In Defense of Extremism

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Extremism is generally considered a bad thing. I'm not sure if that's completely true 100% of the time. While some people here may consider me extreme on everything, I can absolutely see myself as extremist about a few issues, and unabashedly so:

1) I think our educational system is broken on a fundamental level, and the problem is not so much with the schools or the parents or the teachers or the unions (except that all four are heavily invested in the status quo), but in the sense that our educational system is not geared toward children learning and being educated, but rather training to being conformed to what administrators and legislators want people to be.

2) Not only do I see the drug war as a failure (not in and of itself extreme anymore), but I go further than many considered extreme on this issue and see no remaining value in the restriction of access to any drugs. It's a basic issue of the rights of the individual and the simple fact that such restrictions don't work any better on hard stuff than it does on the less dangerous.

3) Related to #2, I am very much in favor of severely blunting the power of police. There is a pendulum of power of sorts, and police simply have too much of it - even getting pulled over can result in major, major problems if you choose to exercise your basic rights, or even not. That the profession appears to draw many who enjoy the power inherent in the position doesn't help matters in the least.

4) Related a bit to #3, I've become convinced that laws against drunk driving, texting, use of cell phones, etc, do not exist to protect the public in a meaningful way as much as provide the appearance of doing something. The ability to take people off the road for reckless driving makes more sense to me than trying simply to catch people doing things that politicians don't like or assuming that everyone handles alcohol the same way cognitively after a certain point.

What are you willing to admit to being extreme about? Why? How do you go about defending it? Do you discuss these issues with your peers at all - especially ones who would be negatively impacted by those extreme ideas being implemented?

Eugenics, genetics, your kids and mine...

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

An important question looming on the horizon is: "to what extent can couples determine the genetic make-up of their kids."

I have a simple answer: "It's not evil eugenics if a majority of those with the genetic trait advocate helping future children avoid it. "


For example, I'm quite short, this has not really had a positive impact on my life my husband is tall and I'd be quite happy to let his genes take over the whole height thing. I'd have a similar feeling were I abnormally tall. On the other hand it'd make me angry if someone ruled out darker skin for our child, that'd be cowing to the pressure of racism, I think ... and creepy. (dark skin also protects one from skin cancers and painful sunburns) I don't envy the lengths my husband must go to avoid getting burned. My husband has often been quite cheerful about the prospect of his kids not having a hard time with the sun as he has.

So, I think the solution is to ask people who have these traits if they *want* them passed on or not. In that sense, maybe the "looming question" isn't so big-- most couples will naturally want persevere human diversity, but will not have much interest in saving traits that just make life more difficult.

But of course things are not that simple. Many black folks (for example) might have chosen lighter skin (and some might do so today) to protect their child from racism. I find this depressing and my instinct is to find a way to prevent it. But, should the state have any place in such choices?

There are lots of people who would quickly choose to reduce the chance of their child being gay (I doubt being gay is as simple as a single gene, so mercifully it may not be possible to tamper with this without tampering with other traits) --on the one hand, maybe it's good that gay kids don't end up being born to intolerant people, on the other, there are enough intolerant people that, if the genetics of sexuality were simple enough, we'd probably see a sharp decine in the gay population. I think this is really depressing.

Now I treated the height issue like it was simple, but there are probably some short people who feel differently.

I think we could come up with reasonable laws by asking those who have a given gene what they think about people selecting for it or against it.

And now for a incomplete poll:
( Read more... )

PS. Here is a great documentary that relates to these questions.

Should Britain have a voluntary Civil Guard ?

[mintogrubb.livejournal.com]

So, rampaging mobs in London have been forced to turn and run when confronted by chaps waving hockey sticks and cricket stumps. Even Millwall residents who were completely unarmed were sufficient to deter some looters who turned up on their patch - one wonders how well the citizens of London would be able to keep law and order given the proper training and some decent kit.

But, the Brits have also got a petition in the air about repealing the ban on capital punishment. So, should we judicially execute people? A writer on the Times letter page, claiming to work for an organisation called Amicus, says that in the USA, the States that have the death penalty have a higher murder rate per capita than the states that have banned executions. True or false, guys? Tell us if you know.( Read more... )

The Apostles Behind Rick Parry's Prayer Rally

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

Why Have the Apostles Behind Rick Perry's Prayer Rally Been Invisible to Most Americans?

Christians in political power annoy me.

Question for the group: Is the NAR a new threat to Liberty? Even if it is conspiracy theory, do you think it is possible for an group keen on culling and uniting "their vision" of an America ready for The Jesus to pull off such a thing?

Either way, be educated. There is a new Boogie Man in town.

PS: the NAR wiki site appears to be an ongoing battlefield of individuals erasing and re-posting. Typical of Wiki: No guarantees on its accuracy.




correction. Not Perry,  It is Rick Parry