Farm News 02-06-05
Farm News
Sunday morning, after chores, 46°, light rain
Downy Downys?
On coming back from morning chores I was greeted at the bird feeders by two Downy Woodpeckers, both acting more expectant than fearful. That generally indicates either a young bird or a bird that has been trained to eat out of someone's hand. These two allowed me to approach within three feet of them before they flew up into the tree and I could clearly see down showing on their backs. They were fledglings, birds taking their first flights from the nest. Apparently, their parents are satisfied with the quality and availability of the food supply here.
Nyn's Bunnies Open Their Eyes
Sunday afternoon, after last week's Farm News had been published, Nyn's Bunnies started showing fully open eyes. One of them appeared to be blind in one eye, something that Calvin will scold me over. I stuffed the nest box with straw for nesting material. He says that straw has sharp ends and will poke out the bunnies' eyes. The straw is a bit dusty which might irritate their eyes, but I thought that by the time they opened their eyes they would be old enough to know better than poke out their eyes.
Calvin was right, it seems. I don't know if it was the sharp ends, the dust, or a combination of both, but several bunnies had some eye problems. Shredded paper over a 3/4” layer of course sawdust seems to be about the top end nesting material for bunnies. With all the paper shredders in the world one would think that I could find a ready source of shredded paper, but, so far, I haven't.
Anyway, Nyn's bunnies are like all bunnies: delightful. At the moment they look like their heads are too big for their bodies and they seem to be sort of clumsy. Actually, when activated, they can run, jump, and dart about quite well. They have no trouble jumping over a board twice their height to get into the nest box.
On Saturday I moved Rosie's bunnies to their own cage and bred Rosie to Fluff again. If she becomes pregnant she will have bunnies in the first week of March. Gestation for rabbits is generally 31 days but can vary three or four days in either direction. Dr. 'M', would you care to write a short essay on rabbit reproduction for us? Am I correct in thinking that the mating act stimulates ovulation in the female?
Editor in a Snit
The Kansas Legislature has me in a snit. I tend to think highly of anyone who holds elective office and is obeying the law, even if their political views are contrary to mine. Having served about ten years on the local school board, I consider myself a politician; I ran for the office four times and was elected the last three. So, when people say, “All politicians are crooks,” or, “You can't believe a politician,” I am offended.
Given that, I am still in a snit about the behavior of a majority of the members of the legislature. Before they took their seats they held up their right hands and swore to uphold and obey the constitutions of the United States and Kansas. Last year a court found the legislature in violation of the Kansas Constitution in that they had failed to provide sufficient and equitable funding for primary education. Thus, the legislature opened this year under the cloud of being in violation of the state constitution.
Their response has been to place a constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriages on the ballot for voter approval. That is a hell of a way to get yourself out of failing to carry out your constitutional duties with regard to education.
Kansas already has a law against same-sex marriage. The constitutional amendment is redundant and serves no legal purpose. What is the deal? Why is it suddenly so important that Kansas pass a constitutional amendment this year? The statute prohibiting same-sex marriage is not due to expire, nor is the Kansas Supreme Court likely to overturn it. The law could be overturned by a federal court, but it makes little difference to the federal court whether they are overturning a law or a state constitutional provision. The federal constitution is the basic law of the land and sets the rules for anything we might do as a state.
There is no urgent problem. For some reason the legislature is spending time and energy on a non-existent problem while many real problems, such as their violation of the state constitution, await their attention. There are few fools and fewer knaves in the legislature, I hope, and it seems unlikely that they should all spontaneously decide that this year it is imperative they symbolically spit in the faces of our homosexual citizens. I don't know why this constitutional amendment is being placed on the ballot, but I do know that prevention of same-sex marriage is not the primary goal, because that has already been done by the law.
Before I vote for a constitutional amendment I would like to know why it is on the ballot. I know what the amendment says and what the sponsors purport it will do, but, when a constitutional amendment is proposed for no obvious reason, I smell a rat. I am concerned that the Kansas Legislature has been deceived by a group of people who hide disdain for secular government behind a facade of fervor to protect the family.
When an elected public official takes office that person must first give an oath of office,
a statement that the official will act in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, and so on. Usually the words, “obey,” “uphold,” and “protect” are prominent. The Constitution of the United States is the law of the land, the document that sets the rules by which we shall govern ourselves. It does not set the rules by which we will behave, it doesn't forbid drunk driving or serial murder, instead it sets the rules we follow while making the laws against drunk driving and serial murder.
Elected public officials swear, implicitly or explicitly, to accept a hierarchy of authority that begins with the Constitution of the United States, then federal law, proceeding through the Kansas Constitution, and state law. The key here is that it begins with the Constitution, the agreement by which we govern ourselves.
Some people think that God or the Bible should be at the top of that hierarchy. They see some divine source of moral authority and feel that it should be the highest political authority, also. The Constitution forbids this. The Constitution also forbids the political authority from dictating religious beliefs. The divine source of moral authority can advise but not dictate to the political authority, and the political authority cannot dictate to the moral authority. The sunshine on a desktop illuminates but does not dictate what is written at that desk, and what is written does not make the sun shine.
