March 2005 Archives

Okay. For those of you that think I'm a left-wing nut, here's one to chew on.

The Colorado Supreme Court overturned a death sentence on Monday and replaced it with a sentence of life without parole. Why is that? Because five of the jurors had consulted the Bible during closed-door deliberations.

The CNN.com article states in part :

Defense attorney Kathleen Lord, arguing before the state Supreme Court last month, said the jurors had gone outside the law. "They went to the Bible to find out God's position on capital punishment," she said.

I would agree that any decision by a jury that was gained by threatening, harassing, or putting pressure on other jurors to vote a certain way should be thrown out.

I do not agree that just because someone relies on their faith in determining whether to sentence someone to death or not. that their decision should be thrown out.

Religion plays a part in most everyone's decisions. At one end of the spectrum are people who are totally guided from moment to moment by their religious beliefs. At the other end of the spectrum are the people who are not at all guided by a belief in a religion for themselves. Most everyone falls between those extremes.

Deciding whether or not to have someone put to death is a difficult and very serious decision to make. In a time like that, one would hope that each juror would delve deep within themselves to determine what they believe should be the punishment for whatever crimes that were committed. I don't think that any juror should take such a decision lightly.

Since a juror must weigh many facts and actions during their internal deliberations, there often are times when jurors will need to seek religious texts to clarify what their religion says is acceptable to their God. Once they have found this out, they can choose to follow the text or not, based on their personal views. Also, anyone who has read the Bible will know that it doesn't always have a clear-cut answer for every situation that may come up in court. So, again, a juror would have to rely on their own judgement to determine the course of action and the weight to give to various facts in the case.

In this case, the Colorado Supreme Court was presented with the fact that "five jurors had looked up such Bible verses as "eye for eye, tooth for tooth," copied them and discussed them while deliberating behind closed doors." I believe that whether they copied the Bible verse, brought the entire Bible in, or just quoted memorized verses is irrelevant. Regardless of the method of presentation, the verse came from the Bible and was undoubtedly presented as such.

I don't believe that jurors could be told to leave their religion at the courthouse door and still be able to decide between what is right and what is wrong. Those decisions are based on your personal belief system. If it wasn't, there wouldn't be a need for a jury of your peers.

To sum it all up, then; I believe that jurors should be allowed to consult any text, either religous or secular, while trying to decide the fate of a convicted criminal.

Roy Schiff is finding it more difficult to find room on his walls these days.

"I treasure every one of them," Roy said as he described how he won each of them. "This one," He said, holding up a golden medallion held by a red, white, and blue striped ribbon, "I won by having the average score for diving in college finals. Coach said it was remarkable for someone with an average score up to that point make it into finals. And then to walk away with this baby. It was sweet."

Now Schiff needs to find more room on his mantle for the gold Average Cup that he won for having the average time of 2 hours, 3 minutes, and 46.3 seconds for the Larry Bud Mellman Memorial St. Patricks Day Marathon in St. Ives, Ohio.

Schiff holds averages in six different individual sports:

• Diving
  
• Marathons
  
• Model Rocketry
  
• Skydiving
  
• Surfboarding
  
• Competitive Staring
  

He also holds averages in three different team sports:

• Hockey
  
• Synchronized Swimming
  
• Tag-Team Hopscotch
  

Schiff looks forward to this spring, when he'll begin training for another, less well-known, sport. Competitive streaking.

"There are several averages that I want to break," Schiff said. "I hope that with some training I'll be able to average them."

Schiff doesn't have any illusions of averageness, though. He realizes that it might take him several years of light training to average those records.

-- Staff reporter -- bs

Let me preface this by saying that I voted for George Bush and other Republicans during the last election. While I've said many times that I agree with some of what GB says and disagree with some of what he says, I'm beginning to find myself disagreeing with his decisions more and more. As I sit here and think about what he and the Republican Congress have done over the last week alone, my stomach is literally upset. I don't get that way easily.

While I understand that the conservative right "values life", I am seeing more and more that it's a very selective system. And, more and more, I'm seeing that it is a very political value.

