Proof Number 4,509,531 that organized religion warps ones brain September 1, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in Religion, reproductive rights, wingnuts.4 comments
If you’d like to be more charitable, you could assume that it’s just Judie Brown’s odious fundamentalism that warps her brain. But you’d be hard pressed to find anything but religious indoctrination that would lead anyone to say anything as stupid and immoral as this:
The entire travesty, from the television cameras to spectacle itself, goes beyond anything I have witnessed in my more than 65 years of life. In fact, while we all thought the appearance of President Barack Obama at the University of Notre Dame was a scandal, the very idea that he offered a eulogy in a basilica, while the real presence of Christ was in the tabernacle, is perhaps the most dastardly thing I have ever seen.
Brown is a rabid fetus-worshiper, so we shouldn’t be surprised that her values are a bit eschew. She seems to honestly believe that the Worst Thing EVAR is that women aren’t forced to give birth. Even so, she’s been around a while, so we might be able to help her come up with some examples of even more dastardly things she’s seen during her “more than 65 years of life.”
Examples abound, so I want your feedback: what’s the most glaring example of a “dastardly thing” in the last 65 years?
Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself. (I am wingnut–I contain multitudes.) June 27, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in reproductive rights, sex, wingnuts.1 comment so far
So let’s see what Sally Kern’s up to. It seems she’s blathering on about how the only cure for our horrible country is to pray and read the Bible. In the midst of this, we get:
…WHEREAS, this nation has become a world leader in promoting abortion, pornography, same sex marriage, sex trafficking, divorce, illegitimate births, child abuse, and many other forms of debauchery…
So, to recap, being a good wingnut means being against both abortion and single parenthood. And while we’re at it, Kern babbles, let’s make those dirty urges harder to deal with on one’s own.
It seems Sally forgot to include the evils of enjoyable sex in her list. But, hell, it’s asking a lot for wingnuts to keep track of what they hate and the reasons they claim they hate those things. You can almost hear her brain grinding as she tries to remember what is the official reason she hates sex.
And, yes, my apologies to Walk Whitman.
Possibly the most inane forced-birther post ever June 18, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in Morality, reproductive rights, wingnuts.3 comments
When I started this blog, I had high hopes for seriously engaging the arguments of others. Years of dealing with wingnuts has largely disabused me of that, and now I save serious argument for people who haven’t proved themselves intellectually dishonest, lazy, irredeemably ridiculous, or a combination of the three. Arguing in good faith with those who will not themselves argue in good faith only serves to legitimize dishonest discourse. Such people can only be dealt with via mockery.
Naturally, high on the mockery-only list is Renew America, which ranks right up there with WingNutDaily in terms of horribleness.* So when I found, via S,N!, this amazing display of fallacies and moral corruption: Feminism the greatest evil: the repudiation of life, I knew what had to be done. Strap in for some pure, undistilled wingnut:
Loftus wrong in calling for wingnut extremist professor to be fired June 17, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in Morality, reproductive rights, wingnuts.6 comments
I frequently agree with John W. Loftus’ arguments, and respect his defense of atheism. And I’m certainly angry as hell about forced-birthers whose violent rhetoric provides political cover for murderers. Furthermore, I’ve read few things as offensive as Edward Feser’s odious declaration that Dr. Tiller, a man who performed legal, medically necessary care to women undergoing on of the hardest experiences imaginable, is worse that Jeffry Dahmer.
That said, I can’t agree with Loftus’ views on Feser:
Feser teaches for Pasadena City College in Pasadena, California which is a community college. I call upon that college to fire him for this highly inflamed rhetoric which will probably bring on more murders of abortion doctors.
I’d be the first to call for Feser to be charged if what he’s said rises to the level of incitement, and I certainly believe he should be held accountable for the horrific implications of his argument. But he should be challenged on the poor quality of ideas, not forced out of his job for what he’s said as a private citizen. Feser is most definitely not calling for violence against abortion providers, and while his rhetoric certainly may encourage dangerous people to do horrible things, he is not calling for violence, nor does he appear to be crying crocodile tears: he seems sincere in his view that violence against doctors isn’t okay. Assuming he is sincere in that, and not simply trying to use an anti-choice dog whistle,* I think it’s incredibly dangerous to call for his firing.
