I think that Prop 2 is all about the Rich people oppressing the poor...
Let us hop aboard the logic train once again, where I am your conductor... And please do not worry, I go slow enough to remember to stay on the tracks...
So we have my initial statement, that Prop 2 is about Rich people oppressing the poor... I guess it is time for me to back that up... Well to do that, I would need to inform the non-Californians (and even those Californians who do not bother to find out about the propositions...) what Prop 2 is...
According to the Official Voter Information Guide Prop 2 is "... this measure prohibits, with certain exceptions, the confinement on a farm of pregnant pigs, calves raised for veal, and egg-laying hens in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs..." Then it goes on to discuss penalties...
That sounds great, good job Californians to find something else wrong to focus on...
The only commercial on TV that I have seen on this has been for it, and it is the one with the Vet playing with her doggie, and empathizing with us saying "... we would not do this to our pets, why would we do it other animals?" (Or something close to that, I understand it is not a direct quote, but the point she is making is still reflected in the statement...)
Now, seeing as this is the only publicity this prop has gotten that I have seen/heard, I wanted to think about the other side of the coin (I am good little voter, head pats are accepted...) and the first thought that came to my head was the initial statement... Rich people are oppressing poor people...
So now you are probably saying to yourself (out loud or in your head), "Chris, you have said that 3 times now and still I do not see the connection. Are you going to keep rambling on, or are you going to tell us the connection?" (I will pause for a moment for you to either say or think this...)
(Pause)
(End of Pause)
One of the arguments against prop 7 is that if it passes there will be fines on the Power Companies and that will have a trickle down effect on the employees and customers... Why then can we not say that about Prop 2 also? If this proposition passes, new building will have to be built, more land will have to be purchased, or even some inventory will have to be removed lessening the overall profit of the company... All of this equals higher overhead costs for the company...
I know this sounds like I am heartless towards animals, but I am the guy who proudly proclaims that PETA stands for People for the Eating of Tasty Animals... When I sit down to eat my turkey at Thanksgiving I am not thinking, "I wonder where this turkey spent its life?" or "I wonder if it had a little turkey family?" And neither are you... We are all thinking "I hope I am near the front of the line so I can get a drumstick!" And maybe you are part of the population who are concerned about where you food came from. Here is my response to you... That turkey's life stunk, it was rotten, miserable... You are actually doing it a favor by eating it... After all the turkey had one purpose on this earth... And you are helping it fulfill it... Aren't you a good Samaritan?
Okay Chris, connection please...
Fine, in case you do not see it yet... Here it is: This will cause the price of meat and dairy to go up... It will make an expensive market even more expensive... And poor people, well are poor... Could you imagine depriving people of milk, eggs, meat... Can you imagine what the price of a hot dog would be at a baseball game then? I think the connection is made, but to some up my feelings here they are...
1. We are not talking about FIDO, we are talking about animals whose sole purpose is for the production of humanities food supply.
2. Passage of this proposition will increase the overhead costs of the industry for reasons I have stated above, and very well could drive even more jobs from our state...
3. Finally, increasing costs, to an already costly item, puts an even greater strained on a normal person's already stretched pocket book...
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
So, what is Science?
Science is the pursuit, attainment (both in accomplishment and understanding), and organization of knowledge. It is divided into many disciplines, spanning even more subjects.
I, from the get-go, want to establish that I do enjoy Science. I like to learn new things, study things, and have always enjoyed asking and figuring out the "Hows" and the "Whys" of the universe.
Growing up, the subject of Science has always been my favorite (Lunch being a close second). I have always leaned toward the physical sciences, like Chemistry (what boy does not like to blow stuff up?) and Physics (or figuring which falls faster from a roof: a cat or a toy soldier on fire?). As I got into Jr. High I had a history teacher, we will call him Mr. N. for anonymity sake, who was the first real person in my life that really started me in the whole "Science and Religion do not mix" philosophy. And you know what? Mr. N was right, but at the time I was not as quick witted as I am now (patting myself on the back, I know).
