jews, Christians and Muslims sitting down to debate who's right can't really point to any evidence, they just feel what they feel very strongly. Largely, those feelings depended on where they were born and to whom, rather than being derived from an objective review of the possibilities and facts. They would agree with Sagan, who when asked about his own mortality and belief in afterlife and God, said, "I don't want to believe, I want to know."

There are many people with a cultural view of religion, that it serves important roles in the history and togetherness of society, and view that culture as part of who they are. I had several friends who attended Catholic mass for this reason even though they knew the church would reject them for falling short of its rules and ideals. That's not uncommon actually... it's different from buying the party line straight up. That kind of unshakable certainty and unwillingness to consider alternative possibilities is a frightening prospect to some people, and a concern for potential leaders, commanders, doctors, or heck, the people that work on your brakes, if they choose confidence over checking.

I get along very well with many devout religious people (unless they try to police my life) and also know where those two guys are coming from. One can also take a judgmental view of religion too far and lose respect for people who are very capable and accomplished. It's not the fatal flaw they would make it out to be sometimes.

[Jason Rees]

McCain's pants not on fire?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Nz ... GY=&w=MA==

[TSDguy]

Interesting article if it didn't have that headline. The article itself just sort of discusses the bill, it's a shame to waste that with a headline that tells us what to think.

Kids in my elementary school were having sex well before the sixth grade (and I sure would have given the opportunity), so PP is definitely on the money with that suggestion. Hell, kids at that age don't really have inhibitions so they have sex parties. Best to tell them what they're getting into, no pun intended.

There is also a natural, built in level of sex ed you can teach someone. You can tell a 4 year old about fallopian tubes all you want, but best you'll get them to understand is "if someone touches you here, tell mommy" or "don't play in someone elses blood; it's dirty."

I would have supported the bill as well. I'll have to rewatch the McCain ad to see if he literally lied about anything.

[Bill Glasheen]

Interesting article if it didn't have that headline. The article itself just sort of discusses the bill, it's a shame to waste that with a headline that tells us what to think.

Kids in my elementary school were having sex well before the sixth grade (and I sure would have given the opportunity), so PP is definitely on the money with that suggestion. Hell, kids at that age don't really have inhibitions so they have sex parties. Best to tell them what they're getting into, no pun intended.

There is also a natural, built in level of sex ed you can teach someone. You can tell a 4 year old about fallopian tubes all you want, but best you'll get them to understand is "if someone touches you here, tell mommy" or "don't play in someone elses blood; it's dirty."

I would have supported the bill as well. I'll have to rewatch the McCain ad to see if he literally lied about anything.

Here's something I'd like to call to your attention.

• Yes it is true that sex happens.
• Yes it is true that sexual molestation happens.
• No it is not true that The Nanny State needs to step in and fix all this because it's the failure of blah blah blah so send federal/state/local government to the rescue to teach us about our private parts and what should and should not be done with them.

I don't mind my kids being exposed to sex ed. It's what they're teaching that bothers me. And I fully understand and defend the rights of families who don't share "the consensus" about sexual practices.

We are a sex obsessed society. It's all over the media. Hollywood Inc. feels like it's the kiss of death to have a movie that isn't at least PG rated. God forbid there be intelligent dialogue, a good plot, or good acting. Then when our kids think abnormal behavior is the norm, we are shocked... shocked I tell you... that there are children having sex with children and making babies before they can even drive a car. So let's let government protect us, right? Hmm...

We have competing lifestyle agendas in our society. I don't really give a flip about who does what with whom when all parties are on board - within reason. But don't force your liberal/conservative agendas down our throats. Don't teach my kids that abstinence before marriage is the only way to go, and don't teach them that mommy has three daddies.

IT ISN'T THE BUSINESS OF THE GOVERNMENT TO PREACH/TEACH MORALS, AND TEACH LIFESTYLES.

That's the slippery slope.