Since his words were on his personal blog and not related to his job, this probably isn’t an academic freedom issue, but it is a personal freedom. Public institutions should not be in the habit of firing someone for something they say as a private citizen, and encouraging them to do otherwise is dangerous, especially in a time when academic freedom is already under assault.
When a public employee, particularly a professor, can be fired for expressing themselves in public, there is a dangerous and potentially silencing precedent, and while I hope that people of good will continue to speak out against Feser’s disgusting words, I don’t want him to be fired. Once we accept that legal speech unrelated to one’s work is sufficient cause to cost one a job, we’ve essentially given our employers veto powers over our ideas. I don’t think that’s a good idea.
Furthermore, I would argue that no one who values freedom of speech should encourage this sort of firing. History shows clearly that censoring of unpopular idea (and this would, it seems to me, be dangerously close to de facto censorship) is not a good way to defeat such ideas. The correct response to odious ideas are better ideas, not pressure to fire those whose views we find offensive. This is particularly true when a government-funded employer is doing the censoring. Private employers have greater latitude in deciding who should represent them, but the government should not be in the position of deciding which ideas are acceptable for its employees to hold.**
*And how could we be certain of the latter? It seems, given his clear statements on the matter, that we should take him at his word.
**There are obviously things one could say privately that should result in disciplinary action by one’s employer, but that circumstances should be highly limited, probably to things that affect one’s ability to do one’s job, or statements that are illegal or in violation of the institution’s mission.
Question of the Moment June 2, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in News and politics, reproductive rights, Terrorism, wingnuts.1 comment so far
Given what we know of accused terrorist and murderer Scott Roeder’s acquaintances, including his connection with convicted felon Cheryl Sullenger*, shouldn’t the rabid anti-terrorists types on the right be freaking out about what has all the appearances of a terrorist group?
Or do such standards only apply to people of color?**
* Sullenger was convicted of conspiring to bomb a clinic, which makes her pretty clearly a terrorist in my view, and, I’ll charitably assume, in the views of wingnuts who were so eager to label Bill Ayers a terrorist.
** To be clear, I think Operation Rescue is a terrorist group, in that they engage in intimidation and violent rhetoric against doctors performing legal procedures, and that their denunciations of Dr Tiller’s murder were mixed with talk of “reaping what he sowed” and other language that is very, very close to incitement to violence. Readers of this blog know I’m a fierce defender of free speech, even speech as odious as calling doctors “murderers” and comparing them to Nazis. But I think its time that people like those who encourage Roeder to be accountable for their actions. If what they’ve said rises to the level of incitement to violence, they should be prosecuted, and even where it does not, we must hold them responsible for their violent rhetoric, to the full extent of the law.
Free speech means they can say what they want; it does not free them from the responsibility of answering for what they choose to say.
Dr George Tiller murdered May 31, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in constiutional issues, News and politics, reproductive rights.3 comments
As you’ve probably already heard, Doctor George Tiller was shot to death this morning. There had been at least one previous attempt on Tiller’s life, and numerous threats, yet he continued to offer one of the rarest medical services, late-term abortions, at great personal risk. He will be greatly missed.
No doubt those, like Bill O’Reilly, who spew political rhetoric which encourages this sort of terrorism will continue to do so, while officially decrying the terrorists who commit these acts.
Sadly, I think we can expect to see an increase in this sort of violence as the far right, increasingly irrelevant in mainstream American discourse, will continue to implicitly (and in some cases explicitly) endorse terrorism, and some particularly evil or unwell people will act on those endorsements.
Good news from Kansas March 27, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in Kansas, reproductive rights, wingnuts.1 comment so far
We’re about to get buried under a freakin’ snowstorm here, but at least there’s some good news:
WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — One of the nation’s few late-term abortion providers was acquitted Friday of misdemeanor charges stemming from procedures he performed, but moments after the verdict was announced the state’s medical board announced it was investigating similar allegations against him.
Prosecutors had alleged that Dr. George Tiller had in 2003 gotten second opinions from a doctor who was essentially an employee of his, not independent as state law requires, but a jury took only about an hour to find him not guilty of all 19 counts.