As a reminder I went to public school from Pre-K to 12: Downer, Ford, Montalvin, Crespi, MCHS. Mr. N found out somehow who the "religious nuts" were in the class. I do not remember everyone, but I do remember Anka (he was a Jehovah Witness) who was the most outspoken in the class. There were certain days the two of them would go at it. Apparently Mr. N was a big guy on Anthropology. He would talk about all sorts of archaeological facts and data, spout off about the different forms of dating rocks and rock layers, and all sorts of other geological proofs. To which Anka, much credit to him, simply would say that God created everything and set things in motion (As I think back he was probably a theistic evolutionist). To which Mr. N's reply was always the same, "God is not Science!" He would end the conversation with that and continue on with class. But that phrase stuck with me.
Onto high school. I got the privilege of going to an unordinary high school at which I attended college classes along side of my high school ones. My freshman year I was in a general science class that was taught by one of the professors, we will call him Dr. Z. And it is to him, that I credit the definition of science at the top of this post and at the top of the next paragraph.
Science can only be executed by the Scientific Process (SP), thereby meaning, that anything that cannot be tested, examined, or otherwise manipulated, by the entirety of the Scientific Process cannot be Science. (Long definition short = If you cannot do the SP then it is not Science) If there was one principle that he hammered into us, it is what I just typed above (Enough that I remember it 15 years later). So, let me end this blurb by outlining the SP for you all:
Observation: Hmm... I noticed that every time that happens, this happens...
Hypothesis: Hmm... I think that if I do this, then this will happen...
Experimentation: Hmm... Let me do this, to see if this will happen...
Comparison: Hmm... When I did it, that did happen...
Repeat: Hmm... Let me try it again...
Peer Review: Hmm... Let me give it to others to see if they do this, will that happen for them.
So, what is my definition of Science? Science is the application of the entire Scientific Process to understand and organize the principles and laws that define Matter, Energy and Time.
I, from the get-go, want to establish that I do enjoy Science. I like to learn new things, study things, and have always enjoyed asking and figuring out the "Hows" and the "Whys" of the universe.
Growing up, the subject of Science has always been my favorite (Lunch being a close second). I have always leaned toward the physical sciences, like Chemistry (what boy does not like to blow stuff up?) and Physics (or figuring which falls faster from a roof: a cat or a toy soldier on fire?). As I got into Jr. High I had a history teacher, we will call him Mr. N. for anonymity sake, who was the first real person in my life that really started me in the whole "Science and Religion do not mix" philosophy. And you know what? Mr. N was right, but at the time I was not as quick witted as I am now (patting myself on the back, I know).
As a reminder I went to public school from Pre-K to 12: Downer, Ford, Montalvin, Crespi, MCHS. Mr. N found out somehow who the "religious nuts" were in the class. I do not remember everyone, but I do remember Anka (he was a Jehovah Witness) who was the most outspoken in the class. There were certain days the two of them would go at it. Apparently Mr. N was a big guy on Anthropology. He would talk about all sorts of archaeological facts and data, spout off about the different forms of dating rocks and rock layers, and all sorts of other geological proofs. To which Anka, much credit to him, simply would say that God created everything and set things in motion (As I think back he was probably a theistic evolutionist). To which Mr. N's reply was always the same, "God is not Science!" He would end the conversation with that and continue on with class. But that phrase stuck with me.
Onto high school. I got the privilege of going to an unordinary high school at which I attended college classes along side of my high school ones. My freshman year I was in a general science class that was taught by one of the professors, we will call him Dr. Z. And it is to him, that I credit the definition of science at the top of this post and at the top of the next paragraph.
Science can only be executed by the Scientific Process (SP), thereby meaning, that anything that cannot be tested, examined, or otherwise manipulated, by the entirety of the Scientific Process cannot be Science. (Long definition short = If you cannot do the SP then it is not Science) If there was one principle that he hammered into us, it is what I just typed above (Enough that I remember it 15 years later). So, let me end this blurb by outlining the SP for you all:
Observation: Hmm... I noticed that every time that happens, this happens...
