The other day, I posted a link to a story on a health care company firing smokers. At the time, I said it is the sort of thing that it would be nice to see state and local governments doing. This article, from the BBC, has some more details. Most of the article is the same as the other. All seems very positive, after all, we all know smoking is bad for you. Most of us don’t like smoke. Its all very unpopular. Very easy to dismiss, or even feel encouraged by, someone banning smokers. However, “Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tools for thee”. Towards the end of the article, is the following snippet of information: “According to Reuters news agency, Mr Weyers wants to turn his attention next to overweight workers.” Again, at first, this sounds fairly innocuous. But then remember, that according to our definitions, most Americans are overweight. Now, I say I’m fat all the time. And I do weight more than I should, by about 50 pounds. But most of my friends, while recognizing that I could and should loose some weight, say that it doesn’t show that much, and most have trouble agreeing to my 50 pound figure. And that figure itself, at my height, I would still probably be considered overweight if I did loose 50 pounds, even though that would put me within 15 pounds of the weight I wrestled in high school, and never mind the fact that I’m stronger now than I was then, though in worse shape. This long tangent really does tie in. If I worked for Weyco, and Mr. Weyers were able to implement his dream of enforcing health standards further, I’d prob be at risk of loosing my job. That puts a different light on it, doesn’t it? We always have to be VERY careful allowing our employers, or our governments, since government could do this as easily as Weyco has, control over our lives. This sort of thing brings out the libertarian in me, and some people would dismiss me out of hand. It is, however, imperative that individual responsibility be promoted, enhanced, and protected. “Freedom” is not the same as “license”, in part because freedom, unlike license, is directly proportional to responsibility. Almost sounds like a contradiction or paradox. But in an absolute sense, we cannot have free will without the ability to cause real harm. That does not mean that causing harm is not wrong, we have the responsibility not to cause harm. We are free to do what ever, but some things are wrong. Contrast this to “license.” If you have a license to hunt ducks, there might be restrictions on your license, but within the bounds of that license, you are not responsible for what duck you choose to hunt, or how you choose to hunt it. This is not a perfect analogy, because while the license to hunt does not impose responsibility, you are still responsible for your actions because of other things. For instance, you are still responsible, under our still somewhat free government, to not kill or recklessly endanger anyone. But as bad as my ability to demonstrate it may be, properly understood (consult a dictionary, its definition number 3 and 4 in both Webster’s and Wordnet), license is different from freedom. Again, I am tangenting. But again, the tangent is related. We do not want a license to eat (so much), but the freedom to eat what we see fit. And, if we overeat, we accept (or should accept), as part and parcel of that freedom, the responsibility for the impact on our health. The problem is that it isn’t quite so simple. Health-care costs have skyrocketed, and without insurance, many people would be unable to afford a level of care that many of us would now consider “basic.” Thus we are all in need of medical insurance, and by that need, the increased cost of my choices affect (effect?) the premiums you pay. And my freedom, reasonably, necessarily, ends where yours starts. So where is the line drawn? That’s a good question, one we should be hesitant to allow health insurance companies, employers, or governments draw casually.

news
David Limbaugh reports on one example of the consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act. While I laud Bush and Congress for acting to fix the oh so obvious failure of the public school system to educate, their action was in this case misguided. Subsidiarity teaches us that governance moved away from the people is not right, that our society should be governed at the lowest level capable of handling a given problem. No Child Left Behind flies in the face of this principle, and here we see the results: it is predictably being used to further stifle excellence, but, now, parents challenging this trend must go to federal court, not to a local school board that they can more easily control.

The BBC reports on the planned meeting of scientists who don’t buy the prevalent hype on global warming. Professor Fred Singer, a former director of the US Weather Satellite Service, is quoted saying that “The greenhouse warming from increased gas emissions is, as far as we can tell, insignificant. It’s unlikely to be appreciable even a century from now, and we can easily adapt to it.” Not what you hear in the news every week, now is that? hhmmm.

Also in the BBC, this article talks about a recent study on the Shroud of Turin that calls into question the 1988 radiocarbon dating find. Perhaps science will once again allow us to believe that the Shroud is legitimate. I wouldn’t hold your breath though.

In their unending quest to blur the distinction between Man and animal, scientists are experimenting with chimeras, as reported by National Geographic here. Naturally there is some legit research to be done in this area. Some things we already do to save lives, like replacing heart valves with those from cows or pigs. But this article rightly questions how far is too far.

Findlaw reports on a pair of school kids now up on felony charges. For what you ask? They drew threatening stick figures. Yes. Stick Figures. Local6.com provides additional detail, though I do not know how long it will be up. Apparently these stick figures were sufficient to cause “extreme fear” in another 10 year old. Certainly this could have been handled in some other fashion…

In other, went to Pub Quiz at the 4Ps last night, and surprise surprise, Jenn came. :-) We had a very good time. I haven’t gotten to see Jenn in forever, so it was awesome. PVI wrestled Gonzaga yesterday, Michael lost his varsity match, won his exhibition match. I think he could have defeated the varsity kid, but he gets so discouraged when the other guy has a strong ability to break you down. I know how that is, it is very hard to continually work up, so I do not, cannot, fault him for having lost; he tried hard the whole match.