Dembski thinks IDists are an oppressed minority–and wait, there’s more February 27, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in Religion, Science, wingnuts.
add a comment
William Dembski is complaining that UCLA plans to establish the nation’s first endowed academic chair in sexual orientation law, but they won’t do the same for intelligent design.
I guess nobody’s told Dembski that gay bashing is no longer the effective instrument it once was. Dembski’s friends on the religious right have been pounding the pulpit for years now warning of the coming Armageddon if gays were granted their full rights as citizens. So far though, the worst thing to happen to the institution of marriage is the hookup between Britney Spears and Kevin Federline.
What would Jesus do? Act like a dick, apparently February 27, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in bigotry, constiutional issues, Morality, News and politics, wingnuts.
I suspect he has a perfect right to do this, though I’m no legal expert. But let’s assume he does: this, to me, is the logical extension of pharmacist denying emergency contraception because of their religious beliefs. They may have a legal right to do it, but they should feel a professional obligation to dispense medication: it’s their goddamn job.
And spare me the whole “the patient can go somewhere else” routine. If you’ve ever dealt with an insurance company, you know that can be a huge pain–who is in your network, who you can get referrals for, and the like. And if you’re poor, or on a schedule, or just without a ride, it can be more than a minor inconvenience to be turned away.
But beyond all that, remember one simple thing: if you’re a doctor, you’re there to help people. When I teach a class, I don’t turn students away because I object to them. My job is to teach them, and I teach them. When someone comes to you for medical aid, you don’t turn them away because you dislike them, or even because they offend you. Otherwise, why not make them swear they’re a member of your religion or political party?
It is fantastically immoral to deny someone aid you would otherwise provide simply because you disapprove of them. Unfortunately, assholes like this will likely get away with it. I’ll do my part, though, by calling this kind of hypocrisy wherever I see it, and by giving my business and support to those who practice tolerance, charity, and love.
Conservapedia February 25, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in Blogging, wingnuts.
Everybody’s abuzz about “Conservapedia,” which purports to fight back against the “liberal bias” of Wikipedia (“Liberal Bias” here meaning the ability of editors to be somewhat selective of content). II’ve found some fun links, but before I get to them let me just add that the conservapedia Index page uses the “CE” notation for dating, not “BC/AD,” despite listing just that choice as one of the “liberal biases” of wikipedia.
thought I’d note a couple entries discovered on conservapedia via random search. They may have changed by the time you read this, but these are as they existed when I found them.
“Pilgrims were people (mostly puritans) in the 1600′s that traveled to the American Colonies because of persecution in England. These settlers started the very first settlement in the American colonies, Jamestown.”
More after the break.
A bit of celebration, plus men kissing February 25, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in Blogging, sex.
It’s Oscar night, and in that spirit (but without the long-winded half-sincere thank-yous) I’ll mention that this blog has just passed 20,000 hits, and only a few months after I migrated to wordpress. I know that’s a drop in the bucket compared to the big names, which regularly fly past that mark every day, but it’s nice to know people are reading. I hope to keep things lively, and I promise to keep saying what’s on my mind and calling BS wherever I see it.
Other topics likely to come up:
- Why working for a major telecommunications corporation sucks
- Men Kissing
Speaking of which… (more…)
“We were inspired to do so because of this man” February 25, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in Al Gore, arts and culture, News and politics, Science.
An Inconvenient Truth won the Oscar for best documentary. which was welcome news. There were other wonderful candidates, but Truth was a film that put climate change in the mouths of those who had been overlooking it, and brought the issue to the forefront of discussions across the nation.
Davis Guggenheim, the film’s director, thanked Al Gore, saying he was responsible for the creation of the film: “we were inspired to do so because of this man.” They are not the only ones Al Gore has inspired. The man who won the popular vote in 2000 remains the conscience of the Democratic Party, a politician who truly stands for something, and what he stands for is an issue that concerns us all. He remains the Democrat who most excites me, though it may be that he won’t run for exactly the reasons that he would make a great candidate: because he is going to do what he thinks is right.
Here’s hoping he changes his mind. Run, Al, Run. Your country needs you.
Anti-gay bigot really likes Lawrence v. Texas now February 24, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in bigotry, constiutional issues, News and politics, wingnuts.
1 comment so far
The attorney for a former Baptist church leader who had spoken out against homosexuality said Thursday that the minister has a constitutional right to solicit sex from an undercover policeman.
The Rev. Lonnie W. Latham had supported a resolution calling on gays and lesbians to reject their “sinful, destructive lifestyle” before his Jan. 3, 2006, arrest outside the Habana Inn in Oklahoma City.
Authorities allege that Latham asked the undercover policeman to come up to his hotel for oral sex.
Latham’s attorney, Mack Martin, filed a motion to have the misdemeanor lewdness charge thrown out, saying the Supreme Court ruled in the 2003 decision Lawrence v. Texas that it was not illegal for consenting adults to engage in private homosexual acts.
And I should add that I agree: if he wasn’t offering to pay for sex, then clearly it’s within his rights to ask for it, obvious hypocrisy not withstanding. But here’s the best part:
The American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma has filed a brief alleging that Latham’s arrest also violated his right to free speech.
I bet it must gall him to have the ACLU in his corner. But this is exactly what they do: defend those whose rights may have been violated, even if that person is disgusting. I’m glad Latham’s getting his day in court, and frankly I hope he’s acquitted. He wanted sex, and there’s nothing illegal about that. Even if he was offering to pay, well, there are a lot of worse things than wanting to pay for sex. Like prying into the private sex lives of others, for example.
Taking bets now February 24, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in News and politics, Religion, wingnuts.
add a comment
Surely no wingnuts would ever be hypocritical, right? Then surely they’ll object to Presidental candidates hiring those who propose murdering Muslim students. How much you want to bet Malkin and Donahue will go after this just as hard as they went after Edwards? If I could only find someone to take that bet.
One more reason I won’t be posting much in the immediate future February 24, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in Blogging.
After all, Hyrule’s not going to save itself.
And the Iran War looms ever closer February 20, 2007Posted by Evil Bender in Dubya, Iran, Middle East, News and politics.
US contingency plans for air strikes on Iran extend beyond nuclear sites and include most of the country’s military infrastructure, the BBC has learned.
It is understood that any such attack – if ordered – would target Iranian air bases, naval bases, missile facilities and command-and-control centres.
The US insists it is not planning to attack, and is trying to persuade Tehran to stop uranium enrichment.
So we’ve already planned our attack. Of course, we’re denying it:
But diplomatic sources have told the BBC that as a fallback plan, senior officials at Central Command in Florida have already selected their target sets inside Iran.
But that doesn’t add up. By all reputable accounts, Iran is years away from being able to build nukes, if they’re even really trying (forgive me for not blindly believing Dubya on that one). Why have a plan of attack on a country that is no threat and is years away from being able to be one?
I’d wager a large sum we have no equivallent plan to deal with the Saudi royals, though they’ve done far more to shelter terrorists than Iran.
Bush plans to take us to war. And it remains to be seen whether anyone will stop him.