*sigh* political correctness gone too far...

blackface-like greasepaint masks have been a common feature of welsh-border morris and other western morris-like traditions for centuries. it has nothing to do with racism or the "blackface" of early 20th century american entertainments. it has far more to do with the "all look the same" aspect of being dirty from coal mining, tin mining, and chimney sweeps. Think the soot-covered sweeps in Mary Poppins and you get the idea.

Well, in spite of the centuries-old history of blackface morris, which as far as anybody knows goes back further in time than any actual black person living in those parts of Britain, the Police decided to do a massive surveilance operation of one festival to determine of the activity was illegally racist, even when the local racial councils have not received a single complaint about the festival (nor has any other border morris team ever received or been the subject of such a complaint).

long story short: if anybody ever tells you that morris dancing or any other british paint-wearing tradition is related to "moors" or in any other way is derived from african traditions, they are wrong or they are lying. there has never been anything racial in these practices, and such fears that the ignorant have come from being over-exposed to American history out of context of their own traditions.

( story behind cut... )

and things just get worse...

"With Congress debating new higher fines for broadcast indecency in the wake of last year's 'wardrobe malfunction' and Howard Stern's antics, Rolling Stone has published an interesting perspective on things. Rolling Stone did a review of fines levied by other federal regulatory bodies, and has found the new indecency fines disproportionately large compared to other fines. According to the article, if the bill passes then 'for the price of Janet Jackson's 'wardrobe malfunction' during the Super Bowl, you could cause the wrongful death of an elderly patient in a nursing home and still have enough money left to create dangerous mishaps at two nuclear reactors.' The article further states the largest fine the Nuclear Regulatory Commission levied last year was $60,000, this new bill would allow broadcast indecency fines up to $500,000. Glad I keep my broadcast cursing to a minimum, now if I could only get a handle on those pesky dangerous nuclear mishaps." -- story and links @ slashdot.

why "teaching the controversy" or "teaching both stories" is harmful

From Does the Discovery Institute Promote Critical Thinking?

The Discovery Institute proposes teaching alternatives in addition to biological evolution in science classes. It maintains that learning alternatives promotes "critical thinking". What the Discovery Institute ignores is what "critical thinking" is and how it's appropriate for science. Raymond S. Nickerson lists a set of critical thinking skills, but which of these are essential to science? In fact Piaget's formal reasoning skills better describe what scientists use. Piagetan skills central to science include handling abstractions, probabilistic thinking, controlling variables, designing experiments and testing hypotheses. Without basic scientific knowledge and some Piagetan skills, "critical thinking" can be propositional logic or merely rationalizing. Propositional logic is a Piagetan skill, but it's easily contaminated by dubious premises and is more central to rhetoric than to science.

Without basic scientific knowledge and Piagetan skills, students hear "two stories" and learn to rationalize them and to choose one by combining propositional logic with personal prejudices. Such "critical thinking" is poor practice and better described as sophomoric reasoning. Many students already equate rationalizing with critical thinking. To maintain high science standards it's crucial to develop formal reasoning skills and minimize rationalizing. Adults who ignore the logical fallacy of equating a scientific explanation with a nonscientific explanation (in a science class) set a low intellectual standard.

In other words, there are different ways of thinking, and the kind of thinking that one applies for analyses of history, literature, the arts, religious apologetics, or even some forms of sociology like politics, is not the same kind of thinking that science employs. To try to introduce such "critical thinking" can permanently distort the students' impresssions of science and how scientists support their theories and assertions.

All it serves to do is increase the impression that science isn't as reliable or accurate as it really is, or give the students the wrong impressions of their own potential aptitude in it.

questions...too many questions...

[Concerning the recent vote in favor of Slots in MD, and the fact that 2,500 of the damned things would go to Frederick County]

As reported by The Post's Fredrick Kunkle, the [Frederick, MD] county commissioners are unified in their opposition to the "morally objectionable" premise of any government extracting taxes from its citizens' weaknesses.

ok, so how does the county feel about the cigarette tax?  the alcohol tax?  the gasoline tax?

if they really feel that way, then flat-rate the tax and sales tax across the board and lobby for the state to do the same.  otherwise, any luxury tax or "vice" tax constitutes a hypocracy.

Note: though I don't live there, i'm against the slots in principle; but i feel that the arguments against them should be more carefully worded so as to not fall into such logical fallacies or hypocritical contradictions.  On logical fallacies, though, I think the arguments against slots don't fall necessarilly into the "slipperly slope" fallacy (even when they share the appearance of) in that the signs of their negatives are easiliy referenceable  from history and from MD's neighbors.

and they say science has no sense of humor...

[Creationist] Steve wrote: The ‘theory of evolution’ exists solely to deny this [Man created in the image of God] and to push atheist, anti-Christ dogma.

Steve Reuland replied: That part’s cool and all, but I really got into it for the babes.