Last night (thanks in part to the Fort Worth Library Summer Reading Program), our family went to the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus. The first thing that we saw were some animal rights protesters.
We had gotten there early so we got to view the animals up close in the animal menagerie. They all looked sleek and well cared for. They had signs around the room that told when the various elephants Ringling owns had been born and what their names are. My husband and I thought it was funny that the baby boy elephant born in January '09 was named Barack. (Don't they know the elephant is for Republicans?)
Then we went to the pre-show show where you could go down to the floor and see everything up close. This is one of the best parts of the circus.
Then the real show began. It was a good one. My favorite parts were:
1. 7 motorcyclists riding around inside a steel ball
2. contortionists
3. the elephant that could do a head/trunk stand
My kids favorite part was: saving up their money to buy a souvenir. (Last year I told them all that stuff was ridiculously expensive and they would have to save their money next year if they wanted to buy something.) My daughter bought a big pink and black hat with cotton candy for $12 and my son bought a plastic sword with a sheath for $17. After the souvenir, they both liked the animal parts.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Home Visitations
I am still very concerned about section 440 of the Health Care Reform Act before congress. All of this section is supposed to be voluntary, but it concerns me that the goal is to have all families that are expecting children or that have young children in these programs. From page 838. . .
the gaps in home visitation in the
17 State, including identification of communities
18 that are in high need of the services;
This is talking about States that want to get grant money from the federal government. Call me extreme, but of course there should be gaps. Should the government be trying to coach any new or expectant parents, let alone all of them? Communities. . . hmm. . . that could be poor communities or black communities or homeschool communities. Either way, do we really want certain "communities" being highly encouraged (I would probably feel pressured) to have these home visits? "High need of services". . . I assume that this means that this means something benign like past history of abuse or something, but could it eventually become (or already be intended) any group that doesn't parent as the state sees fit? Like "fundamentalist Christians" who condone swats or families that have "overly strict" dress standards for their kids.
in supporting home visitation pro11
grams using funds provided under this section,
12 the State will promote coordination and collabo13
ration with other home visitation programs (in14
cluding programs funded under title XIX) and
15 with other child and family services, health
16 services, income supports, and other related as17
sistance;
18
This section is talking about what is required of the State once it receives the funds. Again, call me an extremist if you must, but here I see the State including home visit recommendations as part of your regular doctor visits ("health services"). That would mean that if everyone is in the health services system, every new parent "should" be visited by the state. That just makes my skin crawl.
in supporting home visitation pro11
grams using funds provided under this section,
12 the State will promote coordination and collabo13
ration with other home visitation programs (in14
cluding programs funded under title XIX) and
15 with other child and family services, health
16 services, income supports, and other related as17
sistance;
18
And as if the government won't have enough fingers in your life, they want to use these visitations as ways to refer you to yet further government services and programs.
God has given parents the responsibility to raise children, not the State. If parents need help, it is the place of family and church and community to help them, not the State.
The government has it's place and this is not it.
the gaps in home visitation in the
17 State, including identification of communities
18 that are in high need of the services;
This is talking about States that want to get grant money from the federal government. Call me extreme, but of course there should be gaps. Should the government be trying to coach any new or expectant parents, let alone all of them? Communities. . . hmm. . . that could be poor communities or black communities or homeschool communities. Either way, do we really want certain "communities" being highly encouraged (I would probably feel pressured) to have these home visits? "High need of services". . . I assume that this means that this means something benign like past history of abuse or something, but could it eventually become (or already be intended) any group that doesn't parent as the state sees fit? Like "fundamentalist Christians" who condone swats or families that have "overly strict" dress standards for their kids.
in supporting home visitation pro11
grams using funds provided under this section,
12 the State will promote coordination and collabo13
ration with other home visitation programs (in14
cluding programs funded under title XIX) and
15 with other child and family services, health
16 services, income supports, and other related as17
sistance;
18
This section is talking about what is required of the State once it receives the funds. Again, call me an extremist if you must, but here I see the State including home visit recommendations as part of your regular doctor visits ("health services"). That would mean that if everyone is in the health services system, every new parent "should" be visited by the state. That just makes my skin crawl.
in supporting home visitation pro11
grams using funds provided under this section,
12 the State will promote coordination and collabo13
ration with other home visitation programs (in14
cluding programs funded under title XIX) and
15 with other child and family services, health
16 services, income supports, and other related as17
sistance;
18
And as if the government won't have enough fingers in your life, they want to use these visitations as ways to refer you to yet further government services and programs.