Does this creep in? Absolutely. In every aspect of our lives. The last Fortune 500 company I worked for was Minnesota based. I was required to endure "sensitivity training." In the videos I was forced to watch, I was informed that I could be punished up to and including firing for offending someone else. The video preached it again, and again, and again... NOWHERE in the video was there discussed the concept of due process. All I had to do was offend someone.

Saying Merry Christmas might offend someone.

I needed to understand cultural norms in Minnesota. I had to be concerned about what special interest group might be offended by my views.

Basically nobody could say anything to anyone else. Go to work, smile, do your job, and get the hell out of there.

Sorry... libertarian-minded people get really antsy when someone says that the government must teach us about personal choices. Parenting subservient to the government? I don't think so.

Here's a novel concept. Why don't we make life very, very difficult for a mom and a dad to abandon a child and leave it to The State to see to his/her needs. Why don't we put the responsibility of parenting on... the parents? Why don't we instead teach math, science, reading, and writing in school so kids in Korea aren't kicking or kids' a$$es on standardized tests?

Slippery slope indeed!

Now you understand another view.

- Bill

[TSDguy]

I never disagreed or didn't understand that view, no idea why you think I didn't.

Anywho, he's a fun article. I can't find the damn research paper though.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 75_pf.html

[IJ]

Sounds like your company went overboard, Bill. I am stuck with some very annoying legally required huggy supportive nonbias learning stuff as a supervisor myself (in California, where we need to chill out, you know, like Jerry Brown). It goes into the due process in great detail, and it also explains that being offended doesn't cut it. The offense has to be repeated or deliberate. The online tool actually explained that you can tell people they look hot in their clothes, or pat their buttocks, at work, in the right context, and a major focus is not about how any infraction makes you the devil, but rather must be handled carefully because of potential liability issues. I hate it because it HAS to take 3 hours even if I can speed read. So it gets left up passing time as I check emails. Having seen abusive behavior toward staff at work, I kinda understand why people would want to mandate education about how that can be illegal / inappropriate.

Bill, what did you think of the exemption the bill contained that would have let parents opt out? Also, I took a human anatomy and physiology course in high school. What kind of reproductive biology would you permit? I took health classes as well--when dealing with adolescents in clinic, my focus was always on the "sex drugs and rock n roll." Those kids almost never have medical issues at their sports physicals, but they ARE at risk for trauma, substance abuse, and STDs/pregnancy. So that's what preventive medicine should and does target in that group. My health class covered about the same issues (obesity now needs to be added). Would you... get schools entirely out of the health business? Or just not discuss sex? Would it be ok if medical care were ensured for all students, and the medical professional discussed it (would you not then prefer a legislator directed standard script?)?

[Bill Glasheen]

Sounds like your company went overboard, Bill.

Indeed they did, Ian.

Here's what bothered me more. At the end of it all, they left an opportunity to give feedback. Well... I DID!!! I was very explicit about what I liked and did not like about the training. I intimated that my sister was in charge of personnel at a major oil concern, so I understood the need and the liability. Then I went over the "But..." part in great detail. I even included the famous Seinfeld "Deloris" episode as an example of where their policy could come back to bite them in the glutes.

You know what pi$$ed me off? Nobody so much as wrote an e-mail and said thank you. No feedback. Nothing. Zilch.

From the explanation of policies at your workplace, it sounds like somebody got exactly what I was communicating.

Bill, what did you think of the exemption the bill contained that would have let parents opt out?

Absolutely necessary.

Also, I took a human anatomy and physiology course in high school. What kind of reproductive biology would you permit?

Science-based. Leave morality to the religious studies class. Leave parenting to the parents. Leave health issues to the MD.

I have no problem with a physician talking to his/her patient about their medical risks. Sounds like you are doing something good. And that is strictly between you and your patient.

Would you... get schools entirely out of the health business? Or just not discuss sex? Would it be ok if medical care were ensured for all students, and the medical professional discussed it (would you not then prefer a legislator directed standard script?)?