In Kansas, same-sex marriage has been dealt with by a law. Legislation resulting in law is the correct way to address this issue. It is not a problem with how we govern ourselves, but instead is a problem with how we behave. Amending the state constitution would amount to nothing more than a vain and boastful declaration of our superior morality. The law says what we want the government to say and does not require that something new be stuck on to the rules of how government functions. Will the next campaign be to append all of Leviticus to the state constitution? This whole campaign is shameful and does not deserve one vote.
So there! Thank you for your time while I rage.
I would like to point out that the above argument is about the issue of a constitutional amendment and has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of same-sex marriage. That is a whole group of issues, but the constitutional amendment issue is not one of them. The issue with this amendment is whether we try to embody individual laws within the state constitution, or try to keep it as a set of rules for making laws.
But who cares, anyway, if a couple of difficult women (or flaming faggots) marry each other? Better them than me. Speaking of marriage, if you liked The Da Vinci Code you might enjoy Three Marys by Paul Park. The three Marys of the title are Mary, mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, wife [in the book] of Jesus, and Mary, sister of Lazarus. I think this book takes a byway that misses the gnostic heresy.
Letter to the Editor
If They want to ban something, they should ban marriage.
After all, as the Good Book says, “Marriage is an Abomination unto the Lord.”
Living together is fine, people SHOULD live together, but marriage - same sex, opposite
sex - should definitely be outlawed/unavailable as an option.
What would Freud think of someone who writes uncentered opinions in centered text colored bright red? The editor is including this note for its moral value in teaching younger readers what might happen to their minds if they do not choose their friends carefully. And I'm not making up any part of these letters, generally. This email actually came in red print and centered text.
E-mail Subscribers: Subscriptions are free until 2036, when they will increase to $5 per year. To send a gift subscription, send an email to FarmNews@GeezerNet.com with ‘gift’ in the subject line and the email address to which it is to be sent in the body of the message. Gift subscriptions might be acknowledged in the newsletter.
To subscribe or unsubscribe send an email to FarmNews@RuralNet1.com with either subscribe or unsubscribe in the subject line. If you wish to contribute a few paragraphs or address complaints to the editor, put them in an email and send them to the same address with something else in the subject line. The editor reserves the right to steal ideas submitted, rewrite submissions, and sign false names to them whenever it strikes his fancy to do so.
Sunday morning, after chores, 46°, light rain
Downy Downys?
On coming back from morning chores I was greeted at the bird feeders by two Downy Woodpeckers, both acting more expectant than fearful. That generally indicates either a young bird or a bird that has been trained to eat out of someone's hand. These two allowed me to approach within three feet of them before they flew up into the tree and I could clearly see down showing on their backs. They were fledglings, birds taking their first flights from the nest. Apparently, their parents are satisfied with the quality and availability of the food supply here.
Nyn's Bunnies Open Their Eyes
Sunday afternoon, after last week's Farm News had been published, Nyn's Bunnies started showing fully open eyes. One of them appeared to be blind in one eye, something that Calvin will scold me over. I stuffed the nest box with straw for nesting material. He says that straw has sharp ends and will poke out the bunnies' eyes. The straw is a bit dusty which might irritate their eyes, but I thought that by the time they opened their eyes they would be old enough to know better than poke out their eyes.
Calvin was right, it seems. I don't know if it was the sharp ends, the dust, or a combination of both, but several bunnies had some eye problems. Shredded paper over a 3/4” layer of course sawdust seems to be about the top end nesting material for bunnies. With all the paper shredders in the world one would think that I could find a ready source of shredded paper, but, so far, I haven't.
Anyway, Nyn's bunnies are like all bunnies: delightful. At the moment they look like their heads are too big for their bodies and they seem to be sort of clumsy. Actually, when activated, they can run, jump, and dart about quite well. They have no trouble jumping over a board twice their height to get into the nest box.
On Saturday I moved Rosie's bunnies to their own cage and bred Rosie to Fluff again. If she becomes pregnant she will have bunnies in the first week of March. Gestation for rabbits is generally 31 days but can vary three or four days in either direction. Dr. 'M', would you care to write a short essay on rabbit reproduction for us? Am I correct in thinking that the mating act stimulates ovulation in the female?
Editor in a Snit
The Kansas Legislature has me in a snit. I tend to think highly of anyone who holds elective office and is obeying the law, even if their political views are contrary to mine. Having served about ten years on the local school board, I consider myself a politician; I ran for the office four times and was elected the last three. So, when people say, “All politicians are crooks,” or, “You can't believe a politician,” I am offended.
Given that, I am still in a snit about the behavior of a majority of the members of the legislature. Before they took their seats they held up their right hands and swore to uphold and obey the constitutions of the United States and Kansas. Last year a court found the legislature in violation of the Kansas Constitution in that they had failed to provide sufficient and equitable funding for primary education. Thus, the legislature opened this year under the cloud of being in violation of the state constitution.
