U.N. must stand up for rights of Iranians - CNN.com
EXACTLY RIGHT
2 days ago
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Is abortion your moral bottom line on health reform? - Faith & Reason
Is abortion your moral bottom line on health reform? - Faith & Reason
The conflict over the Catholic church's influence in U.S. health care reform is intense: Will the church's efforts to shut off all access to insurance coverage for abortion, even if people want to pay for it themselves, trump its strong desire to offer more care and better care for the poor and working Americans?
By Carlos Osorio, AP
The conflict over the Catholic church's influence in U.S. health care reform is intense: Will the church's efforts to shut off all access to insurance coverage for abortion, even if people want to pay for it themselves, trump its strong desire to offer more care and better care for the poor and working Americans?
The abortion issue puts it all on the table for Catholic health programs, the leading non-governmental care providers in the USA. Running the table is Richard Doerflinger, lobbyist for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
NPR's Laura Parker's profile of him says,
He and John Carr, who also works for the bishops... helped craft the final wording of the anti-abortion amendment offered by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., that cleared the way for House passage of the health care bill by five votes.
"He's a real smart guy," says Stupak, referring to Doerflinger. "Pretty detailed guy who does his homework ."
Now Stupak is back with an effort to cut off access to individuals to purchase insurance for abortion services, even if they pay for it themselves.
The Christian Science Monitor, looking at the abortion issue, points out:
In sum, when it comes to coverage for abortions, in the House version you'd need two different policies. In the Senate version you'd just need to write two checks and anti-abortion House members think that's getting awfully close to federal funding for the procedure. (Monitor report: House Democrats scramble to find a majority to vote for the Senate's healthcare bill.)
The Senate bill language "basically says that your federal tax subsidies can be used to pay for abortion coverage," said Rep. Stupak in a March 4 interview on National Public Radio (NPR).
Laura Parker goes on to say,...
...critics say it would be a colossal mistake to kill universal health care for an incremental victory on abortion. "The difference between the two bills is pretty thin," says Michael Sean Winters, a liberal Catholic author. "Doerflinger is so dug in, he's missing the point on the Senate bill, which is also pro-life."
Not to Doerflinger. His bottom line, he tells Parker:
If the bill attacks life itself, in our view, it's not health care reform.
Other people have different "bottom lines." What's yours? Do you see a provision in the proposals that you think is essential to see passed or defeated because of your faith or ethical point of view?
'Is God dying?' Questions on morality, evolution and the mind - Faith & Reason
'Is God dying?' Questions on morality, evolution and the mind - Faith & Reason
Are we evolving away from belief in God? Why did thousands of intelligent people let themselves be deceived by investment fraud king Bernie Madoff? Is morality really in decline in the West and can it be reconstructed?
It all starts with questions. Fraser Watts, a professor of theology and science, and Director of Studies, Queens' College set the program off with a wave of his own: What can science tell us about the origin and workings of morality? How did moral capacity arise? Is it all evolutionary? What's the role of neuroscience? What goes on in the brain when we're making moral judgments? Can we use this knowledge to reconstruct morality?Even so, just knowing something has an evolutionary origin "tells you nothing about whether it is valid or useful," Reiss says.
Science Magazine
Are we evolving away from belief in God? Why did thousands of intelligent people let themselves be deceived by investment fraud king Bernie Madoff? Is morality really in decline in the West and can it be reconstructed?
Such questions are in the air at a seminar on science, morality and the mind at Cambridge University, this weekend sponsored by the Templeton Foundation. I've participated in the Templeton-Cambridge Fellowships in Science & Religion since 2005. And for the next few days, I'd like to bring you along for a taste of the lectures and discussions.
By Dr Jose Liht, NONE
Michael Reiss, Professor of Science at the Institute of Education University of London, a specialist in evolutionary biology (and an ordained Anglican priest) walked us through the history of theories on altruism as an evolutionary phenomenon (like vampire bats who support each other by offering up blood if a mate didn't succeed in his own hunting) and the advantages of being good at deception (think Bernie Madoff).
