This is precisely what IQ tests should not be used for. They probably shouldn't be used for anything. Either the state has the right to execute dangerous citizens, or it doesn't. Humans are moral creatures, accountable for their actions. Some people aren't able to live up to the standards of society, but I don't want society deciding who can be held accountable and who cannot. I certainly don't want them using an IQ test to do it. If we have the death penalty, being eligible for it is part of being human. I hate the argument that if you can't pass a test, you don't qualify as fully human. The government cannot be given the power to decide who is fully human, and who isn't. I can deal with excluding children, because combined with a good way of tracking age, at least it's a bright line, even if it is a daft one.
_
respond?
(1)
09:26:47 PM,
Monday 25 July 2005
-
Bizarrely tired today. Dreamt about attending some sort of science museum/Asimov convention thing, and trying to knit in virtual reality.
_
respond?
04:17:13 PM,
Monday 25 July 2005
-
Lyrics from frequently listened songs at work, I'm afraid some of it may be obscure.
1: I never should have asked you to be kind, but I'm slow
2: Whose soul was sad, and whose glance was glum, who sipped no sup, and who craved no crumb
4: What can I do if she dies? What can I do if she's lost?
5: Have you ever wanted her to to sigh, and say goodbye, just to see how much you cry?
6: I can hear the bullfrog calling me
7: In my heart you know that it pains me. A life of leisure is no life you know.
8: It just ain't here among the rest, and I'm a little upset yes.
9: You keep losing, when you ought to not bet.
10: This place is death with walls.
11: Coffee for three?
12: I'm a little overweight, my log book is way behind.
_
respond?
(20)
03:03:34 PM,
Friday 22 July 2005
-
Finally bought the PS2 remake of SpyHunter, which was one of my favorite Apple games, largely because of the Peter Gunn Theme. In fact, I think I like the old synthetic version of the song better than the one that comes with the new game. It doesn't need ornamentation. It certainly doesn't need edgy percussion.
_
respond?
09:05:51 AM,
Thursday 21 July 2005
-
Ach. It's like a pledge drive out there. First endless Rove pursuit, and now prating senators. The first bores me. This is just as fabricated, and nearly as tawdry, as the Monica flap. The second one irrates me. The point is to get a good lawyer, who will treat these questions as legal questions, and not an opportunity to rule. Someone on the radio talked about how O'Connor may have been the most powerful person in America for the past few decades, which started me thinking, what makes one Justice more powerful than another? Why did she have more influence than the others? The answer is that she chose to; she was the most willing to fudge the law to get the right answer. Unhindered by legal considerations, she could strike deals. This is a constant temptation to moderate justices; It's fairly clear that Kennedy is ready and willing to take over the role.
My main concern is this: Once the supreme court takes a power away from state and federal government, as it did with abortion, it then ends up with a moral responsibility to monitor and maintain that law, to make sure that it is a good law, accepted by the people, not abused, and, as is the problem currently, clear. Casey was a terribly muddy decision. Undue burden seems to amount to whatever the O'Connor thought was reasonable. The judiciary is such an unwieldy, undemocratic beast, profoundly unresponsive. Look at the backlog of lobbying money about to pour out over this nomination. The coverage of the nomination, the sorts of conversations, feels like the papal election.
_
respond?
10:08:15 PM,
Wednesday 20 July 2005
-
The Supreme Court does not exist to divine the beliefs and values of american society. It exists to protect us from tyranny, by keeping government within the bounds of it's own laws and constitution. If we want our rights assigned and revoked by a body that reflects our beliefs and values, we should quickly pass an amendment so we can vote for justices.
(Sorry, I shouldn't listen to Senators. They make me itch.)
_
respond?
02:43:53 PM,
Wednesday 20 July 2005
-
Is there anything Judicial Activism can't mean? Perhaps napping during hearings.
_
respond?
01:14:38 PM,
Wednesday 20 July 2005
-
A-ha! Martha Stewert calls a scratter a hand cultivator.
I'm starting to think that americans don't know about scratters and secateurs simply because gardening is such a different game here. It's done on a larger scale, from a greater distance, and with as much noise as possible. We may call secateurs pruners, but a modern pruner is closer to a chain saw than a pair of shears.
Also, it's starting to look like scratter is probably either black country or just family. Either that, or people tend not to discuss garden tools much online.
_
respond?
08:21:13 PM,
Monday 18 July 2005
-
I was wrong: they're still translating, they're just a bit more subtle about it now.
_
respond?
05:00:34 PM,
Monday 18 July 2005
-
Had a legal briefing today about federal ethics rules today. There really needs to be a "Please do not feed the government workers" sign somewhere.
_
respond?
04:37:19 PM,
Monday 18 July 2005
-
Pleased to see secateurs in the new Harry Potter. A point for my native language! I suspect the author is getting her own back against Scholastic for it's translations of the first three. It's one of a list of words from my childhood that betrayed me. I'd be happily talking, and suddenly everyone's looking at me strangely. At least proper foriegners know where the language starts and ends.
Which reminds me, one day I would like to walk around with a scratter, demanding that passers-by tell me what they would call it.
_
respond?
(7)
02:30:51 PM,
Monday 18 July 2005
-
Lichen covered granite mountains are slippery when wet. Also, clouds aren't very interesting from the inside. Still, nice to be tired.
_
respond?
11:34:25 PM,
Sunday 17 July 2005
-
site & script courtesy of Moss
