I consider myself a techno-geek wannabe. Don't get me wrong I am not being derogatory when I use the word geek. I am of the firm opinion that geeks run the world. But that's another post. Like I said technology geek wannabe. That is to say that I love gadgets and toys of the technological variety. But I am not so enthralled by the stuff that I would consider myself "up on the latest." If my PDA meets my needs I'm good to go. Last night I saw something that just made me say..."Ok that's enough." It was for some cell phone company that has a cool add-on feature. Ring backs that are downloaded music.
Let say you call someone and their line is busy. You can leave a directive for the "phone" to keep dialing until the person that you called is off the call that made the line busy. Then when their phone rings they pick up and instead of hearing your ringer tone they hear music that you have chosen for them to listen to. Then your phone rings and you pick it up.
I agree, that is amazing as far as a neat trick of technology is concerned. But as I watched and thought about it I asked, "Why?" Just because it's neat I guess. To whomever thought up the idea...kudos. To whomever implemented the idea...kudos. To whomever figured out the technology...kudos. And to whomever kept their job because of the technology...kudos. But with the price of gas and eventually a gallon of milk do we, the consumer, need more stuff?
File this under a Wednesday morning rant before I go see a man about a tooth...Bless God for dental technology.
Peace
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Monday, August 15, 2005
ELCA Votes
The web page of the ELCA is reporting in it's preliminary minutes and voting results that recommendation #3 on human sexuality, which concerned the ordination of homosexual ministers that could demonstrate commitment to a life long partnership failed by a vote of 490-503.
ELCA Votes
ELCA Votes
Monday, August 08, 2005
Shame on the NCAA
The NCAA ruled recently that Post Season Play of Schools that have mascots and logos that derive from Native Americans will have to be covered up and/or uniforms changed. These same colleges and Universities are allowed to keep mascots and uniforms during the regular season but if they have athletic teams that go beyond the regular season into official NCAA post season play then they must adhere to the ruling.
Logically bogus. What is the difference between say a regular season game on Friday night and a first round play-off appearance on Sunday Night? Answer: Nothing except some arbitrary ruling of a governing body that has run amok.
If a logo and mascot is “offensive” to some segment of a country’s given population and that is the basis for such a ruling by a governing body then so be it. But to make the prohibitive measure only during post season betrays logic and actually discloses the actual concern of the governing body. If the logo is offensive it is offensive. If the governing body is concerned that the given population is seen in a derogatory light then why is it only in the post season? Why not always? Will they try next season to incrementalize it up and make it during the regular season too? Maybe, but then what about that given population this season? Why subject them to another “regular season” of discrimination? Is the NCAA really concerned about native Americans or are they more concerned about their own public persona? Did they make a ruling to save face at the expense of Native Americans? Have they made a ruling that is logically indefensible?
Shame on the NCAA.
Is the ruling Constitutional? Does it interfere with the free speech rights of college and university athletics? Who is the “watchdog” of what is offensive or not offensive? Why have they singled out the Native American logos? Are there other NCAA teams that have logos and mascots that derive from other segments of this country’s population? What is a Demon Deacon? What is a Tarheel? What’s an Aggie? What’s a Boilermaker? What’s Knight? What’s a Spartan? What’s a Gothic Knight? What’s a Cornhusker? What’s a Statesmen? What’s a Blueboy? Ever hear of Dallas Baptist University? Are you getting the point? If so why aren’t they deemed as inappropriate? And under the same regulations? Ridiculous I say; ridiculous. I am not saying that the possible offensiveness of the logos is ridiculous the NCAA and the way they have administered the ruling is ridiculous.
Shame on the NCAA.
Logically bogus. What is the difference between say a regular season game on Friday night and a first round play-off appearance on Sunday Night? Answer: Nothing except some arbitrary ruling of a governing body that has run amok.
