Friday, November 04, 2005

Cervical Cancer: God's Justice on the Hussy

Reason magazine's science correspondent, Ron Bailey, has a great article up on the effort of the FDA and certain social conservative groups to regulate not only drugs, but morality. Recently, it was announced that researchers had discovered and produced a vaccine for HPV, a virus that causes cervical cancer. Some, however, have argued that this vaccine is, basically, a tool of Satan, and could encourage promiscuous sex, so should not be given approval. Horrors! Bailey's response? (emphasis mine)

Federal agencies must reject the logic of values regulations. The FDA should stick to regulating medications solely on the basis of their quality, safety and efficacy—if even that. Bureaucrats should not be deciding whether or not people should be having sex, with whom they should be having sex, or what type of sex they should be having. If a medicine makes it safer to engage in an activity of which some people disapprove, so what? If anyone must be punished for putting his or her genitalia where other people think they shouldn’t, then leave that regulatory decision up to God—or whatever agency is in charge of morals enforcement in the hereafter.
I couldn't put it any better. As Bailey argues, why pursue a cure or treatment for HIV then? Surely THAT is a punishment from our angry God as well? I wonder when the theocracy begins. Just kidding. Really.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at Floridablues)

I hate reading. I REALLY hate reading.

I have previously posted something of a diatribe/self-pity party about my ongoing experiences in education. While things have certainly improved and I am over my yearly funk, I am still rather saddened and frustrated with some of the approaches and issues that I am seeing daily.

Recently, in a faculty meeting to discuss the progress of our school's attempts to raise reading scores through the introduction of reading 'strategies' and a heavy use of those strategies (to such a degree that students have told me that they are sick and tired of them), I was informed by our reading coach that my content comes second; I am to put a heavier emphasis on teaching reading strategies for students to use later in life and in school. If I don't cover all of my material, if I skip over some parts of history because I am teaching reading strategies, well, that's okay. It's simply important that I am using and demonstrating and emphasizing and beating into them the reading strategies. No matter that I am a history teacher, my first love is history, and I have high standards and expectations for my students. I need to change my approach and fill up my day with strategies. Screw history.

have very rarely been so angry at someone (non-Yankee fan) in my life. It is so frustrating. You try to teach, you think you are doing a good job, your students enjoy the material, but no, you are doing everything wrong and you need to do it this other way.

'Your content comes second.' That's complete and utter horse&%$#!!!Please forgive the tone of this post. I still love teaching and the classroom; I'm just sick of priorities that take away from true learning.
(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)

State of the (Red Sox) Nation

So, anything new going on in the world of the Red Sox? Hmmm...should be a quiet off-season. It's only been a year since we won the World Series, after all. How bad could things be?


Damn it.

Knightmare of the Know Nothings

Amy Sullivan has an interesting column up over at Beliefnet that wonders just what may be coming down the pike in the future for the Supreme Court (assuming that Alito wins confirmation). Next year at this time, there could be a majority of Catholics on the bench, and will the Church take the same attitide towards Catholic judges has they have taken toward Catholic politicians: toe the pro-life (abortion) line, or be denied communion? From the piece:

In an ominous note bordering on a spiritual threat, the bishops wrote, “We urge those Catholic officials… to consider the consequences for their own spiritual well-being, as well as the scandal they risk by leading others into serious sin.” Catholic public officials are appropriate targets of attention and pressure, they explained, because their high-profile status puts them in a position to influence ordinary Catholics. They have a special responsibility to be model Catholics and to uphold the Church’s teaching.

After all, if it applies to politicians, it most certainly applies to judges. I would point out, however, that as Sullivan states, being Catholic does not always translate to complete social conservatism. Only time will tell what direction the Court will go.

Well, what ever happens, (gratutious history reference coming!) one thing is for sure: the Know Nothings are surely screaming from beyond the grave!

(Crossposted by Bostondreamer at FloridaBlues)
< Blogarama