OVO

Trevor Blake on Books: The Boy-Man by Tim Jeal [LINK-ZUM]

A biography of Lord Baden-Powell (22 February 1857 - 8 January 1941) and a history of his greatest achievement, the Boy Scouts.

In most of the world you can be a girl Boy Scout (see FAQ at Scouting for All). You can be in prison for robbery, rape, or murder and still be a Boy Scout. But heaven help you if you try to be an atheist Boy Scout. The Boy Scouts of America aren't vague about this ban either - they expressly state that no atheist can be a Boy Scout. The Boy Scouts is a private organization, and I think it is reasonable to allow them to exclude whoever they want. I think it is a private affair that the Boy Scouts - the British original - allows atheists to join while the Boy Scouts of America does not. But in doing so, the BSA should not have access to tax-funded schools or tax-funded public lands, as our taxes are not supposed to support private organizations that discriminate.

But is the Boy Scouts of America is a private organization or is it a recruiting arm of the Mormons? Nearly 10% of the members of the Boy Scouts Advisory Council live in Salt Lake City; Mormons are less than 2% of the U.S. population but make up 21% of the Boy Scouts. The Salt Lake Tribune reports: "If the Boy Scouts of America is forced to accept gays as scoutmasters, the LDS Church will withdraw from the organization and take more than 400,000 Scouts with it." As late as 1974, Mormon BSA troops reserved leadership positions for white men only.

All of this nonsense is at a distance from what Lord Baden-Powell set out to do with his Boy Scouts. Read The Boy-Man and find out for yourself.

Labels: atheist, books, mormon, religion, sex, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Rand Abdel-Qader and Leila Hussein [LINK-ZUM]

Sadie Gray - Girl, 17, killed in Iraq for loving a British soldier: A 17-year-old Iraqi girl was murdered by her father in an honour killing after falling in love with a British soldier she met while working on an aid programme in Basra [...] Rand Abdel-Qader was stamped upon, suffocated and stabbed by her father, then given an unceremonious burial to emphasise her disgrace. Police released her father without charge two hours after his arrest. 'Not much can be done when we have an honour killing case,' said Sergeant Ali Jabbar of Basra police. 'You are in a Muslim society and women should live under religious laws. The father has very good contacts inside the Basra government and it wasn't hard for him to be released and what he did to be forgotten.'"

Afif Sarhan and Caroline Davies - 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love': "For Abdel-Qader Ali there is only one regret: that he did not kill his daughter at birth. 'If I had realised then what she would become, I would have killed her the instant her mother delivered her,' he said with no trace of remorse. Two weeks after The Observer revealed the shocking story of Rand Abdel-Qader, 17, murdered because of her infatuation with a British soldier in Basra, southern Iraq, her father is defiant. Sitting in the front garden of his well-kept home in the city's Al-Fursi district, he remains a free man, despite having stamped on, suffocated and then stabbed his student daughter to death. Abdel-Qader, 46, a government employee, was initially arrested but released after two hours. Astonishingly, he said, police congratulated him on what he had done. 'They are men and know what honour is,' he said. [...] Though her horrified mother, Leila Hussein, called Rand's two brothers, Hassan, 23, and Haydar, 21, to restrain Abdel-Qader as he choked her with his foot on her throat, they joined in. Her shrouded corpse was then tossed into a makeshift grave without ceremony as her uncles spat on it in disgust. 'Death was the least she deserved,' said Abdel-Qader. 'I don't regret it. I had the support of all my friends who are fathers, like me, and know what she did was unacceptable to any Muslim that honours his religion,' he said."

Afif Sarhan and Caroline Davies - Mother who defied the killers is gunned down: "Leila Hussein lived her last few weeks in terror. Moving constantly from safe house to safe house, she dared to stay no longer than four days at each. It was the price she was forced to pay after denouncing and divorcing her husband [...] Though she feared reprisals for speaking out, she really believed that she would soon be safe. Arrangements were well under way to smuggle her to the Jordanian capital, Amman. In fact, she was on her way to meet the person who would help her escape when a car drew up alongside her and two other women who were walking her to a taxi. Five bullets were fired: three of them hit Leila, 41. She died in hospital after futile attempts to save her. [...] It was two weeks after Rand's death on 16 March that a grief-stricken Leila, unable to bear living under the same roof as her husband, found the strength to leave him. She had been beaten and had had her arm broken. It was a courageous move. Few women in Iraq would contemplate such a step. Leila told The Observer in April: 'No man can accept being left by a woman in Iraq. But I would prefer to be killed than sleep in the same bed as a man who was able to do what he did to his own daughter.' [...] Mariam [a woman who had been helping Leila escape] has moved out of her home. But within hours of speaking to The Observer a close friend went to her new address to deliver a message that had been left for her at her front door. It read: 'Death to betrayers of Islam who don't deserve God's forgiveness. Speaking less you will live more.' She believes it was sent by Leila's killers. 'They want this story to be buried with Leila,' she said. 'But I cannot close my eyes to all this.'"

[Much of the Muslim world is skilled at closing its eyes to these stories. Muslims around the world will riot in the streets for weeks if a newspaper prints the wrong sort of cartoon, but laugh and shrug if an outsider is shocked at how they brutalize real live human beings. Whatever Islam may have been, it has lost its way. Islam must be secularized or abandoned. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, sex, theocracy

Craig Gustafson: San Diego County workers may be excused from gay weddings [LINK-ZUM]

San Diego County plans to comply with a state Supreme Court ruling that allows same-sex marriages but will not force employees to perform the ceremonies if they cite religious or moral objections. County Assessor-Recorder-Clerk Greg Smith, whose office issues marriage licenses, said he has informed the roughly 115 employees deputized to conduct ceremonies to tell him if they object to same-sex marriages. Smith said he needs to know if he'll have to juggle employees around or train more to handle what could be thousands of gay couples arriving at his office after the court's ruling takes effect next month. [...] County Counsel John Sansone has advised Smith to wait until the state gives direction before issuing licenses. He said the county will comply with the court ruling, it's just a matter of when it can start. Sansone also said employees cannot simply object to performing same-sex ceremonies. They must give a legitimate religious or moral reason for refusing, he said.

[Article continues at link. The state of Oregon has banned, offered, and rescinded same-sex marriage licenses. I have spoken with opponents of same-sex marriage as they campaigned. When I asked them what legal rights available only to married couples they want same-sex couples not to have, they have been either at a complete loss or state clearly that they do not want to deny any of those rights to same-sex couples. A few more questions reveal their genuine concern. They believe that their place of worship will be legally required to conduct same-sex marriages. No place of worship has ever been required to conduct any marriages. Clergy are free to decide who they will or will not conduct a wedding ceremony for. Legal recognition of same-sex marriage will not change this fact. As has always been the case, there is a difference between weddings (what happens among friends and family) and marriage (a legal contract sanctioned with the State). Should legal recognition of same-sex marriage occur, clergy will remain free to refuse to conduct their weddings. Getting that through the head of those who oppose legal recognition of same-sex marriage would likely cause their efforts to evaporate. The compliment to the freedom clergy have in being free to decide who they will wed is that the State is not free in the same way. The rule of law applies to all. State workers should not be free to refuse to issue marriage licenses. If they object to doing so strongly enough, they are free to find a new job. I cannot imagine what criteria County Counsel Sansone will use to determine what "a legitimate religious or moral reason for refusing" might be. County Counsel Sansone perhaps might benefit from reading the Constitution of the United States of America in which it is clearly stated that the State is not fit to establish religion, not fit to judge which religions are legitimate or not. Should State employees be free to refuse to issue marriage licenses for religious or moral reasons, you can be sure it won't stop with same-sex marriages. State workers would then be free to refuse to issue marriage licenses for multi-ethnic marriages, as commanded by Numbers 12:1. State workers would then be free to refuse to issue fishing licenses for clams, oysters, crabs, lobsters, and shrimp, as commanded by Leviticus 11:10-12. State workers would then be free to refuse to issue teaching licenses to women at some schools, as commanded by 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. There's a very good reason why the United States government was advised from the very start to keep out of the religion business. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, sex, theocracy

AP: Divorce, unwed parenting costs billions [LINK-ZUM]

Divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing cost U.S. taxpayers more than $112 billion a year, according to a study commissioned by four groups advocating more government action to bolster marriages. Sponsors say the study is the first of its kind and hope it will prompt lawmakers to invest more money in programs aimed at strengthening marriages.