By Martin Redfern
So understanding how the mind can evolve to do mathematics is separate from deciding if a particular theorem is good. Translated to evolution, biology and society, it means it might have been safer in some times and societies if you thought there were gods. "But that doesn't answer the question of whether there actually are Gods."
"Is God actually dying?" mused Barbara Bradley Hagerty of National Public Radio.
"I'm not a prophet," quipped Reiss. "I have absolutely no idea." Still, he observed, human conceptions of the divine are very different today than in the past, different often than their own parents, and that it would not be surprising if they continued to change.
Whose idea of God is the definitive one, the one that can be said to be living, dying or changing?Where do you think God came from and if our idea of God vanishes, does God?
Obama's education law overhaul to focus on college
Honoluluadvertiser - Obama's education law overhaul to focus on college
Obama's education law overhaul to focus on college
| Posted 3/13/2010 1:22 PM ET | E-mail | Save | Print |
| ||||||||||
By Dorie Turner, Associated Press Writer
ATLANTA — The Obama administration unveiled its plan Saturday to radically change his predecessor's No Child Left Behind law in hopes of replacing an accountability system that in the last decade has tagged more than a third of schools as failing and created a hodgepodge of sometimes weak academic standards among states.
The changes would dismantle the 2002 law championed by President George W. Bush, moving away from punishing schools that don't meet benchmarks and instead focusing on rewarding schools for progress, particularly with poor and minority students. The blueprint calls for states to adopt standards that ensure students are ready for college or a career rather than grade-level proficiency -- the focus of the current law.
"Unless we take action -- unless we step up -- there are countless children who will never realize their full talent and potential," Obama said during a video address on Saturday. "I don't accept that future for them. And I don't accept that future for the United States of America."
The blueprint also would allow states to use subjects other than reading and mathematics as part of their measurements for meeting federal goals, pleasing many education groups that have said No Child Left Behind encouraged teachers not to focus on history, art, science, social studies and other important subjects.
And, for the first time in the law's 45-year history, the White House is proposing a $4 billion increase in federal education spending, most of which would go to increase the competition among states for grant money and move away from formula-based funding.
The blueprint goes before the House Education and Labor Committee on Wednesday as Obama pushes Congress to reauthorize the education law this year, a time-consuming task that some observers say will be difficult. Committee Chairman George Miller, a Democrat from California, praised Obama's plan.
"This blueprint lays the right markers to help us reset the bar for our students and the nation," Miller said in a prepared statement.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan briefed a handful of governors, lawmakers and education groups on the plan Friday, including Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, a Republican.
"The governor is very supportive of the direction the secretary is going," said Perdue's spokesman Chris Schrimpf.
A few other highlights from the blueprint:
_ By 2020, all students graduating from high school would need to be ready for college or a career. That's a shift away from the current law, which calls for all students to be performing at grade level in reading and math by 2014.
_ Give more rewards -- money and flexibility -- to high-poverty schools that are seeing big gains in student achievement and use them as a model for other schools in low-income neighborhoods that struggle with performance.
_ Punish the lowest-performing 5 percent of schools using aggressive measures, such as having the state take over federal funding for poor students, replacing the principal and half the teaching staff or closing the school altogether.
_ Duncan has said the name No Child Left Behind will be dropped because it is associated with a harsh law that punishes schools for not reaching benchmarks even if they've made big gains. He said the administration will work with Congress to come up with a new name.
Amy Wilkins, a vice president with The Education Trust in Washington, D.C., called the blueprint a "culture shift."
"One of the things America has not been clear about is what k-12 is supposed to do," Wilkins said. "In this, we're saying K-12 is supposed to prepare kids for college and meaningful careers."
The nation's first federal education law -- Elementary and Secondary Education Act -- was passed in 1965 as part of Lyndon B. Johnson's war on poverty. The law has been reauthorized several times since, most recently in 2001 under President George W. Bush.
