Wednesday, November 30, 2005


Read this article.

Dr. George Tiller of Kansas has terminated over 60,000 pregnancies; his website brags that the good doctor's clinic has "more experience in late abortion services over 24 weeks than anyone else currently practicing in the Western Hemisphere, Europe and Australia." Most babies are considered viable (that is, can live outside the womb with the help of medical technology) at 23-24 weeks. These are viable, living children.

Dr. Dennis Christensen of Wisconsin, who has aborted between 80,000 and 100,000 fetuses, celebrates his career as a moral good. "When I meet my maker," he grins, "I think she's going to say, 'Way to go!'" Current liberal thought posits that abortion should be "safe, legal and rare" in the words of former president Bill Clinton. Only by stipulating that abortion should remain "rare" can liberal politicians escape popular outrage. Yet these same politicians refuse to answer just why abortion should remain rare. If abortion is a moral good under any circumstances (as abortion-on-demand advocates declare), why should it remain rare? And if keeping abortion rare is a rational goal, why should state governments be barred from taking steps to discourage abortion?

The left doesn't want abortions to be "rare" -- they want them to be mainstream and quite acceptable with no guilt at all on the part of the aborting woman. They certainly do not want to give any legitimacy to the life that is being ended.

The abortionist is a monstrous person in my view--he actually sees the little limbs and torsos and heads of the children he destroys, and yet smiles all the way to the bank.

Monday, November 28, 2005

Another KU Effort to Minimize Intelligent Design

KU recently announced plans for a class that lumps Intelligent Design in with mythology. The professor of that class posted a note to a usenet group that the purpose for the class was to stick it in the face of us idiots in the religious right. A nice use of my tax dollars professor!

The newest class is in the Anthropology department and aims to classify Intelligent Design as pseudoscience because it can't be proven. Until they can prove that one species involves into another species, I suggest that KU also includes evolution in this class on pseudosciences.

It's too bad I love KU basketball so much, because it would be so easy to write them off for their radical liberal ways. But oh how I love Jayhawk basketball! Am I selling my soul to the devil every time I recite the Rock Chalk Jayhawk chant?

Debunking the "Evangelical Christian" Stereotype

Read this article on a study of the effect of religion on American lifestyles.

Americans who attend church with greater frequency than their neighbors tend to be richer, healthier, and happier, less prone to commit acts of crime, and more likely to get and stay married; possible explanations include educational background and the influence of religion in withstanding worldly pressures.

It's amazing that Hollywood continues to portray white evangelicals as stupid rubes when the exact opposite is more commonly the case. You would think their "capitalist natures" would compel them to produce some movies that more accurately depicts the religious right...even though they despise us...just for the sheer purpose of getting us to give them more of our money.

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Antiwar sermon brings IRS threat

An episcoplian priest gave an anti-war sermon right before the 2004 election, which has recently brought a letter from the IRS threatening its tax-exempt status.

Here's the article in the Los Angeles Times.

Why does the IRS threated a white liberal church for doing what black liberal churches do each election season? This is not a racist observation, so don't go there. It's just so obvious when black churches have Democrats giving campaign speeches from their pulpits, with preachers singing their praises alongside those aimed toward Jesus. We never see Republican candidates giving campaign speeches behind the pulpits of Southern Baptist or Assembly of God churches.

Just one of those "things that make you go 'hmmmmm...'...

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Kansas Backs Intelligent Design

Here's a Washington Post article on the Kansas Board of Education's backing of new science standards that encourages criticism of the theory of evolution.

"If this issue can be resolved by voting these people out in the next elections, the standards will never get in place enough to make a court case worthwhile. They'll be lame ducks," said Jack Krebs, vice president of Kansas Citizens for Science.

If we want to keep these new standards in place, we'll need to protect those incumbants on the board. We don't want to see them booted out like last time.

Sunday, November 06, 2005

Evolution in Kansas

How's this for a subjective headline:

Education board acts Tuesday: State expected to alter science standards, run risk of being national joke

I guess it shows clearly the times we're in...when we once again run the risk of being a national joke for calling into question a theory taught as fact in science classes, instead of all the states that teach that fiction as fact. Why aren't they the joke?

Raising the criticisms of evolution in a classroom evokes debate and discussion--which I thought were encouraged in schools. They're so sure they are monkey's uncles that they can't allow any contrary theories to be raised in the classroom.