If a logo and mascot is “offensive” to some segment of a country’s given population and that is the basis for such a ruling by a governing body then so be it. But to make the prohibitive measure only during post season betrays logic and actually discloses the actual concern of the governing body. If the logo is offensive it is offensive. If the governing body is concerned that the given population is seen in a derogatory light then why is it only in the post season? Why not always? Will they try next season to incrementalize it up and make it during the regular season too? Maybe, but then what about that given population this season? Why subject them to another “regular season” of discrimination? Is the NCAA really concerned about native Americans or are they more concerned about their own public persona? Did they make a ruling to save face at the expense of Native Americans? Have they made a ruling that is logically indefensible?
Shame on the NCAA.
Is the ruling Constitutional? Does it interfere with the free speech rights of college and university athletics? Who is the “watchdog” of what is offensive or not offensive? Why have they singled out the Native American logos? Are there other NCAA teams that have logos and mascots that derive from other segments of this country’s population? What is a Demon Deacon? What is a Tarheel? What’s an Aggie? What’s a Boilermaker? What’s Knight? What’s a Spartan? What’s a Gothic Knight? What’s a Cornhusker? What’s a Statesmen? What’s a Blueboy? Ever hear of Dallas Baptist University? Are you getting the point? If so why aren’t they deemed as inappropriate? And under the same regulations? Ridiculous I say; ridiculous. I am not saying that the possible offensiveness of the logos is ridiculous the NCAA and the way they have administered the ruling is ridiculous.
Shame on the NCAA.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
A must read for Senator Frist
Just found this article at the center for Bioethics and Human Diginity. Kinda makes you think Senator Frist needs to read a bit more.
Adult stem cells-3, Embryonic Stem cells-0
Adult stem cells-3, Embryonic Stem cells-0
Senator Frist...*doh*...what a Homer
By now you have heard the Senators comments and how he decided that in the interest of science he was going to vote to extend stem cell research moneyies etc. It is very disturbing to me that he has done this for a number of reasons. The primary reason has been already and most eloquently stated by Keith Plummer at the Christian Mind.[see links] NO LOGIC
The next reason for me goes back to something I read recently in Hugh Hewitt's book, If it's not close, they can't cheat where he brings forward the idea that "There aren't enough targets that you have to shoot at your friends." He also makes the statement "...proving once again that in the nation's capital, it isn't about winning or even moving in the right direction; it is about getting noticed." [pg.113]
Bill Frist did a masterful job of revealing Democratic obstructionism in November of 03 and has been a good "leader" in the Senate. So I ask myself...why now Senator Frist? Supreme Court nominees to get appointed, recess appointments to support, and so many other issues why would you now break from your Commander In Chief and take a shot over his bow? Are you thinking about running in '08? Senator, you're a doctor, remember your oath? Look at the research Doctor...it doesn't square with this move of yours. The benefits of fetal stem cells are not proven. Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity
I don't want to take a shot at Senator Frist. I have no political asperations this issue isn't one of politics. To be sure government is involved but it isn't a political issue it is an issue of life. And Senator you should be ashamed.
Peace
The next reason for me goes back to something I read recently in Hugh Hewitt's book, If it's not close, they can't cheat where he brings forward the idea that "There aren't enough targets that you have to shoot at your friends." He also makes the statement "...proving once again that in the nation's capital, it isn't about winning or even moving in the right direction; it is about getting noticed." [pg.113]
Bill Frist did a masterful job of revealing Democratic obstructionism in November of 03 and has been a good "leader" in the Senate. So I ask myself...why now Senator Frist? Supreme Court nominees to get appointed, recess appointments to support, and so many other issues why would you now break from your Commander In Chief and take a shot over his bow? Are you thinking about running in '08? Senator, you're a doctor, remember your oath? Look at the research Doctor...it doesn't square with this move of yours. The benefits of fetal stem cells are not proven. Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity
I don't want to take a shot at Senator Frist. I have no political asperations this issue isn't one of politics. To be sure government is involved but it isn't a political issue it is an issue of life. And Senator you should be ashamed.
Peace
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