[Article continues at link. Full state and federal recognition of same-sex marriages would increase the number of families. Full state and federal support for same-sex couples to adopt would increase the number of families. Science-based sex education would decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies. Increased access to contraception and abortion and sterilization would decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies. I'm not all that smart or educated, but I'm quite sure the above four-point plan would work very well and cost very little. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: science, sex

BBC: US network faces $1m nudity fine [LINK-ZUM]

US television network ABC may have to pay a fine of $1.4m (707,000 UK Pounds) for airing an episode of NYPD Blue which depicted female nudity. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said the 2003 show had "multiple, close-up views" of a woman's buttocks before the US watershed. The FCC deems "sexual or excretory activities" shown in an "offensive" way before 2200 as indecent.

[Article continues at link. Here is the scene in question (video). What really happened in the less-than-40-seconds which the FCC fined? A woman took off her bath robe and stepped into a shower. The actress in question was not forced to do this and was likely paid handsomely, as was everyone on the set. No one, anywhere, was forced to watch that episode of that television show. No one, anywhere, was harmed in any way by watching that episode of that television show. Truth be told, most people do take of their clothes before stepping into the shower. This was not a sexual act nor was it an excretory activity. I can imagine some people being surprised, or embarrased, or confused by what they saw. But if their discomfort eats away at them for more than a short while, they have problems unrelated to this episode of this television show. One of them is watching television, and there's an easy answer for that problem. Preventing people from being surprised, embarrassed or confused is not the role of government. Neither is preventing people from being naked as part of their job, or in expression of their political views. The actress in question also appears nude in a protest against the use of animal fur in fashion. Should the government fine someone for that as well? A much more damning solution was available to the prudes who brought about this fine in the form of a boycott against advertisers of the television show. In that solution, everyone remains free to make the choices they want yet they are also accountable for them. We don't need the government to tell us what is bad on television. The answer is 'most of it.' Television is called a medium because it's seldom well done, as Ernie Kovacs said. But bad art isn't a crime, it's just bad art. What a shame that mainstream media companies are being punished for brief scenes of non-sexual nudity while not being shaken to their foundations for their uncritical support of George W. Bush's war of conquest and Jesus in the Middle East. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, fascism, sex, television, theocracy

Sara Corbett: A Cutting Tradition [LINK-ZUM]

When a girl is taken - usually by her mother - to a free circumcision event held each spring in Bandung, Indonesia, she is handed over to a small group of women who, swiftly and yet with apparent affection, cut off a small piece of her genitals. Sponsored by the Assalaam Foundation, an Islamic educational and social-services organization, circumcisions take place in a prayer center or an emptied-out elementary-school classroom where desks are pushed together and covered with sheets and a pillow to serve as makeshift beds. The procedure takes several minutes. There is little blood involved. Afterward, the girl's genital area is swabbed with the antiseptic Betadine. She is then helped back into her underwear and returned to a waiting area, where she's given a small, celebratory gift - some fruit or a donated piece of clothing - and offered a cup of milk for refreshment. [...] These photos were taken in April 2006, at the foundation's annual mass circumcision, which is free and open to the public and held during the lunar month marking the birth of the prophet Muhammad. [...] According to Lukman Hakim, the foundation's chairman of social services, there are three "benefits" to circumcising girls. "One, it will stabilize her libido," he said through an interpreter. "Two, it will make a woman look more beautiful in the eyes of her husband. And three, it will balance her psychology."

[...] As Western awareness of female genital cutting has grown, anthropologists, policy makers and health officials have warned against blindly judging those who practice it, saying that progress is best made by working with local leaders and opinion-makers to gradually shift the public discussion of female circumcision from what it's believed to bestow upon a girl toward what it takes away. "These mothers believe they are doing something good for their children," [Laura Guarenti, an obstetrician and WHO's medical officer for child and maternal health in Jakarta] told me. "For our culture that is not easily understandable. To judge them harshly is to isolate them. You cannot make change that way."

[Article continues at link. Ihave three comments on this article. First, female genital mutilation is an Islamic practice. To attack FGM is to attack Islam. I am in favor of attacking Islam. This practice should be outlawed in every nation and those who practice it should be punished to the full extent of the law. That doing so will tred an ancient sacred traditional Islamic practice underfoot does not matter, at all. These women should be judged most harshly, isolated (to keep them from continuing the practice), and no regard whatsoever should be given to the practice because it is part of a culture. Second, it is (as far as I know) always adult women who practice female genital mutilation on girls. What does this mean for the Western notion of feminism and its idea of who oppresses who? Third, let me propose a thought experiment. This is something to think about, not to actually do. Really, don't do this. Get a large piece of wood and strike as many Muslim women in the face with it as you can. This will break their noses. There will be a little blood. Very, very few will die from the process. It will change how they look and breathe, but they will survive. Say that you needed to do it as part of an ancient, sacred tradition. Muslim women do not need to volunteer to have their faces smashed in, any more than girls need to volunteer to have their genitals mutilated before they can understand the consequences of that proceedure. If you object to my thought experiment, you must object to female genital mutilation. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, sex, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Suffrage [LINK-ZUM]

Question: In the United States, is there a relation between when a group of people gains suffrage and the percentage of that group that is registered to vote?

Conjecture: The longer a specific group has suffrage, the higher the percentage of registered voters in that specific group will be.

Data: Voting in the United States is based on state law and not federal law. There is no nation-wide right to vote, only nation-wide laws that prevent states from excluding specific groups from voting. This survey uses federal laws preventing state exclusion of specific groups as data points.

1787: United States Constitution grants suffrage to 21-and-older land-owning white male non-Christians.
1856: Suffrage granted to 21-and-older landless white males.
1870: 15th Amendment grants suffrage to 21-and-older non-white non-Native American males.
1920: 19th Amendment grants suffrage to 21-and-older women.
1924: Suffrage granted to 21-and-older Native Americans.
1971: Suffrage granted to those 18-and-older.

The 2004 census makes suggests about specific groups and their rate of registration to vote.

I do not know how to make us of the following data in this investigation. These specific groups were granted suffrage in a staggered fashion. For example, blacks gained suffrage before women did, thus no single percentage can be listed for a group made up of both blacks and of women.

