Pet Portraits by
Sally Jane Photographic Art
Beautiful Images Painted by CameraAll images mounted and ready to frame.
Prices from £50Visit www.sally-jane.com
30 April 2007
27 April 2007
The Question - Is Commercialism Destroying The Blogosphere?
My answer - You Can’t Stop Evolution
If commercialism is destroying the blogshere then it is only because there is a ready market for it. If bloggers really wanted to keep blogs personal and non commercial they would not include AdSense on their pages. OK so I know a lot of blogs don’t carry Google Ads but there are tons that do. Myself included.
As for whether the blogshere is being destroyed by it that depends on your point of view. I agree that overly commercial blogs are not worth bothering with so I just ignore them but if blogging is to survive it has to evolve. Blogging is evolving very fast, just as the internet did in the first place, and still is. That should be seen as a healthy sign. If it didn’t evolve it would destroy itself by becoming obsolete.
Ok, so maybe we could control it’s evolution in some way by banning commercialism? Yes, that might work but the most likely effect would be to simply slow its evolution down. That could even turn it into something that too few people want and so once again, destroy it. Evolution is most effective when it is not artificially tampered with.
If there is enough support for purely personal blogs it could be that the blogshere simply splits. Who knows, anything could happen. I actually find that quite exciting, don’t you?
So to sum up…Watch this space!Adendum....this is the final question from the Love to Lead team and so my last chance to win a lap top. If you have found my responses interesting over the last few months please vote for me here at the Love to Lead site.
24 April 2007
22 April 2007
There is a positive side to all this, a lady called Lucy Fensom has set up a charity to rescue and look after some of these animals but she needs our support. The web site lists a variety of ways in which anyone can help and it's not just about cash.
Take a look at the web site and meet some of the donkeys...they would certainly love to meet you.
21 April 2007
I mentioned he was being really good at not chewing his bandage. Well he is but this is a border collie we are talking about here and no body ever told him he couldn't lick it! Thursday I gave him that hide chew he has in his mouth in the photo thinking it would help prevent him getting bored. Small hide chews he eats no problem but big ones are worth hanging on to so he wouldn't eat it, just kept walking around the house with it in his mouth. Not quite what I was hoping for. Yesterday he lays down with it on the front door mat. I put some honey on it to start him licking it with a hope that he will then start to chew it and sure enough he gets really into the honey. Satisfied I go to my study to do some work. The licking noises continue and I feel pleased with myself for my small success. 2 hours later I go to get a cup of coffee. He is dosing on the mat not doing anything. I leave him be. Lunchtime arrives, he follows me into the lounge, I don't notice anything different. After lunch I go to bathe and redress his foot only to discover his bandage is soaking. I look at the chew, it's untouched. He had been laying there licking his foot and spent all morning in a sodden bandage which was otherwise undisturbed. On inspection of the cut I notice the beginnings of some puss showing. Signs of infection. Hey Ho...off to the vets, where I am told that a few hours in a sodden bandage would indeed have been enough to allow unwanted bacteria to take hold. He's now on antibiotics and under strict instructions not to so much as sniff his foot. He has now started eating his chew instead.
19 April 2007
Question - Should Gay Couples Be Allowed To Adopt?
My answer -
My answer -The needs of the child outweigh the rights of the potential parents.
Let’s get this clear from the outset. I’m not a homophobe although I’m sure there will be people who will disagree. Once again, I have to speak as I feel which will no doubt ruffle a few feathers. I’m not out to upset anyone but the question has been asked.
I do not think it is right for gay couple to adopt. There, I’ve said it. Now for my reasons.
Initially it won’t make any difference to the child but how will things be for them once they start school? Chances are once the other kids understands about their parents they will use it as an excuse to pick on them. Kids can be cruel and anything that makes one kid especially different from the rest is likely to be a trigger for teasing or worse.
I never fitted in at school because my parents thought that pop music was bad for us kids so we were fed a diet of classical music. Nothing wrong with the classics but it meant I couldn’t join in with the conversations my piers were having and so I became branded as being different. That led to teasing and later relatively mild bullying.
If something so minor can prevent a child fitting in how much more would having gay parents cause problems? I accept that this, with time and it becoming more common, would eventually be less of an issue but why should any kid be placed in that position? Do we really want our children to play the martyr now so that future kids will accept gay parents as normal? We must remember that the babies placed with gay couple won’t have had any say in the matter.
My other reason is more old fashioned. All primates, including humans, learn their parenting skills from their parents. In a similar way we also learn our family and relationship skills from our parents too. If we agree that you are either born heterosexual or homosexual how will this effect the child’s understanding of how to make a relationship work if the child is heterosexual?
You could argue that the same applies to heterosexual couples who go through a divorce when the kids are small or that have a violent relationship. Children do go on to repeat the lives of their parents in a high number of cases. Some situations, such as a break-up of a marriage, cannot always be avoided but when a situation can be avoided I think we owe it to the children to do just that. For this reason it’s not just gay couple who I feel should not adopt but single people as well. The adoptive family should be as near normal as it is reasonable to expect even though, I accept, there is no guarantee it will stay that way.
I do understand that some gay couples desire children just as much as non gay couples but the needs of the children do need to be put first even though this may be a very hard thing to do.
The cut was right on his main pad on a back leg and about 1.5cm long. It bled quite a bit but at the time he was not particularly bothered by it and quite happy to finish the walk home without the slightest limp. Having cleaned and dressed it he then decided he was only going to walk on 3 legs as if I had amputated his back leg at the hock! This morning I changed the dressing and the cut has stopped bleeding but was weeping a little. I think it is unlikely to heal sufficiently for the show and it will certainly be a few weeks before I can allow him to continue with his agility training that he loves. Still, he's a good patient, he's quite happy for me to treat his foot and he doesn't chew his bandage so I don't have to make him wear a lampshade!
18 April 2007
16 April 2007
13 April 2007
12 April 2007
Question - Does The World Need Disease To Control Overpopulation?
My answer - Well if it does it’s not working.
Disease and predation are the two factors that normally prevent a species becoming over populated. If they fail then there is a third and final control point…starvation. Humans are not predated on and medical advances are getting ever better at preventing premature deaths. The result is that we have over populated the world. So does this mean we will eventually starve?
I was once quoted by one of my uni lecturers that there are more people alive today than have ever lived! By that he meant that if you add up all the people on this planet who have ever lived but now deceased they would not outnumber those that are currently living. When you think about this it is really quite frightening. The lecture was on environmental sustainability.
Bird flu threatened to become a global pandemic and it would not be unreasonable to expect we were due for something like that but the risk of this appears (touch wood) to have subsided. In the past plague has hit the human population hard but it has not been seen for hundreds of years. Strangely enough Scientists still do not know what the plague was or why it hasn’t been seen in modern times so perhaps that will remain a mystery.
I think the question is a little behind the times. The world is overpopulated as disease has largely lost its grip on us. Any pandemic that kills enough humans to restore the balance would knock out so much of our infrastructure that the world economy would crash. Many otherwise healthy people would then probably starve anyway because food supplies would suffer. The great plague of 17thC killed a 1/3 of the population of the
We all want to live, and we are doing that very well. Those who are able want to have children and we consider it our right. We all know the world is over populated but which one of us will volunteer to do anything about it? Disease is unlikely to provide the answer and we wouldn’t want it to. There are no acceptable answers. Perhaps the Chinese have come closest to the right idea after all.