Check out my list of opportunities to take personal action locally to save world civilization -- really !
Showing posts with label social justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social justice. Show all posts
Act Local, Save Global
Check out my list of opportunities to take personal action locally to save world civilization -- really !
Erroring On The Side of Compassion
Thanks to Joe Murchison for sharing his personal quandary and insights about giving to beggars ("Panhandlers offer parents a perfect teaching moment," Jan 18). It is indeed sometimes, but not always, hard to tell the frauds from the truly needy. Here's what I do -- your own mileage may vary.
If they are not an obvious fraud, I choose to err on the side of compassion by giving them a food gift certificate from a nearby restaurant -- McDonald's or whatever. I know certificates are converted easily into cash or traded for addictive substances, but that is an autonomous choice made by the recipient.
On a related subject, when I closely questioned the Prince George's Homeless Hotline (301-864-7140), they said that the rules they have been given to work under do not permit them to provide any services (and they have no other government or private social service referrals they can make) to "homeless" people who can not prove they have a PG County "home address." Let that sink in.
Then they told me that the D.C. Homeless Shelter (800-535-7252) will take anyone without any residence requirement (which I confirmed).
Of course, that is literally cold comfort this winter for those who find themselves "homeless" without a home address in Prince George's County.
Garold Stone
Laurel
Laurel Leader, Letters, January 26, 2007
Act Now to End the War January 27
On Saturday, January 27th, between 1-4 pm, the Buddhist Peace Delegation and Buddhist Peace Fellowship will march on the D.C. Mall as part of a larger rally, "Act Now to End the War" organized by United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of more than 1000 religious and secular groups. Children and families are especially welcome. There will also be a Meditation and Teach-in the night before, Friday, January 26th, 7-9:30 pm, at Foundry United Methodist Church, 1500 16th St, NW (at P St, near the DuPont Circle metro stop on the Red Line). For more information, see http://www.bpf.org/html/whats_now/2007/2007_BPD.html
"What, then, are we to do?" (*)
What, then?
What them?
Want them?
What end?
Want's end!
One tent.
Onement.
-gs
(*) This enduring question is asked in various ways in:
-- The Year of Living Dangerously (film),
-- What Shall We Do Then? Leo Tolstoy
-- Luke 3:10-11.
-- Lotus Sutra.
This form of morphemic transformation is familiar to many of us from our childhood as "the telephone game", except that in that game all we get is the original sentence and the final version -- the intermediate sentences are not revealed -- supposedly as a dramatic admonition to children against gossip and later in self-improvement seminars to demonstrate the poor results of trying to communicate unilaterally without feedback.
Here, I'm using an experimental technique that i'll call progressive morphemic transformation (PMT). I follow intuitively (not procedurally) a non-linear, possibly looping, path of small, incremental phonetic changes that reveal the morpheme-space contiguous to the morphemes in the original phrase and in the subsequently encountered phrases -- in hope of serendipitously discovering meaningful insights, without forcing a path to some predetermined target phrase.
i have no idea if this technique has any relationship to any other use of the term "morphemic transformation", but after a quick google search, i found that it is a "creative constraint" possibly akin to what is described in this Journal article by Colin Symes; Mosaic (Winnipeg), vol 32, 1999, Writing by Numbers: OuLiPo and the Creativity of Constraints
Currently reading :
Coming to Our Senses: Healing Ourselves and the World Through Mindfulness
By Jon Kabat-Zinn
What them?
Want them?
What end?
Want's end!
One tent.
Onement.
-gs
(*) This enduring question is asked in various ways in:
-- The Year of Living Dangerously (film),
-- What Shall We Do Then? Leo Tolstoy
-- Luke 3:10-11.
-- Lotus Sutra.
This form of morphemic transformation is familiar to many of us from our childhood as "the telephone game", except that in that game all we get is the original sentence and the final version -- the intermediate sentences are not revealed -- supposedly as a dramatic admonition to children against gossip and later in self-improvement seminars to demonstrate the poor results of trying to communicate unilaterally without feedback.