Do you need a legislator to tell you what you can/should/cannot/shouldn't discuss with your patient?

- Bill

[TSDguy]

Teachers aren't purely information giving machines, they also protect and mentor the kids. My wife teaches kindergarten, and the percentage of science and math learning is awfully low compared to things like "wash your hands" and helping them solve disputes. If a teacher loses a student because they got pregnant at age 11, that's not helping anyone. And they CERTAINLY have to protect kindergarteners from being molested. I know of one kid who was analy raped by his peers at that age; a teacher needs to let the kids know to tell someone.

Most parents are completely incompetent at protecting or teaching their kids, in my opinion, and good teachers help save entire generations.

I'm not arguing with Bill's points, as there was a clause to opt of of the education, just tossing that out.

[Bill Glasheen]

I'm all for good teachers. I think we should pay them more and expect more of them. That way we can keep the good ones.

There was always that one out of ten that made a mark on my life...

Most parents are completely incompetent at protecting or teaching their kids, in my opinion,

Do you realize that it's this very thinking that causes parents in the red states to bristle? It's this very thinking that makes them think that the elite in the blue states "don't get it."

Weird, isn't it?

It isn't the caring parents that are the problem. It's the kids without caring parents, or kids living in single parent households where one is trying to do the job of two. That - and not typical parents - is the problem. In my humble opinion, making it possible for these activities to happen at home, in the community, and in a doctor's office is a better alternative in this heterogeneous society.

This is a public health issue. That doesn't involve interrupting the education that unfortunately most kids don't get. As it is, I'm having to pay extra to get my kids special training over the summer to make up for a lack of teaching during the year. That should tell you something.

- Bill

[Glenn]

Here's a novel concept. Why don't we make life very, very difficult for a mom and a dad to abandon a child and leave it to The State to see to his/her needs. Why don't we put the responsibility of parenting on... the parents? - Bill

Nebraska is dealing with this issue in a more literal sense this week with it's new 'Safe Haven' law, which went into effect in July. Nebraska is one of the last states to enact a safe haven law, however the version that passed allows any child (minor) to be dropped off at a hospital without fear of prosecution, instead of being restricted to newborns as most states' safe haven laws do. This weekend the first kids to be abandoned at hospitals under the law were a 15-year old left at a Lincoln hospital by his aunt (saying she could not handle his behavior problems) and an 11 year old left at an Omaha hospital by a parent. Neither are considered to have been in any immediate danger and appear to have been 'convenience' drop-offs. Needless to say there is now a lot of discussion about how this was not the intent of the law, promoting other options, and about the possibility of restricting it to younger ages. Obviously the families are in a tough situation, and there should be some options for children in dangerous household situations, but some laws allow too easy an out.
Woman leaves teen at hospital under safe haven law

Woman leaves teen at hospital under safe haven law
By JoANNE YOUNG / Lincoln Journal Star
Monday, Sep 15, 2008 - 08:29:13 pm CDT

Lawmakers were afraid this would happen: Two older children were abandoned over the weekend under the state’s new safe haven law.

In Lincoln, a 15-year-old boy’s guardian dropped him off at BryanLGH Medical Center West Saturday evening, saying she couldn’t deal with the boy’s behavioral issues, Lincoln Police Chief Tom Casady said.

He and an 11-year-old boy — taken to Immanuel Medical Center in Omaha over the weekend — are the first two to be abandoned under a Nebraska safe haven law that went into effect in July.

Neither was in any immediate danger when dropped off, said Todd Landry, director of the Children and Family Services Division of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Neither the guardian in Lincoln nor the parent in Omaha will be charged with a crime. Before the law went into effect, they could have been charged with child neglect or abandonment, both misdemeanors, or felony child abuse.

The Lincoln boy, a high school freshman, is staying in a Lincoln emergency shelter. The Omaha boy was admitted to the hospital for evaluation and observation, Landry said.