69.5%: white non-hispanic women.
67.9%: white non-hispanic, both sexes.
67.9%: black women.
67.6%: 18-and-older women, black and white.
66.2%: white non-hispanic men.
64.4%: black, both sexes.
64%: 18-and-older men, black and white.
60%: black men.

For the next set of specific groups, gender and ethnicity are not limitations to suffrage. All of the following specific groups have had suffrage for the same amount of time, 37 years.

55.6%: 19-year-old women.
55.1%: 20-year-old women.
53.8%: 19-year-olds, both sexes.
51.5%: 18-year-old women.
51.5%: 20-year-olds, both sexes.
50.2%: 19-year-old men.
47.9%: 20-year-old men.
46.8%: 18-year-olds, both sexes.
42.1%: 18-year-old men.

Conclusion: based on the data consulted and my limited statistical skills, I conclude that the length of time a specific group is granted suffrage is not related to the percentage of that specific group that will register to vote. Groups with the same time period of suffrage (37 years) vary by more than 13% in their registration rates. It is possible there is a relation between gender and suffrage, as women appear to register to vote more often than men no matter their ethnicity or age. My conclusion could be refuted by a better data set or increased statistical skills.

Note: this post has changed significantly over the course of the day, as I find and correct errors and omissions.

Labels: race, science, sex

Trevor Blake: NOW and Muslim Women, 19 December 2007 [LINK-ZUM]

Previously, in Where Are You Now? and NOW and Sharia, I asked why the National Association of Women had made no comment about a woman who was sentenced to 200 lashes by an Islamic court for the crime of being outside unaccompanied by a male relative (this after she was gang raped). After global protest, none of it from NOW, the King of Saudi Arabia gave her a pardon. As far as I know, NOW continues to remain silent on her fate. But NOW has (as of 19 December 2007) placed a link to Muslim Women: Damsels in Distress? by Soumaya Ghannoushi on their Web site. NOW precedes the link with a disclaimer reading "NOW recognizes the importance of the information conveyed in the links below, but does not necessarily endorse the content." Weak praise offered after others fought their fight for them.

From Ghannoushi's essay: "It seems that Muslim women - particularly those living in western capitals- are destined to remain besieged by two debilitating discourses, which though different in appearance, are one in essence. The first of these is conservative and exclusionist, sentencing Muslim women to a life of childbearing and rearing, lived out in the narrow confines of their homes at the mercy of fathers, brothers, and husbands. Revolving around notions of sexual purity and family honour, it appeals to religion for justification and legitimisation. The other is a 'liberation' discourse that vows to break Muslim woman's bondage and free her of the oppressive yoke of an aggressive, patriarchical, and backward society. She is a mass of powerlessness and enslavement; the embodiment of seclusion, silence, and invisibility. Her only hope of deliverance from the cave of veiling and isolation lies in the benevolent intervention of this force of emancipation. It will save her from her hellishly miserable and bleak existence, to the promised heaven of enlightenment and progress. It is a game of binaries that pits one stereotype against another: the wretched caged female Muslim victim and her ruthless jailer society against an idealised 'west' that is the epitome of enlightenment, rationalism, and freedom. Those escapees who leave the herd are held up as living testimonies to the arduousness of transition from the twilights of tribe, religion and tradition, to the dawn of reason, individualism, and liberation."

I suggest that there is a world of difference between the West and the Muslim world, and that it is not at all 'one in essence.' Even if I were to grant in full Ghannoushi's claim that women in the West are patronized, this is not the same at all as women being stoned to death, having their genitals mutilated, or being subject to honor killings - all part of the Muslim day to day world. If Ghannoushi can't tell the difference between being belittled and being beheaded, let her try both on for size and see if direct experience counts for more than abstract politics. Or perhaps Ghannoushi might care to comment on how Nazia and her husband Mumtaz celebrated Eid ul Adha, the Islamic ritual of sacrifice, this past week. Is there a difference between what Nazia experienced and, say, a woman getting passed by in a promotion for a job due to her gender? I say yes, Ghannoushi says no. In their cultural relativism and abstract politics, Ghannoushi and NOW have a hands-off policy of women getting their hands cut off.

NOW has lost any standing it may have once had as an advocate of women's rights.

Labels: islam, sex

Jeff Jacoby: The Islamist war on Muslim women [LINK-ZUM]

The "Qatif girl" won a reprieve last week. On Dec. 17, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah pardoned the young woman, who was sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in prison after she pressed charges against seven men who had raped her and a male acquaintance in 2006. Two weeks earlier, Sudan's president extended a similar reprieve to Gillian Gibbons, the British teacher convicted of insulting Islam because her 7-year-old students named a teddy bear Muhammad. Gibbons had been sentenced to prison, but government-organized street demonstrators were loudly demanding her execution. [...]

No international furor saved Aqsa Parvez, a Toronto teenager, whose father was charged on Dec. 11 with strangling her to death because she refused to wear a hijab. "She just wanted to look like everyone else," one of Aqsa's friends told the National Post, "and I guess her dad had a problem with that." No reprieve came for Banaz Mahmod, either. She was 20, a Kurdish immigrant to Britain, whose father and uncle had her killed last year after she left an abusive arranged marriage and fell in love with a man not from the family's village in Kurdistan. Banaz was choked to death with a bootlace, stuffed into a suitcase, and buried in a garden 70 miles away. More than 25 such "honor killings" have been confirmed in Britain's Muslim community in recent years. Many more are suspected. [...]

By Western standards, the subjugation of women by Muslim fanatics, and the sometimes pathological Islamist obsession with female sexuality, are unthinkable. Time and again they lead to shocking acts of violence and depravity: [...] In San Francisco, a young Muslim woman was shot dead after she uncovered her hair and put on makeup in order to be a maid of honor at a friend's wedding. [...]

All these are only examples - the tip of a dreadful iceberg that will never be demolished until Muslims by the millions rise up against it. As for the rest of us, we too have an obligation to raise our voices. It took a worldwide outcry to spare "Qatif girl" and Nazanin. But there are countless others like them, and our silence may seal their fate.

[Article continues at link. The West is largely a Christian culture, but a secular Christian culture. Christianity is still tied to the Bible and all its support for slavery, all its oppression of women, all its scientific nonsense. But secular Christianity can simply ignore these cruel and foolish practices, picking out the good stuff from the Bible and getting on with things. The Muslim world has so far rejected the secular and has no intention of getting rid of its support for slavery, all its oppression of women, all its scientific nonsense. I hope the Muslim world can get its act together, keep the good stuff and join the rest of us in the 21st Century (even joining the 19th would be an improvement), but there isn't much the West can peacefully do to make that happen. But we can do something about honor killings in the West. Prosecute the murderers and their murderous support system. Use the same techniques that were successful against the Ku Klux Klan and the Mafia - crushing taxation, relentless arrests and incarceration, and inescapable social opprobrium. No honor for honor killers, not one second of respect for their sacred traditions and ancient culture. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, islam, science, sex, slavery, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Three Theists and their E-Mail Decisions [LINK-ZUM]

Jihad Watch: "Allah Willing, thetime will come when flashes of fire will burn your belly to ash, your wife(your yahoodi whore) shall be a slave for the pleasure of the Al-Muslimoon. Inshallah, I will find yuo and killed you SOMEDAY YOU KUFFAR PIG, YOU SON OF THE APES AND THE SWINE ALLAH TA'ALLA SHALL ROAST YOUR ORGANS FOR THE PLEASURE OF THE MUSLIMS YOU SCUM FILTHEIR THNA THE COCKROACH, YOU K A F I R"

Dan Savage, Another Day, Another Dozen Stories Like This: "A day doesn't go by without an email arriving from some fundie douche expressing concern for my son's immortal soul."

