The Demand For A Product Of Cologates

Critics of the prison system Multiverse

is curious to see how after thousands of years of civilization there are still some systems or human institutions remain essentially unchanged, however much we advance in other fields such as social science, politics or technology. One example is the prison system. For thousands of years, humans have resorted to prisons to eliminate crime, and although the details have changed the essence of the system remains unchanged. Perhaps the reason

last of that permanence is a widespread feeling that prisons are inevitable. But no human institution is inevitable if it is not really justified its existence. Asked if prisons were really necessary response can only be answered before another more immediate question: Is it useful to the prison system?

In this sense, the usefulness of the prison system is primarily determined by three functions: punitive (to punish the guilty), preventive (to deter citizens from committing crimes) and rehabilitation (to reintegrate the prisoner in our society and prevent re- offending):

1) rehabilitation function. To what extent are rehabilitated people passing by a prison? Do most are rehabilitated or otherwise reoffend after their stay in it? It is difficult to understand how a prison environment, consisting of all sex offenders, can help a person to forget the crime. It seems more logical, however, that the "university of crime" foster new relationships between criminals and learning new forms of crime. Is it an exaggeration to say that the prison actually encourages crime, and therefore is counterproductive?

2) Function preventive. It is more than arguable that prisons are an effective crime deterrent system. If we look at the crimes of blood, most are passionate and therefore irrational, and it is unlikely that a person acting irrationally stop to weigh rationally the consequences that lead to the realization of his act.

As regards other crimes, the vast majority are due to poverty or marginalization (theft, drug trafficking, etc..), Ie either to sheer survival or to the environment, two factors much more likely to weigh on the performance of a person that the threat of future punishment. In this context, a preventive measure certainly more effective would be to eliminate pockets of poverty and marginalization of our societies.

3) punitive function. Certainly the prison is a harsh punishment for the offender, but there is little point that beyond the simple satisfaction of a primal instinct for revenge. And aside from the no use of that function, we must consider other points of ethical and moral, is it lawful deprivation of liberty of a human being? Will there come a day when the right to liberty is considered a human right as fundamental as the right to life, and therefore the State can not even threaten him?

We must also take into account that the deprivation of liberty of a human being not only punish the man, but all of its surroundings. What happens to the family of a convict? Why is condemned to that family to give your loved one? What will happen to those who may depend sentimental, or economically material condemned as a parent, a spouse or a child? We are talking about a tragedy that transcends the punishment to a single fault to affect several innocent. Is it ethical therefore uphold the punitive function of prison?

Another issue we must add to the above is the immense social injustice filters leading to the jail. I am referring to the judicial system suffer from the system millions in fines to bail, to the lack of free legal defense (which means that the best lawyers are also the most expensive). This is clearly designed to punish the offender poor and rich return the offender unpunished, which makes the whole judicial system in general and prison in particularities, something very wicked and unjust.

be alleged that the reason that the prison system remains unchanged over the centuries, despite being unfair, counterproductive, useless and ethically questionable, is none other than the absence a realistic and viable alternative to it. But the truth is that humanity has not made any serious effort to rethink the system, perhaps because the criminals are the last human beings that anyone would worry. Either way I think the time has come to open a serious debate, calm and reflective about the prison system to remove and replace it with another (or others, since the problem we are dealing with is wide and therefore requires more than one solution) more useful, fair and humane.

Shelly Martinez And Jewel Denyle

evolutionary theory lost

"Another theoretical physicist Lee Smolin has developed a tempting Darwinian version of the multiverse theory, including both serial and parallel elements. Smolin's idea, outlined in The Life of the Cosmos, depends on the theory of universes were born child of the parent universe, not in a Big Crunch fully protected, but more localized black holes. Smolin adds a form of inheritance: the fundamental constants of a universe versions child are slightly "mutated" from his father's constant. Inheritance is the fundamental ingredient of Darwinian natural selection, and the rest of the Smolin theory flows naturally. Those universes that have what it takes to "survive" and "play" come to predominate in the multiverse. "What makes failure "includes long enough to reproduce. Given the fact that reproduction takes place in black holes, universes selected should have what it takes to generate black holes. This capability involves several other properties. For example, the trend matter to condense into clouds and then into stars is a prerequisite to generate black holes. Also, the stars are, as we have seen, precursor chemical is an interesting development, and hence to life. Thus, as Smolin suggests, has been a Darwinian natural selection of universes in the multiverse, indirectly favoring the evolution of fertility and indirectly black hole production of life. Not all physicists are enthusiastic about the idea of \u200b\u200bSmolin, although it is said that the physicist, Nobel winner Murray Gell-Mann said, "Smolin? Is this young with these crazy ideas? Can not be wrong ". A naughty biologist might like to know if some other physicists are in need of improvement Darwinian consciousness. "

In this excerpt from The God Delusion ( recently spoke of the great Richard Dawkins ) We are talking about a revolutionary scientific theory, mixing consistently in the top two branches of physics as diverse as cosmology and Darwinian theory natural selection. The process used for that Lee Smolin, and that Dawkins may not entirely satisfy explain, is simple:

1) Just as the Big Bang was the beginning of the universe, the theory of "Big Crunch" predicts that the expansion of space-time due to that end being slowed by the force of gravity and all matter in the Cosmos will be gathered and compressed into a single point or "singularity." This instability may suffer so that they would have to expand again by another Big Bang, and perpetuating the Universe in a sequence ("infinite?) Expansion-contraction: Big Bangs followed by Big Crunches, which in turn provoke new Big Bangs.

