So according to Wikipedia, you have American Novelists and then you have American Women Novelists, and no the first does not include the second – the two are intended to be separate, though the separation hasn’t been completed yet.

Gee, what a brilliant idea. You have normal, and then you have normalette. There are the Smurfs, and then there’s one Smurfette.

The intention appears to be to create a list of “American Novelists” on Wikipedia that is made up almost entirely of men. The category lists 3,837 authors, and the first few hundred of them are mainly men. The explanation at the top of the page is that the list of “American Novelists” is too long, and therefore the novelists have to be put in subcategories whenever possible.

Too bad there isn’t a subcategory for “American Men Novelists.”

Well you see being a man is what’s normal, so there’s no need to say it, while being a woman is weird and abnormal, so you have to say it. The condition of being female is marked, while being male is unmarked.

People who go to Wikipedia to get ideas for whom to hire, or honor, or read, and look at that list of “American Novelists” for inspiration, might not even notice that the first page of it includes far more men than women. They might simply use that list without thinking twice about it. It’s probably small, easily fixable things like this that make it harder and slower for women to gain equality in the literary world.

Professional victim! Drama queen! Diva! Sisterhood of the Oppressed!

I looked up a few female novelists. You can see the categories they’re in at the bottom of their pages. It appears that many female novelists, like Harper Lee, Anne Rice, Amy Tan, Donna Tartt and some 300 others, have been relegated to the ranks of “American Women Novelists” only, and no longer appear in the category “American Novelists.” If you look back in the “history” of these women’s pages, you can see that they used to appear in the category “American Novelists,” but that they were recently bumped down. Male novelists on Wikipedia, however — no matter how small or obscure they are — all get to be in the category “American Novelists.” It seems as though no one noticed.

I did more investigating and found other familiar names that had been switched from the “American Novelists” to the “American Women Novelists” category: Harriet Beecher Stowe, Ayn Rand, Ann Beattie, Djuna Barnes, Emily Barton, Jennifer Belle, Aimee Bender, Amy Bloom, Judy Blume, Alice Adams, Louisa May Alcott, V. C. Andrews, Mary Higgins Clark…

…and Smurfette.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

A BBC story on the trial of four would-be mujahideen helps to back up what I always think about these projects: a lot of it is about adventure and spectacle and attention-seeking and thrills, more than it’s really about theocracy or sharia. The theocracy is a kind of excuse or shortcut-reason.

These four dudes went off to Pakistan for what they thought would be glam exciting dangerous training, and turned out to be a nightmare camping trip from hell. They lasted two days.

Conditions were, according to Ishaaq Hussain’s account, primitive. They slept on bare ground in sleeping bags, with a hole in the ground for a loo.

What little food they could get was a far cry from Mum’s home cooking or the tasty takeaways of Sparkhill and Sparkbrook.

Mosquitoes posed a more immediate threat than American drones, and if the insects weren’t going to get the Brits, the unbearable heat would.

As soon as the sun set, the men were in darkness. Ishaaq Hussain, 19, had left home two days earlier – where his mother made the beds. Now, with no bed at all, he was disillusioned.

Let’s face it – beds are nice. So is home cooking, so are tasty takeaways. They may all be the product of the demonic secular demons, but they’re nice. So are toilets, that flush.

So they left. Now they’ll be spending some time in prison, which won’t be as nice as Mum’s home cooking, but also won’t be as nasty as the mountain hideout in Pakistan.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Mehdi Hasan is back on Twitter. (He was busy interviewing BHL in the meantime.) He’s fighting dirtier than ever.

“Poor diddums” – my god he’s vulgar. I told him he has a squalid mind and mouth.

That Mohamed guy is cool; I followed him.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

The Appignani Humanist Legal Center is filing suit against a Mississippi high school that forced all students to attend a lecture on “finding hope in Jesus.”

(Washington, DC, April 25, 2013) —The American Humanist Association’s legal center filed a lawsuit at 2:30 p.m. ET yesterday against Northwest Rankin High School in Flowood, Mississippi, challenging the school’s recent mandatory student assemblies that presented a Christian message as a violation of the separation of church and state.

The Appignani Humanist Legal Center learned from Northwest Rankin High School students that a mandatory assembly was held during school hours on April 9 where a representative of the Pinelake Baptist Church spoke of finding “hope” in “Jesus Christ.”

According to students present, those who attempted to leave were prevented from doing so. At the end of the presentation, the speakers led the students in a Christian prayer.