Associated Press, Teen Held After Threat Sent to Satanists: "A teenager was arrested after a leader of the Church of Satan turned over to the FBI an e-mail the high school student had written to the sect in which he threatened to kill his grandparents, authorities said."

[All articles continue at links. A tip of the hat to Magus Peter H. Gilmore, High Priest of the Church of Satan, for making the unfortunately necessary and responsible choice. - Trevor]

Labels: fight, islam, religion, satanism, sex

Daily Rotten: December 10 [LINK-ZUM]

[The following is from Daily Rotten for December 10, 2007. Sometimes I imagine creating a calendar of 'this day in the history of religion.' Days like December 10 show that it would almost write itself. - Trevor Blake]

December 10, 1520: The heretic Martin Luther burnt the papal bull issued by Leo X, titled "Exsurge Domine", demanding an end to his heresies. Luther had published 95 points against the practice of granting indulgences, and the Catholic Church only had 94 points in favor of them. Although technically he was the winner, Luther was subsequently excommunicated.

December 10, 1792: "That if any do commit the detestable and abominable vice of Buggery, with man or beast, he or she so offending, shall be adjudged a felon, and shall suffer death, in the case of felony, without the benefit of Clergy." (Act of General Assembly of Virginia)

December 10, 1958: Ralph Muller and Peter Kamenoff, two ex-members of the Fountain of the World religious cult, accost guru Krishna Venta at the cult's hillside compound in Box Canyon, Ventura County, California. The men accuse Venta of having fucked their wives. For whatever reason Venta, the reincarnation of Jesus Christ and formerly known as Francis Pencovic, is unable to placate the men. So they detonate 20 sticks of dynamite they brought, 19 of which are strictly overkill. The three men are instantly blown to pieces along with 7 other cultees. Venta's remains are only ever identified through dental records.

December 10, 1993: Adolf Hitler is baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in a ceremony performed inside their London temple. Mormons use this strange retroactive baptismal ritual to ensure ancestors or other relatives may join them in heaven.

[Also in the news on December 10, 2007..."Vigilantes kill 40 women in Iraq's south: Religious vigilantes have killed at least 40 women this year in the southern Iraqi city of Basra because of how they dressed, their mutilated bodies found with notes warning against 'violating Islamic teachings,' the police chief said Sunday." ... "Iran Executes 21-Year-Old Accused of Gay Sex as a Teen: Mouloodzadeh was a 21-year-old Iranian citizen who was accused of committing anal rape (ighab) with other young boys when he was 13. However, at Mouloodzadeh's trial, all the witnesses retracted their pre-trial testimonies, claiming to have lied to the authorities under duress. Mouloodzadeh also told the court that his confession was made under coercion and pleaded not guilty." ... and happy 60th birthday to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The advance of the secular is the advance of peace and prosperity. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, fascism, islam, mormon, religion, sex

BBC: US Church splits over gay rights [LINK-ZUM]

A Californian diocese has voted to become the first to break away from the US Episcopal Church in protest at its support for gays in the Church. Delegates of the San Joaquin diocese in Fresno voted 173-22 to secede. It follows years of disagreement with Church authorities triggered by the consecration of a gay bishop in 2003.

The Episcopal Church is the US wing of the 77m-member Anglican Communion, which is threatened by a deep split between conservatives and liberals. The Episcopal Church says that in recent years 32 of its 7,600 congregations had left, with another 23 voting to leave but not taking the final step.

[Article continues at link. Private and voluntary organizations are certainly free to be as inclusive or exclusive as they want. What strikes me as contradictory in this story is that the break away cult voted on the issue. On the one hand, they claim their rules are immutable. Homosexuals cannot be part of their cult, and that's that. It is not possible for the cultists to have a say in the matter. But the way they carried out their decision was by vote. They voted to break away from the rest of their cult. It is, apparently, possible for the cultists to have a say in the matter. Sometimes their superstition is based on a divine and infallible source, sometimes they are free to openly make things up as they go along. They couldn't accept homosexuals (inflexible) so they voted (flexible) to break away. If their superstition was as rock-solid as they claim it is, they have no choice but to accept what God (by way of their leaders) tells them. Voting is just the opposite of superstition, it is a secular tool and there is nothing sacred about it. Their cult cannot be changed, but it can be changed. This seems to be a contradiction.

Superstition is thick with contradiction. Claims are made in spite of conflicting evidence (the superstitious call this 'faith'), and they are held as sacred until the moment they are not. The change always comes with a series of unsatisfying explanations. If the change comes from a revelation, why was a false or incomplete revelation given in the first place? If the change comes from a recognition of human error, what means do the superstitious have to recognize error in the future (such as in the new change)? If the change is just ignored (as Christianity does now regarding the thousands of years it supported slavery) then why not ignore any number of other superstitious rules too?

The difference between science and superstition is that superstition cannot change - until it does. Science is always changing. Superstition is never wrong - until it is. Science is always considered tentatively true and likely to be found in error or incomplete if testing continues. Superstition has no questions, only an answer (God did it). Science has a few answers for now and many, many questions.

I am glad to see this vote in the Episcopal Church. By excluding homosexuals, it makes itself more irrelevant to the modern world. By voting, it embraces secular over superstitious values. Both of these hasten either its secularization or withering away, either of which outcome I welcome. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, sex

Trevor Blake: What Can God Do with 32 Virgins? [LINK-ZUM]

In Numbers 31, we read that God directed Moses in war against the Midianites. God commanded that all the Midian men and boys were to be killed, as were the women and girls who were not virgins. The Midian cities were to be burned to the ground and certain offerings were made to God (more about those offerings later). Moses does all these things, and Numbers 31 includes a list of all the spoils of war he gained because he did as God commanded.

I will set aside for now the question of whether God or Moses ever existed, and the question of whether what they did was right or wrong, and the question what all this might mean for today's believer in God. I will instead try to answer the question of what Numbers 31:40 might mean. Check any edition of the Bible you prefer or which you feel is the most accurate. Numbers 31:40 states that God wanted thirty-two of the virgins reserved for Himself. What can God do with thirty-two virgins?

Does God want them offered up as human sacrifices (Genesis 38:24; Judges 11:29-39)?
Will God make them eat children (Deuteronomy 28:56-57; Lamentations 2:20-22, 4:10-11)?
Maybe God wants them to be raped in public (2 Samuel 12:11-12).
God might want to just lock them in a room for the rest of their lives (2 Samuel 20:3).
Feed them to dogs? Throw them off walls? Trample them with horses? Sometimes God does that to women (1 Kings 21:23, 25; 2 Kings 9:33-37).
Sometimes God makes women go bald, get stinking scabs on their heads and forcibly disrobes them (Isaiah 3:16-17, 32:6).
Here's an idea. Maybe God wants to parade the women naked in front of their family then kill them. Or cut off their nose and ears, make them pull off their own breasts, be raped and mutilated, then stoned to death. He's God, God can do that (Ezekiel 23:1-49).
God could have them sold into sex slavery (Hosea 4:13).
If God had a mind too, God could make these women barren, or get them pregnant then force a miscarriage, or kill their babies in the womb (Luke 1:31, Hosea 9:14).
God kills women by dashing them against children, if He wants (Hosea 10:14).
God might want to throw "abominable filth" at these women (Nahum 3:4-6).
God has these women where God wants them, but God might just abandon them (Mark 10:29-30; Luke 5:11, 18:29-30).

