Critics across the country and on both sides of the aisle, including a noted TV chef, are criticizing Georgia for their new proposal to remove the word "evolution" from the state science curriculum and replace it with the phrase "biological changes over time". I think they've got it backwards. I applaud the progressive thinkers in Georgia for their effort to demystify controversial terms and eliminate buzzwords. In fact, I think they should go even further.
Other terms they should eliminate, and their replacements:
Ah, I'm such a fan of your blog and the Game Report, but this is pretty crude. The Bible is not "imposed" on anyone...least not anyone with free will. So a few people try, big deal. Let 'em give it their best shot. Kicking the religious is so cliche.
And the war on terror concerns more than Hussein, else it would be over now that he's caught.
Abortion, blah. Who knows what you're even trying to say here, but it's sad that so much of the left sees a fetus as a parasite. Someone's been watching too many Alien movies?
Posted by: dave on February 1, 2004 5:13 AMi have never heard anyone but myself refer to a fetus as a parasite. that's what i called both of my kid's before they were born, and i truly meant it.
i agree with the rest of your list as well except for the oreo blizzard one. haven't had one so i can't comment.
Posted by: dana on February 1, 2004 11:45 AMNice! What a lovely world. All praise be to the TV.
Posted by: Damon on February 1, 2004 11:58 AMWould the term be "flake-ette"?
Posted by: dave on February 1, 2004 12:59 PMDave: I didn't say that The Bible was imposed on anyone. I said it's an excuse used to justify the imposition of a belief system. As in "The Bible says XXX is wrong, therefore XXX is wrong." You don't seriously believe that doesn't happen, do you? The Bible is used as justification for positions against abortion, homosexuality, Dungeons & Dragons... the list goes on. A state supreme court chief justice put a statue of the ten commandments in his courthouse, and to this day doesn't understand why that's wrong because, in his eyes, he's Righteous and therefore right. I'm not kicking the religious-- you have the right to believe whatever you want to believe. It's when that belief starts to impinge on the rights of others that I get upset.
Re: the war on terror-- you seem to have missed my whole point. Of course it's not over now that Hussein's caught. The government has a Get Out of Jail Free card for whatever anti-privacy or 3rd-world-imperialist measures they've been slavering to take for years. Opportunities like that don't come along often, and they're not going to let this one go until they've wrung every last budgetary penny and personal agenda out of it. The "War on Drugs" has conditioned the public to think that it's possible to go to war against abstract concepts. That's not a war. A campaign, perhaps. But a war requires a clearly defined enemy, and we don't have one. And haven't you ever questioned why the U.S. spent all this effort against Saddam Hussein, who had nothing to do with 9/11, while the guy who actually planned the attacks is still out there? Classic misdirection, a stage magician's trick, and the American people fell for it.
As for abortion, I'm actually on the fence on that issue. Intellectually I'm for it, emotionally I'm against it. I wasn't actually trying to make any kind of political statement there. In fact, the only political statement I was trying to make with this post was that Oreo Blizzards should be the official dessert of the nation, prompting the change of our national motto to "Scrumpdilicious."
Posted by: Peter Sarrett on February 1, 2004 2:15 PMi would happily change from 'in god we trust' to 'scrumpdilicious'. wouldn't it be spelled 'scrumdelicious' though?
Posted by: dana on February 1, 2004 6:29 PMWow, this just proved that people will get their knickers in a twist over just about anything, doesn't it? I may not agree with all the "demystifying phrases" that Peter suggested, but I acknowledge their humor none the less. If people just took everything with a grain of salt instead of looking for a reason to undertake the next Crusade, our world would be a lot happier. You go, Peter!
Posted by: Erin on February 2, 2004 10:16 AMOreo Blizzard?
Mixing two of the worst substances - Chocolate and Milk Products? Makes me want to puke.
More like Hell on Earth.
Now if only we could get a clairification on Heaven and Hell.
Posted by: Greg on February 2, 2004 11:16 AMYou are all missing the real problem with this list - the libelous statements about Vin Diesel's talent. The dude has chops, and he's a smart cookie (he plays D&D, Peter, that should give him some bonus points in your book). His choice of roles is questionable, but when the bosses are throwing that much money after you because of your looks, I imagine it's hard to say "no". This should not count against him any more than Goldmember should count against Michael Caine. No, rather you should have impugned the likes of Ashton Kutcher, who was recently fired by Cameron Crowe from a film set and told by him to get some acting lessons.
Posted by: Nathan Beeler on February 2, 2004 11:58 AMXXX
'Nuff said.
Posted by: Peter Sarrett on February 2, 2004 12:10 PMabortion --> murder of a child, intellectually or emotionally
Posted by: Stephen Glenn on February 2, 2004 1:43 PMre: TiVo --> our lord and master
I just saw Moxi (from Digeo) in action... it kicks TiVo's butt, big-time. They are partnering with the digital cable providers so it maybe a while to it is available to everyone in all areas... but definitely worth the wait!
One box, record one channel watch another, much better UI, and a slave box for another television in the house so you can watch what you recorded anywhere.... and more!
Just my 2 cents...
Danielle -
and Peter, they are out your way in Kirkland, Wa.
Posted by: Danielle on February 2, 2004 5:42 PM