A brief roundup of a few items I've come across in recent days that concern me. I may do this periodically to keep up with items which merit more description than a simple link, but for which I don't have time to write a longer piece.

A proposed Missouri law would ban doctors from even mentioning the word abortion, or telling patients how to obtain one. For all the rhetoric we hear about "activist judges", here's another clear case of "activist legislators" who, through internal processes insulated from voters, can essentially eliminate something legal through their control of budgets. Through an ongoing series of measures that defund and undermine anyone with connections to abortion, they're writing de facto anti-abortion laws without popular votes--legislation without representation, in my opinion. Which, I believe, is more of a concern when denying rights than when providing them. This is the very kind of conspiracy that gun owners fear is being waged against their rights, but unlike that case, this is real.

New tactics in "debating" evolution. Honest debate is fine--that is, after all, what science is all about. But this debate is dishonest and unscientific. In fact, it's unscientific by design, because it begins with an idea that is "inherently right" (creation) and then attempts to discredit anything that might conflict with that assumption. In scientific terms, that's backwards--the scientific method moves from unbiased observations toward an uncertain result. A scientist may have a hypothesis, or even a hope of discovering something specific, but not a pre-planned outcome. In scientific circles, deciding the outcome first and then selectively choosing evidence is called fraud. It's fine if you believe in creation--beliefs don't have to be scientific, and I'm not trying to say that creationism is wrong--but it's wrong to go about attacking evolution in a fraudulently pseudo-scientific way.

US eases Saudi visa restrictions. This, then, is the payoff for their promise to pump more oil. Trading security for oil, travelers from perhaps the world's main wellspring of terrorism get their restrictions eased. Not that I'm a supporter of racial profiling--delays for any nationality may well be wrong--but with the evidence we've seen of Saudi money involved in terror, and the continuing inability of our various branches of government intelligence to share even basic information, somehow I don't think we're going about this the right way. Especially when I still have to take off my shoes every time I want to get on a plane...

I could rant about the grotesquely uncompassionate nature of Republican meddling in such issues as Medicare and Social Security, but this gentleman does a very nice job of singling out one current absurdity.

And finally, an inspiring story of women's lib in Afghanistan: stoned to death for adultery. Was that before or after the men's hard day of work increasing opium exports? That's freedom, ladies and gentlemen, Bush-style.

Labels: Politics