Please, check the Bible for yourself to see if what I have written here is true to what God does to women. So I will ask again - what can God do with thirty-two virgins? The Bible offers at least twelve possible answers. But maybe a better question to ask is this: why do people consider the Bible to be a worthy source for morality? If you have reason in your head and compassion in your heart, you have to admit the Bible is full of mean-spirited nonsense. Don't sacrifice yourself or your morals to an invisible monster that lives in the sky. You're worth much more than that.

Labels: christianity, sex

Trevor Blake: NOW and Sharia [LINK-ZUM]

In my post titled Where Are You NOW? I asked why the National Organization of Women has so far made no comment about a women sentenced to 200 lashes for the crime (under Muslim law) of being outdoors without a male relative as a chaperon. This after she was gang raped. My post has since been quoted in Technoccult.

Does NOW refrain from commenting when women are sentenced to lashings? If so, this is a change from 2001 when they spoke out against it. Does NOW refrain from commenting about Muslim law (also known as sharia law)? If so, this is a change from 2002 when they spoke out against it. In the past NOW has spoken out against lashings and against Muslim law. Is the difference cause by the passage of time, or the fact that NOW is willing to criticise some Muslim nations (Nigeria) and not others (Saudi Arabia), or is it for some other reason?

The Bush administration funded the Taliban to the tune of US$43 million (just a few months before 9/11 - read about that spinning to the left or to the right). The Bush administration has ignored years of evidence that the government and wealthy of Saudi Arabia are largely responsible for 9/11 and other acts of jihad. But the Bush administration did say something about this women's sentence. They said they the sentence was "discouraging and outrageous." Even that weak response is more than NOW has offered us.

Labels: fascism, islam, sex, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Where Are You NOW? [LINK-ZUM]

Backstory: A woman in Saudi Arabia has been sentences to 200 lashes for being outside her house without the supervision of a male relative. This after she was gang raped.

27 May 2007:
Christina Hoff Sommers (quoted by OVO October 2007): "If you go to the websites of major women's groups, such as the National Organization for Women, the Ms. Foundation for Women, and the National Council for Research on Women, or to women's centers at our major colleges and universities, you'll find them caught up with entirely other issues, seldom mentioning women in Islam. [...] The condition of Muslim women may be the most pressing women's issue of our age, but for many contemporary American feminists it is not a high priority. Why not?"

October 2007:
OVO: "What -ism is it in the West that is addressing atrocities like this? At present, it isn't feminism. Feminism in the West currently devotes a great deal of effort critiquing body image in the mass media. This is a topic well worth addressing, but it is utterly insignificant in the face of what is happening to women (and men, particularly homosexual men) in Muslim nations. The -ism in the West that is addressing atrocities like this is atheism."

17 November 2007:
Advice Goddess: "Meanwhile, the National Organization For Women has been bizzy, bizzy, bizzy protesting a bunch of rather benign ads they find 'offensive to women,' yet not a peep out of the ladies about Saudi Arabia's punishment for this Saudi rape victim (apparently increased because she complained about how little punishment her attackers got)."

19 November 2007:
Glenn Beck: "Before the break I promised you that I`d read the full statement of outrage from the National Organization of Women and organizations like that, about the case in Saudi Arabia where a rape victim was sentenced to 200 lashes and thrown in jail for being raped. So here they are. [... silence... ]"

20 November 2007:
This is Mission Critical: "Now, before I rage about how terrible this makes the country of Saudi Arabia look, please permit me one brief diversion. Reading the article, I went to the website of the National Organization of Women, expecting to find them up in arms over this absolutely ludicrous treatment of a fellow woman. Alas, not a single mention. Read that again as well. The leading feminist organization in the biggest democracy in the world cannot be bothered to care about a woman who is being punished for (1) being out on her own, and then (2) punished again for speaking out against gang rape. What else is so important to NOW that they don't have the time to once mention this unnamed Saudi woman? Let's look. At 8:34 P.M. on 20 November 2007, the leading news article on NOW is about holiday shopping."

21 November 2007:
Bloodthirsty Liberal: "Now I'm curious, what has NOW (National Organization of Women) said about this case? See for yourself. Hint: you have to go way past 'Easy Holiday Shopping That Supports Women's Rights' and 'No Reward for Imus'... and you still won't find it."

Labels: islam, sex, theocracy

Associated Press: court hands jail term, doubles lashes for woman victim of gang rape [LINK-ZUM]

A Saudi court sentenced a 19-year-old woman victim of gang rape to six months in jail and 200 lashes - more than double than in her initial sentence for being in the car of a man who was not her relative, a newspaper reported Thursday. [...] According to Arab News, the court informed the rape victim that her sentence was made harsher because of "her attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media." Three judges from the Qatif court had initially sentenced the woman to 90 lashes, convicting her of violating Saudi's rigid laws on segregation of the sexes. [...] Women are not allowed in public in the company of men other than their male relatives. Also, women in Saudi Arabia are often sentenced to flogging for adultery and other crimes. [...] The court also banned the woman's lawyer from defending her, confiscated his license to practice law and summoned him to a disciplinary hearing later this month.

[Article continues at link. What -ism is it in the West that is addressing atrocities like this? At present, it isn't feminism. Feminism in the West currently devotes a great deal of effort critiquing body image in the mass media. This is a topic well worth addressing, but it is utterly insignificant in the face of what is happening to women (and men, particularly homosexual men) in Muslim nations. The -ism in the West that is addressing atrocities like this is atheism. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: atheist, islam, sex, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Superstitious Exemption from the Rule of Law [LINK-ZUM]

UN News Center: UN rights expert warns against use of religion as excuse for criminal acts. Religious belief should never be accepted as a legitimate excuse for carrying out criminal actions that encroach on the rights of others, a United Nations independent human rights expert warned today. [Asma Jahangir, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, said] "No impunity should be awarded when criminal acts which infringe on the human rights of others are given a religious label. At the same time, all governmental actions should be proportionate, abide by the rule of law and respect the applicable international human rights standards."

Associated Press: 6th Circuit revives challenge to mandatory anti-harassment training. An eastern Kentucky high school student can pursue nominal damages from a school district over a policy that required anti-harassment training, a federal appeals court ruled today. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 vote, reinstated Timothy Allen Morrison's claim that the district's policy "chilled" his ability to profess his Christian beliefs and opposition to homosexuality. The ruling sends the case back to U.S. District Judge David Bunning for further proceedings.

[Articles continue at links. The rule of law is not the only sort of rule. There is also rule by force, monarchy and no rule at all. Rule by force provides no peaceable means to conduct inevitable transfers of power. Monarchy, fiat and other forms of rule by people has weak means at best to learn from and minimize the damage from its mistakes. No rule at all lends itself immediately to rule by force and fiat. Of all forms of rule, rule by law is the least objectionable. Rule by law can provide a peaceable means to transfer power, it can accumulate knowledge about its mistakes that survive those who made the mistakes, it can state an objective before acting and thus limit the damage that action might cause. Rule by superstition is not compatible with the rule of law. If God exists, God's rule is by fiat. If God does not exist but the superstitious act on supposed perfect divine laws, no means exist to learn from the mistakes and damage those laws might cause.

