Worst Places for Schoolchildren?

I came across an article called "The 10 Worst Places to Be a School-Aged Child." It's based on a study by the South African-based Global Campaign for Education. Here's their list of the top ten worst countries for school-kids.

1. Somalia
2. Eritrea
3. Haiti
4. Comoros
5. Ethiopia
6. Chad
7. Burkina Faso
8. Central African Republic
9. Mozambique
10. Zimbabwe

Other than Haiti, it appears that Africa has cornered the market on bad places for schoolchildren. According to the linked article, the criteria include: "access to basic education, teacher-to-student ratio and a lack of educational provisions for girls." With those factors in mind, there seem to be some major omissions. Two countries that spring immediately to mind are Afghanistan and Congo. Is school-age education really worse in Ethiopia than in Afghanistan, which is not only ravaged by war, but has terrorists regularly blowing up schools for girls? And I know Haiti is bad, but is it worse off than Congo, the rape capital of the world? If I were forced to send my son to a random foreign school and had to choose between Congo and Haiti, I'd take Haiti in a second.

The so-called "Kidnapping" Case in Haiti

With the caveat that all details may not be available, from what has been printed so far, the charges of kidnapping against American missionaries in Haiti appear to be a massive overreaction. These people were trying to help children after a huge disaster. They aren't kidnappers. The charge is ludicrous.

I've seen things on various atheist sites attacking the missionaries as people trying to steal children for God, and supporting the ridiculously harsh charge of kidnapping. In my opinion, these atheists are blinded by their hatred of religion -- and in some cases religious people. The missionaries failed to follow the proper procedures, yes. But Haiti isn't America. It isn't even the Dominican Republic. It's a country in total chaos. I find it amazing that a government helpless to provide even basic services, is somehow able to find the resources to arrest foreigners who are trying to assist after the disaster.

Naturally, as usual the Obama administration is completely worthless when it comes to protecting American citizens abroad.

the Obama administration said the matter was in Haitian hands. 

"This will be a judgment based by the Haitian government on Haitian law," State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said. "If Haiti decides to consult with the United States in terms of other legal avenues, obviously, there are legal procedures for us to do that."

Here we have the Obama administration pretending that Haiti is somehow just an ordinary, functioning country that we have to treat like an equal. Haiti was a basketcase before the earthquake. Now, the U.S. and other countries are providing a gigantic array of services and support, with the U.S. military controlling key parts of the capital. The country would probably have twice as many dead now, with disease running rampant, if it weren't for the U.S. and other international aid and direction. The Haitian government and law are bad jokes, and so is the Obama reaction. 

The Obama administration, which thinks we need to provide terrorists with rights, is perfectly happy to allow barely functioning third-world hellholes to decide the fate of Americans. Isn't it great that we have a president that thinks "Haitian law" is more important than American citizens?

Why Ask Religion?

One of the arguments you will almost always see deployed against relying on rational thinking alone, is that religion deals with big questions that can't be answered by science. Why are we here? What is the meaning of life? Why do bad things happen to good people? And so forth. The problem is that when religion offers answers, those answers aren't based on any evidence, but on the interpretation of holy books, ideas about God, religious philosophical tradition, and other explanations based on faith. If you have an active imagination, you could easily come up with your own answers that have just as much real-world validity -- none.

I was reading some articles about Haiti, and I happened upon "Haitians in the US Turn to Religion for Answers." Because theologians are obviously the best people to go to for explanations of natural disasters.

After last week's disaster, many of New York's Haitians are turning to religion for answers. But spiritual leaders have few to offer in the aftermath of a tragedy so overwhelming and incomprehensible.

Theologians admitting they have few answers is actually a positive step.

One of the questions so often repeated in the last 10 days is why this catastrophe struck a country already struggling under the burden of natural and man-made disasters, from hurricanes and floods to military coups and a string of unstable governments.

