 | septrose14 on Reddit layoffs |
 | shelldigger on Thought of the day |
 | The Sauciest Duck on Chauvin and Rittenhouse |
 | Michael on Chauvin and Rittenhouse |
| Stephen Moreton on Chauvin and Rittenhouse | |
 | Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Merry Christmas |
| Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Mele Kalikimaka |
 | somdeblahiriyahoocoi… on Thought of the day |
| Michael on Wuhan virus and one last… |
| Quick correction | F… on The A-Unicornist, Bernie Bro… |
It looks like Monica Lewinsky is back in the news for some reason. I can only be thankful that the worst offender when it comes to bad Clinton-sex jokes – Jay Leno – has retired.
(By the way, there are no good Clinton-sex jokes. They stopped being funny after about a month. So now that we’re 15 years after the fact, can we please stop?)
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Clinton, Thought of the day | 2 Comments »
Science is rarely on the side of the religious, and it is no different with the abortion debate. We hear that life begins at conception because the combination of gametes is the first step in a line to a distinct person. Of course, this is arbitrary. The production of the egg or the sperm could just as easily be called the first step. Or even the consumption of a burger that was later used for a person to be able to produce sperm or eggs in the first place could just as easily be called the first step. Again, it’s arbitrary. Yet, we still get arguments about fertilization being so distinct that it is the true difference maker. Alright, fine, let’s go with that. Then what about twinning? Twinning is known to happen upwards of 4 days after the initial gametes combine. Was fertilization still the first step towards each twin? If so, how?
Of course, my questions are rhetorical. Once we begin defining arbitrary things in arbitrary ways, the rabbit hole becomes very deep.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Abortion, Thought of the day | 2 Comments »
If you’ve ever wondered if feminism is for you, ask yourself one simple question: Can a woman ever be sexist towards a man? If your answer is yes, then feminism is not for you.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Feminism, Thought of the day | Leave a comment »
That may have been the worst Super Bowl I’ve ever seen.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Super Bowl, Thought of the day | 3 Comments »
Nate keeps telling me that Hawaii sucks, but I get the feeling that he either 1) would say that about any place expensive or 2) is thinking of his mother. At any rate, I intend on visiting soon. Here’s some eye candy:
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Hawaii | 2 Comments »
The argument against the notion that corporations are people is so simple: A corporation is a government-defined, sanctioned, licensed, and registered organization. It exists as a legal concept and will cease to exist as it stands should there be no government. An actual human being, on the other hand, may have a legal definition of sorts, but a human will continue to exist without government.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Corporations are not people, Thought of the day | 9 Comments »
The reason I don’t find the anti-cosmetic argument of anti-circumcisionists convincing is that these people usually aren’t arguing from any solid principle they’re willing to consistently hold. That is, the anti-circumcisionist argument states that a person’s bodily autonomy is important and should not be violated against his or her will except when medically necessary. That means if your baby has a potentially fatal or life-altering heart defect, for example, surgery is an okay thing to demand. Having foreskin, on the other hand, is not fatal or life-altering, and so circumcision is unjustified. But here’s the problem: vaccines cause the body to create antibodies that otherwise would not be there. This is a change to the body which, depending on the vaccine, may last forever. It isn’t an outward change like circumcision, but that is neither here nor there. If the anti-circumcisionists want to premise their argument on bodily autonomy, then any permanent change to the body is fair game.
Let’s review. Circumcision is not necessary for a quality life, nor is a lack of circumcision inherently fatal or life-altering. Vaccines, too, are not necessary for a quality life, nor is a lack of vaccination inherently fatal or life-altering. The differences that exist between these two examples are plenty, but when we’re talking purely about bodily autonomy? There isn’t a bit of difference. Circumcision permanently changes a part of the bodily. Vaccines permanently change the body’s antibodies. Each example, strictly speaking, can be argued to be a violation of a person’s bodily autonomy. Yet, except for the kooks and quacks, we never hear of any anti-circumcisionists wailing on about vaccines. Funny that. It’s almost as if their primary argument is a lie that isn’t based upon any principle at all.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Circumcision, Thought of the day | 5 Comments »
Another year has gone by and still no evidence for God.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Thought of the year | 1 Comment »
What I’ve learned from the Internet:
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Internet, Thought of the day | 4 Comments »
I realize I’m a little late, but I make a post about Christmas music every year. Unfortunately, that nasty ice storm cut me off from the Internet for a few days (plus I’ve been busy with Christmas stuff). So that’s why you’re seeing this now. Also, I’ve come to appreciate Judy Garland’s voice quite a bit lately:
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Christmas music, Judy Garland | Leave a comment »
For the Sake of Science 