Attorneys for the Appignani Humanist Legal Center sent a letter to the school condemning the assembly as unconstitutional but did not receive a reply.

While in a statement the school contends the assembly was “student-led and organized,” William Burgess, legal coordinator of the Appignani Humanist Legal Center, said, “It is clear that these assemblies are put on by the school itself.  They were staged in a school room, during the school day and the school sent an email to teachers telling them that students were required to attend.”

“As the Supreme Court has made clear, when a school sponsors an event, the religious speech of speakers, including students or other private parties, is attributable to the school and therefore subject to the Establishment Clause,” Burgess continued.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the American Humanist Association in federal court in Jackson, Mississippi.  The complaint filed in the case can be read here.

One to watch.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Maureen mentioned that England actually prosecutes internet harassment, and linked to a current example.

A self-confessed British internet “troll” has admitted threatening to kill 200 people at a US school by posting menacing comments on a memorial Facebook page.

Thousands of pupils stayed away from the school in Warren county, Tennessee, after Reece Elliott, 24, of Fossway, South Shields, South Tyneside, left terrifying messages under an assumed name.

Oh yes? Whiners. Divas*. Professional Victims. Sisterhood of the Oppressed. Don’t they know trolling is just trolling and all you have to do about trolling is Not Feed It?

Elliott appeared at court dressed in a grey top and admitted one count of making a threat to kill and eight of sending grossly offensive messages. He has been held in custody since his arrest in February.

Using a false name, he wrote on a tribute page to Caitlin Talley, a 17-year-old girl at the Tennessee school who had died in a car accident in October: “My father has three guns. I’m planning on killing him first and putting him in a dumpster. Then I’m taking the motor and I’m going in fast. I’m gonna kill hopefully at least 200 before I kill myself. So you want to tell the deputy, I’m on my way.”

Oh so what. It’s just kids having a little fun. Lighten up. It’s the Internet. If you don’t want people threatening you on Facebook, then don’t post things on Facebook.

Gary Buckley, prosecuting, said: “The residents of Warren County and all the people who have access to the Facebook page were clearly concerned. I am told that the local authority immediately put all the local schools in the area on what was called lockdown.

“Because of the hysteria caused, around 3,000 children were kept off school on that specific day. Inquiries made by the FBI and Homeland Security managed to trace the user name to an address in this area.

“The American authorities contacted police and various inquiries were made in order to identify who made these postings. It would appear that Reece Elliott was well aware that he was wanted. He handed himself into South Shields police station.

“He [Elliott]  said he was a part-time troll [the term for those who make unpleasant remarks online]. He said he decided to post offensive comments to see what kind of reaction he could provoke.”

Well of course he did, the poor little mite. Kids just like to have fun.

“He confirmed he did post the postings on Facebook and therefore did make these threats but he didn’t expect the threats to be taken seriously and didn’t expect them to cause the reaction they did.”

Because it’s the Internet. It’s magic. Stuff you say there has a completely different meaning from stuff you say in meatspace. Magic.

*Thank Karla Porter for that one.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

The BBC has graphics illustrating the rise in measles outbreaks in England and Wales. It’s scary.

Measles is back and causing outbreaks in England and Wales.

It is a nasty and potentially fatal disease. It is also one of the most infectious viruses around.

Before vaccination there were hundreds of thousands of cases in epidemic years, but the disease was effectively eradicated in the UK after the MMR vaccine was introduced.

However, in 2012 there were more than 2,000 cases of measles in England and Wales – the highest figures for two decades.

Gee, how did that happen?

The current spread of measles is in stark contrast to a decade ago, when there were only a handful of cases. Measles was once effectively eradicated, with the only cases being those imported from abroad.

However, vaccination rates plummeted after, now discredited, claims of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism by Andrew Wakefield. It started in 1998, but the debate intensified and MMR uptake reached its lowest levels in 2003-04.

As the number of unprotected children increased, so did the number of cases.

One guy. I wonder if he’s proud of himself.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Australian universities are doing it too – allowing Islamist groups to tell women to sit at the back of the room.

THE University of Melbourne has declined to condemn gender segregation at public events held by Islamic organisations at its Parkville campus…

On April 13, a lecture entitled “Islamic rulings on Jihad in Syria & why great scholars’ silence” (sic) was held in the university’s Copland Theatre by Islamic education organisation Hikmah Way.

At the entrance to the lecture, attended by The Australian, signs directed “sisters” to the back of the theatre, and “brothers” to the front. Asked whether seating was segregated, a male attendee said: “It usually is here, yeah.”…

Gender segregation was also encouraged at an information session for prospective Australian Islamic Peace Conference volunteers held by the Islamic Research and Educational Academy at the university’s Public Lecture Theatre on March 10.

