Brett Bim: Culture

Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:12:11 GMT

Thank God we have James C. Dobson to protect us from evil.

Thu, 23 Dec 2004 23:34:29 GMT

So apparently a cat was cloned recently for a lady in North Texas who missed her cat of 17 years who had died recently. You can read stories about it here and here. I'm not sure how you feel about people cloning their beloved pets. I for one would never do it. I love my cats (if one more of my co-workers says starts a sentence with "There's only one good kind of a cat. . .", I'm going to rip their testicles off) but I wouldn't want an exact clone. Some day, my cats will die and I'll be terribly, terribly sad. But I would hate to try and replace them. In time, I'll get another cat that I'll love for its own personality and traits. So cloning's not for me. But I don't think you shouldn't be able to do it if you've got the cash.

However, it seems that most of the people who object to cloning of pets do so much like the fellow in the first link above:

A critic, David Magnus, co-director of the Center for Biomedical Ethics at Stanford, said: "It's morally problematic and a little reprehensible. For $50,000, she could have provided homes for a lot of strays."
To which I say, shut the hell up! Mr. Magnus doesn't end up arguing on morality or the reprehensibility of the act. He basically tries to turn his argument on guilt which is patently absurd. Yes, the woman could have provided homes to a great number of strays. But just because someone COULD have done something, it does not logically follow that they SHOULD do that thing. It's a non-sequitur. A similar non-sequitur relating to healthcare was recently pointed out over at ChicagoBoyz.

This woman had $50K (to which I say at Christmas time and house buying time and wedding time "Damn, must be nice!") to do with as she pleased. She chose to take HER money and do something that would provide HER happiness. Why is it so difficult for some people to grasp that this is not only perfectly reasonable but also perfectly admirable? Why does Mr. Magnus believe that he knows best when it comes to this woman's money?

His rebuttal, and the one in the DMN article linked second, are not really rebuttals and do nothing to add to the debate. Their statements are logically false. It does not follow that because something is good for society that an individual should do that thing. This case of the cloned kitty is no different.

Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:46:24 GMT

For all the leftist elites who think those of us in fly-over country are all hicks and rednecks, a story about a small-town in Oklahoma coming to terms with one young man's homosexuality.

And if there is a hell, may Fred Phelps burn there for a thousand lifetimes.

Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:02:45 GMT

If the white people of a white neighborhood formed a white citizens' group to try and "educate" the people of the neighborhood about why it was wrong to buy items from a local black store owner, would that make national news? Would it be ethically and morally wrong? Then why does it seem less evil when it's done in a black community and the victim is Korean? Is this endemic to black communities in general, this small-time xenophobia towards Asians owning successful businesses in the community? Beats me but it would be interesting to find out.

Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:12:33 GMT

Missouri overwhelmingly votes to ban gay marriage. While there does seem to be a movement underfoot to allow gay marriage, this result shows that it has yet to gain serious footing in the South and Midwest. Regardless of how you feel about the result, this is how democracy should work, not through the courts but through the people, voting their consciences or their moral beliefs or whatever they use when they vote.

It will probably be another generation before gay marriage really has a chance and two or three before it's seen as something resembling normal. No one ever said democracy, or cultural change for that matter, was fast or easy.

Mon, 26 Jul 2004 12:12:56 GMT

Is the New York Times a liberal newspaper? Roger Simon examines that question. But the key graf to me is only peripherally related to his topic but directly related to the War on Terror:

Talk about "On Contradiction"! People of the "Zabar's zeitgeist" find it almost constitutionally impossible to acknowledge the other side "did the right thing."

These freedoms that the left always cries for in America seem to be strangely missing in their foreign policy. The fact that women have infinitely more freedoms now in both Afghanistan and Iraq, that the people there have the ability to critize their governments when before they did not, that by making particular countries safer necessarily means that the world, and America by relation, is a safer place, these facts seem to be so alien to many on the left side of the aisle and yet these are the ideals that those on the left of the aisle claim to hold most dear. The cognitive dissonance must be crushing.

When you bring this up to someone of the "Bush is a liar and Satan who can't talk and should be shot", their typical response is a sputtering, stuttering reply revolving around what the American people were told. But they can't seem to grasp the fact that it's entirely possible that regardless of what the American people were told, the results are at least a net positive and possibly much greater than that if for no other reason than women aren't burned in Afghanistan anymore for showing their face and people aren't being rounded up and killed for no real reason in Iraq.

Eventually, America needs to come to the realization that in being the only superpower, we have responsibilities that may require the shedding of our own blood to increase and foster the lofty ideals and rights that we hold dear throughout the world. But those who critize the simplisme of the current Administration seem to want to hold those ideals while concurrently doing everything in their power to avoid spreading the ideals to the greater world.