But naturally the assault on women’s bodily rights will continue:
Soon after the verdict was announced, the state’s Board of Healing Arts made public a complaint against Tiller on allegations similar to those at issue in the criminal case. The complaint was filed in December but not released until Friday.
The board, which regulates doctors, could revoke, suspend or limit Tiller’s medical license, or fine him.
And of course what this is all really about:
Tiller said he is one of three doctors in the U.S. who currently perform late-term abortions. The others are in Boulder, Colo., and Los Angeles, he said.
You see, anti-choicers love the tactic of getting women to delay abortions until they’re “late-term” and then make it impossible to procure them. And they’re protected in this by a Supreme Court that’s decided women don’t know what they want and need a bunch of men to make them carry pregnancies to term.
Still, in the short term, this is a definite win. Nice to have some good news on a Friday.
Dear Pope Ratzi March 17, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in Morality, Religion, reproductive rights, wingnuts.1 comment so far
Go Fuck Yourself. And please remember to use a condom while doing so:
Pope Benedict XVI said on his way to Africa Tuesday that condoms were not the answer in the continent’s fight against HIV, his first explicit statement on an issue that has divided even clergy working with AIDS patients. [...]
“You can’t resolve it with the distribution of condoms,” the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane headed to Yaounde. “On the contrary, it increases the problem.”
Let me make this clear to you, My Dear Pontiff: Condoms only “increase the problem” if the choice people are making is safe sex vs no sex. Since correct use of condoms is vastly safer than unprotected sex, and since problems of AIDS in Africa aren’t going to go away by wishing everyone would approach sexuality the way you do (that is, to personally eschew it and to attack anyone who doesn’t fit your narrow views of what it should be), the choice isn’t between safe sex and no sex: it’s between safe sex and unsafe sex.
The choice is between safe sex and continued expansion of the AIDS pandemic. And your backward ass comments endanger the lives of millions.
So much for your “consistent ethic of life,” you hypocritical fucker.
[h/t]
Dear Anti-Choice Catholics March 5, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in Religion, reproductive rights, wingnuts.11 comments
Go Fuck Yourselves. Seriously.
RIO DE JANEIRO – A 9-year-old girl who was carrying twins, allegedly after being raped by her stepfather, underwent an abortion Wednesday despite complaints from Brazil’s Roman Catholic church.
[...]
Fatima Maia, director of the public university hospital where the abortion was performed, said the 15-week-old pregnancy posed a serious risk to the 80-pound girl.
“She is very small. Her uterus doesn’t have the ability to hold one, let alone two children,” Maia told the Jornal do Brasil newspaper.
But Marcio Miranda, a lawyer for the Archdiocese of Olinda and Recife in northeastern Brazil, said the girl should have carried the twins to term and had a cesarean section.
“It’s the law of God: Do not kill. We consider this murder,” Miranda said in comments reported by O Globo.
Demanding a raped 9 year old girl give birth to twins and describing her abortion as murder: I’m sure Jesus would be real proud of you fuckers.
The next time someone tells me atheists are immoral, it will take all my restraint not to superglue this story to their forehead.
Yet another example of why “pro-life” politicans aren’t pro-life at all February 25, 2009
Posted by Evil Bender in Morality, reproductive rights, wingnuts.3 comments
Democrats were outraged Wednesday morning when Republican state Sen. Dave Schultheis said he planned to vote against a bill to require HIV tests for pregnant women because the disease “stems from sexual promiscuity” and he didn’t think the Legislature should “remove the negative consequences that take place from poor behavior and unacceptable behavior.” The Colorado Springs lawmaker then proceeded to cast the lone vote against SB-179, which passed 32-1 and moves on to the House.
It’s nice that Schultheis is eager to punish a fetus for promiscuity, and since he’s all “pro-life” he’ll no doubt be happy to tell the baby with HIV that they deserve it because mom was a slut.
I really don’t like to wish harm on others, but, seriously, where’s a case of crippling penis rot when you need one?
[Unrelated: real life is very busy around here these days. Expect things to pick back up again after the next couple of weeks, assuming I survive them with some of my sanity intact.]
