![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
silveradeptAnd it felt like it - luckily as the weather warms up, things feel a little fresher. I wandered around in shirtsleeves and jeans today, and it was good.
As an SI student, I am in complete awe of this - The Interstitial Library. I wonder, indeed, if there is any sort of repository where people may place their own cataloguing schema and collections as part of the Circulating Collection. I may have to inquire about it and see if I can't open up a branch or two out here in Ann Arbor. Although the U-Librarians might not be so pleased at people marking up their collection with references to another possible collection.
A lot of the youth (and others) in this world feel powerless. Perhaps it is because we are playing a game by another's rules. If this is so, then why not change the rules of the game?
And then there's a fee bits here and there - like the ongoing saga of evolution and ID in the school system. Beyond the obvious comment about the misuse of the phrase "scientific theory", I find it interesting that both sides are hashing things out (the textbook stickers that were ruled no-go committed the same mistake of terminology - so they should have been wrecked) in such a vicious manner. ID and evolution can be taught together - so long as it is made clear which theory holds which supporters. If ID is an unscientific hypothesis because of ceratin elements that are currently unverifiable, that part should be mentioned as the reason why it isn't being taught. Even then, a small diversion can be made to encompass the basic tenets of it, just so that kids are aware of the discussion going on.
The kids should always be able to raise potential points of discussion, instead of sitting there like sponges being lectured to. I like my university ed much better simply because of that part.
There was some rage today on the list because certain states passed bills (or something) that allow pharmacists to not fill prescriptions that they consider immoral. (This was a while ago according to the link given - January) My memory's a bit fuzzy, but I sem to recall making mention of something that would allow physicians, excepting in emergency cases, to exercise the same discrimination with their clientele. We are still Not Amused by such things. Is there not a part of the Hippocratic Oath that binds a doctor to help all in need, regardless of whom they are? Or am I reading into that? What I'm really worried about is that another ballot issue could appear in 2006, misnamed Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, that purports to end preferential treatment in the state. I'm not sure whether it's only by gov't or completely and utterly forbids preferences for everyone. Either way, it has the merit of supposedly putting all on equal footing again. Unfortunately, there are still examples (coughcoughDETROITcough) where ending preferences could cause considerably more harm than good.
However, this is in the state that cheerfully passed a "Defining marriage" resolution, and seems to be in no great outrage as it is shamelessly bent in directions that the populace was told would not be invoked. So, packaged like this, there's a good chance it will pass. Beyond that point, there will be one year left before a degree, if everything goes according to plan, and then I can seriously consider taknig a job in another state as an escape from the situation here. At the same time, fleeing the area could be the wrong idea - perahps it would be better to stay on and try to drill sense into teh populace. I'll figure that part out when I get there. For now, sleep.
As an SI student, I am in complete awe of this - The Interstitial Library. I wonder, indeed, if there is any sort of repository where people may place their own cataloguing schema and collections as part of the Circulating Collection. I may have to inquire about it and see if I can't open up a branch or two out here in Ann Arbor. Although the U-Librarians might not be so pleased at people marking up their collection with references to another possible collection.
A lot of the youth (and others) in this world feel powerless. Perhaps it is because we are playing a game by another's rules. If this is so, then why not change the rules of the game?
And then there's a fee bits here and there - like the ongoing saga of evolution and ID in the school system. Beyond the obvious comment about the misuse of the phrase "scientific theory", I find it interesting that both sides are hashing things out (the textbook stickers that were ruled no-go committed the same mistake of terminology - so they should have been wrecked) in such a vicious manner. ID and evolution can be taught together - so long as it is made clear which theory holds which supporters. If ID is an unscientific hypothesis because of ceratin elements that are currently unverifiable, that part should be mentioned as the reason why it isn't being taught. Even then, a small diversion can be made to encompass the basic tenets of it, just so that kids are aware of the discussion going on.
The kids should always be able to raise potential points of discussion, instead of sitting there like sponges being lectured to. I like my university ed much better simply because of that part.
There was some rage today on the list because certain states passed bills (or something) that allow pharmacists to not fill prescriptions that they consider immoral. (This was a while ago according to the link given - January) My memory's a bit fuzzy, but I sem to recall making mention of something that would allow physicians, excepting in emergency cases, to exercise the same discrimination with their clientele. We are still Not Amused by such things. Is there not a part of the Hippocratic Oath that binds a doctor to help all in need, regardless of whom they are? Or am I reading into that? What I'm really worried about is that another ballot issue could appear in 2006, misnamed Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, that purports to end preferential treatment in the state. I'm not sure whether it's only by gov't or completely and utterly forbids preferences for everyone. Either way, it has the merit of supposedly putting all on equal footing again. Unfortunately, there are still examples (coughcoughDETROITcough) where ending preferences could cause considerably more harm than good.
However, this is in the state that cheerfully passed a "Defining marriage" resolution, and seems to be in no great outrage as it is shamelessly bent in directions that the populace was told would not be invoked. So, packaged like this, there's a good chance it will pass. Beyond that point, there will be one year left before a degree, if everything goes according to plan, and then I can seriously consider taknig a job in another state as an escape from the situation here. At the same time, fleeing the area could be the wrong idea - perahps it would be better to stay on and try to drill sense into teh populace. I'll figure that part out when I get there. For now, sleep.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-03-31 09:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-31 11:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-31 11:45 am (UTC)