I have always nodded in agreement when Republicans have stood at podiums and said that the government should be small and should not impose the government's views on individuals. They have said time and time again that the movement in the U.S. to make homosexuality more tolerated and/or accepted must be stopped. They say that they (the Republicans) refuse to have "that lifestyle" shoved down their throats. However, they are guilty of the very same thing. Here they are shoving a life-beyond-all-reason stance down Michael's, Terri's, and every other U.S. citizen's throat whether we like it or not. Just as they don't want Ted Kennedy running their personal lives, I don't want Bill Frist (or Ted) running mine.

It has come to my attention that, while Governor of Texas, George W. Bush signed into law the "Texas Futile Care Law". This law gives hospitals, nursing homes, and other health care facilities the authority to turn off life support to anyone who was braindead or in a persistent vegetative state and, in the health care facility's judgement, would not get better with treatement and the family could not pay for treatment, regardless of the family's wishes!! You can't pay? We flip the switch. Bye bye grandma, baby, sis, mom, dad, whoever.

This authority was exercised last Thursday on 6 month old Sun Hudson. He died after a Texas hospital removed his feeding tube, despite his mother's pleas. He had a fatal congenital disease, but would have been kept alive had his mother been able to pay for his medical costs.

What's different in Terri's case? Number one, she's in Florida, where, as far as I know, Jeb hasn't signed a similar bill -- probably due to the huge percentage of aging retirees that die and grant Florida a sizeable chunk of estate taxes. They wouldn't want to delay anyone's death and risk having medical bills eat up that tax base. Number two, her husband won a malpractice lawsuit soon after her brain damage and that money is paying for her treatment.

Of course, Congress is feverishly working to limit such lawsuits so that in the future families of people like Terri won't have that benefit. They'll have to pay for that treatment out of their own pocket. So what if the bills pile too high? File bankruptcy? Nope, Congress is also working feverishly to keep that from happening too.

What would you do in the situation where your spouse is terminally ill or a vegetable? It's looking more and more like Republicans in Congress want you to keep your spouse alive, no matter what, until your money runs out. Then, you won't have a choice. The medical facility will turn off their support, whether you want it or not, and send you packing. Then you'll have plenty of time to get three or four jobs to try to pay off those hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills that you racked up. Maybe you'll get it all paid off by the time you are shoveled into the grave next to your spouse. Probably not.

So, what the Republicans in Congress are doing is to suck every penny they can out of working-class people so that medical providers and big businesses can rake in the dough. Once they've raked it all in, Republicans want to make sure it stays there, by limiting lawsuits and making bankruptcy nearly impossible to pull off.

What are they creating? A class of indentured servants. Because of your circumstances, you may be forced to work all of your life to pay off a debt that you may or may not be responsible for. Even one that you were born into.

There are at least two sides to the Terri Schiavo case: 1) She should be given every opportunity to recover, including living out a life-span of 30-40 more years connected to medical devices; and 2) Every effort has been reasonably exhausted to give her the chance for any recovery and it's time to let her go.

I fall onto the side of #2. There are several reasons (moral, legal, and humane) why I'm on the side of letting her go.

Morally, I find it objectionable to allow someone to lay in a bed for fifteen years as a vegetable and decide that it would be better for her/him to lay in that bed for another forty years. There comes a time as reasoning human beings that we decide that enough is enough. In Terri's case, Michael gave her eight years (1990 - 1998) to show any sign of recovery. She showed no sign of recovery. After eight years of seeing your spouse lying in a bed with no change, wouldn't you also decide that it was time to let him/her go? I would. I hope my wife would before that long had passed.

So, Michael filed all of the necessary paperwork and consulted doctors to make sure he was making the right decision. He decided it was and proceeded. Terri's parents, however, decided that it wasn't the right decision and began filing claims to stop him. While I understand that parents don't want to see their child die, they must realize that there is a time that even they must let go.

Legally, states have traditionally given a husband or wife the final say in medical treatment of their spouse. This is for very good reason. Who should know a person's wishes better than their spouse? Parents can claim to know better, but the law conveys those rights to a spouse as part of the legally binding agreement of marriage -- an institution that, evidently, the Republicans in Congress no longer hold sacred. What happened in the past couple of weeks to turn them 180 degrees? Politics.

In addition, Terri didn't secretly tell Michael that she didn't want to be kept alive on tubes. She told her best friend, her brother-in-law, and an uncle that she didn't want to be kept alive artificially.

