A MISSOURI LAWYER'S
FEBRUARY 4, 2005
Archived Prior Ramblings
2002 02-22-02 03-30-02 04-05-02 04-21-02 04-27-02 05-01-02 05-03-02 05-10-02 05-17-02 05-31-02 06-21-02 06-26-02 06-29-02 07-04-02 07-05-02 07-12-02 08-02-02 08-10-02 08-21-02 08-23-02 08-30-02 09-06-02 09-11-02 09-11-02F 09-13-02 09-20-02 09-27-02 10-04-02 10-11-02 10-18-02 10-25-02 11-01-02 11-08-02 11-15-02 11-22-02 11-29-02 12-06-02 12-13-02 12-20-02 12-27-02 2003 01-03-03 01-10-03 01-10-03R 01-17-03 01-24-03 01-31-03 02-07-03 02-14-03 02-21-03 02-28-03 03-07-03 03-14-03 03-21-03 03-28-03 04-04-03 04-11-03 04-18-03 04-25-03 05-02-03 05-09-03 05-16-03 05-23-03 05-30-03 06-06-03 06-20-03 06-27-03 07-04-03 07-11-03 07-18-03 07-25-03 08-01-03 08-08-03 08-15-03 08-22-03 08-29-03 09-05-03 09-12-03 09-19-03 09-26-03 10-03-03 10-10-03 10-17-03 10-24-03 10-31-03 11-07-03 11-14-03 11-21-03 11-28-03 12-05-03 12-12-03 12-19-03 12-26-03 2004 01-02-04 01-09-04 01-16-04 01-23-04 01-30-04 02-06-04 02-13-04 02-20-04 02-27-04 03-05-04 03-12-04 03-19-04 03-29-04 04-02-04 04-09-04 04-16-04 04-23-04 04-30-04 05-07-04 05-14-04 05-21-04 05-28-04 06-11-04 06-18-04 06-25-04 07-09-04 07-16-04 07-23-04 07-30-04 08-06-04 08-13-04 08-20-04 08-27-04 09-03-04 09-10-04 09-17-04
Greets and Huggers. Posted the evening of February 4,
2005. On Wednesday night, our President delivered "the State Of
The Union" as mandated by our Constitution, "The
President shall from time to time give to Congress information of the
State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as
he shall judge necessary and expedient." Article II, Sec.
3, U.S. Constitution. George
Washington delivered the first
annual message to Congress on January 8, 1790. He had a lot less
to deal with, (little things, like a new democracy and how a union of
sovereign states was supposed to work), than G. W. Bush. Sat there
on Wednesday night and watched all the "smiley faces" walk in,
(all our elected representatives were already there .... including
the "Purple Fingers" crowd.), G. W.'s Cabinet, our Supreme
Court ... and G. W. Bush, my President. ... He gave a good
speech: he looked like a President. But out of all the
"Blah", "Blah", "Blah", (Yeah, right
... he is THE President that will "fix" social security, health
insurance, our court system and forever cure "skid marks" in
shorts), there were two moments which stood out, one touched
my heart: as my President said, "We have said farewell to
some very good men and women who died for our freedom and whose memory
this nation will honor forever," Two women hugged
(whose father had been murdered by Sadam Hussien and who proudly displayed
her "purple finger", showing she had voted in Iraq's first
election in 30 years), and Janet
Norwood, (whose son, a marine, had been killed in Iraq, so she
could do so). The irony was, for me, overwhelming.
The second moment was, when our President made the statement: "I will work with Congress to ensure that human embryos are not created for experimentation or grown for body parts, and that human life is never bought or sold as a commodity. America will continue to lead the world in medical research that is ambitious, aggressive, and always ethical." The current "embryonic stem cell" lines, currently authorized for research, (see the October 15, 2004, Ramblings for an overview of "stem cell research"), are contaminated: "The nonhuman cell-surface sialic acid can compromise the potential uses of the stem cells in humans, say scientists at the University of California, San Diego. Their study was published Sunday in the online edition of Nature Medicine." ... they are useless. "... that human embryos are not created for experimentation or grown for body parts" ... got news: they are created for a thriving fertility industry, not research: good moral couples seeking to have a child, in their image, rather than adopt. Multiple eggs in vitro fertilized ... some implanted ... the rest discarded. So share with me: should the moral focus be on "stem cell" research ... or ... the origins of stem cells, (cast a ways in the fertility clinic industry)?