Dr Jennifer Oriel does not waffle.

Monotheism and sending women to the back of the room are not the stuff of which enlightenment is made. It is a sad day indeed when Australia’s university leaders allow the democractic values of liberty and equality to fall victim to archaic religious mores.

Drip drip drip…

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Well there had to be one somewhere, right? Or several. It stands to reason. But anyway, there he is – the college kid who calls himself a “street preacher” and did a little impromptu “street preaching” at the University of Arizona where he is a junior; the message of his sermon was that women deserve rape. The Arizona Daily Wildcat reports.

A student holding a sign that read “You deserve rape” ignited outrage across campus Tuesday, on the same day of a sexual assault awareness event, but administrators declined requests to remove him or his sign.

That’s quite a message, if you think about it – it’s so sweeping. “You” – meaning what? Just everyone who reads it?

Actually no, it turns out that his sign is just stupid, because it doesn’t say what he means. Poor guy. I wonder how his grades are.

Saxton, a junior studying classics and religious studies, said his sermon was meant to convey that “if you dress like a whore, act like a whore, you’re probably going to get raped.”

“I think that girls that dress and act like it,” Saxton said, “they should realize that they do have partial responsibility, because I believe that they’re pretty much asking for it.”

Saxton’s sermon came ahead of the “Take Back the Night” event held Tuesday night, which aims to unite people against sexual violence. He said his decision to create the sign and display it was tied to the event and to the fact that April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

But see that’s where he’s so wrong, because “you deserve rape” doesn’t limit the people who deserve rape just to women who “dress like a whore.” It’s a wonder a bunch of football players (US football, with the huge guys like water towers) didn’t come along and punch him.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Good news about libel reform, at least. It’s been agreed by Parliament and once the queen says ok it will become the Defamation Act 2013.

The Libel Reform Campaign has comments from a lot of relevant people.

Tracey Brown, Director, Sense About Science said: “A campaign of small organisations, thousands of individuals and good parliamentarians has achieved changes that were denied to citizens  and publishers for a century. We didn’t have resources but we had the weight of mounting injustice and the pressure from citizens to talk freely about their society, evidence, culture and the behaviour of powerful people within it. There are many compromises in the Defamation Act. But restrictions on trivial claims, a stronger defence of fair comment, and a new public interest defence will help writers everywhere to decide what to publish based on ‘is it true?’ rather than ‘will they sue?’”

…

Jo Glanville, Director, English PEN said: “This  has been a remarkable campaign that has united politicians and   campaigners to reform a law that had become an international embarrassment. The chill has had an impact on anyone speaking out in the public interest – from scientists to bloggers – so this is good news for freedom of speech in the UK. However, as we heard in Parliament today, there is still unfinished business regarding internet regulation and procedure that will be critical for delivering a fairer and more accessible law.”

Dr Evan Harris, Libel Reform Campaign parliamentary adviser said: “As someone involved [in] the campaign from the start, and from inside and outside Parliament, I can see what an achievement it is to achieve this reform. Although not perfect or complete, it is a major step forward, although much will depend on the new proposed court rules and  procedures which are awaited”.

Simon Singh, science writer and defendant in BCA v Singh said: “This is an extraordinary story of cross party collaboration, fired up by a grass roots campaign, backed by everyone from nerds to Mumsnet, which includes mums who are also nerds. Four years ago, libel reform was not an issue that anybody cared about, but I have witnessed first hand how charities, bloggers, MPs, Lords and a multitude of others pushed this issue up the agenda, into manifestos, into the Queen’s Speech and now, at last, we have a Defamation Bill that will change the landscape of free speech in Britain.”

Well done all.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

This matters.

As I said in the last post, Mehdi Hasan calls Maryam “Islamophobic” and claims that she “compares hijab to Nazism.”

This matters; he’s influential, and influential on the left as opposed to the right.

I expressed incredulity about his claim on Twitter but he hasn’t replied (yet) so I Googled. Guess where he got that little poison pen item.

Dear old Islamophobiawatch, that’s where. From a post nearly two years ago. And the post is bullshit anyway…as is most of what’s on Islamophobiawatch.

