Kottke has a post today wherein he shows how little space would be required to house the United States' entire population if it were packed as densely as The Bronx, Manhattan, or Manila?

I decided to ask the question from the other angle: What would the population of the US be if the entire area were populated as densely as The Bronx, Manhattan, or Manila.

See more ...

In response to my previous post (Taking care of the hyprocrites), someone said this:

... if people see the government [providing health care] and they start thinking they can just stop reaching out to those in need, that's a mistaken perspective, and I think God will hold them accountable for leaving the loving to the government."

This refrain is oft repeated and I need to address its problems.

See more ...

Why aren't Christians insisting on public health care, based on the teaching in the bible? Take care of the poor and the sick. It is one of the clearest and most consistent messages in the bible. If I recall correctly, there are thousands of references to taking care of the poor and the sick. Even if there aren't thousands, but merely hundreds, the bible does not vary or waver on the point - they are to be cared for.

See more ...

There are new reports from humanitarian organizations regarding the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. The reports from organizations are sketchy, and somewhat inconsistent, but it appears that prisoners are being subjected to Perl. Some of the reports tell of prisoners being forced to write Perl. Others say that some prisoners have been forced to debug someone else's Perl code. But that is not the most alarming report. Some of the prisoners have been subjected to the shrill, repetitive, vacuous cacophony of parroted Perl criticism. Those prisoners, who are enduring the worst kind of torture, are in our prayers.

I really like Violent Acres' blog. It's well written, and funny, and until now, hasn't disappointed. I can't tell if she considers herself an exception from the "most athiests" group she derides in the post "Atheists are Snobs". I mean, from the context of that post it's clear she does, but the rest of her blog demonstrates that she's a snob.

"I, myself, have not been able to claim belief in a higher power for many, many years."

"[Athiests] come off sound[sic] like condescending pricks."

Yes. Yes she does. She comes off that way in almost every post. And that's great - it makes for a good blog. But criticizing people for a characteristic you share with them is, well it's the pot calling the kettle black. "How pathetic of you snobs being all snoby. Being snoby is way beneath me."

I live in Ohio and I am a Progressive Independent. If Senator Clinton wins the nomination, she will have to do something very impressive to get my vote. If Senator Obama wins the nomination, he will have to do something incredibly stupid to lose my vote. In summary, I'll likely abstain if Hillary gets the nomination, and I'll very likely vote for Barack if he gets the nomination. Superdelegates, please take this into consideration when you vote.

Some people continue to misunderstand a previous post on a specific pair of vegans (Stupid Fucking Vegans) as being an indictment of all vegans. I can understand how the title and the language at the end might lead some people to believe that. However, the bulk of the post is clearly referring to a particular couple. And this couple killed their own infant by feeding it a vegan diet. Those two people are stupid fucking vegans. That does not mean that all vegans are stupid. Only the ones who put misguided ethics above the welfare of their children are stupid. I have no problem with people who choose to eat differently than I do. That would be truly ridiculous.

"No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at the truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings." - Patrick Henry

Go read the whole thing. A simple vocabulary shift and it's eerily appropriate in the current political climate.

I don't know if the President has the Constitutional authority to order torture. What I do know, however, is this: Waterboarding is torture. And any person who would order, engage in, allow, or support torture is an evil person. Period. Torture is evil, and any level of acceptance casts a pall over the soul. Such a person cannot be said, however, to be evil to the core, or beyond redemption.

Regarding this not-at-all recent article by Jeni Tennison.

---

I've never understood the presumption that any particular field of endeavor should have some sort of gender balance.

See more ...