Law is, however, a poor means of establishing falsehood or suggesting truth. Therefore law should refrain from determining what is obscene or superstitious. Individuals and perhaps communities are the better judges of these. The Constitution of the United States government did well to specify that the government was not in the business of controlling the press or distinguishing superstition from fact.

The United Nations has elevated the rule of law above the rule of force, fiat or superstition. This will harm no one, which is the ideal outcome of most laws. The 6th Circuit decision illustrates two sorts of difficulties. The first difficulty is accommodating divine law and human law. If a person believes in divine law, they will not feel compelled to obey human law. In this case it merely meant a young man did not want to 'accept' homosexuals but others have taken this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. The second difficulty is when the government tries to enforce diversity. Inevitably, it encounters what it claims is an unacceptable form of diversity. For better and for worse, it is not the case that we can all happily get along. But where there is the rule of law and not force, fiat or superstition we can at least get along peaceably. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: sex, theocracy

Richard Spencer and Juliet Turner: Doctors battle to save 'human pin-cushion' [LINK-ZUM]

Doctors in China have saved the life of a woman who had 26 pins and needles inserted into her body when she was a child in an apparent attempt to change her sex to a boy. The objects were discovered when the 29-year-old woman, named in local papers as Luo Cuifen, went to hospital for a check-up after she started experiencing blood in her urine. Doctors in China have saved the life of a woman who had 26 pins and needles inserted into her body when she was a child in an apparent attempt to change her sex to a boy. The objects were discovered when the 29-year-old woman, named in local papers as Luo Cuifen, went to hospital for a check-up after she started experiencing blood in her urine. [...] Since the one-child policy came into force, around the time of Miss Luo's birth, many girl children have been aborted, abandoned, or killed after birth - in some cases by grandparents. Miss Luo, who comes from a rural area in Yunnan, one of China's poorer provinces, told doctors she had two needles removed when she was a child but had had no health problems until she gave birth.

[Article with photographs continues at link. Here is the side of 'alternative medicine' and 'Chinese medicine' and 'traditional medicine' that you don't hear as much about in the West. Although there are perhaps thirty (30!) wild South China Tigers left in the world, they continue to be butchered for 'medical' treatments that do not now nor have they ever worked. Acupuncture may be an effective placebo delivery system but it can also result in sickness and death. China is a socialist country, suggesting socialism does not provide an immunity to superstition or poor parenting. It isn't alternative medicine if there is no alternative. The real alternative here would have included access to actual medical care and not attempting to change the sex of an infant. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: krankheit, science, sex, socialism

James Mills: Foster child to be taken away because Christian couple refuse to teach him about homosexuality [LINK-ZUM]

They are devoted foster parents with an unblemished record of caring for almost 30 vulnerable children. But Vincent and Pauline Matherick will this week have their latest foster son taken away because they have refused to sign new sexual equality regulations. To do so, they claim, would force them to promote homosexuality and go against their Christian faith. The 11-year-old boy, who has been in their care for two years, will be placed in a council hostel this week and the Mathericks will no longer be given children to look after. [...]

Earlier this year, Somerset County Council's social services department asked them to sign a contract to implement Labour's new Sexual Orientation Regulations, part of the Equality Act 2006, which make discrimination on the grounds of sexuality illegal. Officials told the couple that under the regulations they would be required to discuss same-sex relationships with children as young as 11 and tell them that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages. They could also be required to take teenagers to gay association meetings. When the Mathericks objected, they were told they would be taken off the register of foster parents. [...]

The Mathericks' case comes at a time when there is a chronic shortage of foster parents, who work on a voluntary basis. An extra 8,000 are needed to plug the gaps in the service.

[Article continues at link. I don't mind when forces I oppose fight each other. It is a delight when political correctness and religion clash. But the fact that the foolishness of each is being paid for with the lives of foster children makes my blood boil. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, sex

Christina Hoff Sommers: The Subjection of Islamic Women [LINK-ZUM]

The subjection of women in Muslim societies - especially in Arab nations and in Iran - is today very much in the public eye. Accounts of lashings, stonings, and honor killings are regularly in the news, and searing memoirs by Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Azar Nafisi have become major best-sellers. One might expect that by now American feminist groups would be organizing protests against such glaring injustices, joining forces with the valiant Muslim women who are working to change their societies. This is not happening. [...] One reason is that many feminists are tied up in knots by multiculturalism and find it very hard to pass judgment on non-Western cultures. They are far more comfortable finding fault with American society for minor inequities (the exclusion of women from the Augusta National Golf Club, the "underrepresentation" of women on faculties of engineering) than criticizing heinous practices beyond our shores. The occasional feminist scholar who takes the women's movement to task for neglecting the plight of foreigners is ignored or ruled out of order. [...]

On February 20, 2007, a Pakistani women's rights activist and provincial minister for social welfare, Zilla Huma Usman, was shot to death by a Muslim fanatic for not wearing a veil. And he had a second reason for killing her: She had encouraged girls in her community to take part in outdoor sports. The plight of women like Usman does not figure in NOW's "Six Priority Items," although Global Feminism is one of the 19 subjects it designates as "Other Important Issues." NOW hardly mentions Muslim women, except in the context of the demand that the U.S. military withdraw from Iraq. So what sort of issue does the flagship feminist organization consider important?

NOW has just launched a 2007 "Love Your Body" calendar as part of its ongoing initiative of the same name. The body calendar warns of an increase in eating disorders and includes a photograph celebrating the shape of pears. There is also an image of the Statue of Liberty with the caption, "Give me your curves, your wrinkles, your natural beauty yearning to breathe free." The calendar bears these inspiring words: "None of us is free until we are all free." To breathe free, college women are encouraged to organize "Love Your Body" evenings. NOW suggests they host "Indulgence" parties: "Invite friends over and encourage them to wear whatever makes them feel good - sweat suits, flip flops, pajamas - and serve delicious, decadent foods or silly snacks without the guilt. Urge everyone to come prepared to talk about their feelings and experiences."

This is pathetic. To be sure, serious eating disorders afflict a small percentage of women. But much larger numbers suffer because poor eating habits and inactivity render them overweight, even obese. NOW should not be encouraging college girls to indulge themselves in ways detrimental to their well-being. Nor should it be using the language of human rights in discussing the weight problems of American women.

[Article continues at link. NOW appears to share the problems of Greenpeace and Amnesty International USA. Rather than celebrate their victories and move on to new challenges, they have becomes generic leftist groups that rely on their past relevance for continued support. The above article describes some of the problems NOW has. Wikipedia has a summary of criticisms of Greenpeace. A co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, has further criticisms. The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg counters some claims of the environmental movement. I have not yet found a worthy criticism of Amnesty International USA. AIUSA has moved away from their success in defending political prisoners and toward a generic leftist defence of "economic, social and cultural rights." Only individual human beings have rights, not economies, not societies, not cultures. AIUSA has been criticised by Christians for recently supporting legal access to abortion. But a criticism of AIUSA based on facts and ethics rather than superstition has yet to be made. There is real work to be done in improving the lot of women, of the environment and of political prisoners. These groups have stumbled in their charge. My criticisms are offered such that these groups might find their relevance again. One suggestion: less superstition, more science. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: B12, christianity, islam, sex, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Christ @ Work [LINK-ZUM]

From the "Christ@Work" Web page: "Christ@Work is the organizational brand name for FCCI used in the United States. FCCI (Fellowship of Companies for Christ) is an international organization of Christian business leaders whose members believe in the sovereignty of God and the validity of His Word. As such, we understand that God is the owner of the company we seek to lead, and that we are stewards of His business. Together we seek His will for the operations of these companies through study, mutual encouragement and accountability, and prayer. [...] Mixing religion and business DOES work." FCCI believes that "the Bible is God's written and inspired revelation to man and is the primary authority for man's life." They cite Leviticus 19:35, wherein the Lord commands us to not cheat others by using dishonest weights and measurements in commerce. That sounds good. I wonder what they have to say about Leviticus 19:19, wherein the Lord commands us to not wear clothes of both linen and wool? How about Leviticus 19:20-22, wherein the Lord commands us to beat slave women who have sex with men other than their slave-fiance (the Lord missed His chance, again, to say that slavery was wrong)? And does FCCI have anything to say about Leviticus 19:27, wherein the Lord commands men to refrain from rounding the corners of their hair or beards? The Lord commanded us to do all those things, and said them all at the same time - shouldn't we do all of them?

