Melanie Phillips's Articles: The demographic death-wish: "Britain is sitting on an infertility time-bomb. A leading fertility expert, Professor Bill Ledger, has warned that within the next ten years the number of couples experiencing problems conceiving children is expected to double.
By 2015, he says, one in three couples may need fertility treatment. Low success rates from IVF mean soaring numbers will be left childless, with extra thousands going through this draining treatment at huge cost to the health service.
He blames this looming crisis on modern lifestyle factors such as delays in starting a family, obesity, falling sperm counts and rising rates of sexually transmitted diseases."
VERY INTERESTING
Kamis, 30 Juni 2005
The Belmont Club
The Belmont Club: "Politics at its most corrupt is the art of promising something for nothing; or more realistically, concealing the price for services rendered. Nobody wants to mention that 'free health care' is paid for by tax deductions. Still fewer want to admit that security is obtained by force; information by compulsion; or that war involves violence. The process of 'extraordinary rendition' is a case study in laundering responsibility; a description of how a commodity is provided by an astute political division of labor."
OpinionJournal - Peggy Noonan
OpinionJournal - Peggy NoonanHow exactly does it work? How does legitimate self-confidence become wildly inflated self-regard? How does self respect become unblinking conceit? How exactly does one's character become destabilized in Washington?
The Supreme Court this week and last issued many rulings, and though they were on different issues the decisions themselves had at least one thing in common: They seemed to reflect a lack of basic human modesty on the part of many of the justices. Many are famously very old, and they have been together as a court for a very long time. One wonders if they have lost all understanding of how privileged they are to have lifetime sinecures of power and authority. Do they have any sense anymore of common human wisdom, of the normal human arrangements by which Americans live?
Maybe a lot of them aren't bothering to think. Maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg is no longer in the habit of listening to arguments but only of watching William Rehnquist, and if he nods up and down she knows to vote "no," and if he shakes his head she knows to vote "yes." That might explain some of the lack of seriousness in the decisions. Local government can bulldoze Grandma's house because it's in the way of a future strip mall that will add more to the tax base? The Ten Commandments can appear on public land but not in a courthouse, but Moses, who received the Ten Commandments can appear in the frieze of the House but he'll be sandblasted off the Supreme Court? Or do I have that the other way around?
What are they doing? All this hair splitting, this dithering, this cutting and pasting--all this lack of serious and defining principle. All this vanity. Readit all
The Supreme Court this week and last issued many rulings, and though they were on different issues the decisions themselves had at least one thing in common: They seemed to reflect a lack of basic human modesty on the part of many of the justices. Many are famously very old, and they have been together as a court for a very long time. One wonders if they have lost all understanding of how privileged they are to have lifetime sinecures of power and authority. Do they have any sense anymore of common human wisdom, of the normal human arrangements by which Americans live?
Maybe a lot of them aren't bothering to think. Maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg is no longer in the habit of listening to arguments but only of watching William Rehnquist, and if he nods up and down she knows to vote "no," and if he shakes his head she knows to vote "yes." That might explain some of the lack of seriousness in the decisions. Local government can bulldoze Grandma's house because it's in the way of a future strip mall that will add more to the tax base? The Ten Commandments can appear on public land but not in a courthouse, but Moses, who received the Ten Commandments can appear in the frieze of the House but he'll be sandblasted off the Supreme Court? Or do I have that the other way around?
What are they doing? All this hair splitting, this dithering, this cutting and pasting--all this lack of serious and defining principle. All this vanity. Readit all
Selasa, 28 Juni 2005
Minggu, 26 Juni 2005
Anubis
Anubis: "Islamic barbarity watch
Much is made of the 'elevated' civilization the various Muslim Caliphates allegedly enjoyed while Europe was enduring the Dark Ages.
While my ancestors managed to claw their way back into the light, it seems that, at some point, Islam - and especially Islamic law - fell into the abyss and never got out:
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Rapist cop booked under controversial religious law
A Pakistani policeman charged with raping a teenaged girl in a police station has been charged under a controversial religious law that carries the death penalty - but which could also enable him to walk free.
Sub-inspector Qaiser Shah was booked under Sections 10 and 11 of the Hud Zina Ordinance, which puts the onus on the victim to prove she was raped.
Under this law, the victim has to produce four male Muslims who were witness to the rape. If she fails to prove the allegation, she can be ostracised and even charged with adultery.
------------------------------------------------------
There's an enlightened bunch for you."
Much is made of the 'elevated' civilization the various Muslim Caliphates allegedly enjoyed while Europe was enduring the Dark Ages.
While my ancestors managed to claw their way back into the light, it seems that, at some point, Islam - and especially Islamic law - fell into the abyss and never got out:
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Rapist cop booked under controversial religious law
A Pakistani policeman charged with raping a teenaged girl in a police station has been charged under a controversial religious law that carries the death penalty - but which could also enable him to walk free.
Sub-inspector Qaiser Shah was booked under Sections 10 and 11 of the Hud Zina Ordinance, which puts the onus on the victim to prove she was raped.
Under this law, the victim has to produce four male Muslims who were witness to the rape. If she fails to prove the allegation, she can be ostracised and even charged with adultery.
------------------------------------------------------
There's an enlightened bunch for you."
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)