Mon, 12 Jul 2004 04:53:22 GMT

Street painting is cool. (Via ChicagoBoyz )

Tue, 29 Jun 2004 04:10:25 GMT

Michael Moore hates America. Heh.

Tue, 08 Jun 2004 03:53:36 GMT

A great post from Alphecca on Reagan, the reactions from some on the left, and his own feelings on Reagan's passing.

Tue, 08 Jun 2004 03:39:49 GMT

On NPR this morning, I heard an interview with Billy Crystal in which Susan Stamberg asked him what he was listening to on his "Walkperson". This is perhaps the most ridiculous, stupid extension of politically correct feminism that I've ever heard. How does he figure out what his "Walkperson" does? Does he read the "personual"? When he goes to audition for roles, does he read from the "personuscript"? I can't even begin to express how stupid Stamberg sounded. If she had said that to Eddie Murphy or Richard Pryor, I hope they would have made a joke at her expense. What a maroon.

You can listen to the audio here.

Thu, 27 May 2004 00:25:29 GMT

Open Google, type in "John Kerry's principled positions" and hit "I'm feeling lucky.". Funny stuff. Not as funny as doing the same thing with the phrase "French military victories" but funny nonetheless.

Thu, 27 May 2004 00:17:21 GMT

I recently wrote about how the media is failing in it's job and that it's the American people who lose out in this kind of situation. People from both sides of the aisle frequently complain of bias towards their political adversaries but in fact, I think this is highly unlikely. While a recent Pew Research Center poll shows that journalists tend to self-identify with liberal values, I think, and The Belmont Club tends to agree (Or is that you agreeing with the Belmont club-Ed. hard to say), that the real culprit here is a lack of ability, motivation and desire to report the real news. People tend to acheive to the lowest acceptable level. Journalists are people. Until we develop higher standards for the news and media, we'll continue to get bad coverage.

I truly believe blogs will lead the way in the revolution of how the world is reported on. I was once skeptical and it's easy to forget that we are still a very small minority, but in the long run, giving people the freedom to easily report on their world has to improve the accuracy of news reporting.

Wed, 19 May 2004 01:09:01 GMT

Who needs 14 jars of Vaseline to jack off to porn? Apparently this man does. (Via Shark Blog)

Tue, 18 May 2004 02:02:54 GMT

K and I are currently doing two of the things that you see on any list of the most stressful events in life: planning a wedding and buying a house. I haven't decided yet which is more stressful but Dan Drezner argues for the house.

Sat, 28 Feb 2004 21:56:19 GMT

Civil liberties take another hit in Ashcroft's America. I can't imagine that the Supreme Court wouldn't overturn the lower court's ruling on having to provide identification at all times. If I'm out running, I don't carry ID and shouldn't be required to. If you go for a walk around the neighborhood, you shouldn't be required to carry ID. This seems to be a true overreach of the powers of law enforcement in a democracy. But this is what is truly scary in the argument above:

Even some conservatives, such as Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, support the idea of so-called Social Security cards with biometric identifiers such as retina scans and electronic fingerprints.
How can someone call themselves a conservative yet favor cards with retina scans and electronic fingerprints? This is very frightening if the case stands. Via BitchGirls.

Wed, 25 Feb 2004 02:59:20 GMT

What's wrong with Christianity today? On one hand, they denounce homosexuality and public nudity. On the other hand, they think a bloody, violent, R-rated film about Christ's life is perfectly ok even though there are tons of studies that show the negative influence of violence in television and movies.

To hold what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms and occasional images of the human form as being more worthy of disgust and condemnation than a movie filled with gore and violence is a view that I find inconsistent with the teachings of Christ and a view that I believe Christ would take issue with, were he given the chance today.

Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:21:44 GMT

I've seen quite a few responses to the Bush support for a constitutional amendment in the blogosphere and elsewhere today but no one says it better than Daniel Drezner:
"Bush to gays: go f@$# yourselves -- and do it out of wedlock"

Mon, 23 Feb 2004 23:19:30 GMT

This is an excellent article on what it's like to be childless in America.
Via BitchGirls.

Fri, 20 Feb 2004 01:58:08 GMT

An interesting post by Roger Simon on gay marriage. However, as always, the lively comments section is the fun part. So many issues are raised there that I can not even hope to address any of them. My own personal opinion is that there is absolutely no reason why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed. Government should not restrict the rights of a minority at the behest of the majority if said rights do not negatively affect anyone in the majority. I'm not sure that Newsom is accomplishing what he hopes to accomplish but I believe that eventually, in the same way that we now allow interracial marriages, we will allow gay marriages.