Both will be in 48-hour protective custody and the county attorneys in Lancaster and Douglas counties will make the determination if the boys will remain in custody, Landry said. The courts will decide what happens next.

Landry said that could include family reunification, alternate placement or a more permanent solution.

The Lincoln boy’s mother died in September 2003, and her sister assumed temporary custody of all five children in the family, including one half-sibling.

The four other youths have already become state wards.

A brother and two sisters now live in group homes. The half-sister became a ward after she broke the law.

The father has lived in Lincoln but has not had custody of the children. He is listed in the mother’s obituary as her life partner.

Casady said the boy’s aunt, when she brought him to BryanLGH, said she was having trouble supervising him because of all of his behavior problems.

Landry and the sponsor of the safe haven law, Sen. Arnie Stuthman of Platte Center, said what happened this weekend was not the intent of the law.

Stuthman said LB157 was initially intended for infants less than 72 hours old who were in danger of being harmed or abandoned in an unsafe place. That’s the way most other states’ safe haven bills are written.

But to get the bill passed, he said, he had to agree to expand the language to include all children.

“This is not intended to be used when a child is unruly or out of control,” he said. “People need to realize the effect on the child and what it will do to families.”

Other options could have been pursued, Landry said.

Jim Blue, president and CEO of Cedars Youth Services, said if a parent or guardian does not feel a child is safe in their own care, he or she can call the Cedars emergency hotline at 437-8888 and receive free temporary shelter for the child.

He was supportive of a safe haven law for younger children, even up to the age of 2, whose young, unprepared parents cannot deal with parenting, he said.

But the emotional cuts and scars in an older child who is abandoned can be much deeper than those of an infant, he said. An adolescent’s social attachments, let alone family attachments, can be precarious, even in normal situations, he said.

“There are good organizations that can help with teens when situations become stressed,” he said.

Cedars is one of those, he said, and has been providing shelter for more than 60 years.

Both Landry and Stuthman said they will watch closely what happens with the law in the next few months. If necessary, the Legislature could try to adjust the law, Stuthman said.

[IJ]

My point about the exemption is that nothing gets crammed down anyone's throats. They can opt out of something wise just like with vaccines. Sounds reasonable to me!

As for health education, ABSOLUTELY it should be fact based and science based. I don't want the schools teaching our kids about morals. As it was, the moral education I got was the anatomy teacher saying he could barely talk about the rectum because he knew some people did 'inappropriate things with it"--my God, man, we were just talking about the digestive system! I don't tell patients what's right and wrong,* I give them information about risks and diseases associated with certain behaviors and how to reduce/prevent.

"I have no problem with a physician talking to his/her patient about their medical risks. Sounds like you are doing something good. And that is strictly between you and your patient."

Me and them and George Bush. You know about gag rules, right?

"Do you need a legislator to tell you what you can/should/cannot/shouldn't discuss with your patient?"

I certainly do not. But if you get every kid into health care, and leave it up to the American Academy of Pediatrics or the AMA, they're going to get teh kind of frank, honest STD/pregnancy information that scares the heck out of the parents you're talking about.

*actually that's a lie. I DO tell patients it is right to follow the golden rule and they have a responsibility to at least try to prevent the spread of STDs they have to others. Ah, the people I meet at work...

[TSDguy]

Do you realize that it's this very thinking that causes parents in the red states to bristle? It's this very thinking that makes them think that the elite in the blue states "don't get it."

I'm living in a blue state, Bill. So I don't get what you're saying. I have no idea what situations are like in many cities, but in Boston- and keep in mind my wife has taught from kindergarten to HS and in between- the kids are DISASTERS. The other day I walked into the men's room to find a 4 year old girl climbing out of the toilet. Many of my wife's fourth graders didn't know how to read. I've called the police on kids attacking other kids with baseball bats. I'm not making this stuff up about the red states, Bill. Point not taken.