Saturday, August 27, 2005


George W. Bush portrays himself as a decent Christian man. He talks compassion and often seems to be a nice, caring person. But if his policies cause so much death and grief can he be viewed as anything other than callous?

The war in Iraq makes the headlines, Almost 2000 American dead, 12,000 wounded and more than 100,000 Iraqis dead or wounded. Even though we can't now withdraw from the country we invaded, the cost in human lives and misery traces back to President Bush's decision to start an unnecessary war.

But other Bush policies have exacted a far greater toll than those in Iraq. That is where the need arises for researchers and statisticians. Women's groups have pointed out the enormous incidence of death and suffering resulting from withdrawal of U.S. support of family planning and reproductive rights around the globe. All because there may be abortions somewhere. What is the cost of Bush policies preventing sex education that includes awareness of the value of condoms for safe sex? Or the policies that prohibit the distribution of disposable needles for drug addicts? More AIDs, more pain and suffering and death.

And of course President Bush’s administration has opposed medical use of marijuana to alleviate nausea and pain Now, just before September 1st, his Food and Drug Administration has reneged on a promise to decide upon over-the-counter availability
of the Plan B "morning after" pill. Restrictions such as these are bound to cause sorrow to both young women and unwanted babies.

Maybe a statistician can sort all this out and provide numbers to the voting public.
But the death and suffering toll does not stop there. How much damage in human life, environmental health, crop failures and famine, and human habitat has been and will be caused by Mr. Bush's refusal to acknowledge or act upon the threat of global warming? That is immeasurable.

Monday, August 22, 2005


The Discovery Institute and its cohorts have hit the big time, a series on its efforts published in the New York Times. Its success in using politicized scientists and religious groups to spread its message and even to obtain curriculum presence in some public schools warrants news coverage, I suppose. This is especially true when intelligent design may possibly be taught in scientific courses as an alternative to evolution. That's science classes,not religious studies.

I'll go with the opinion of a British scientist, expressed on NPR. He viewed engaging in a scientific debate with advocates of intelligent design as akin to a human reproduction scientist debating the stork theory of reproduction.