The Bible does contain some fine moral advice in it. It also contains some inhumanly evil moral advice. It also contains some foolish nonsense that dresses itself up as moral advice. That doesn't make it much different from any number of other books, ancient and modern. What makes the Bible different is that groups like FCCI cite the Bible as divinely inspired - infalliable, and to be taken as a whole. The FCCI presents the Bible as a moral authority only when it makes sense and when it matches current secular morals. When the Bible commands us to beat women slaves or to not cut our beards in God-displeasing ways, only a few verses away from the 'good' stuff, the FCCI has to rely on people not reading the Bible for themselves to maintain their moral authority.

Labels: christianity, sex, slavery

Trevor Blake: More Sperm [LINK-ZUM]

February 2005 saw the return of OVO after 13 years of hibernation. The theme for that issue was 'sperm.' Sperm remains in the news, and here are some of the top sperm stories from the past two years. Court in the United States and in Israel have ruled that sperm can be harvested from dead men for use in artificial insemination. Competition between males in the race to impregnate females has caused evolutionary changes in male sexual physiology and behavior. A woman named Holly Marie Adams had sex with identical twins. The DNA tests administered to determine who is the father of her child are a 99.999-percent match to either man. OVO 15 SPERM included information about the mood-altering effects of sperm, but there is also some evidence sperm is addictive. Crossing the trail of destruction left by OVO 16 ANTICHRIST comes Ezekiel 23. To quote the Skeptics Annotated Bible, this is a tale of two sisters: "Two sisters were guilty of 'committing whoredoms' by pressing their breasts and bruising 'the teats of their virginity.' As a punishment, one sister's nakedness was discovered, her children were taken from her, and she was killed by the sword. And the fate of the surviving sister was even worse. Her nose and ears were cut off, she was made to 'pluck off' her own breasts, and then after being raped and mutilated, she is stoned to death." We place emphasis here on the lusts of one of the sisters, who preferred a man with a penis like a donkey and who came like a horse. If you'd like to have the inspirational Ezekiel 23:20 on a t-shirt or a thong, Landover Baptist Church can provide. The Quran claims that sperm comes from somewhere 'between the loins and the ribs.' Islam also forbids the oral stimulation of men, lest such include the consumption of sperm, but does not prohibit the oral stimulation of women. And if all that isn't enough sperm for you, here's a few hundred more articles...

Labels: christianity, islam, ovo, periodical, science, sex, sperm, zine

Trevor Blake: The Latter-Day Saints and the Boy Scouts of America [LINK-ZUM]

Time magazine wrote in 2000 that Church of Jesus Christ, Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) comprise less than 2% of the U.S. population but make up 21% of the boys in the Boy Scouts of America. This suggests that while most BSA Scouts are not Mormon, most Mormon boys are BSA Scouts. Mormon sponsorship of the BSA goes back nearly eighty years. The Mormons like Scouting so much that it is an official Church program. Brigham Young University offers a major in Scouting [article] [description]. In some areas the only BSA Troop available for boys to join are Mormon BSA Troops. Mormon BSA Troops, with BSA approval, have their own requirements for membership, advancement, and activities. Until 1974, one of those requirements was that no leadership position could be held by anyone who was Black. No Black man could hold a leadership position in the Mormon Church, therefore they reasoned no Black man or boy could hold a leadership position in the BSA. Because of this discrimination a secular lawsuit against the LDS arose in that year. By magical coincidence the invisible monster that lives in the sky and talks to the LDS Elders chose exactly that time to tell them their policy had changed and Blacks could now lead Mormon BSA Troops. Currently the Mormons are developing their own Scouting program in case the BSA joins every other Scouting program in the world and allows openly homosexual people to be Scouts.

Maybe it wouldn't be such a terrible thing if the Mormons got out of the Scouting business.

Labels: atheist, mormon, race, sex

Trevor Blake: Priorities [LINK-ZUM]

ADNKronos: A court in the Iran's second largest city, Mashad, has sentenced to death by stoning a mother-of-three for having an extra-marital affair, an Iranian newspaper reported Friday. The daily Quds said the married woman's lover had confessed to having had sex with her and that the court sentenced him to 100 lashes. There are currently eight women in Iranian prisons waiting to be executed by stoning, a practice usually reserved for those found guilty of adultery according to the Islamic republic's laws.

Chicago Sun-Times: So long, Halloween parade. Farewell, Santa's gift shop. The holiday traditions are facing elimination in some Oak Lawn schools this year after complaints that the activities are offensive, particularly to Muslim students.

[Articles continue at links. It seems that other people being free to celebrate or have their own superstitions is intolerable to Muslims, while public whippings and stoning are just fine as long as they occur in-house. The Muslim world has managed to roust thousands of people around the world to protest cartoons. Why can't it manage to raise a feeble finger to stop its brothers and sisters from killing each other? Islam does not deserve consideration as a moral agent. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: education, islam, sex, theocracy

BBC: Shock at archbishop condom claim [LINK-ZUM]

The head of the Catholic Church in Mozambique has told the BBC he believes some European-made condoms are infected with HIV deliberately. Maputo Archbishop Francisco Chimoio claimed some anti-retroviral drugs were also infected "in order to finish quickly the African people". The Catholic Church formally opposes any use of condoms, advising fidelity within marriage or sexual abstinence.

Aids activists have been angered by the remarks, one calling them "nonsense". "We've been using condoms for years now, and we still find them safe," prominent Mozambican Aids activist Marcella Mahanjane told the BBC. The UN says anti-retrovirals (ARVs) have proved very effective for treating people with Aids. The drugs are not a cure, but attack the virus on several fronts at once. The BBC's Jose Tembe in the capital, Maputo, says it is estimated that 16.2% of Mozambique's 19m inhabitants are HIV positive. About 500 people are infected every day.

[Article continue at link. No one should consider this man a credible source of science, health, public safety or morality ever again. Only superstition allows people to both make this sort of mean-spirited, harmful, foolish claim and yet remain respected. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, sex

Trevor Blake: U. S. Senator David Vitter [LINK-ZUM]

2000: Asked by an interviewer [...] whether she could forgive her husband if she learned he'd had an extramarital affair, as Hillary Clinton and Bob Livingston's wife had done, Wendy Vitter told the Times-Picayune: "I'm a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary. If he does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony, trust me."