The hijab, too, is seen by the WPI [Worker-Communist Party of Iran] as part of some sinister Islamist plot. Writing in support of the headscarf ban in French state schools, Namazie delivered the following truly demented rant:

“‘My Hijab, My Right’ is like saying ‘My FGM (Female Genital Mutilation), My Right’!!! The veil is an instrument to control a woman’s sexuality, like FGM…. Today, more than ever before, the veil is political Islam’s symbol…. The veil is not just another piece of clothing – just as FGM is not just another custom. I suppose if it were to be compared with anyone’s clothing it would be comparable to the Star of David pinned on Jews by the Nazis to segregate, control, repress and to commit genocide.”

The linked article is from 2004. Bob Pitt of Islamophobiawatch went back seven years for a gotcha quote, so Mehdi Hasan is using something Maryam said in an article nine years ago to accuse her of “comparing hijab to Nazism” – which she doesn’t do in any case; she compares the hijab to the Star of David and then compares the purpose of the hijab to that of the Star of David.

This is very thuggish behavior.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

I’m having a rather heated discussion with Mehdi Hasan on Twitter, with Oliver Kamm joining in, also the Ex-Muslims Forum and Alex Gabriel and a few more. What about? “Islamophobia” of course.

I started because Mehdi had been equating Maryam with fascists and the EDL earlier.

 A. S. Markland

@mehdirhasan@MaryamNamazie It’s still fallacious to link fascist (irrational) with liberal-atheistic (rational) criticism of religion.

Mehdi Hasan

Really? Tell that to the fascist EDL who have in the past invited Maryam and co to join with them. Goodbye.

Maryam Namazie

Don’t be silly. If anything the EDL is more like your Islamist brethren. Both are far-Right. I am against both. @mehdirhasan@asmarkland

Mehdi Hasan

@MaryamNamazie@asmarkland So I’m an Islamist now? You’re a parody of yourself. Go away. The EDL are calling you. Ba-bye.

Maryam Namazie

I have never supported the EDL; unfortunately you cannot say the same about Islamism now can you? @mehdirhasan@asmarkland

Mehdi fights dirty. Maryam has nothing to do with the EDL or fascism; she denounces both.

He’s right that Muslims are a target group, but he’s dead wrong that all critics of Islam are xenophobic anti-Muslim bigots.

Update: There’s also one where he says Maryam “compares hijab to Nazism” – which sounds like a falsehood to me. In a tweet to me just now he even claimed she compares wearing hijab to Nazism, and that I really don’t believe.

Mehdi Hasan

@CEMB-forum Let me tell you what’s NOT legitimate: comparing hijab to Nazism and FGM, as your islamophobic friend @maryamnamazie does

That’s easy for him to say, isn’t it. No one is going to force him to wear it.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Now there’s a stupid idea.

Pints of hearty ale flow freely as morris dancers frolic in the spring sunshine and gentlewomen recline under a weeping willow… dressed in traditional Muslim headscarfs.

OK, that last part may seem out of place with the hackneyed picture of merry England that is peddled to tourists.

But it is time for the hijab to be embraced as an integral part of national life, according to religious leaders.

‘We want to promote a new, relaxed and confident English national identity,’ they said in a St George’s Day appeal for unity.

Relaxed? They want to promote a new, relaxed English identity by embracing the hijab? What’s the hijab got to do with relaxed?

The hijab isn’t about relaxed. It’s about religious “duty” and “obligation”; it’s about being “a good Muslim”; it’s about obeying a demanding god; it’s about fretting about “modesty” and “temptation” and not being a “whore” or a blot on the family’s “honor.” It’s nothing to do with “relaxed.”

And it’s not something to embrace, either. It’s not nice or benign or cuddly. It’s not like beautiful embroidery or colorful stripes; it’s not like spicy food or haunting music. It’s about treating women as both sluttish and dangerous, and about punishing them for life as a result. It’s about muffling their heads and necks no matter what kind of climate they live in. It’s about paying attention to rules from 14 centuries ago. It’s not a good thing. Yes, women who wear it should be treated like everyone else; no, no one should hassle them for wearing it; but that doesn’t mean it should be actively embraced, nor should it be treated as anything to do with any kind of new, relaxed, confident identity.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Willard Foxton, at the Telegraph of all places, asks a very good question.

If we can prosecute a man for selling fake bomb detectors, how are homeopaths still in business?

Why indeed?

Remember those fake bomb detectors? I remember blogging about that years ago. In fact [goes to find the posts] – yes, in It won’t work unless the operator is relaxed and Flashing lights, and a beeping noise. A bit from the latter:

Call me sentimental but I do think this is a quotation for the ages. It’s from the guy who made the ‘bomb detector’ thingy out of an antenna and a hinge and a plastic tag, and sold lots of them for $40,000 each, and got arrested on suspicion of fraud for doing that.