The problem with this question is that the question itself shows how religion promotes irrational thinking. Asking such a question implies that the earthquake was either directed in some way (such as the Pat Robertson assertion), or a thinking entity rather than a natural phenomenon. The fact that Haiti was already in pitiful shape has nothing to do with why an earthquake struck. The earthquake wasn't picking on Haiti. If you need an example of a major problem with religion, look no further than the fact that this question is so common. One theologians responds to the question,

He tells people they cannot ask why the earthquake struck Haiti because to do so implies that it should have struck somewhere else, that it should have caused some other country the pain and suffering that Haitians feel now.

Yeah, that's a great response. I guess it's just too difficult to explain that sometimes earthquakes strike along fault lines, that the proximity of the quake to Port au-Prince, and the lack of earthquake-resistant structures is what caused the massive devastation.

As usual with such disasters, a wiser minority question their faith.

"The question that people ask, 'Where was God when my brother was suffering, where was God when my mom or my loved one was struggling to breathe air when these rubbles were falling on top of them. Where was God?' "

Apparently observing and doing nothing to help. But of course theologians see it differently.

God is always there for people who are suffering.

That's great. Too bad he's still just observing and letting them continue to suffer. 

As a final note, when religion isn't offering made-up answers to difficult questions, or ignoring rational explanations for natural events,  it's giving God credit for positive human actions.

the response from the international community is an example of God's love.

Really? It looks more like it's an example of human beings helping other human beings in distress. Somehow God isn't responsible for the bad things such as all the death and suffering that he could have prevented completely if he wished -- being all-powerful and such -- but he is responsible for all the good things that happen, such as people surviving under rubble, or the massive charitable response. That's awfully convenient. It's almost as if God were an imaginary being who could simply be cited as an explanation for anything in particular, depending on one's outlook.

Money for Haiti

Guess who is putting up the largest share of aid to Haiti? I know, it's a big surprise. Here's a chart based on UN figures.

What are the odds that a large portion of that $106 million from private donors & organizations also comes from the U.S.? And note what's missing from the chart. Where's economic powerhouse China? They've put up a whole $4.4 million. I hope they can afford it. How about India? $5 million. At least they managed more than China. 

The U.S. numbers will go far higher, especially with the major military deployment. According to the administration,

Haiti will require "substantial assistance" from the U.S. and international governments for years to come

You might ask, why is it our job to rebuild Haiti and take care of Haitians? Or you could wonder,  what gives the U.S. government the right to give away huge amounts of U.S. taxpayer money, especially during a recession with the deficit & debt spiraling out of control, and major problems here at home? If you ask those questions you might also notice that you are in a fairly small minority. There's no outcry over aid to Haiti -- pretty much the opposite. For the most part, Americans expect to spend large sums of money doing everything possible to help whenever there is any sort of major disaster. It's something worth remembering the next time some anti-American type starts screeching about the evil U.S.

France & Brazil Whining About U.S. Operations in Haiti

France and Brazil are complaining about U.S. control of Toussaint L'Ouverture airport in Haiti. As usual no good deed by the U.S. goes unpunished. In the chaos after the earthquake, the Haitian government formerly transferred control of the airport to the U.S., obviously recognizing that someone needed to take charge, and that the U.S. was in the best position to do so. But the French and Brazilians aren't happy because some of their aid flights have been diverted to the Dominican Republic. Never mind that the damaged airport has a low capacity, that flights have to be prioritized, and that unorganized relief efforts aren't going to do much good. They've chosen to take offense at U.S. leadership. The Brazilian reaction:

Brazil, which saw its leadership of the UN peacekeeping mission as a calling card of its burgeoning influence, was also indignant when three flights were not allowed to land. The foreign ministry reportedly asked Hillary Clinton to grant Brazil priority over chartered flights. Nelson Jobim, the defence minister, said Brazil would not relinquish command duties and suggested it, not Washington, would continue to lead UN forces.

Yeah, because Brazil's influence is just more important than actually getting relief efforts organized. Brazil has so much experience leading massive international relief efforts. I'm sure they'd be much better suited for leadership than the U.S. And then there are the French.

Paris complained the airport had become a US "annexe"

Instead of working with us, recognizing that the Haiti is right in our backyard, the French would rather whine, snivel and cause problems. I guess that's something you can always count on no matter what the situation.