New Story!

I know, I know, I'm a little behind schedule. The camping trip sorta put me out of whack, and this is either a day late or eight days late, depending upon whose counting. But, never fear. Here's the latest episode in the Journal Entries: Sterlings: Journal Entry 237 / 061119: The Strange, Perverted Zia Tau.

Polly's not such a nice girl after all, ne?

At least the agenda is clear

Are "designer babies" a bad thing for the human species? This is actually a pretty big question as it's one of the issues covered in the Caprice Starr stories. I'm pretty much in the lassez-faire camp myself, but I still want to read various opinions on things.

I believe that intellectual growth only happens by having two points of view on every topic. For every person in your RSS feed who believes one thing, having at least one person who can strenuously argue the contrary is valuable.

Dissent magazine bills itself as a counterpoint to mainstream thought, and they have an article today called Designer Babies and the Pro-Choice Movement. In one of the most stunningly obtuse paragraphs I've read yet, they propose that their article will discuss the following topic [emphasis mine]:

Like it or not, pro-choice groups, then, will be compelled to take a stand. They will have to distinguish their concept of reproductive rights from that advanced by neo-eugenicists and to decide whether and how to endorse regulation of reproductive technologies without jeopardizing already tenuous rights. But along with these challenges come opportunities. By incorporating concerns about the abuse of reproductive technologies into a pro-choice platform, the movement can shift away from an individual-liberties paradigm toward a social justice orientation; move away from a single-issue focus on abortion toward a more comprehensive agenda; and form coalitions with other segments of the left.

Submission to the collective: this is a definition of "freedom" with which I am not familiar.

I do hate to point out to the author that her bioconservative proposition is a losing one: some nations will offer these choices, the wealthy will be able to purchase these options, and their children, blessed by dint of cash with excessive longevity and vitality, will overrun the rest of us if we aren't free to exercise the same power.

♪ One of these things is not like the other ♪

From a press release celebrating a "newspaper for children's" seventh year of operation:

We believe that children should be free to be children. We also believe that parents, have the right and responsibility to teach their kids morals and values. Therefore The Current Events does not report on any news concerning sexuality, religion, and the theory of evolution.

Whole release here.

Don't these people ever watch Sesame Street?

Yes, I confess to a little rearrangement.