If there had been abuse, I could understand the Schindler's argument that Terri's and Michael's marriage should be disolved and the right to determine her medical treatment be conveyed to them. However, an investigation concluded that there was no abuse on the part of Michael. To the contrary, I applaud Michael's resolve to pursue her treatment for eight years before deciding that it was time to let her go.

With Congressional "leaders" spouting off how we should protect the sanctity of marriage, in the case of Terri and Michael Schiavo they are saying, "Her husband doesn't know best. We, the Congress in Washington D.C., know what's best for his wife." While they spout that a husband should love their wife and vice versa, they are saying that it doesn't matter unless they agree. Basically, they are saying "To Hell with their marriage, it's worthless."

So where does it stop? Florida state law says that Michael should decide, as her husband, what is best for her. The Congress disagrees with his decisions and the decisions of many courts and doctors over the past seven years.

Many say, "If she had only had a living will, none of this would have happened." Is that true? I wonder.

How would having a living will make the situation any different? Her parents would argue that she didn't mean it, or that Michael had forced her to write it, or that she didn't understand it, or that what she wrote didn't specifically apply to what was happening to her. Could we cover all of the possible things that can happen to us? Probably not. Why not, then, just say that we give legal authority to our spouse to decide based on the circumstances? Sounds reasonable, right? Wrong. That's what the law says in regards to those in Terri's position without a written document specifying what happens. It gives the spouse, Michael Schiavo in this case, the right to decide what is best for their spouse, Terri Schiavo in this case.

So, even if you write a living will, this precedent, if it stands, will allow congress the authority to override any living will you may write to prohibit your death in the case you are a vegetable, severely disabled, or even terminally ill. Regardless of your wishes. Furthermore, if this precedent stands, they would have the legal authority to override ALL STATE LAWS regarding medical treatment. From prenatal care to end of life care, we would be subject to the rules and regulations of Congress.

I believe that this move by Congress is a move toward creating a legal Federal precedent to give the Federal government the right to outlaw physician assisted suicide and euthenasia. If this stands, it will be a short step to give the Federal government the ability to move all cases where individuals (either themselves or via their medial guardian) decide that they should end their life.

In the case of Terri Schiavo, I think it is inhumane to allow someone to live year after year, with no hope of recovery, in a state such as Terri's, so that the parents and sister can feel good about themselves. That is totally selfish, doesn't do Terri any medical good, would probably disgust her, and is disrespectful toward Michael.

Bottom line, I agree with seven years' worth of court rulings. It's time to let Terri rest in peace. May God have mercy on the Schindler's souls for putting her through this against her wishes.

-- Mark --

Like in the marijuana post, I didn't plan to jump right into a subject that might scare people away. However, I keep coming back to this subject as I try to think of things to write. So, I decided to get it off of my chest (partly).

Most of my friends know that I'm a nudist. None of my co-workers do. That's by plan. I just have to keep the two groups apart now...

First, for all of you whose only knowledge of nudism comes from Playboy or Hustler articles (or the like), or from your college buddies who once went to a nudist "colony", I'll tell you what true nudism is not.

• It's not about sex.
• It's not about sex. (just wanted to make sure you saw that one)
• It's not about showing off your body -- anyone who knows me understands that
• It's not about seeing naked people -- anyone who has been to a nude beach or nudist resort knows that the perfect 10's don't usually come out... or the perfect 9's or 8's either.
• It's not about showing off or comparing anatomy
• It's not about finding a loose woman to hit on or get it on with

When I tell someone new about nudism, they always have certain questions that they ask. Some of them are:

Question : Are there old or young people there?
Answer : There are all ages there, from a few weeks old to men and women in their 90's and beyond.

Question : Do people have sex at nudist resorts?
Answer : Sure. But like textile (clothed) resorts, they do it in their hotel room or in their cabin. Open sex (or even too much touching of any kind) will get you thrown out of the resort and probably banned from all nudist resorts. It's pretty rare to even see two people holding hands for fear of displaying enough affection to warrant management intervention.

