The International Tracing Service (WWII) archive

This is one of a few reasons why I remain unapologetically pro-Israeli.

Let cancer put the fear of God in them!

From NewScientist.com:

US conservatives block cancer vaccine for girls

Plans to vaccinate young girls against the sexually-transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer have been blocked in several US states by conservative groups, who say that doing so would encourage promiscuity.

Advocates of the vaccine point out that the jabs work against human papillomavirus (HPV) - which causes virtually all cases of cervical cancer - and are safe.

The latest data from a large clinical trial of Merck's cervical cancer vaccine, Gardasil, found it offered 100% protection against cervical, vulval and vaginal diseases, caused by HPV (types 6, 11, 16 and 18) and 98% protection against advanced pre-cancers caused by HPV types 16 and 18 (New England Journal of Medicine: vol 356, p1915).

After around three years of the four-year trial, almost all girls who received the vaccine before being exposed to HPV 16 or 18 appear to be protected...One word - wow! They'd rather see their daughters die than allow for a possibility of suggestion about premarital sex. Just how screwed up must one be?

One word - wow! They'd rather see their daughters die than allow for a possibility of suggestion about premarital sex. Just how screwed up must one be?

Reg. Sharpton vs. Romney

What to make of the reverend's remarks?.. I have two points. One (and I believe I said something similar in regard to the Pope's remarks about Islam), why is anyone surprised? That's what really surprises me. Sharpton is an evangelical, a born-again, a fundamentalist, well, you get the picture. By definition, he takes Bible literally, and believes that only those who are born again (in the way that evangelicals interpret it) go to heaven. Romney is a Mormon. Whatever Mormonism is, one thing is certain, it's not an evangelical denomination, nor is it a part of "main stream" Christianity. Why, why is anyone surprised that Sharpton doesn't accept it as simply "yet another path to the mountain top"? If he did, he'd be out of a job. It's literally against his religion.

Regarding Romney… It's an interesting situation. Yes, I think that anyone should be free to practice his religion and not be afraid of being persecuted or discriminated against. That much is true; true in most instances, anyway. But let me give you an example: my wife has a very, very distant relative, who holds a few quaint beliefs: there are tiny people living in some underground cities on Earth; ground coffee is poisoned by the government to keep the U.S. population in check; and I'm sure he has some other gems. He certainly has a right to these beliefs. And as long as he's not applying for a job at Starbucks or the city sanitation department, he doesn't have anything to worry about. However, if you were a coffee house manager, would you hire him? – Not likely, and rightly so. The point is, not all beliefs were created equal. In my opinion, Mormonism is more or less on par with the tiny men living underground. Yes, yes, it's his right to practice his faith. However, it's my right, nay – responsibility, not to suspend my judgment regarding his ability to think critically. And anyone who's even remotely familiar with the basic tenets of Mormonism (with the notable exception of Mormons themselves) would agree that they read like a fun medley of Greek mythology and science fiction (with emphasis on fiction).

Romney is right in his statement that "we elect a person to lead the nation not based on what church they go to, but based on their values and their vision.", but incomplete. That person's ability to think critically without suspending his judgment when it conflicts with reality is a key quality that most would seek in a presidential candidate. And Mormonism just doesn't pass this test (I'll admit that as far as I'm concerned, no orthodoxy does).