Republicans (natch) have introduced yet another “Defense” of Marriage amendment bill.
It’s co-sponsored by Larry “Wide Stance” Craig and David “Diaperman” Vitter.
This has got to be a joke. No one can be that irony-blind.
At a time when I, like a lot of the country, was starting to suffer from outrage fatigue, it seems that today brought a higher-than-usual number of news stories in the “You’ve got to be fucking kidding me” department.
One of Erik Prince’s companies (no, not Blackwater; another one) invokes Shari’a law when it’s convenient:
RALEIGH – To defend itself against a lawsuit by the widows of three American soldiers who died on one of its planes in Afghanistan, a sister company of the private military firm Blackwater has asked a federal court to decide the case using Islamic law, known as Shari’a.
Last year, they tried arguing that the airline was a government contractor, and individuals can’t sue the government, but judges didn’t buy that. So now they’re arguing that since the crash was in Afghanistan, the case is subject to Afghan law, which is basically Shari’a.
Remember when questions like “Is it okay to torture people as a matter of government policy?” were no-brainers?
Ah, those were simpler days. Yesterday, John Yoo, the guy who came up with the legal rationalization for Gitmo and torture, in testimony before Congress wouldn’t say whether the president has the right to order that someone be buried alive.
In a blast from the past, Cheney’s chief of staff David Addington regales us with last year’s hit single, “The Vice President Isn’t In the Executive Branch“.
Reuters reports
that Spain is expected to pass a law granting rights to non-human apes:
MADRID (Reuters) – Spain’s parliament voiced its support
on Wednesday for the rights of great apes to life and freedom in what
will apparently be the first time any national legislature has called
for such rights for non-humans.
Dembski’s
reaction:
Here is one consequence of evolution being used to justify
strict continuity between humans and other forms of life. Discovery
Institute’s persistent stress on humans being made in the image
of God and that not being a privilege extended to the rest of the
animal world makes more and more sense. [Slippery slope
snipped.]
I just heard that George Carlin died on Sunday.
Well, shit.
Fuck.
Piss, cunt, motherfucker, cocksucker.
Tits.
I first ran into his Seven Words You Can Never Say on TV when I was, oh, twelve or thirteen. At the time, I thought it was the funniest thing ever.
Later, I decided it wasn’t actually all that funny; that the humor came entirely from the fact that you’re not supposed to say those words—in other words, it was an elaborate poop joke.
Still later, I listened to the sketch again, and realized that no, it’s funny even if you’re not shocked by words like “cocksucker”. And while the humor is based on the fact that you’re not supposed to say words like that, it’s more subtle than just a poop joke; it’s more of a commentary on society, and the interaction between the meaning of words and their connotations.
But to hell with that. Here’s a sketch of Carlin’s that’s all about death and heaven:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niqVVENiY2c&hl=en]
And finally, let’s thank the sun for the fact that we had Carlin as long as we did. And Joe Pesci, if you’re listening, please make sure he’s not in any discomfort.
I can do magic. I don’t mean the card trick kind; I mean real magic.
I can hear dead people (I have on my iPod a wax-cylinder recording of a letter that Sir Arthur Sullivan sent to Thomas Edison, both of whom are dead).
Whenever a relative of mine is ill or has an accident, I know about it (my mom, who keeps in touch with everyone, calls me on the phone to let me know).
I can move objects with my mind, even from hundreds or thousands of miles away (my mind tells my fingers to do a Google search, which causes a disk arm in California to move).
We’re all familiar with Clarke Third Law, that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”. A corollary is that magic is “merely” technology, if you understand what’s going on.
Greta Christina has scooped me, saying what I wanted to say, but making it sound purty. It concerns a testimonial for The Pope’s Cologne (a cologne supposedly made from a recipe that Pius IX enjoyed, or some such):
A few minutes before the brunch ended we got the bad news that a friend of my parents for over 50 years had just died. He was struggling with cancer but did not win the battle, he was 76 years old. The following morning we assisted the wake and as my mother hugged his widow she mentioned how pleasant her fragrance was. My mom proceeded to explain to her that it was a mother’s day gift given to her by one of her daughters. His widow expressed a feeling of peace and comfort as she was hugging my mom, and that it was the fragrance that made her feel this way. […]
What I experienced later will be a sight I will never forget!!! The widow used the cologne to “anoint” her husband EVERY 20 minutes. She would sprinkle it on his hands, his head, his forehead, and his neck. You could see in her eyes she had found a way of redemption through the cologne. Everyone was asking about the cologne and its origin. Everyone that came in to give her their condolences could not stop asking about the pleasant aroma they were experiencing. Everyone was quiet and in awe for hours. She also kept on rubbing the bottle as if it was some sort of amulet or charm.
(Bold emphasis added.)
