On Monday Europe’s main human rights body canceled a scheduled vote on banning creationist and intelligent design views from school science classes, saying the proposed resolution was one-sided.

The proposed resolution said the Council of Europe’s 47 member states should “firmly oppose the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline on an equal footing with the theory of evolution by natural selection“.

The resolution, which the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly was due to vote on Tuesday, said attacks on the theory of evolution were rooted “in forms of religious extremism” and amounted to a dangerous attack on scientific knowledge.

Some conservative groups in the United States, both religious and secular, have long opposed the teaching of Darwinian evolution in public schools but U.S. courts have regularly barred them from teaching religious views of creation.

Pressure to teach creationism is weaker in Europe, but an Assembly committee got active because a Muslim creationist book has appeared in several countries.

The resolution would not have been binding on member states. Source

Creationism makes a comeback in U.S.

Meanwhile, on Monday in America, three of the Republican presidential candidates do not believe in evolution, high-tech creation museum opened in Kentucky and controversy has been fueled by a book claiming the Grand Canyon, one of America’s most well-known landmarks, was carved by Noah’s flood rather than by erosion.

Grand Canyon: A Different View is compiled by Tom Vail, who has been guiding rafting trips down the Colorado River for 25 years and became a Christian convert a decade ago. His a full colour coffee-table book, features expensive paper, sophisticated layout, spectacular photos, lots of quotes from the Old Testament and scientific language.

The American Geological Institute and other groups have demanded the book be removed from the national park.

My husband and I decided years ago that we would remain child-free and we have never regretted that choice. As two older children from large families we both had plenty of experience when it came to raising our younger siblings.

Both at work and in our personal lives we have been expected to contribute financially to children’s organizations and we have given freely of our funds and time. We have had lots of hands-on experience volunteering in children’s clubs.

We have benefited from the good times we had with the kids. And those we came into such close contact with valued our relationship so highly that they still drop in to visit us now that they are headed off to highschool.

However, there have been many  who have not respected our choice. They were in a state of denial. They were just to closed minded to foresee how happy together and how devoted to one another childfree couples can be.

A few (impaired by their religious brainwashing) told us our choice was “un-Godly”.

Some told us we would be missing something “special” in our lives.

Others told us not wanting children is “unnatural”.

Still others told us not having children means we are “selfish”.

It was and still is hard not to laugh out loud at these types because they all have the same thing in common — closed minds. They are deluded by their belief that producing little images of themselves is a selfless, natural act blessed by God — a service to humanity.

Well, as the Dalai Lama said:

The mind is like a parachute, it works best when it is opened.

We live in an overpopulated world. The children born today are among those who will devour 80% of the planet’s resources. Moreover, given the state of the environment, we ought to think it’s perverse that children today are being falsely taught that the hormonal drive to reproduce evident in all animal species is “special”; and that, those who do not choose to breed are “selfish”.

It’s clear how this state of affairs came to be. Between 1960 when “the pill” was introduced and 2007 a stigma against childfree couples, based on the same old religious saws deeply entrenched in our society was revived, and minding the reproductive business of others became the agenda of religious zealots.

There are many reasons to choose not to have children and when couples make the childfree choice that choice should be respected. For interest sake I searched the web and came up with a survey that contains all the reasons we made the choice to remain childfree. And, I’m now going to share them with you.

Between November 2004-July 2006 Laura S. Scott conducted a Childless by Choice Survey. 171 self-selected, voluntarily childless/childfree individuals (single, partnered and married) living in the U.S. and Canada participated in the survey 121 (71%) of the respondents were women and 50 (29%) of the respondents were men.

Participants were asked to rate eighteen statements reflecting frequently cited motivations for remaining childless on a Likert scale from 0-5, to the degree to which they identified with that statement or the degree to which it applied to them in the course of their decision making. A zero rating would indicate that the motive statement was not applicable or that the respondent did not identify at all with that statement. A higher number would indicate the relative degree to which the respondent identified with the statement, a rating of five indicating a very strong identification with the statement or an acknowledgment that it is, or was, a primary motivator in the decision to be childless/childfree.