2) According to this theory, it is logical to think that the Big Crunch not only causes the death of a universe, but also the birth of a new one. There would, therefore, a "child universe" born of a "parent universe."

3) But we know it "small Crunches" that exist in our universe, in the center of many galaxies is black holes. These are created when the immense gravity of a supermassive star comes to a collapse of the fabric of space-time into a singularity similar to that formed at the time of a Big Crunch, but a much smaller scale. Black holes would then be a Big Crunch in miniature.

4) According to Smolin's theory, the same way that a Big Crunch creates a new universe, black holes could perhaps do the same. Perhaps there is only one Big Crunch, but many, and these black holes. If the whole universe devoured by black holes ended, multiple and unstable singularities that would be established following the collapse (massive black holes) would lead to the formation of multiple expansions (Big Bangs), and therefore of new universes. We thus find a multiverse that is reproduced and multiplied, so as you would like a living organism.

5) The law of probability tells us that the new universes created from the "parent universe" could have very different characteristics, and in fact the possibilities are endless, but only a universe that has black holes could grow again. Thus the black hole becomes the "reproductive" universes contained in the multiverse, and any universe in which events do not occur as black holes would be doomed to extinction, and vice versa: a universe that has Black holes have many chances to reproduce.

6) But a universe that has black holes is quite different from one that does not possess. If black holes exist, it is because there are stars and they occur because the cosmological constant universe (the gravitational force, for example) are what you have in our universe. Sufficient a slight variation in the values \u200b\u200bof these constants for our universe was very different, but Smollin believe that the values \u200b\u200bof the constants of the "child universes" are similar or very similar to the "parent universe." We thus obtain a form of "inheritance", and that slight margin of error allowed in the values \u200b\u200bof "child universe" with respect to the "parent universe" would be the equivalent of a "mutation." Both factors (inheritance and mutation) are what make evolution possible, which means that would eventually dominate the Multiverse universes with black holes.

7) On the other hand, the existence of stars (which make the existence of black holes) also implies the existence of complex chemicals (formed only in the stellar core), which allow the existence of complex chemical interactions to turn give rise to life, and after intelligent life. This suggests that the existence of black holes in a universe more than likely the existence of intelligent beings within it. Therefore, the evolution of the multiverse would be at various levels.

All this is summarized in that we could live in a multiverse that is subject the same factors that living things: reproduction, multiplication, heredity, mutation and evolution, and therefore is an "agency" is born, grows, multiplies and evolves. Would live within a cell belonging to a cosmic being very similar to a living being, or at least subject to similar laws. In fact, that cosmic evolution would have reached the point where it arises in a mind capable of understanding, or at least trying. Not only have achieved the degree of "living organism", but also of "intelligent living organism."

is true that Smolin's theory is purely speculative and lacks any evidence for it. But it is an important theory is wrong but because it opens our minds to new concepts and potential future discoveries. On the other hand, if only the core of Smolin's theory have any credibility and the world also suffer some kind of cosmic evolution based on natural laws, this would have obvious implications, not only in science but also religion: just as that natural selection applied to living beings made unnecessary the concept of a Creator to explain the great complexity of them, the same law applied to the Cosmos could also explain the great complexity of this without any external factor to it.

29 Weeks Pregnant And Stools Are Black

left senseless crime

- Win PP and PSOE, both in number of votes into seats (both win 5 more). A new step, then, to American-style bipartisanship.

- collapses IU (passed 5 to 2 seats), probably due to the mismanagement of Llamazares, without discarding of all the excuses he has presented it: the electoral law, the useful vote and bipartisan trend. In any case lost its parliamentary group, about what will happen to the Joint Group as any residual force.

- ERC collapses (from 8 to 3 seats). Do not forget that the excellent results he achieved in 2004 were due mainly to the fierce campaign Carod-Rovira suffered at that time by the right because of his meeting with ETA.

- Right Catalonia (CiU) won one seat (with a total of 11) and it probably rests on the PSOE during this term, given the good results that have given money to the "center."

- The PNV loses more than 100,000 voters and a seat, having been overtaken as largest party in Euskadi in favor of the PSOE, for the first time in its history. "It promises that a future conquest of the Basque territory PPSOE? More than one-independence is shaking with fear at the possibility.

- EA loses his seat and disappears Congress. It will be difficult to return to it.

- Canary Coalition lost a seat and gets 2.

- BNG Nafarroa Bai and manage to keep their seat each.

