“Raising pit bull children” is amusing. It is an extended analogy with a great deal of truth to it, but I can’t help but find the repeated references to put bulls funny. Seriously though, he has a point, where are children supposed to learn to stand up for their beliefs if not from their parents? We need to assert that there is such a thing as absolute truth. We need to hold our selves accountable to it. We need to hold our society accountable as well, and work to change what doesn’t stand up. This last is something I fail at I fear.

This is scary and exciting beyond belief. “Altered HIV Attacks Mice Tumors” talks about a research project in which HIV was altered to attack cancer cells instead of immune cells. It was apparently rather successful in mice. They claim it isn’t really much of a risk because they “have completely removed 80 percent of the virus. So really it’s just a carrier.” Obviously a potential cure for cancer needs nothing else to be exciting really, but this is especially so because they are building a cure from a plague. What a mind-boggling example of bringing good from evil! It is scary though. The claim is they can target “any protein on the surface of a cell” and have “seen success with about a dozen different molecules, including brain and other blood cells.” On one hand, this will make it particularly effective, it can be customized for the various cancers, making it potentially particularly effective, assuming there is a way to tell the difference between the cancer cell and the normal cell from the cell surface for any given type of cell. On the other hand though, the potential for biological weaponry of particular nastiness, especially for those with a genocidal bent (Saddam Hussein, your average PLA suicide bomber wishing to kill Jews, several instances of this in Africa currently, the whole Bosnia/Serbia thing not long ago..) is not particularly far under the surface here, now is it? Just goes to show, technology is never in and of itself good or evil, it all comes down to the use to which man puts it.

I also want to mention “A Big Week for Religious Liberty;” FIRE is, I think, rightly concerned about the outcome of this case. We really are taking political correctness to absurd levels when we aren’t letting Christian groups contain only Christians.

Some lawyer was convicted of passing messages from imprisoned terrorists to unimpassioned ones. She claims that the attorney-client privilege protects her from prosecution for her actions in “Rights Lawyer Vows to Appeal Conviction.”

“Officials: Woman Made Up Tossed Baby Story” is just weird. The woman apparently made up a story of someone throwing a baby out a car window so as to hide the fact that she had been pregnant from her family.

“Death Row Retardation Rules Questioned” documents that California is getting around to dealing with the USSC decision that doesn’t allow you to execute someone with mental retardation.

“I was just following orders” as a defense in “Lawyer: Contractor Beat Afghan As His Duty.” Given how well this worked at Nuremberg, part of me wonders if this is just being done to keep the story in the news.

NYTimes article “State Dept. Relaxes Visa Rules for Some Scientists and Students” talks about making clearances for foreign students and scientists last longer, so as to make it more possible for them to work and study here. Apparently they need clearances to do just about anything in “Fields like chemistry, engineering and pharmacology.” Not sure what I think of this.

On a lighter note, perhaps, progress in nanotechnology is reported in “Scientists find flaw in quantum dot construction.”

A dose of hypocrisy for you: “Bloomberg Criticized on Gay Marriage Laws” has someone being criticized for failing to act on his beliefs, but instead choosing to uphold and defend the rule of law. If this were reversed, do you think there would be calls for him to oppose gay “marriage?” Do we see people in Massachusetts who oppose gay “marriage” being praised for refusing to follow the supreme court decision?