Here, I'm using an experimental technique that i'll call progressive morphemic transformation (PMT). I follow intuitively (not procedurally) a non-linear, possibly looping, path of small, incremental phonetic changes that reveal the morpheme-space contiguous to the morphemes in the original phrase and in the subsequently encountered phrases -- in hope of serendipitously discovering meaningful insights, without forcing a path to some predetermined target phrase.
i have no idea if this technique has any relationship to any other use of the term "morphemic transformation", but after a quick google search, i found that it is a "creative constraint" possibly akin to what is described in this Journal article by Colin Symes; Mosaic (Winnipeg), vol 32, 1999, Writing by Numbers: OuLiPo and the Creativity of Constraints
Currently reading : Coming to Our Senses: Healing Ourselves and the World Through Mindfulness
By Jon Kabat-Zinn
re: "The Jewish Mistress"
From: [Me]
To: [My Friend]
Subject: re: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: "The Jewish Mistress"
To: [My Friend]
Subject: re: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: "The Jewish Mistress"
Dear Friend,
It is always good to get email from you ... even when you are only forwarding a "joke" that just came to you over the internet (below).
Please let me share with you what came to my mind when i read it and why i feel strongly that it is not "just a joke". And, of course, i'd also like to hear what you think about it.
Why is it "a Jewish couple"? -- Why not simply "a wealthy couple", which they obviously are.
Why is it "The Jewish mistress"? -- In the joke, she is not identified as Jewish.
Why is it that the mutual friend has a Jewish name, "Morrey" [in another version he's "Moishe"]? -- Why not another name, such as "Joe".
This "joke" is seemingly innocuous -- but it is overtly anti-Semitic -- not to mention misogynistic. Every carefully crafted sentence plays on ages-old negative stereotypes of Jews. We all know those stereotypes and many of them are implied in that joke. Knowing that, we need to look inward and ask, "What devious trick has the hateful author of that joke played on us to make it seem funny to us, at first reading at least, even for us who do not hate Jews?"
Such hateful stories should be dying embers from the last Holocaust. Sadly, instead, they are kept glowing with each retelling -- and these days with each forwarded email -- until someday, adding their residual heat along with other seemingly innocuous but hateful ideas, they help ignite bolder flames of hateful action, which grow and spread until they explode into the next "Krystallnacht" and the next Holocaust.
The hateful author of that "joke" has "freedom of speech". But we each also have the freedom to choose to let such hateful embers die, by not spreading them farther. Or we can choose to pass them on so they can again immolate millions of people.
I choose life.
For a less metaphorical, more scientific explanation of the evolutionary spread of ideas (dangerous and beneficial), see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics
And for comparison with the anti-semitic joke below, here is a link to a "good" Jewish joke.
Be well, and Please Stay in Touch,
Gary
------------------------------------------------------------
From: [My Friend]To: [Me]
From: [A Friend of My Friend]From: [A Friend of a Friend of My Friend]From: [A Friend of a Friend of a Friend of My Friend]
Subject: Fw: Fw: Fw: Fw: "The Jewish Mistress"
A Jewish husband and wife were having dinner at a very fine restaurant when this absolutely stunning young woman comes over to their table, gives the husband a big open-mouthed kiss, then whispers in his ear that she'll see him later, winks, and walks away.
The wife glares at her husband and says, "Who was that?"
"Oh," the husband replies casually, "she's my mistress."
"That's the last straw," says the wife. "I've had enough! I want a divorce!"
"Well, I can understand that," replies her husband, "but remember this: if we get a divorce it will mean no more shopping trips to Paris, no more wintering in Barbados, no more summers in Tuscany, no more Jaguar in the garage and no more yacht club. So, the decision is yours."
Just then, a mutual friend enters the restaurant with a gorgeous babe on his arm. "Who's that woman with Morrey?" asks the wife.
"That's his mistress," says her husband.
"Ours is prettier," she says.