God has given parents the responsibility to raise children, not the State. If parents need help, it is the place of family and church and community to help them, not the State.
The government has it's place and this is not it.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Does it all come down to property rights?
Walter Williams has an interesting article out that talks about freedom and property rights. It ties in with my thoughts on the government not getting involved with every good idea (See posts from earlier in the week). Here is a paragraph of it for your consideration.
In a free society, many conflicting harms are settled through the institution of private property rights. Private property rights have to do with rights belonging to the person deemed owner of property to keep, acquire, use and dispose of property as he deems fit so long as he does not violate similar rights of another. Let's say that you are offended, possibly harmed, by bars that play vulgar rap music and permit smoking. If you could use government to outlaw rap music and smoking in bars, you would be benefited and people who enjoyed rap music and smoking would be harmed. Again, there is no scientific or intelligent way to determine whose harm is more important. In a free society, the question of who has the right to harm whom, by permitting rap music and smoking, is answered by the property rights question: Who owns the bar? In a socialistic society, such conflicting harms are resolved through government intimidation and coercion.
In a free society, many conflicting harms are settled through the institution of private property rights. Private property rights have to do with rights belonging to the person deemed owner of property to keep, acquire, use and dispose of property as he deems fit so long as he does not violate similar rights of another. Let's say that you are offended, possibly harmed, by bars that play vulgar rap music and permit smoking. If you could use government to outlaw rap music and smoking in bars, you would be benefited and people who enjoyed rap music and smoking would be harmed. Again, there is no scientific or intelligent way to determine whose harm is more important. In a free society, the question of who has the right to harm whom, by permitting rap music and smoking, is answered by the property rights question: Who owns the bar? In a socialistic society, such conflicting harms are resolved through government intimidation and coercion.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Critter Corner V. 5
Chickens
We are excited to be hatching some eggs in an incubator. Some friends of ours who live on a small farm invited us over. While we were there, they offered to let us try to hatch some eggs that their chicken had laid. They loaned us the incubator, too.
It took me a while to get the incubator set up with proper temperature and humidity, but now we are making a go of it. I hope to have some news of chicks on the 25th.
Dogs
When we went to my in-laws for the 4th, they gave our dogs a dose of Frontline Plus.
I must say that this stuff WORKS. It is 30 days later and they are still flea free. With our usual stuff, I was still combing 10-30 fleas off of them a day. It is very expensive though. About $45 for a three month supply.Crawdads
There are 5 baby crawdads that survived to this point. 1 is huge (about 1" long), 2 are medium (3/4" long), and 2 are small (1/2" long). These are guesses of course. I have no idea why they have grown at different rates.
The mother crawdad died. She was trying to molt and didn't have the strength. Sort of a sad way to go if you ask me.
All of the other pets are largely the same.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Town Hall Meetings
I got an e-mail from FRC action linking to Panzramic's post of footage from a Philadelphia town hall meeting. From all the booing and conservative sounding questions I would have said this was somewhere in the central US not Philadelphia. Many of the questions are good. My favorite was this one from a legal immigrant.
Some of the other questions asked were(paraphrased): "Why can't you read everything you vote on?" (We have aides who read them.), "Why aren't government monopolies as bad as private ones?" (Health Exchange isn't a monopoly. It is. . . Something you can't hear because there is so much booing), "If Medicare and Medicaid are bankrupt, what makes you think you can do a better job with a whole health care system?" (Those broken systems don't cover 47 million people [exaggerated number by the way]. We want everyone to be in our [broken] system."
It is worth watching.
Some of the other questions asked were(paraphrased): "Why can't you read everything you vote on?" (We have aides who read them.), "Why aren't government monopolies as bad as private ones?" (Health Exchange isn't a monopoly. It is. . . Something you can't hear because there is so much booing), "If Medicare and Medicaid are bankrupt, what makes you think you can do a better job with a whole health care system?" (Those broken systems don't cover 47 million people [exaggerated number by the way]. We want everyone to be in our [broken] system."