Question : How do you walk around nude around a bunch of strangers?
Answer : It does take some getting used to. We live in a society that says that nudity=sex=naughty. We are taught to be ashamed of ourselves at a very young age. Once you can get over a little of that, it gets a lot easier. Once you get over the shame aspect of nudity, you find that you feel more free and open than you have ever felt before.

Question : Are there any Christian nudists? Is that a contradiction?
Answer : Absolutely there are Christian nudists. There are nudists from all religions. If there is interest, I'll write another article why it is acceptable for Christians to be nudists. For those interested, start by reading about Isaiah.

Have I covered the major points?

For me, nudism is about comfort and freedom. There's nothing like laying next to a pool in the Sun as the heat of a summer day is building. Feeling the breeze blow over your bare skin combined with the heat from the Sun is just incredible. Then, getting into the pool to cool off and swimming around without a heavy pair of trunks dragging around me is exhilarating.

There is certainly a camaraderie between nudists. We know what it's like to go home and have to keep our nudism to ourselves. To shut ourselves behind doors and curtains because society believes that we are either perverts or are just lunatics.

When we gather at nudist resorts or beaches, there is a common bond between us that helps us to relax, begin new conversations, and make new friends. Nudists are very open and will start a conversation with little provocation. I like to lay back and listen to conversations mostly. However, I like to join in when I feel I have something of interest to contribute too. In most settings I'd doubt myself and would rarely interject. However, at a nudist venue I feel more outgoing and accepted.

Acceptance is a major part of what nudism is about. Nudists, for the most part, strive to accept everyone -- no matter age, size, race, sex, handicap, or scarring of life. I have seen women with mastectomies, men and women with amputated legs and arms, men and women with cerebral palsy, and many other disorders, conditions, or hardships. Everyone is accepted.

Keep in mind, though, that although we accept others and ourselves as we are, many of us still look in the mirror and find things that we want/need to change about ourselves. I am currently working to lose some weight. It's not that I care what anyone (other than my wife, of course) thinks about my body, but it's about trying to get down to a healthy weight for myself.

I must note, however, that nudists are people too. There are always people that are prejudiced, judgemental, rude, and just outright mean. Some of them happen to be nudists. However, the vast majority of dedicated nudists are open-minded, friendly, and accepting.

Do I think nudism is for everyone? Not at all. Neither is horseback riding, model airplane flying, astronomy, or any other hobby/lifestyle. Do I think that there are people that want to be involved but are too afraid, ashamed, or nervous about giving it a try? Sure.

A poll of adults by Roper in March 2003 showed that 19% of respondants said that they had skinny-dipped in mixed company. 18% said that they would consider visiting a clothing-optional beach or resort. I would hope that the numbers have grown even more in the last couple of years.

In recent years, nudist vacation businesses have reported tremendous growth. It is the fastest growing sector of the travel industry. The numbers also were outstanding during the major travel slump after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. I guess it just goes to show that nudists are dedicated and have money to burn... On second thought, some of us are just dedicated.

If you want to be involved in (or just read) on-going discussions on nudism, try checking out a nudist bulletin board. For instance, The Clothesfree.com website has a large and very active bulletin board. You should also check out the site of the American Association For Nude Recreation (AANR). They have a lot of practical information about what nudism is and is not, what the role of the AANR is, and how to get involved in nudism if you think it's right for you.

If there are particular questions that you have about nudism, feel free to post them and I'll try to answer them in future posts. Keep in mind the Terms Of Conduct For Posting if you decide to write.

--Mark

Parents struggling to control their hyperactive ADHD kids have a new weapon in their arsenol - NK-U-0T. Temporarily called "Wonder-Z" by its manufacturer, Dippy Drugs, Wonder-Z is expected to sell like hotcakes when it hits the pharmacy shelves this fall.

"We expect to ship a massive number of pills," Rob Thompson, CEO of Dippy Drugs said. "We plan to have Wonder-Z to all of the major pharmacy chains by the time school begins in the fall."

That should be a relief to parents as well as to teachers, who often complain that there aren't enough options when it comes to dealing with ADHD kids.

"They just bounce off of the walls," Judy Hankins, a teacher at Rosewood Middle School in Portland, Maine said. "They take their pills but it just doesn't seem to help sometimes. They need something stronger."

Mrs Hankins describes some of the most unruly behavior of one of her ADHD students. "He'll just be sitting there listening to me teach and then, BOOM, his hand goes in the air and he asks a question."