It was criticized by educators for focusing too much on testing and not enough on learning. Daniel Domenech, executive director of the American Association of School Administrators, said he is glad to see No Child Left Behind go away.
"We're delighted over that," he said. "We have not been a fan of No Child Left Behind."
___
Associated Press Writer Christine Armario in Miami contributed to this report.
DON’T FENCE ME IN
DON’T FENCE ME IN
A Post from Andy Parx blog about the dispute at Larsons beach.
WHen I read it, I was wondering just exactly Bruce was talking about when he said he would have 50 Hawaiians down there, and that he was reclaiming the land for the Hawaiians. In that case, me and my kids, both Hawaiians, will be down there real soon to go get a peice of land then. I was unaware thats what was going on down there. Awesome! Now we can get out of Public Housing, and have a nice little house, and a peice of land, and I can grow plants, and fruits, and veggies, and flowers to make leis. I hope thats true! So you beleive its true? If it is, hey Bruce....call me. Dying to get a peice of that land.
A Post from Andy Parx blog about the dispute at Larsons beach.
WHen I read it, I was wondering just exactly Bruce was talking about when he said he would have 50 Hawaiians down there, and that he was reclaiming the land for the Hawaiians. In that case, me and my kids, both Hawaiians, will be down there real soon to go get a peice of land then. I was unaware thats what was going on down there. Awesome! Now we can get out of Public Housing, and have a nice little house, and a peice of land, and I can grow plants, and fruits, and veggies, and flowers to make leis. I hope thats true! So you beleive its true? If it is, hey Bruce....call me. Dying to get a peice of that land.
Honoluluadvertiser - US avoids anti-abortion debate at UN meeting
Honoluluadvertiser - US avoids anti-abortion debate at UN meeting
US avoids anti-abortion debate at UN meeting
US avoids anti-abortion debate at UN meeting
| Posted 3/13/2010 12:58 PM ET | E-mail | Save | Print |
| ||||||||||
By Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS — A U.N. meeting to assess progress in advancing the fight for women's equality that ended Friday had a dramatically different slant than a similar session held five years ago: This time, the United States was not trying to make an anti-abortion declaration a crucial theme.
Much of the 2005 meeting to take stock of what countries had done to implement the landmark platform of action adopted at the 1995 U.N. women's conference in Beijing was consumed by the Bush administration's demand that the final declaration make clear that women are not guaranteed a right to abortion.
By contrast, abortion was a non-issue during the two-week session that concluded Friday with a rousing speech by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who had electrified the 1995 Beijing conference when she was first lady.
Her focus was on galvanizing fresh momentum to promote equal opportunities for women in business and education, to end discrimination under law and in practical reality, and to stop the "global pandemic" of violent attacks on women. She made a single reference to the U.S. increasing support for family planning as part of its Global Health Initiative, which also aims to reduce maternal and child deaths and HIV infections.
At the 2005 review conference, the Bush administration fought to insert language against abortion in the final declaration. But the U.S. faced strong international opposition and near the end of that meeting it backed down and dropped the demand.
In sharp contrast, the final declaration for the 2010 review was adopted with little fanfare during last week's ministerial session. It reaffirmed the Beijing platform, welcomed progress toward implementing it, and pledged more action to overcome the "challenges and obstacles" to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of women.
Charlotte Bunch, the founding director of Rutgers University's Center for Women's Global Leadership who attended Beijing and both follow-up meetings, said the biggest difference "is the change in the U.S. government."
The Bush administration questioned the reaffirmation of the Beijing platform because of reproductive rights and the abortion issue, which were "hot issues," she said. But the Obama administration strongly backs the platform, as Clinton stressed Friday.
The Beijing platform calls for governments to end discrimination against women and close the gender gap in critical areas including health, education, employment, political participation and human rights.
At the 1994 U.N. population conference in Cairo, delegates approved a platform recognizing that abortion is a fact that governments must deal with as a public health issue. At Beijing the following year, delegates reaffirmed this and went further, asking governments to review laws that punish women for having abortions.
