| |
|
Friday, December 27, 2002
|
|
Barney reviews the script for "Das Booty"
Wild German Sex With Barney...
Some children in New Jersey discovered some pornography in a Barney song book. Turns out the publisher (or Chinese printer) got some orders mixed up, and printed a picture of a naked couple, standing and embracing, along with some porn film reviews written in German in an otherwise-innocent Barney song book.
The parents were shocked, of course, to have their children exposed to the harsh and guttural German language. So, they contacted their attorney, of course, who contacted the media. Not sure why the attorney needs to be involved, since the parents say they plan no legal action, but you can't be too careful when dealing with crafty naked Germans.
The publisher sent an apology letter, but apparently didn't apologize for much, saying that the image was relatively tame compared to what kids routinely see today. I suppose that's true; the photo was from a film that only got two "puckered lips" in the review. Thank goodness photos from the five-pucker "Lord of the Cock Rings" or "Monster Balls" weren't printed.
All the parents say they want from the publisher is a real apology, and some assurance for the children that Barney is "pure". Having endured my share of Barney broadcasts, I can assure you that Barney is pure...shit. I mean, it's good enough for what it is; it does teach children to be nice, and to love. Frankly, the photo is probably right in line with Barney's theme song: "I love you, you love me (we are in a German porn film with a bad Kraftwerk knockoff soundtrack)"
The most amusing thing about this story is that the kids were age 4 to 7. Now, I'm not going to sit here and say that a four year old should be exposed to naked Germans in embrace. As a parent, I would probably be a bit put off by that myself. But the other kid was seven. SEVEN! First of all, I think that kid can handle seeing some naked people; it probably made his day. But you know what's scariest of all? Why is a seven year old having anything at all to do with Barney? Linus is only 3 and a half, and Barney is so passe to him. If Linus is still into a Barney sing-a-long book at age 7, he deserves whatever schoolyard justice the cooler kids are meting out to him.
3:21:34 PM 
|
|
Send In The Clones...
Clonaid, a mysterious company with ties to a religious sect that believes humans were created by extraterrestrials, claims that they have created a human clone.
The scientific community is lining up to express doubt that it can be done by a group who has little apparent expertise in the area of cloning. Guess that won't look good if this group can pull off what so many "legitimate" scientists have been pursuing for so long. Beyond that, the scientific community says that there are real concerns about the long-term health of such a baby, if it exists.
I don't know where I stand on all of that. I certainly don't have a problem with stem cell research, and more should be done in that area. But cloning humans? Hmm. It's a real quandry for an Agnostic to tackle with; I don't approach it from the standpoint of religious belief. I approach it from the standpoint of, "Maybe we don't know what the fuck we are messing with." That's not so much an ethics concern, though I think there are certainly compelling ethical arguments to be made. It is just a base feeling that perhaps there are some things that are best not explored or tinkered with. I don't have any scientific reason for stating that; it's just a hunch. You know how baking recipies are very precise? How certain altitudes and even minute variations in the ingredient list can produce a product very far from what was intended? That's kind of how I feel about cloning, and genetic engineering overall. Yeah, I know the potential payoff could be huge in terms of disease reduction, or helping doting pet owners with empty lives ensure their beloved Pomeranian lives in perpetuity. But is the lot of human existence really that bad? I know we die a little early in some cases, but overall, isn't the human being a pretty good piece of work just like it is? I'm not talking about being made in God's image, or any of that crap. I'm talking about a biological entity that has stood the test of time, but is based on a fragile combination of genetic codes.
I guess I just have a high standard of proof for messing with our genetic makeup. If we screw that up, where do we go? What will it do to our genetic diversity? What will it do to our species? No way do I believe we know where this is going to go. It's one thing to risk it all if you have no choice, say, if an asteroid is going to crash into Earth and you can only destroy it with a nuclear detonation in space. That would be bad, but worth risking to avoid nearly certain death of the planet. But what bad outcome are we trying to avoid with cloning that justifies the risk of altering our genetic makeup irretrievably? All the same, I'll take my chances with getting Alzheimers, thanks.
Finally, if we are going to be cloning people, are we going to have any control at all over who gets cloned? How do we choose? Do we clone the rich? Do we clone Venus Williams? What about that guy who ran onto the field at Comiskey and assaulted the first base coach? Some people just shouldn't be cloned, but that's a pretty slippery slope that leads into a Hitler-style Aryan Master Plan.
I do know one thing, though. This group claiming responsibility for the cloning has ties to the French, to the French media, and to a religious sect. The absolute last choice for what we want to perpetuate is anything at all French, much less a French media religious zealot. Somebody needs to tell them: You can try to clone French people, but their language is still going to die.
2:37:12 PM
|
|
Do you know who the favorite son of Silver Lake, KS is? Hint: He just got fired by the Atlanta Hawks. It's Lon Kruger Day in the Basketball Pipeline. Also, what gives with the new Laker Whites?
10:23:30 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2003 Doug Hennessee.
Last update: 1/1/2003; 1:55:20 PM.
|
|
|
