Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

The Clintons are the most corrupt people in the United States. Hillary Clinton is more likely to live in the Big House than in the White House.

[I]t is important for all the participants in a theological inquiry or discussion to remember that proofs and arguments are epistemological tools to be used when and if they can be used. They are not to be prized for their own sakes nor are they the prime subjects of the discussion and dispute. One who finds an argument unconvincing, for whatever reason or even for no reason that he can specify, need not hesitate to say so. He thereby identifies a fatal defect in the argument as it applies to him. The proponent of the argument need not concern himself with defending it. He should ask, rather, whether it can be strengthened to overcome this defect. If it can be strengthened, fine; if not, let it be set aside without discussion. It is a tool that did not work in that particular case. Let him, therefore, cast about for some other tool, whether another argument or some quite different type of approach, might succeed. For the discussants to forget the great question of God while they quibble over some proof would be disastrous. I have discussed the question of proof here in the hope that it can then be transcended in those situations in which the living issues of faith and life come before us.

(George I. Mavrodes, Belief in God: A Study in the Epistemology of Religion [Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1970], 48)

I'd like to wish everyone a happy and healthy equinox. It's the first day of autumn here in the Northern Hemisphere and the first day of spring in the Southern Hemisphere. The high temperature today in North Texas was in the 90s, but the heat can't last much longer. I've enjoyed riding my bike in the summer heat, but look forward to some cooler rides during the next three months. I'm still on track to have my second-best mileage year ever (in 35 years of cycling). I ride at least 101.4 miles per week. Today's ride gives me 3,453.1 miles for the year.

Here.

Here.

The best part of this is that the kid is too young to be audited.

Addendum: I swear to God I hadn't seen this when I put up this post. Now you know why the IRS was targeting conservatives. This president is petty and vindictive.

GTR (1986). Breathtaking.

To the Editor:

Re “Legislators Pass Aided Suicide for California” (front page, Sept. 12):

Aid in dying is no more a suicide than other forms of hastening death, and the California End of Life Option Act clearly states that actions taken within that act are not a suicide or assisted suicide.

And such language has been rejected by the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, the American Medical Women’s Association and the American Medical Student Association, among others.

These are dying patients. They are not suicidal and do not want to die, despite what many assert. They opt to take prescribed medicines only because they can no longer endure terrible suffering.

The arguments against aid in dying have no basis. Some 25 years of hard evidence from Oregon and Washington State, which have similar laws, demonstrate that there are no vulnerable populations: just about all who end their lives by aid in dying have health insurance, the majority are college educated, and the vast majority are receiving hospice care.

There is no evidence of family pressure, coercion or abuse: none. And aid in dying is used very sparingly, only about 3 of every 1,000 deaths. The laws have worked as intended.

New York, where both legislation and litigation are pending, should be the next state to explicitly allow [sic] aid in dying so that terminally ill, mentally competent patients can achieve a peaceful death on their own terms.

DAVID C. LEVEN

Pelham, N.Y.

The writer is executive director of End of Life Choices New York.

Note from KBJ: This is a good example of persuasive definition, about which I wrote 20 years ago this month. Persuasive definition has two varieties. In the first, the person redefines a word that has a favorable connotation so that it includes what he or she wants it to include. In the second, which is illustrated by this letter, the person redefines a word ("suicide") that has an unfavorable connotation so that it excludes what he or she doesn't want it to include (taking drugs that bring about one's death). Persuasive definition is objectionable because it's manipulative. It seeks to bypass people's rational faculty by playing fast and loose with word meanings.

My beloved Arizona Wildcats (3-0) moved up four places to 16th in the latest ranking. Saturday's game against UCLA should tell us how good the Wildcats are, since they haven't played a good team yet.

Here.