- New: Rosa Díez's party won seats, so unfortunately continue charging the public treasury.

- My personal choice has not reached the 300,000 votes and has declined compared to 2004.

- The inactivity of the state is more or less the same as 2004 but has increased in Euskal Herria Hego to reach eight points. The leftwing nationalist campaign in favor of abstention has taken effect, but only among regular voters. Would there have been more abstention in the absence of the ETA attack last day of campaigning? In any case not benefited.

The conclusions are obvious: out very detrimental to the multiparty system in favor of PP and PSOE. The shift to right center that will take both parties is evident. On the other hand, the parliamentary left collapses down to almost nothing, while there are new right-wing forces as UPyD.

Anyway, now more than ever have won as usual, while others have lost.

Where Can I Buy Fabric To Make Fluffies

I think we can draw some conclusions about the latest attack by ETA:

1) ETA has carried out an attack easier and convenient: a person without an escort and in a town like Mondragon, where I suppose that the organization will have significant support. I conclude therefore that ETA wanted by all means do not fail on this occasion.

2) It seems clear that an attack carried out two days before the election is intended to influence them. The question is whether this will eventually influence and in which direction. For now, I fear that no such attack had been less participation (by that of "ETA wants to not vote, so voted all over the world" or by statements Carrasco's daughter calling for participation), for what gives paradox that the killing undermines the strategy of abstaining from the nationalist left. High participation also benefits the PSOE, with the risk that Zapatero reach an absolute majority and reach a clear conclusion: that the Basques stick up for the polls, because even the responses of ETA at the same benefit you.

3) Isaias Carrasco was not an elected official, but a former elected official. It appears that ETA opens a new front (another): the former elected officials. The next step will be to imagine that the rank and simple, and I think this step will prove to be targets of ETA even mere voters, thereby giving the reason that the manipulators Euskadi ensure that there is a fear vote. On the other hand, I think that ETA's supporters are more sympathetic to its stock when the murder in question is a member of the ESF or a politician who has anything to do with state repression. I guess one more will have been hand-to-head to see that this time the crime has been directed against a person who already had nothing to do with the apparatus of state repression (if they ever had something to do that is enough), so that social support ETA is today somewhat less than yesterday.

Conclusion: I believe that this murder was senseless even from the cold point of view of political tactics. This is what has let the military conduct policy analysis.

Xilisoft Dvd Creator 6 License

more useful Voting Article 19

politically responsible Everyone has a duty to consider its position regarding the forthcoming general election, against which the radical left has few alternatives to be analyzed rationally and calmly. The

at first sight could be the most obvious is precisely what discard before: vote for the PSOE. Nobody who actually see on the left can help to establish a government that has been characterized by its position in international politics quite fascist (active collaboration with the occupation of Afghanistan and Lebanon, complicit with Israeli and American terrorism, confrontation with Venezuela, etc..) and with respect to the Basque conflict (negotiation-trap, outlawed, mass arrests of political leaders, torture ...), or his cowardice with dyes accomplices in other national issues: the economy, church-state relationship, etc. Some tentative progress in certain social rights (gay marriage law) do not compensate at all the above.

Another option would be to vote in another force on the left, for example UI. Obviously this is a far more left-wing party the PSOE, but not enough, or at least not enough to stop paying his support and contributions to it. It is true that both IU and ERC have had a key pressure for the government of Zapatero derechizase no further, but the conclusion remains the same: it does not offset the full support and complicity that have provided the PSOE.

And the latter is true for left-wing parties as IU as nationalist parties PNV and CiU as: votándoles guarantee the parliamentary support and complicity of the "consensus" that needs Zapatero.

But if we discard the parliamentary parties ... Who do vote then? We can forget any kind of pragmatism and choose to offer our support to innumerable (and often wacky) minority parties also submitted to the elections, it will not be very different to throw away the ballot next: do not get any representation (d'Hondt law and the provincial district and are responsible it) and our votes will be included within the limited category of "other", so will not help.

We only have, therefore, two proposals: one abstention and blank votes, and both are excellent in showing our disagreement and our contempt for this "democracy" glue. The leftwing nationalist campaign is conducted in the Basque Country abstention, for example, is a magnificent example of demonstration of protest against the system and the government to suffer. Predictably, the abstention orchestrated hundreds of thousands of people will be a real blow to democracy that called rigging.

However, to join this campaign in other parts of the state is an error. If someone wants to do a show similar to the nationalist and declines, will likely be added to all that passive abstention composed of citizens politically unconscious, among other reasons because there is no campaign to call the locals, like myself, the abstention. Thus, the protest vote would remain in nothing.

My conclusion therefore is that if we make a show of contempt for this system cuasifascista is no other recourse than white vote, which hopefully will be posted along with the rest of blank ballots as an expression of protest dissidents in the country, ensuring not to be confused with passivity or any political passivity.

I also can say that I consider the forthcoming elections in terms of "useful vote." In fact, I think my vote is going to be the most useful of all.