The wife glares at her husband and says, "Who was that?"
"Oh," the husband replies casually, "she's my mistress."
"That's the last straw," says the wife. "I've had enough! I want a divorce!"
"Well, I can understand that," replies her husband, "but remember this: if we get a divorce it will mean no more shopping trips to Paris, no more wintering in Barbados, no more summers in Tuscany, no more Jaguar in the garage and no more yacht club. So, the decision is yours."
Just then, a mutual friend enters the restaurant with a gorgeous babe on his arm. "Who's that woman with Morrey?" asks the wife.
"That's his mistress," says her husband.
"Ours is prettier," she says.
April 30th D.C. Rally To Stop Genocide in Darfur
The Rally to Stop Genocide will feature leading voices in the effort to stop the genocide in Darfur, including a broad spectrum of prominent faith leaders, political figures, human rights activists, celebrities, and survivors of genocide.
Take action: sign up today for the Rally to Stop Genocide.
Who, What, When Where?
Click here for the latest Rally Fact Sheet.
Confirmed Speakers and Entertainment
WHY IS THIS ALL THE MORE IMPORTANT and URGENT NOW??
Because the Darfur genocide Crisis is spiraling out of control and spreading.
Because the Darfur genocide Crisis is spiraling out of control and spreading.
Directions to Rally
Directions for Bus Parking and Metro Transportation
Metro Directions
Map of Rally Area
Hotels
Printable Rally Flier
Suggested Sign Slogans
Information for Special Needs/Disabilities
MORE at www.savedarfur.org
Send Tony Blair a Christmas Card - End Poverty !!
Send a Christmas Card in your own words to Tony Blair, encouraging himto continue in 2006 to lead world-wide efforts to end global poverty.
http://www.makepovertyhistory.org/xmascard/
Voting is a fundamental right, not a mere privilege
As printed in Letters to the Editor in the Laurel Gazette, Dec 14, 2004
Thanks for the excellently researched Dec. 2 article, "Voting machine opponents report notes election troubles."
In that article, a local election judge was quoted saying, "Voting is a privilege, not a right."
Voting is most certainly not a mere "privilege" -- it is the most fundamental right of each citizen in a democracy.
In the Maryland State Constitution, the Declaration of Rights, Article 7 states: "That the right of the people to participate in the legislature is the best security of liberty and the foundation of all free government; for this purpose, elections ought to be free and frequent; and every citizen having the qualifications prescribed by the constitution, ought to have the right of suffrage."
Those "prescriptions" are given in Maryland State Constitution Article 1 Elective Franchise, which states: "Every citizen of the United States, of the age of 18 years or upwards, who is a resident of the state as of the time for the closing of registration next preceding the election, shall be entitled to vote in the ward or election district in which he resides at all elections to be held in this state."
The constitution goes on to enumerate procedures for orderly registration to enable "the right of every person, thus registered, to vote."
The word "privilege" does not appear anywhere in the Maryland State Constitution relating to the voting franchise.
Any statement or action, intentional or inadvertent, which might downgrade our precious right to vote to a mere privilege must be resisted with every fiber of our being.
In such an alternate universe where voting would not be every citizen's right, who would decide who is privileged enough to vote?
The purpose of voter registration is to ensure free and fair elections in which all citizens exercise their fundamental right to vote.
When procedures for registration and voting are misconstrued by those in power as privilege-granting exercises, they serve only to prevent all citizens from voting.
Garold Stone, Laurel
So-called Intelligent Design is Not Science
It is, therefore, an egregiously evil breach of mutual repect, civility and the law for any one religious group (majority or miniority) to try to force its own religious views (mainstream or extreme) on the rest of society by trying to take control of government institutions or government-sponsored activities, such as public schools, which serve all Americans of all religious and non-religious beliefs. Such behavior is just plain selfish.
On December 20 the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania issued a ruling against the Dover [PA] Area School District policy of teaching so-called Intelligent Design in public school science classes and trying to discredit the scientific validity of evolution theory -- for religious reasons.