Hypothesis: Hmm... I think that if I do this, then this will happen...
Experimentation: Hmm... Let me do this, to see if this will happen...
Comparison: Hmm... When I did it, that did happen...
Repeat: Hmm... Let me try it again...
Peer Review: Hmm... Let me give it to others to see if they do this, will that happen for them.
So, what is my definition of Science? Science is the application of the entire Scientific Process to understand and organize the principles and laws that define Matter, Energy and Time.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Proposition Eight
Love it or hate it, right or wrong, whatever your choice may be, there is still one thing that everyone should agree on... This proposition is anti-Californian and teaches a wrong principle...
What is Propostion Eight?
According to the voters handbook put out by the State Department of Elections, it "eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry." It is to be a constitutional admendment.
No matter what side of the issue you are on, the fact that this is back on the ballot is what I would like to address...
1. Factoid: Back in 2000, 61% of Californians voted for a constitutional admendment that read these 14 words (which are in this proposition again) "Only marriage between a man and a woman is vaid or recognized in California."
2. Factoid: Four judges in one city, San Francisco (not even a panel representing the whole state), overturned the people's vote...
I can hear the collective "so" across the board here...
The problem is that 4 people overturned the majority of the people... Last I checked, the whole point of the proposition system was so that the people continued to have a say in government, and to limit the state's power... But back in 2000, this was not the case... The people spoke, and it did not matter... It was overturned by 4 people with agendas of their own... What kind of lesson is the teaching our children, and foregin people moving in? Trust our government, but they are not going to listen to you... That is the lesson I got... So now prop 8 is up again, the citizens are going to vote again, but will it matter?
What I am trying to say is this... Whether you Agree or Disagree with the proposition, if it does not pass, all we are doing is proving that the power does not lie in the people's hands, but the power is in the hands over the people. And that sounds as Anti-Californian as it can possibly get... Afterall we got Sather's Gate in Berkeley, the loud mouths down in Hollywood, we are all about the open speech and support of the people... So why did we let those 4 judges get away with stifling the voice of 61% of Californians?
Okay, I am going to get off my soapbox now...
Oh and by the way... Vote yes on prop 7 too... If you wanna know why, read the voter's guide, it explains it well...
What is Propostion Eight?
According to the voters handbook put out by the State Department of Elections, it "eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry." It is to be a constitutional admendment.
No matter what side of the issue you are on, the fact that this is back on the ballot is what I would like to address...
1. Factoid: Back in 2000, 61% of Californians voted for a constitutional admendment that read these 14 words (which are in this proposition again) "Only marriage between a man and a woman is vaid or recognized in California."
2. Factoid: Four judges in one city, San Francisco (not even a panel representing the whole state), overturned the people's vote...
I can hear the collective "so" across the board here...
The problem is that 4 people overturned the majority of the people... Last I checked, the whole point of the proposition system was so that the people continued to have a say in government, and to limit the state's power... But back in 2000, this was not the case... The people spoke, and it did not matter... It was overturned by 4 people with agendas of their own... What kind of lesson is the teaching our children, and foregin people moving in? Trust our government, but they are not going to listen to you... That is the lesson I got... So now prop 8 is up again, the citizens are going to vote again, but will it matter?
What I am trying to say is this... Whether you Agree or Disagree with the proposition, if it does not pass, all we are doing is proving that the power does not lie in the people's hands, but the power is in the hands over the people. And that sounds as Anti-Californian as it can possibly get... Afterall we got Sather's Gate in Berkeley, the loud mouths down in Hollywood, we are all about the open speech and support of the people... So why did we let those 4 judges get away with stifling the voice of 61% of Californians?
Okay, I am going to get off my soapbox now...
Oh and by the way... Vote yes on prop 7 too... If you wanna know why, read the voter's guide, it explains it well...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