But attempts to approve stronger language on access to abortions failed at Beijing, and references to sexual rights and sexual orientation were dropped. Nonetheless, the Beijing platform stated for the first time that women have the right to "decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality ... free of coercion, discrimination and violence."
Adrienne Germain, president of the International Women's Health Coalition who also attended all three meetings, welcomed the "robust references" to the Cairo and Beijing conferences in resolutions adopted Friday by the Commission on the Status of Women.
She cited important measures on ending female circumcision, combating HIV and AIDS especially in women, and reducing maternal mortality, which has remained high and virtually unchanged since 1995.
Germain praised President Barack Obama and Clinton for understanding that it is impossible to improve women's health without a broader commitment to human rights and equality.
Bunch, now a senior scholar at the Rutgers center, welcomed the commission's adoption of another resolution Friday, introduced by Egypt, endorsing the creation of a single U.N. body to promote the advancement of women, to be headed by an undersecretary-general.
While reproduction health wasn't an issue at this conference, Patricia Licuanan, a former head of the Commission on the Status of Women who chaired the committee responsible for drafting the Beijing platform, said "I don't think it's less of an issue ... because ... the church, religious fundamentalism, is on the upsurge."
"I think it's still very much around," said Licuanan, who is president of Miriam College in Manila, in the Philippines. "That's part of the fear of any type of movement to open up discussions on Beijing. I really would fear that possibly (the platform) might (go) backward."
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Hawaii Gov. Lingle speaks against new taxes, 1st Ld-Writethru, HI
Hawaii Gov. Lingle speaks against new taxes, 1st Ld-Writethru, HI
HAHAHAHAHAHA. The only person making life a living hell for the people of Kauai is THE GOVERNOR
HAHAHAHAHAHA. The only person making life a living hell for the people of Kauai is THE GOVERNOR
Kaua‘i school funds to be used for O‘ahu special election
Kaua‘i school funds to be used for O‘ahu special election
wow what a slimey thing to do linkges boy dukie baby is running against neil for governor. he left early to concentrate on the campaign. so there needs to be a special election, there is supposed to be money in the election fund to cover this, or in the rainy say fund. but lingle siphoned off this money a long time ago so what does she do now? change the accounting ruiles so that any fund can be raided now, so she raids public school funding OF COURSE...from where? THE OUTER ISLANDS her private little trough that the dictator can siphon off any time she chooses. whats more she knows a lot of support from neil comes from the outer islands. so to enrage the citizenry against neil whom she sees as the biggest threat to the dukie she, the heartless queen of no heart she raids already strapped schoiol funding from all of the outer islands to pay for it knowing full well that some people will not know the truth. But most will. We arent stupid lingle. I know you see the unwashed masses as not good enough to exist and to be used at your beck and call whenever you want but not this time. Its time to impeach you. period. Lets the games begin Neil will get a ton more votes now because poeple will know the truth. We are gonna make sure they know.
wow what a slimey thing to do linkges boy dukie baby is running against neil for governor. he left early to concentrate on the campaign. so there needs to be a special election, there is supposed to be money in the election fund to cover this, or in the rainy say fund. but lingle siphoned off this money a long time ago so what does she do now? change the accounting ruiles so that any fund can be raided now, so she raids public school funding OF COURSE...from where? THE OUTER ISLANDS her private little trough that the dictator can siphon off any time she chooses. whats more she knows a lot of support from neil comes from the outer islands. so to enrage the citizenry against neil whom she sees as the biggest threat to the dukie she, the heartless queen of no heart she raids already strapped schoiol funding from all of the outer islands to pay for it knowing full well that some people will not know the truth. But most will. We arent stupid lingle. I know you see the unwashed masses as not good enough to exist and to be used at your beck and call whenever you want but not this time. Its time to impeach you. period. Lets the games begin Neil will get a ton more votes now because poeple will know the truth. We are gonna make sure they know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