Their response has been to place a constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriages on the ballot for voter approval. That is a hell of a way to get yourself out of failing to carry out your constitutional duties with regard to education.
Kansas already has a law against same-sex marriage. The constitutional amendment is redundant and serves no legal purpose. What is the deal? Why is it suddenly so important that Kansas pass a constitutional amendment this year? The statute prohibiting same-sex marriage is not due to expire, nor is the Kansas Supreme Court likely to overturn it. The law could be overturned by a federal court, but it makes little difference to the federal court whether they are overturning a law or a state constitutional provision. The federal constitution is the basic law of the land and sets the rules for anything we might do as a state.
There is no urgent problem. For some reason the legislature is spending time and energy on a non-existent problem while many real problems, such as their violation of the state constitution, await their attention. There are few fools and fewer knaves in the legislature, I hope, and it seems unlikely that they should all spontaneously decide that this year it is imperative they symbolically spit in the faces of our homosexual citizens. I don't know why this constitutional amendment is being placed on the ballot, but I do know that prevention of same-sex marriage is not the primary goal, because that has already been done by the law.
Before I vote for a constitutional amendment I would like to know why it is on the ballot. I know what the amendment says and what the sponsors purport it will do, but, when a constitutional amendment is proposed for no obvious reason, I smell a rat. I am concerned that the Kansas Legislature has been deceived by a group of people who hide disdain for secular government behind a facade of fervor to protect the family.
When an elected public official takes office that person must first give an oath of office,
a statement that the official will act in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, and so on. Usually the words, “obey,” “uphold,” and “protect” are prominent. The Constitution of the United States is the law of the land, the document that sets the rules by which we shall govern ourselves. It does not set the rules by which we will behave, it doesn't forbid drunk driving or serial murder, instead it sets the rules we follow while making the laws against drunk driving and serial murder.
Elected public officials swear, implicitly or explicitly, to accept a hierarchy of authority that begins with the Constitution of the United States, then federal law, proceeding through the Kansas Constitution, and state law. The key here is that it begins with the Constitution, the agreement by which we govern ourselves.
Some people think that God or the Bible should be at the top of that hierarchy. They see some divine source of moral authority and feel that it should be the highest political authority, also. The Constitution forbids this. The Constitution also forbids the political authority from dictating religious beliefs. The divine source of moral authority can advise but not dictate to the political authority, and the political authority cannot dictate to the moral authority. The sunshine on a desktop illuminates but does not dictate what is written at that desk, and what is written does not make the sun shine.
In Kansas, same-sex marriage has been dealt with by a law. Legislation resulting in law is the correct way to address this issue. It is not a problem with how we govern ourselves, but instead is a problem with how we behave. Amending the state constitution would amount to nothing more than a vain and boastful declaration of our superior morality. The law says what we want the government to say and does not require that something new be stuck on to the rules of how government functions. Will the next campaign be to append all of Leviticus to the state constitution? This whole campaign is shameful and does not deserve one vote.
So there! Thank you for your time while I rage.
I would like to point out that the above argument is about the issue of a constitutional amendment and has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of same-sex marriage. That is a whole group of issues, but the constitutional amendment issue is not one of them. The issue with this amendment is whether we try to embody individual laws within the state constitution, or try to keep it as a set of rules for making laws.
But who cares, anyway, if a couple of difficult women (or flaming faggots) marry each other? Better them than me. Speaking of marriage, if you liked The Da Vinci Code you might enjoy Three Marys by Paul Park. The three Marys of the title are Mary, mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, wife [in the book] of Jesus, and Mary, sister of Lazarus. I think this book takes a byway that misses the gnostic heresy.
Letter to the Editor
If They want to ban something, they should ban marriage.
After all, as the Good Book says, “Marriage is an Abomination unto the Lord.”
Living together is fine, people SHOULD live together, but marriage - same sex, opposite
sex - should definitely be outlawed/unavailable as an option.
What would Freud think of someone who writes uncentered opinions in centered text colored bright red? The editor is including this note for its moral value in teaching younger readers what might happen to their minds if they do not choose their friends carefully. And I'm not making up any part of these letters, generally. This email actually came in red print and centered text.
E-mail Subscribers: Subscriptions are free until 2036, when they will increase to $5 per year. To send a gift subscription, send an email to FarmNews@GeezerNet.com with ‘gift’ in the subject line and the email address to which it is to be sent in the body of the message. Gift subscriptions might be acknowledged in the newsletter.
To subscribe or unsubscribe send an email to FarmNews@RuralNet1.com with either subscribe or unsubscribe in the subject line. If you wish to contribute a few paragraphs or address complaints to the editor, put them in an email and send them to the same address with something else in the subject line. The editor reserves the right to steal ideas submitted, rewrite submissions, and sign false names to them whenever it strikes his fancy to do so.
posted by The Geezer at 9:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home