That ruling is a benchmark in our understanding and practice of the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state.
The court's Memorandum Opinion establishes legal precedent only in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. But it offers extensive fact finding and legal analysis (far beyond that quoted here) which will significantly inform any litigation elsewhere regarding any attempts to teach so-called Intelligent Design in public science classes.
This post provides two relatively short quotes from the court's full 139-page Memorandum Opinion, which fully and fairly characterize the ruling:
- The court's summary conclusions as to fact and law.
- The court's order.
Here is the court's conclusion (QUOTE):
The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.
Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator.
To be sure, Darwin’s theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.
The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.
With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.
Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board’s decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.
To preserve the separation of church and state mandated by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and Art. I, § 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, we will enter an order permanently enjoining Defendants from maintaining the ID Policy in any school within the Dover Area School District, from requiring teachers to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution, and from requiring teachers to refer to a religious, alternative theory known as ID. We will also issue a declaratory judgment that Plaintiffs’ rights under the Constitutions of the United States and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have been violated by Defendants’ actions.
Defendants’ actions in violation of Plaintiffs’ civil rights as guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the United States and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 subject Defendants to liability with respect to injunctive and declaratory relief, but also for nominal damages and the reasonable value of Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ services and costs incurred in vindicating Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.
END QUOTE
Here is the court's order (QUOTE):
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. A declaratory judgment is hereby issued in favor of Plaintiffs pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 such that
Defendants’ ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and Art. I, § 3 of
the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
2. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65, Defendants are permanently enjoined
from maintaining the ID Policy in any school within the Dover Area
School District.
3. Because Plaintiffs seek nominal damages, Plaintiffs shall file with the
Court and serve on Defendants, their claim for damages and a verified
statement of any fees and/or costs to which they claim entitlement.
Defendants shall have the right to object to any such fees and costs to
the extent provided in the applicable statutes and court rules.
END QUOTE
All items sold at my cost - no markup, no profit
End AIDS March Through Laurel Nov 3
About 30 very enthusiastic AIDS activists marched briskly south on Route 1 today, right past me as i sat in the Silver Diner, on their way to overnight in College Park. Tomorrow, they will walk the final leg of their journey on foot from the Lincoln Tunnel in NYC to the Lincoln Memorial in D.C.. There they will begin four days of action to END AIDS.I walked with them for a few minutes and took pictures for their web site before returning to my lunch.
For more information about this kick-off event for a sustained campaign to once-and-for-all end the AIDS epidemic in the U.S. and around the world, and how you can participate, see http://c2ea.org
A Day for Darfur Rally at White House Sep 8, 2005
I just got back from a day at a rally of over 800 people at the White House, which was part of a nation-wide "A Day for Darfur" to bring more attention to the still unrelenting Genocide in Darfur. Pictures from the rally. Background on Darfur. Darfur updates and What you can do right now to help.
I didn't realize until i got there that a big part of that event was asking people like you and me all across the country to call the President and ask him to take immediate action to stop the Sudan government's genocide and violence against people in Darfur. Over 400,000 people have been killed and over 2 million have been displaced. The genocide and violence will continue until the African Union troops are allowed to intervene with force to prevent Sudan government troops and Sudan government-supported Janjuweed irregulars from killing and raping Darfurians and burning down their villages. Right now all the AU forces can do is observe and report the genocide and other atrocities because they do not have enough troops and they do not have a legal mandate to take any forceful action to protect the people of Darfur.
Even though that day for calling the President has passed, you may still consider taking this simple action soon -- call the White House comment line (202) 456-1111 to leave a brief recorded message for President Bush -- the White House comment line opens at 9 am and closes around 4 or 5 pm Eastern Time.
Even though that day for calling the President has passed, you may still consider taking this simple action soon -- call the White House comment line (202) 456-1111 to leave a brief recorded message for President Bush -- the White House comment line opens at 9 am and closes around 4 or 5 pm Eastern Time.