It is worth watching.
Monday, August 3, 2009
More Good Ideas. . .
THAT THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T NEED TO BOSS PEOPLE ABOUT.
These are some good (research-backed) ideas about childbirth and infant care. I think healthy women should do them. But I don't want the government to force you to do them.
1. Natural labor- It is better for mom, baby, and the bottom line.
2. Midwifery care- Trained midwives have proven themselves in medium and low risk deliveries. Again this would certainly cost less than traditional doctor/hospital delivery.
3. Having a doula or some other women with you for continuous emotional support during labor- Far better and less expensive outcomes.
4. Encourage mobility and uprightness by getting rid of hospital beds- Replace the traditional bed with a mattress on the floor, birth balls, and other options. The best way to avoid c-sections, epidurals and other (costly) interventions is to stay upright and mobile.
5. Ditch the standard bathing, weighing, swaddling routine- Skin to skin contact for the first 1-2 hours is advantageous.
6. Breastfeeding- everyone knows it is better for mother and baby
I am sure my list could go on. How many of you would want my standards foisted on the American public? I bet many of you would rather make your own (though less favorable) choices about such things. Don't you think that you should have that right in all areas of health care?
These are some good (research-backed) ideas about childbirth and infant care. I think healthy women should do them. But I don't want the government to force you to do them.
1. Natural labor- It is better for mom, baby, and the bottom line.
2. Midwifery care- Trained midwives have proven themselves in medium and low risk deliveries. Again this would certainly cost less than traditional doctor/hospital delivery.
3. Having a doula or some other women with you for continuous emotional support during labor- Far better and less expensive outcomes.
4. Encourage mobility and uprightness by getting rid of hospital beds- Replace the traditional bed with a mattress on the floor, birth balls, and other options. The best way to avoid c-sections, epidurals and other (costly) interventions is to stay upright and mobile.
5. Ditch the standard bathing, weighing, swaddling routine- Skin to skin contact for the first 1-2 hours is advantageous.
6. Breastfeeding- everyone knows it is better for mother and baby
I am sure my list could go on. How many of you would want my standards foisted on the American public? I bet many of you would rather make your own (though less favorable) choices about such things. Don't you think that you should have that right in all areas of health care?
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Just Because It's a Good Idea . . .
DOESN'T MEAN THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE INVOLVED.
A comment I made on OneMom's defense of certain portions of the health reform bill brought me to this post.
Just because something is a good idea doesn't mean that I want the government being in charge of it or mandating it or regulating it. Here are some examples.
End of life document counseling- I think this should be left to individuals and their attorney/religious adviser.
Pre-marital counseling- Better in the hands of those who have been married 20+ years/ religious adviser.
Healthy eating- You can keep your fat tax and let me make my own decisions. And I will regulate my kids eating habits too thank you very much.
Educating our kids- It wouldn't bother me one bit if the government got out of education.
Energy efficient homes- I feel it is good stewardship to look for ways to be more energy efficient, but I will make those decisions about how much of my resources need to to to upgrades on my insulation, etc.
I am sure that this list could go on and on, but I think you get the point. I want the freedom to be stupid. I want the freedom to make choices that you see as less than ideal.
A comment I made on OneMom's defense of certain portions of the health reform bill brought me to this post.
Just because something is a good idea doesn't mean that I want the government being in charge of it or mandating it or regulating it. Here are some examples.
End of life document counseling- I think this should be left to individuals and their attorney/religious adviser.
Pre-marital counseling- Better in the hands of those who have been married 20+ years/ religious adviser.
Healthy eating- You can keep your fat tax and let me make my own decisions. And I will regulate my kids eating habits too thank you very much.
Educating our kids- It wouldn't bother me one bit if the government got out of education.
Energy efficient homes- I feel it is good stewardship to look for ways to be more energy efficient, but I will make those decisions about how much of my resources need to to to upgrades on my insulation, etc.
I am sure that this list could go on and on, but I think you get the point. I want the freedom to be stupid. I want the freedom to make choices that you see as less than ideal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)