As a follow up to last weeks Ramblings, (about some folks assigning "lifestyles" to cartoon characters, like SpongeBob Square Pants, et. al.): "Tolerance itself can be a very dangerous word," said the Rev. Terry Fox, a Southern Baptist pastor in Wichita, Kansas. "Tolerance gives the public schools an avenue to literally brainwash our kids that every lifestyle is OK." (Click HERE for the article). Why is it some folks equate "tolerance" with condoning? How about we have the APA, (American Psychological Association) designate another pathological designation in the DSM: Cartoonophilia. "A mental dysfunction which causes a person to view children's cartoon characters in a sexual manner". Suggested therapy? Help the patient confront the fact that cartoon characters have no genitals, help the patient overcome their need to project their sexual orientation or sexual preferences on cartoon characters, help the patient view their own genitals as something other than the Devil's Playground and help the patient overcome their belief that Missionaries are locked into one position ... <whispering> ... really .... they aren't .... they have freedom of choice as well.
In other news: "A New England Journal of Medicine report concludes the world should begin preparing now for the strong possibility that a recent bird flu outbreak in Asia could turn into a deadly global epidemic. Officials are alarmed at one particular sign of trouble: the virus, which has been spreading from birds to humans for several months, now appears to be starting to spread among humans .... a Flu pandemic could kill one billion people around the world, say experts." The expected death rate in our America will exceed 700,000 persons: a pandemic would wipe out whole populations in the developing world, (without adequate health care, Avian Flu has an 80% kill rate). It's coming. Be worried.
Sitting here editing the Ramblings, sipping on some Port and watching the evening news, while thinking about the courage it would take to be a citizen of Iraq, walking around with a purple finger, a death warrant for having voted. Do you wear gloves? Wouldn't that be a tip off that you voted as well? To see the shear number of persons, risking death, just to vote, just to have a say in their future, speaks legions about the human spirit. Whatever you may believe about the war in Iraq: our men and women in uniform are doing an honorable job, at great personal sacrifice and cost, to them and their families. It is interesting: over the past couple of years, I have read the posts on the SFIG, about dissent to the war being, in fact, support for our men and women in uniform. The posters, adamant about supporting our troops: adamant our troops would never again face, what our Viet Vets faced, when they came home. During the *POL* political debates, such passionate arguments about one candidate or the other, being better or worse because they would help our men and women in uniform by doing this or by not doing that. I have no doubt, the posters are honorable persons, strong in their beliefs ... and .... then, there was a call by Karl Dickhaus yesterday, a call to aid one of these men and women in uniform, (whom all profess to support). Out of the 16 responses I saw, (there were 193 messages to the SFIG yesterday and 115 today), only 6 offered actual assistance: me, William Cownie, Cindy Sachtleben, Dan Ryan, Les Steinberg and Shelley Bishop. Guess some folks talk the talk .... and some folks walk the walk. Certainly put a few folks posts into perspective for me: got news ... talking about doing what is right .... is no substitute for doing what is right. On the evening news, Ossie Davis died today ... a great actor, (winner (with Ruby Dee, his wife, who survives him), of the 2004 Kennedy Center Honor), and civil rights activist ... <sigh> ... one, by one, the great men and women of my fathers generation are passing. Tonight, as I drift off to sleep, holding the best partner a man can have, I will say a prayer for our men and women in uniform and a much longer prayer for those that profess to support them .... <whispering> .... (Please, Please, Please, Lord .... let their actions speak ... rather than their words). Tonight, as you drift off to sleep ... would you have the courage to lay there with a purple finger ... to have voted, knowing that purple finger could be a death sentence? But then you don't need to do so, do you? ... because, the best there is, is on watch ... If my post offends, I apologize ... that is not my intent. As always ....
A Warm Brotherly Hug
Karl (the dumb ole country lawyer, from Holden, Missouri)
Karl H. Timmerman M.A.J.D. © 2005
All Rights Reserved