Greta reaches the same conclusion as I did:
I do not ever — ever — want to hear another progressive theologian say that modern religious thought doesn't involve magical thinking. […]
But if you think nobody believes [in the personal interventionist God who answers prayers] in the rather larger world outside of theology schools, you need to visit Lourdes. Or attend a prayer meeting being organized by the parents of a terminally sick child. […]
Or else, just go to a funeral where the grieving widow is anointing her dead husband with Magical Oil of Pope.
But go read the whole thing.
The “Editorial Review” of Bill Dembski’s new book says that it’s aimed at
readers whose understanding may have been confused by educational bias and one–sided arguments and attacks.
In case you were wondering who exactly these readers might be, Billy clarifies:
[The book] is geared specifically at mobilizing Christian young people, homeschoolers, and church youth groups with the ID alternative to Darwinian evolution.
So there you go. ID is scientific, and there’s nothing religious about it. It just happens to be marketed at religious folks, but that’s just a coincidence.
The BBC reports:
Foreign suspects held in Guantanamo Bay have the right to challenge their detention in US civilian courts, the US Supreme Court has ruled. […]
The Military Commissions Act (MCA) passed in 2006 removed the right of habeas corpus and set up tribunals to try detainees who were not US citizens.
This is, of course, excellent news for human rights, and I’m glad the SCOTUS has done the Right Thing. Presumably this also means that the original reason for keeping these people in Guántanamo—in Cuba, and therefore outside the jurisdiction of US law—is gone.
Now, I’m sure that even now, a bunch of people are complaining about how the detainees in Guántanamo are terrorists and how we shouldn’t be coddling them.
I don’t doubt that a lot of the detainees are, in fact, enemy fighters, or terrorists, or generally supporters of America’s enemies, people who ought to be locked away for a long time. But the thing is, we’re supposed to have this thing called justice. And justice, being blind, applies to everyone, whether they’re pillars of the community or murderous scumbags. It’s one of those things that defines a civilized society.
As I understand the article, this ruling simply restored the right of habeas corpus to prisoners in Gitmo. For those who’ve forgotten, habeas corpus is when the government has to show that it has a good reason for keeping someone locked up. Basically, if a cop arrests you for looking like a drug dealer, he then has to prove that there’s good reason to believe that you really are a drug dealer, or else let you go.
Which brings me to the part that blew my mind:
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who voted against the ruling, warned that “it sets our military commanders the impossible task of proving in a civilian court … that evidence supports the confinement of each and every prisoner”.
WTF? Did he just say that it’s too much trouble to have to show to a court that every person currently locked up, should be locked up? I hope the reporter got this wrong, because the alternative is that we have an insane Supreme Court justice.
Ron Strelecki posted a comment over at chez Julia, which I think deserves wider circulation:
I regularly experience what I call the “band saw effect”. That’s the feeling I get when I am at a tool store looking at a $600 band saw that I need to do just one little thing. I can’t pay $600 for a band saw, and then return it after I cut one little piece of wood. I think to myself, “If I was a member of a church, there’d be a dozen old guys with band saws sitting in the back of their sheds. All I’d have to do is ask one old guy, and he’d say, ‘Oh yeah, Mike’s got a band saw…’ and then I’d go over to Mike’s and drink lemonade, do my band saw thing… maybe I’d get his VCR clock to stop blinking 12:00… everybody wins.”
That’s the kind of service that a Church really serves. Old guys with tools… Atheists have none of this. There is no gathering point. There’s no hangout. Churches serve a load of very real functions that you can’t imagine needing until they aren’t there. Like, how do you know your mechanic isn’t ripping you off? If he has to sit two pews away from you for the rest of his life and you babysit his kids, he (probably) won’t.
He’s right, of course. And this is one of the great benefits of religion: having a circle of friendly people.
On one hand, I want to say that people who identify themselves as atheists are the ones independent or antisocial enough not to care what other people think, or that they can’t in good conscience join a church. (As opposed to people who may not believe in any gods per se, but are members of a suitably-liberal church, and/or keep their doubts to themselves for the sake of fitting in.)
On the other hand, I want to say it’s our own damn fault: it’s not as if there aren’t any secular organizations to join, be it Toastmasters, the local library’s book-reading club, or just happy hour on Friday with your coworkers.
There are even explicitly atheist social organizations, like the Atheist Community of Austin, or the Beltway Atheists in Washington.
One of the loopy denizens of Rapture Ready wrote:
My husband framed our marriage license when we recieved it in the mail, I was very touched because he did that. It is still in the same frame, and always will be. After I heard the news about legalized gay marriage, I just happened to look at my marriage license and my heart sank, it was as though it was stripped of it’s value.
(via FSTDT)
Imagine someone writing in 1967, after Loving v. Virginia:
After I heard the news about legalized interracial marriage, I just happened to look at my marriage license and my heart sank, it was as though it was stripped of its value.
If anyone can explain how this analogy is wrong, I’m all ears.