Two subjects for today. Wow! I’m really getting into this weblog thing.

Fries

Freedom fries — I had to point out this particular piece of stupidity. I don’t think the concept itself is really stupid; I found it rather amusing at first. Yet, isn’t Congress supposed to be some important part of the American government? It would be better to do something constructive and leave the humor to more appropriate venues.

Do As Nature Intends

I go to a catholic school, despite being an atheist myself. Religion classes are required. Right now, I’m taking Moral Theology, and we’ve got this book, Growing in Christian Morality, which says that doing as nature intends, or natural law, is one of many basic moral principles so widely held that it could be considered universal. I disagree with this wholeheartedly. The principle is completely ambiguous. Granted, other moral principles have some ambiguity, but not to the extent of this principle.

What is considered natural? Are elements that only occur when man-made considered natural? After all, humans are a product of nature, so it can be said that anything a human does can be considered natural.

Genetic diseases, such as cystic fibrosis, naturally occur. Is it natural to let this gene propagate and affect others? Or, is it natural to restrict the freedom of this person?

To me, the definition of nature seems to be what is the norm. The problem is that humanity has no idea what this is. In experiments, one must have a control and test variables against it. We don’t have a control. Then again, one could say that everything a human thinks is natural simply because it is a product of nature.

Recapitulating, I’ve just specified only a little bit on the ambiguities of the so-called “natural law” of philosophy. It doesn’t make sense, so I don’t believe one can follow it.