The respondents rated the following 18 motivation statements and were invited to add their own:

• My lifestyle/career is incompatible with raising children.
• I value freedom and independence.
• I can better serve myself by not having children.
• I can better serve the world by not having children.
• I have no desire to have a child, no maternal/paternal instinct.
• The costs outweigh the benefits, financially and otherwise.
• I don’t think I would make a good parent.
• I don’t enjoy being around children.
• I am concerned about the physical risks of childbirth and recovery.
• I have seen or experienced first hand the effects of bad or unintentional parenting, and I don’t want to risk the chance that I might perpetuate that situation.
• My partner does not want kids.
• I love our life, our relationship as it is, and having a child won’t enhance it.
• I delayed having children and eventually decided I wanted to remain childless.
• I want to focus my time and energy on my own interests, needs or goals.
• I do not want to take on the responsibility of raising a child.
• I want to accomplish/experience things in life that would be difficult to do if I was a parent.
• I am concerned about the state of our world and I do not think it would be wise to bring a child into it.
• People I know have not realized the rewards they expected as a parent.

As for the survey results, you’ll have to use the link above to read them.

Childfree and loving it
I began saying, my husband and I do not regret our child-free state. I’m conclude saying, ‘au contraire’ — we celebrate it.

Well gents, if you haven’t read Your Guide to Men’s Fashion / Grooming by Daniel Billett, then I recommend you do.

I’m telling you true when I say there are men walking the streets everywhere in get up that make us ladies cringe.

Daniel lists eight fashion mistakes to avoid at all costs including: Socks with Sandals; Novelty Ties, Shirts, Boxer Shorts, Etc.; Blaring Designer Labels (the walking advertisement look); Backpacks and Suits; Chunky Shoes; Shiny or Glittery Shirts and Suits; Sloppy Too Loose Fitting Clothes; and, Unflattering Colors.

You can get the whole scoop on men’s fashion mistakes by reading the full article.

I also recommend reading Fashion Advice for Men Over 40. Here’s an excerpt:

“Even when a man over 40 has a good body he should wear clothes differently than he did in his younger years. For example, even if he has a six-pack and a great butt, he should avoid wearing low cut and tight fitting jeans he might have worn in his 20s and 30s. He can still wear flattering, stylish jeans and t-shirts, but just differently.”

NIGEL JOHNSON-HILL, PARK FARM, MILLAND, LIPHOOK GU30 7JT
Rt Hon David Miliband MP
Secretary of State,
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London SW1P 3JR

16 May 2007

Dear Secretary of State,

My friend, who is in farming at the moment, recently received a cheque for £3,000 from the Rural Payments Agency for not rearing pigs. I would now like to join the “not rearing pigs” business.

In your opinion what is the best kind of farm not to rear pigs on, and which is the best breed of pigs not to rear? I want to be sure I approach this endeavour in keeping with all government policies, as dictated by the EU under the Common Agricultural Policy.

I would prefer not to rear bacon pigs. But if this is not the type you want not rearing, I will just as gladly not rear porkers. Are there any advantages in not rearing rare breeds such as Saddlebacks or Gloucester Old Spots, or are there too many people already not rearing these?

As I see it, the hardest part of this programme will be keeping and accurate record of how many pigs I haven’t reared. Are there any Government or Local Authority courses on this?

My friend is very satisfied with this business. He has been rearing pigs for forty years or so, and the best he ever made on them was £1,422 in 1968. That is – until this year, when he received a cheque for not rearing any.

If I get £3,000 for not rearing 50 pigs, will I get £6,000 for not rearing 100?

I plan to operate on a small scale at first, holding myself down to about 4,000 pigs not raised, which will mean about £240,000 for the first year. As I become more expert in not rearing pigs, I plan to be more ambitious, perhaps increasing to, say, 40,000 pigs not reared in my second year, for which I should expect about £2.4 million from your department. Incidentally, I wonder if I would be eligible to receive tradable carbon credits for all those pigs not producing harmful and polluting methane gases?

Another point: these pigs that I plan not to rear will not eat 2,000 tonnes of cereals. I understand that you also pay farmers for not growing crops. Will I qualify for payments for not growing cereals to not feed the pigs I don’t rear?

I am also considering the “not milking cows” business, so please send any information you have on that too. Please could you also include the current DEFRA advice on set aside fields? Can this be done on an e-commerce basis with virtual fields (of which I seem to have several thousand hectares)?

In view of the above you will realise that I will be totally unemployed, and will therefore qualify for unemployment benefits.

I shall of course be voting for your party at the next general election.

Yours faithfully,