Mrs Hankins describes another time when the kids in her class were working on a project. "He always wanted to be involved. He would ask questions, do the work, and even redo some of it if he didn't think it was right. I thought he was just going to drop dead of exhaustion. He really scared me sometimes."

With diagnoses of ADHD on the rise, officials at the Centers For Disease Control are preparing to issue an ADHD epidemic warning.

"It's just spreading by leaps and bounds," Dr. Roy Tims, and epidemiologist at the center said. "Every time we think we have it cornered, it mutates." Tims and his collegues are planning to distribute a pamphlet with warning signs of ADHD infection to hospitals and clinics over the next few months. Some of the warning signs included are :

• Wakefulness during the daytime
  
• Inability to ignore teachers or parents during discussions
  
• Inability to disinterest themselves in schoolwork
  
• Reading
  
• Asking questions
  
• An excited but restful look during the day
  
• Normal bowel movements
  
• Desire for physical activity
  

Dr Tims recommends taking your child to see your family doctor if he or she exhibits two or more of these symptoms.

The new drug, Wonder-Z is in the same class of drugs as Valium. One capsule, they say, will put the unruly child straight to sleep. No more hyperactivity. You will need to make sure that the snoring doesn't disturb other children, though, which could be solved with another drug, tentatively called I-Kilz-U, which is due out early next year pending FDA approval.

--staff reporter--bs

Ramallah, West Bank - Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia gets a lot of mail these days. But while he was sorting through his mail last Wednesday one envelope caught his eye. "I just couldn't believe it," Qureia said. "There it was, right in my mailbox. I kept looking to it so to verify that it was for me."

It was Ahmed's lucky day. The front of the envelope declared that he may already be a winner. As the Prime Minister ripped into the envelope, thoughts of what the Palestinian Authority could do with $10 million (U.S.) raced through his mind.

Qureia and his staff rushed to fill out the paperwork and one staff member braved Israeli gunships to get the letter to the post office. The mail between the U.S. and the West Bank is slow, so Saeb made the extra effort. "I just dodged and ran," Saeb Shaath said. "I knew how important it is to Mr. Qureia. I wanted it to get back in time."

Prime Minister Qureia will have to hold his breath until March 17th to find out if he's won. If he has, the Prize Patrol will show up at his door with balloons and confetti to present him with Publisher's Clearinghouse's trademark oversized check made out to Mr. Qureia. The Prime Minister can pick up his real check from the Publisher's Clearing house corporate offices in the United States.

Congratulations Prime Minister!

staff reporter - BS

Kennet, Missouri -- In a shocking conclusion to 12-year-old Jason Williams' attempted murder trial, the jury has delivered another shocking verdict - death by electrocution.

On November 20th, 2004, the same jury returned a guilty verdict in nine of the eleven counts against Jason Williams, which ranged from "conspiracy to commit murder" to "attempted murder in the first degree with special aggravated circumstances" - the latter allowing capitol punishment to be considered. Parents and politicians were outraged and filed complaints with the court.

"Justice has been done," Judge Thomas Nelson said at the time. "Hopefully he'll get the chair."

The case began in May 2004, when Jason fired off a series of rubberbands at his 7th grade history teacher.

"I was terrified," Mrs Alexander said. "He could have killed me. I didn't know what was going on," She recounted. "One minute I was teaching the class, the next minute projectiles were whizzing by my head. I dropped to the floor to keep from being shot."

When Mrs Alexander had dropped to the floor, she dropped onto the supplies that she was carrying to create a map of the world. One of those items was a compass and another was a wooden ruler.

The compass entered her chest point first and punctured her left lung, while the ruler entered between two ribs and punctured her liver. As she rolled off of the equipment, the ruler broke off, leaving more than eight inches embedded in her liver.

She was rushed to Kennet Memorial Hospital, where surgeons worked feverishly to stop the bleeding and seal her ruptured lung.

"It was touch and go," Dr Bill Pike said. "It was more go than touch, actually. We thought we had lost her several times, but she pulled through."

Mrs Alexander spent six weeks undergoing liver treatments and cosmetic surgery to heal the wounds, followed by two months of physical therapy.