2004: "This is a real outrage. The Hollywood left is redefining the most basic institution in human history, and our two U.S. Senators won't do anything about it. We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts' values. I am the only Senate Candidate to coauthor the Federal Marriage Amendment; the only one fighting for its passage. I am the only candidate proposing changes to the senate rules to stop liberal obstructionists from preventing an up or down vote on issues like this, judges, energy, and on and on." - Vitter Statement on Protecting the Sanctity of Marriage.

2004: On WSMB radio last Saturday, a caller who identified himself as Elwood asked Vitter about charges, made by a member of the Louisiana Republican State Central Committee in the Weekly that the then-State Representative, had had an affair with a known prostitute in the French Quarter. Elwood continued, "Would you be willing to sign an affidavit that you have ever known, met or had relations with one Wendy Cortez." Vitter responded, "I think you know that that allegation is absolutely and completely untrue... I have said that on numerous occasions... I'll say that in any forum... Unfortunately, that's just crass Louisiana politics, now that I am running for the Senate. I have made that clear that it is all completely untrue... And, it's obviously politically motivated."

June 25, 2007: U.S. Sen. David Vitter last week authored a letter to the chairman and ranking member of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee expressing support for reauthorization of the Title V Abstinence Education Program of the Social Security Act. Twelve senators joined Vitter in writing in support of the program. "This a valuable program with proven results, but it is nearing its expiration. We must reauthorize this program so we can continue the incredible strides we have made in teaching teens about both risk avoidance and protecting themselves from potential abuse," Vitter said.

July 9, 2007: Sen. David Vitter, R-La., apologized Monday night for "a very serious sin in my past" after his telephone number appeared among those associated with an escort service operated by the so-called "D.C. Madam.'' Vitter's spokesman, Joel Digrado, confirmed the statement in an email sent to The Associated Press. "This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible," Vitter said in the statement. "Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counselling. Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there – with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way.''

Deuteronomy 23:1 "He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD."

July 10, 2007: All of the above posted to American Samizdat, with thanks to Metafilter for the heavy lifting. At the time I also wrote: "Unlike Sen. Vitter, I consider consenting sexual relations to be a private affair among adults and not something the government should regulate. I also support sex education, unlike Sen. Vitter. Sen. Vitter hides behind the Bible both in his lies and in his laws. I, an atheist, have never had an affair (unlike Sen. Vitter, I'm not lying when I say that). I wish Sen. Vitter and his family the best in what I'm sure will be hard times ahead. But I hope that they re-consider the virtues of a religion that neither prevents nor heals wounds such as this. I also hope his voters won't be so easily tricked next time someone waves a cross at them come election time."

September 22, 2007: Sen. David Vitter, R-La., earmarked $100,000 in a spending bill for a Louisiana Christian group that has challenged the teaching of Darwinian evolution in the public school system and to which he has political ties. The money is included in the labor, health and education financing bill for fiscal 2008 and specifies payment to the Louisiana Family Forum "to develop a plan to promote better science education."

[I guess the voters of Louisiana haven't learned anything yet about Sen. Vitter. They might do well to read the ongoing reporting at Your Right Hand Thief and Daily Kingfish. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, creationism, sex, theocracy

Trevor Blake: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (The Mormons) [LINK-ZUM]

There are feminist housewife Mormons, gay Mormons, kinky Mormons, celibate Mormons... Republican Mormons, Democratic Mormons, socialist Mormons, Libertarian Mormons... police Mormons and murdering Mormons.... orthodox Mormons and reformed Mormons and heretical Mormons... Mormons all over the map, so much so that most generalizations about their actions and character would likely fail. But it can be said that Mormon parents do place a premium on having children.

A study in Utah concluded that the more children a couple had, the worse their health became and the sooner they died. Parents in Utah have a fertilitate rate of 2.6, compared to 2 for the rest of the USA. Inbreeding among Mormons has caused the highest concentration of fumarase deficiency (and its resulting severe mental retardation) in the world.

Learn more about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints than most LDS members know. Read The Book of Mormon and The Skeptics Annotated Book of Mormon. Although unwilling to turn their critical eye upon themselves, the Utah Lighthouse Ministry offers well-documented accounts of Mormonism. And wrap it all up by viewing (legally, of course, never via a pirate copy) episode 712 of South Park, titled All About The Mormons.

Labels: mormon, sex, television

Robert Fulford: Feminists fall silent [LINK-ZUM]

Surely honour killing is the ultimate male oppression, being uniquely permanent and committed by close relatives in the name of an abstraction. It's among many anti-woman atrocities in the Arab world that should enrage feminists of the West and rouse them to urgent action -- mass rallies, pickets, boycotts, furious public debates and anything else they would do for, say, California grape pickers who have no right to health care. But no action of this kind ever materializes, which amounts to a grave abdication of responsibility. Feminism, after all, embodies the principle that women deserve the same rights and dignity as men. In the original discussions nobody said "except for Muslims." A major reason for this failure is that feminism has generally made common cause with the left, and the left has in most cases decided it favours the Arabic cause. The Arabs have virtue on their side because they are not Americans.

Phyllis Chesler, an American therapist and psychologist who often writes on women's issues, argues that attitudes grounded in thoughtless cultural "sensitivity" inhibit what should be the natural response of women. The result is that "instead of telling the truth about Islam and demanding that the Muslim world observe certain standards, you have Westerners beating their breasts and saying, 'We can't judge you, we can't expose you, we can't challenge you.'" This reaches the level of absurdity when gay and lesbian activists support Palestinians "who, meanwhile, are very busy persecuting homosexuals, who in turn are fleeing to Israel for political asylum."

[Article continues at link. This is an example of the errors that can emerge when political claims are grouped as if they were inherently connected. Feminism linked itself with the left, and the left linked itself with being against the United States, and being against the United States linked itself with being for Arabs and/or Jews. The more political claims are linked together, the more contradictions will arise. All things are connected, but all things are not equally connected. After decades of spectacular success with addressing one or two issues, Amnesty International has shifted to being a one-stop-revolutionary-shop for 'economic, social and cultural rights' (and fraternizing with rock stars). It has lost some of my support, for what that is worth, in doing so. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, judaism, sex, theocracy

Adrian Humphreys: Deportee can stay to change religion [LINK-ZUM]

Federal Court of Canada Judge Sean Harrington stopped this Saturday's deportation of a Christian man from Brazil so he can complete his conversion to Judaism alongside his Jewish wife and his sponsoring rabbi. The ruling, in favour of Diogo Cichaczewski, is believed to be the first of its kind. "While Canada's focus is on removing an individual who has no legal status here, an unfortunate repercussion is that his conversion would be delayed; in other words, arguably impaired," Judge Harrington ruled.

"How can the harm arising from a roadblock in Mr. Cichaczewski's right to celebrate the religion of his choice be measured?"

[Article continues at link. Enrique Villegas applied for refugee status in Canada based on the persecution his sexual orientation would bring if he returned to Mexico. His application was turned down. He was killed after returning to Mexico, and his friends and family claim it was due to his sexual orientation. But heaven forbid that refugee status be denied a man if he is in the middle of swapping one superstition for another. Who, from this point forward, will be denied refugee status? From the most worthy hero to the lowest criminal, anyone who claims that they are a refugee because they need to work magic spells powered by an invisible monster that lives in the sky will have a precedent for getting refugee status. Religion trivializes the rule of law. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, judaism, sex, theocracy