We have been dealing with doubters for ten years. One of the problems we have is that the machine does look a little primitive. We are working on a new model that has flashing lights.

Do admit. The sunny innocence, the tenderly confiding honesty of that brings tears to the eyes, does it not? He sweetly admits there are ‘doubters’ – people not convinced that a stick and a bit of duct tape and a ‘card’ and a bit of plastic can actually detect explosives. He admits that one little stumbling block (to what? charging $80,000 apiece?) is that the ‘machine’ (the bendy stick with the bit of plastic inside) looks a little primitive even though in reality of course it is more elaborate and complicated and technical and sciencey than an MRI or a particle accelerator or an iPod or an electric toothbrush. And then, in the bit that is so limpid and childlike and of the dawn dawny, he murmurs of his exacting technical labors on a new model with flashing lights. So what you would have then, see, would be a bendy stick with a ‘card’ and a bit of plastic all topped, like a car wash, with flashing lights. So there you’d be shuffling around the checkpoint in Afghanistan, swinging your bendy stick around sniffing for explosives, and your life would be made more glamorous and exciting and Christmassy and convincing by these exciting flashing lights on your bendy stick. Until you stepped on the bomb, of course.

Actually that’s not a bit, that’s all of it. So that’s James McCormick and his amazingly expensive useless pseudo-machine.

At the old Bailey yesterday, the court was told McCormick’s detectors, which he had been selling at £27,000 a piece, were “completely ineffectual” and “lacked any grounding in science”.

When I read those words, I couldn’t help but think of all of the assorted homeopaths, wizards and internet psychics that plague the gullible online.

Why can’t they be prosecuted too?

Well, they could be. Maybe someday they will.

 no one is going to die using skin cream, or getting what I suspect is a shonky pseudoscientific facelift. The prosecution in the McCormick case said “McCormick showed a complete disregard for the safety of those who used and relied upon the device for their own security and protection.”

Isn’t that also true of people selling ineffectual medicines? It’s not hard to find posters on homeopathy message boards offering homeopathic treatment for everything from gout to cancer. No one will die as a direct result of taking these sugar pills, but in the same way as a fake bomb detector can kill you by not finding a bomb, taking an ineffective treatment can indirectly kill you. The difficulty in getting prosecutions for fraud on this sort of thing comes down to belief – the prosecution was able to prove that McCormick didn’t believe his products worked.

Hmm. Really? If people “sincerely” believe the magic works, it’s difficult to prosecute them? If that’s true it shouldn’t be. People will believe anything. We’re supposed to have laws to protect consumers; they shouldn’t be defeated by the credulity of people who market bullshit.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

What about transcendence?

I don’t like the word. I’m suspicious of it.

James Croft and Tom Flynn just had an interesting discussion of that on Facebook, with contributions from me and Alex Gabriel and Valerie Tarico among others.

What do we mean by it? It seems to need some pinning down; once there is pinning down there is more agreement. Are we talking about Something Beyond, or are we talking about this world experiences that feel beyondish but in fact are still this world experiences? The second, as it turns out, but with different views of words like “transcendent.” James likes them, you won’t be surprised to know; Tom and I not so much.

Tom said one thing that echoed something I was thinking yesterday, in the wake of disagreeing with Mehdi Hasan on the “meaningful” answer to questions about How It All Began.

We could have evolved to expect — even demand — that reality display a pattern analogous to that of human intention, when it just doesn’t.

I was thinking much the same thing yesterday. To me, it seems odd to find it satisfying to say “God” is the answer to questions about How It All Began, because of the obvious and much-cited problem that it just raises the same question. I was thinking about that, and why Hasan and many others don’t see it that way, and so I was thinking about the possibility – likelihood really – that it’s just part of the human cognitive equipment to see questions like that in familiar terms. How did it begin? Somebody made it begin. It’s a natural thing for us to think, in other words, so it’s hard or at least peculiar to overcome it or veto it.

(That thought doesn’t really solve the problem with people like Hasan, though, because he’s an intellectual. Overcoming our first thoughts or intuitions is something intellectuals do.)

Alex’s reply is amusing, as is so often the case.

I think very often, religion drills a God-shaped hole where one wasn’t before, so that it might claim to fill it.

I like the word “drills” there.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Another wonderful column from Kunwar Khuldune Shahid, this time “apologizing” to “the #MuslimahPride social media jihadis.”

