Education

No Child Left Alive

Shahms E. King — Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:04:00 GMT

The stupidest "education" bill ever, the No Child Left Behind Act, apparently has some interesting provisions buried in it. Along with meeting the unrealistic (some would say, impossible) standards of the act, schools also have to provide confidential student records to military recruiters or be denied federal funds. This bill is completely indefensible and was clearly drafted by an idiot or someone who was activitly trying to sabotage education. If you disagree, you either haven't read the bill or are an idiot. There can be no discussion on those points. Okay, there is always a third possibility: you are a deeply disturbed individual whose continued existence threatens the viability of the human race. The Nationalist party is a menace to the health and well-being of this country, and thanks to the slow decline of the US hegemony, the entire world. Fortunately for the rest of the world, (and unfortunately for US) the actions of the "Red Menace" are rapidly hastening the decline.

Evolution v. Stupidity, Round 2

Shahms E. King — Fri, 13 Feb 2004 20:06:00 GMT

Creationist: Your Honor, the idea that I was not Created in the image of God offends my delicate sensibilities and undermines my ability to indoctrinate my children with irrational and down right stupid claims. Furthermore, it teaches our children the idea of critical analysis which they can use to realize the baselessness of our religion. The state should not interfere with religion, therefore it shouldn't be teaching evolution. It is also not based on "sound science" as clearly I am not an ape and Your Honor is certainly not an ape, therefore there is no empirical data to back up the claim and "intelligent design" or creationism is the only real answer. After all, the Bible says so, so it must be true.

Evolution: Objection, assumes facts not in evidence.

Judge Georgia: Are you suggesting I'm an ape? overruled. And, seeing as I am clearly retarded, I find for the plaintiff. Evolution has no place in our schools, poisoning the minds of our children. If they learn how to think for themselves, how will we control them? Where will we find people willing to die for questionable causes? Our military will crumble and our enemies will attack! Evolution is not only "unsound science" it is treasonous as well. Let it never be mentioned in this state again. Now, if you'll both excuse me, I have to go pick some nits off my mate.

Jimmy Carter (From The Peanut Gallery): You're honor, I object. Evolution is a well established and generally accepted scientific theory. If parents want their children to grow up without a proper education, they can choose to not send them to school. However, it is the State's avowed duty to give children an adequate education, no matter how controversial an issue may be among an uneducated minority.

Judge Georgia: You're Jimmy Carter and we do whatever you say.

On Reason and Religion

Shahms E. King — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 11:54:00 GMT

In my often contentious political adventures I have often found a striking overlap between politically irrational people and religiously irrational people. To be fair, I have known people who fell into only one category or the other, but the preponderence of my experience suggests that the underlying mental failing in both of these cases is similar enough to be intriguing. After a lot of thought, I have found that it boils down to one major factor: Faith. Now, the religious among you (probably aren't reading this, but if you were) might say "wait a minute, Faith is one of the most resplendent and wonderful things about religion, how can you call it a 'mental failing?'"

I'll tell you how. First let me agree that in certain circumstances Faith can be a wonderful and fulfilling thing, in limited amounts and when tempered with reason. You must be willing to give up your Faith when it has been resoundingly demonstrated to be false. A "willingness to believe" is good a "willingness to dogmatically adhere to a flawed world-view despite evidence to the contrary" is not.

It is the latter quality that I find so prevalent among the religious wrong. The seem to have an almost supernatural willingness to adhere to the doctrines of a governing body, no matter how damaging those doctrines may be to their own well-being or society as a whole. The ability to accept "Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction" or "I am not a crook" or "Ronald Reagan suddenly developed late-stage Alzhiemer's hours after leaving office" is intricately linked to the ability to accept "Jesus died for your sins" or "This book is the word of God" (pick your book, they all maintain that and it's just as ridiculous in every instance). Especially the latter. Dogmatic adherence to a factually incorrect doctrine is not admirable. Faith that the world was created in seven days or that the rabbit is a hoofed mammal is not admirable. It is, in fact, strong evidence of a diseased mind.

Of course, what makes personal conviction to wrong-headed ideas dangerous to society as a whole is when that conviction is coupled with a complete lack of empathy. When the belief in those ideas is stretched to the point of disallowing alternative viewpoints from even being expressed or held, your beliefs begin encroaching on my freedom. And any ideas that requires "ignorant faith" to be upheld is immediately questionable in my mind. Doctrine cannot replace thought. Accepting someone else's explanation for anything is not an excuse to stop considering the alternatives for yourelf. "The Bible says so" is not a valid reason in a rational argument. It is, in fact, patently absurd. The fact that The Bible has passages that can be interpreted as anti-homosexuality does not make the book an any more pertinent reference for that subject as a reference for "the flora and fauna of ancient Israel" or the origins of the species. In fact, if the only evidence you have for a political opinion is the Bible or your religious faith, you need to keep that religion out of my life. You may think your morality is the only morality and any other morality is "Evil" and you would be wrong. The ironic thing is religion (including yours) can be used to justify any behavior, no matter how reprehensible. Religious justification is justification only for personal matters, between you and your God. It is not justification for anything between me and my world. If you find my behvior morally wrong because of your religion, whoopty-fucking-doo, unless you can find a rational reason for that behavior to be outlawed, it is your responsibility to keep your religion out of my life.

Enough is Enough: If you're going to argue, do it right!

Shahms E. King — Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:05:00 GMT

In an attempt to increase the level of debate on this site (which frequently begins very well and then quickly degenerates into ad hominem attacks from both sides) I suggest you read the following:

If you are unable to ignore the location of the second link, then just read the first one, they are both very similar in content, the second just included more information on logic and constructing a solid argument in general, rather than just focusing on fallacies. I, like most people, am willing to consider viewpoints with which I disagree provided they are presented in a a consistent and reasonable argument. I, like most people, don't respond well to "You're an idiot >fill in the blank< is the greatest thing since sliced bread because >fill in the specious reasoning<."

I know I'm not the only who's tired of the bickering and snide comments. Not only are they irritating, they distract from the substantive debate and lower the overall quality of discussion. If you absolutely must make a snide comment, at least make if funny! This is just a humble request from a frequent visitor in an effort to make all of our Aaroncommand.com experiences more enjoyable.

For some extra fun, try listening to the next Dem debate (or Presidential speech) with the preceding in mind.