Based on accounts by other students, who testified that Jason had planned to shoot Mrs Alexander while she passed his desk, the jury concluded that his intention was to catch her unawares in the hope of doing considerable harm. At this time it is difficult to speculate how the jury made the leap to attempted murder.

The jury's recommendation, which was accepted by Judge Nelson, was for death by electrocution.

Jason's sentence was scheduled to be carried out on May 29th unless an appeal is filed.

-staff reporter-bs

Nakuru, Kenya -- Scientists studying cave paintings in Kenya have announced that they have translated some of the oldest cave paintings ever found there.

"We believe that we have deciphered what most of them mean," Dr David Drummlin said on Thursday. "There are quite a few that we're still working on, but I think we've figured out the gist of what they were painting about."

Drummlin explained that all of the paintings in the cave are between 8,000 and 10,000 years old, making them some of the oldest ever discovered. That they are in one of the dryest caves in the world has helped to preserve them over the millenia.

The paintings near the mouth of the cave are the oldest, dating around 10,000 years ago. The paintings get younger as they move deeper into the cave, the youngest dated at about 8,000 years old. The age difference between each set of paintings gets shorter, indicating that as time went on, the painting activity increased.

"We speculate that there may be as little as a few years' difference between some of the newest sets," Drummlin said. "There was almost a frenzy of paintings at the end. Then, all of a sudden, they stop. Poof."

It is speculated that some major event happened in the area that either killed the painters or drove them to another region.

"The interesting part is what the paintings are about," Drummlin said as he gave reporters a tour. "It seems that they were concerned about some of the same global issues that we are concerned with today. The main one, it seems, is global warming."

Drummlin explains that the deciphered paintings are warnings to other cavemen that excessively large fires were contributing to greenhouse gases. The prehistoric scientists had predicted a major catastrophe like the one that had wiped out the dinosaurs. Little did they know, however, that the dinosaurs were actually wiped out after a meteor struck the Earth about 65 million years ago.

The cavemen had noticed that the grasslands that they had hunted over centuries had been steadily getting more sparse. The scientists among them blamed lack of sunlight and increases in temperatures for the changes.

"What causes things to heat up?" Drummlin asked. "Fire, of course. The cavemen blamed the rapid spread of cooking and heating fires for the increases in temperatures and more smoke in the air. The smoke blocked out the sunlight, which stunted grass growth. And those increases in average temperatures for climate change that reduced the average annual rainfall amounts. Consequently, grasses became more sparse and the game that they hunted began to migrate away to find greener pastures. It was a serious problem for them."

The newest cave paintings showed a frenzy of activity that lead up to a certain event. "The same symbols appear over and over again. There was something in particular that they were worried about. The particular event, though, evades translation."

Drummlin's team will continue their work over the summer months and will return to the U.S. to begin planning their next expedition for 2006.

The team's findings will appear in next month's Caveman Quarterly.

-staff reporter-bs

Tallahassee, Florida -- Jeb Bush was so upset with the Supreme Court for not defending his quickly-crafted Terri's Law that he punched a hole through a filing cabinet. After he calmed down, he began working on a new law to try to sidestep the courts.

In 2003 Jeb Bush quickly rushed through the Florida Legislature a bill that became known as "Terri's Law". This law made it illegal to allow Terri Schiavo to die by witholding feeding. The courts subsequently declared the law unconstitutional. Jeb Bush had hoped that the U.S. Supreme Court would take up the case and create a national precedent for disallowing the intentional withholding of vital nutrients or hydration. The U.S. Supreme Court decided to not hear the case, which let the lower court's decision that the law was unconstitutional stand.

The new law, enacted on March 7, goes even further. Since one of the downfalls of Terri's Law was that it applied to only one person, Jeb Bush decided to write the new law to apply to everyone.

So, as of March 7, 2005, it is illegal to die within the state of Florida. If you are caught in the act of dying, you will be fined up to $10,000 and may have to spend a year in jail. If you are caught discussing or planning your own death, it is punishable by a fine up to $5,000 and six month's in jail.

"We just think that death is unnatural," Bush said. "It's an alternative lifestyle that we're just not willing to accept anymore. We're not going to let dead people push their lifestyles on us any more."

staff reporter - BS