It’s amazing what a week of introspection can do. I now realise how ridiculous it was of me to try and promote Western, postcolonial and imperialistic ideals like gender equality and human rights. I realise how foolish it was to stereotype everything by quoting your authentic religious commandments and regularly reported events in Islamic countries. I realise how obnoxious it was to think that demonstrating against stoning women to death was a better cause than protesting against shameless infidels. Last week’s letter was clearly a remonstration against the fact that women spoke out, not against the fact that they could’ve spoken out against something more meaningful. In any case, who am I to judge what’s more deserving of a protest; women being stoned to death, or a protest against women being stoned to death. It’s obviously a cultural debate and has got nothing to with basic human rights.

Funny how it’s like “Dear Muslima” except it really isn’t. It even starts with “Dear Muslimaat”…but its point is quite different.

I was imprudent enough to believe that you could’ve taught those infidels the “right way” of preaching freedom, instead of showcasing denial about the atrocities that your fellow women face for not choosing the way of life that you’ve ostensibly chosen. I was foolish enough to think that a protest in hijabs in support of women being coerced into wearing them would’ve been an astoundingly effective way of telling the world that despite your differences you stand with those who face death threats and need liberation. I’m sorry I thought “Nudity doesn’t deserve brutal death” would have been a far stronger message than “Nudity does not liberate me”.

If only they will pay attention.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Killing one child by praying instead of going to a doctor isn’t enough. True faith requires killing another one.

A couple serving probation for the 2009 death of their toddler after they turned to prayer instead of a doctor could face new charges now that another son has died.

Herbert and Catherine Schaible belong to a fundamentalist Christian church that believes in faith healing. They lost their 8-month-old son, Brandon, last week after he suffered from diarrhea and breathing problems for at least a week, and stopped eating. Four years ago, another son died from bacterial pneumonia.

Well that sounds like a nasty slow death.

At a hearing Monday, a judge told the couple they had violated the terms of their probation, noting the Schaibles had told investigators that they prayed to God to make Brandon well instead of seeking medical attention.

“You did that once, and the consequences were tragic,” Philadelphia Common Pleas Judge Benjamin Lerner said, according to the Philadelphia Daily News.

The consequences were tragic, they were on probation as a result, yet they still didn’t learn.

The Schaibles

grew up in the First Century Gospel Church in northeast Philadelphia and have served as teachers there. The church’s website has a sermon titled “Healing – From God or Medicine?” that quotes Bible verses purportedly forbidding Christians [to visit] doctors or [take] medicine.

“It is a definite sin to trust in medical help and pills; and it is real faith to trust on the Name of Jesus for healing,” says the message, from last May.

Really? Why? Is it also a sin to take the stairs instead of stepping out of the window? Is it a sin not to step in front of an approaching bus? Is it a sin to eat instead of trusting on the Name of Jesus to provide supernatural nutrition? Is it a sin to put on a sweater when it’s cold? Is it a sin to avoid poison ivy? Is it a sin not to step off the edge of a cliff?

What a nightmare.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Hello to you too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdciZ-4Mkhg

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Oh the horror, Rowan Atkinson did an archbishop of Canterbury routine as part of Comic Relief. Cue Outraged of Basingstoke!

The monologue, which was broadcast on BBC1 before the watershed at 7.45pm, was the subject of 2,133 complaints to the BBC – making up the bulk of the 2,819 complaints received about the show overall.

…

The Atkinson sketch featured his Archbishop of Canterbury character – or “Arch” as he styled himself – underlining that he was not gay, using the phrase “arsing about” and the word “shagging”, and comparing One Direction to Jesus’ disciples.

The skit was pre-recorded on a studio set but was played out to the live audience at BBC Television Centre, who audibly gasped at the line: “Keep on praying – it doesn’t work, but it’s a good part of a getting-to-sleep routine if you’ve got insomnia.”

Gasp!

The BBC is vewwy sowwy.

The BBC has not included the sketch in its iPlayer compilation of Comic Relief highlights, and has issued this statement: “Comic Relief night features seven hours of live television and is known for pushing at the boundaries of comedy alongside heartfelt appeal films.

“It is made for a varied and wide-ranging audience, so getting the language, tone and content of the evening is extremely important to us… to any viewers we may have offended, we apologise.

“Rowan is well known for his comedy characters and this was an affectionate portrayal of an Archbishop figure, which was intended to amuse and entertain. We did not mean to cause any offence.”

I’m sure Rowan is very flattered by that endorsement.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)