Or if you prefer, send an email to president@whitehouse.gov
The goal for "A Day for Darfur" was a lot of calls -- but please just do which ever you can.
The goal for "A Day for Darfur" was a lot of calls -- but please just do which ever you can.
Here is an example of the kind of message that the President needs to hear (so he can see the rising concern about Darfur by Americans of all political persuasions across the country).
Mr. President:
Thanks for being the first world leader to declare one year ago, that what is taking place in Darfur is truly Genocide. But Genocide still continues there today, with over 400,000 killed, over 2 million displaced, thousands raped and most villages, crops and food supplies destroyed from burning by Sudan government troops and government-supported Janjuweed militias. Please take immediate action through the U.N. and NATO to send western forces to work jointly with the currently inadequate level of African Union peace-keeping troops in Darfur, with a mandate to use force to intervene to prevent this unrelenting genocide and other atrocities in Darfur. Please now declare "Never Again -- Not on My watch." Please personally lead a coalition of nations supporting a global "Culture of Life", to stop this Genocide in Darfur now.
Thanks for being the first world leader to declare one year ago, that what is taking place in Darfur is truly Genocide. But Genocide still continues there today, with over 400,000 killed, over 2 million displaced, thousands raped and most villages, crops and food supplies destroyed from burning by Sudan government troops and government-supported Janjuweed militias. Please take immediate action through the U.N. and NATO to send western forces to work jointly with the currently inadequate level of African Union peace-keeping troops in Darfur, with a mandate to use force to intervene to prevent this unrelenting genocide and other atrocities in Darfur. Please now declare "Never Again -- Not on My watch." Please personally lead a coalition of nations supporting a global "Culture of Life", to stop this Genocide in Darfur now.
Something like that, or whatever your heart leads you to say.
You can contact your U.S. Senators and Representatives, too, but the focus of "A Day for Darfur" was on raising this Darfur Genocide on the President's agenda -- to let him know that it matters to more and more Americans every day. The Holocaust in Europe ... Genocide in Armenia ... Kosovo ... Ruwanda ... and now Darfur. All Genocide must stop now.
Thanks for considering what you might do.
Please pass this on as you may see fit, using this web link:
I'm keeping a public file of Darfur related news. To reach it on this BLOG click Topical Links then Darfur or you can bookmark/RSS http://www.blinklist.com/GaroldStone/Darfur/
Please pass this on as you may see fit, using this web link:
I'm keeping a public file of Darfur related news. To reach it on this BLOG click Topical Links then Darfur or you can bookmark/RSS http://www.blinklist.com/GaroldStone/Darfur/
I compile a list of upcoming opportunities for action on Darfur or other Social Justice actions on this Blog under Social Justice Action or bookmark/RSS
http://www.blinklist.com/GaroldStone/action/
http://www.blinklist.com/GaroldStone/action/
Bush on Teaching Intelligent Design in Public Science Classes
I felt anger when i read about the President promoting
the teaching of "Intelligent Design" in public school
science classes.
But, if the purpose of Skepticism is to achieve for
myself, and promote in others, respect for reason and
reasoned argument based on empirically demonstrable facts
and well-tested theory ... then it behooves me as a
Skeptic to be not only passionate in defense of reason,
but at all times a REASONABLE person (equivocation
intended) ... in public where it shows and in private
where it forms habits ... and at a minimum ... on my part,
to eschew ad hominem attacks on others, even when --
especially when -- seemingly well-justified anger and
frustration well up within me. Often i will fail in that
effort -- but i should continue to try.
Else, i believe, skepticism will lose (fail to reach?)
the ethical and rational high ground it presumes to be
defending, because others will see Skepticism (in my
practice of it) as just another venally partisan and
selfish "special interest group".
When i compare these two statements from an Aug 3
Washington Post article, it is clear which one is easy
for anyone to dismiss out of hand and which one genuinely
advances the argument against ID.
1) Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), a leading liberal
lawmaker. Noting Bush's Ivy League education, Frank
said, "People might cite George Bush as proof that
you can be totally impervious to the effects of
Harvard and Yale education." [such examples cover
the political spectrum, of course, and the intended
audience is usually the partisan choir]
2) Bush's comments were "irresponsible," said Barry W.
Lynn, executive director of Americans United for
Separation of Church and State. He said the president,
by suggesting that students hear two viewpoints,
"doesn't understand that one is a religious viewpoint
and one is a scientific viewpoint." Lynn said Bush
showed a "low level of understanding of science,"
adding that he worries that Bush's comments could be
followed by a directive to the Justice Department to
support legal efforts to change curricula.
I'm both encouraged and cautioned by this excerpt from
Surowieski's The Wisdom of Crowds, page 76 large print
edition (last page of Chapter 2):
"Ultimately, [expressed] diversity contributes not just
by adding different perspectives to the group but also by
making it easier for individuals to say what they really
think." ... "Having even one person in the group who
felt as they did made the subjects happy to announce their
thoughts, and the rate of conformity plummeted."
The President's highly visible statements have made it
much easier for more people to express and act
(legislatively and otherwise) on their beliefs in ID.
As a Skeptic i need to become more visible in supporting
the teaching of evolution vice ID in public school
science classes, so that others will feel more comfortable
expressing their support for the teaching of evolution
vice ID in public school science classes.
I know how to do this, conversation by conversation,
letter by letter, email by email. I just need to get busy.
the teaching of "Intelligent Design" in public school
science classes.
But, if the purpose of Skepticism is to achieve for
myself, and promote in others, respect for reason and
reasoned argument based on empirically demonstrable facts
and well-tested theory ... then it behooves me as a
Skeptic to be not only passionate in defense of reason,
but at all times a REASONABLE person (equivocation
intended) ... in public where it shows and in private
where it forms habits ... and at a minimum ... on my part,
to eschew ad hominem attacks on others, even when --
especially when -- seemingly well-justified anger and
frustration well up within me. Often i will fail in that
effort -- but i should continue to try.
Else, i believe, skepticism will lose (fail to reach?)
the ethical and rational high ground it presumes to be
defending, because others will see Skepticism (in my
practice of it) as just another venally partisan and
selfish "special interest group".
When i compare these two statements from an Aug 3
Washington Post article, it is clear which one is easy
for anyone to dismiss out of hand and which one genuinely
advances the argument against ID.
1) Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), a leading liberal
lawmaker. Noting Bush's Ivy League education, Frank
said, "People might cite George Bush as proof that
you can be totally impervious to the effects of
Harvard and Yale education." [such examples cover
the political spectrum, of course, and the intended
audience is usually the partisan choir]
2) Bush's comments were "irresponsible," said Barry W.
Lynn, executive director of Americans United for
Separation of Church and State. He said the president,
by suggesting that students hear two viewpoints,
"doesn't understand that one is a religious viewpoint
and one is a scientific viewpoint." Lynn said Bush
showed a "low level of understanding of science,"
adding that he worries that Bush's comments could be
followed by a directive to the Justice Department to
support legal efforts to change curricula.
I'm both encouraged and cautioned by this excerpt from
Surowieski's The Wisdom of Crowds, page 76 large print
edition (last page of Chapter 2):
"Ultimately, [expressed] diversity contributes not just
by adding different perspectives to the group but also by
making it easier for individuals to say what they really
think." ... "Having even one person in the group who
felt as they did made the subjects happy to announce their
thoughts, and the rate of conformity plummeted."
The President's highly visible statements have made it
much easier for more people to express and act
(legislatively and otherwise) on their beliefs in ID.
As a Skeptic i need to become more visible in supporting
the teaching of evolution vice ID in public school
science classes, so that others will feel more comfortable
expressing their support for the teaching of evolution
vice ID in public school science classes.
I know how to do this, conversation by conversation,
letter by letter, email by email. I just need to get busy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
