The Irish bishops have spoken up. Just as they spoke up when all that terrible stuff about child rape by priests and the moving of child-raping priests from job to job instead of reporting them to the law was coming to light despite decades of effort to keep it hidden. They say the same thing now as they said then. They’re very very very sad.

The death of Mrs. Savita Halappanavar and her unborn child in University Hospital Galway on the 28 October last was a devastating personal tragedy for her husband and family. It has stunned our country. We share the anguish and sorrow expressed by so many at the tragic loss of a mother and her baby in these circumstances and we express our sympathy to the family of Mrs. Halappanavar and all those affected by these events.

See? They’re saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad. Now will everybody please shut up and leave them alone?

But first let them explain. It wasn’t their fault. They have it right and the people who think University Hospital Galway should have evacuated Savita Halappanavar’s uterus at once instead of waiting three days until the fetal heart stopped – those people have it wrong.

In light of the widespread discussion following the tragic death of Mrs Halappanavar and her unborn baby, we wish to reaffirm some aspects of Catholic moral teaching. These were set out in our recently published Day for Life message on 7 October last, available on www.chooselife2012.ie.

- The Catholic Church has never taught that the life of a child in the womb should be preferred to that of a mother. By virtue of their common humanity, a mother and her unborn baby are both sacred with an equal right to life.

And if the “baby” happens through some strange accident to be inside the mother and in the process of dying because the mother is miscarrying – then that “equal right to life” means the doctors just have to fold their hands and do nothing while infection rages, until the “baby” no longer has a heartbeat.

- Whereas abortion is the direct and intentional destruction of an unborn baby and is gravely immoral in all circumstances, this is different from medical treatments which do not directly and intentionally seek to end the life of the unborn baby. Current law and medical guidelines in Ireland allow nurses and doctors in Irish hospitals to apply this vital distinction in practice while upholding the equal right to life of both a mother and her unborn baby.

Right. That’s what they did. So Savita Halappanavar is dead. She’s another sacrifice on the altar of Catholic “moral” conceit and presumption and interference.

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

Amy did an interview of Carrie Poppy about Women in Secularism. There are a lot of pictures taken by Amy so you can see with your own eyes how horribly bullied Carrie is being by the dreaded FTBullies who of course include the Skepchicks and also Rocket. Rocket is being super mean and Carrie is just crushed.

Have you been influenced by any women in the secular or skeptic communities? If so, who and why were they influential?

I don’t agree with everything anyone says (you know, because I’m a human with a unique brain that’s not exactly like anyone else’s brain), but I’ve at various times been moved by Eugenie Scott’s courageous and exhausting work fighting anti-science in the classroom, Sharon Hill’s tireless skeptical gumshoe work, Sadie Crabtree’s amazing talk at TAM9 wherein she spoke on effective skeptical outreach, Rebecca Watson’s humor and insight, Claire Knowlton’s disarmingly honest and challenging work on Selfish Blogger (where she calls on people to give up as much money and time as they can to those in need, on humanist grounds) and you, Amy Davis Roth, who once said to me “the only reason to get into skepticism is to help people.” Hear hear.

There are also countless women involved locally who work, often thanklessly, out of the spotlight, and are always inspirations. Some examples I see every day are Stacy Kennedy, Wendy Hughes, Taylor Proctor, Alice Pine, Louise Monaco, and on and on.

Stacy and Alice! I have been influenced by them too likewise.

Read it all and check out Rocket being a bully.

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

Dr Jen Gunter tells us about ectopic pregnancies and Catholic medical “ethics.”

A pregnancy has trophoblastic tissue, which is aggressive, like cancer, because the walls of the uterus are thick. The walls of the fallopian tube, on the other hand, are thin. Alert readers can tell where this is going.

These mini Ms. Pacman-like trophoblasts chew up the relatively flimsy fallopian tube tissue, damage blood vessels, and catastrophic bleeding ensues. The pregnancy can literally blow a hole in the side of the fallopian tube.

This is how women die from ectopic pregnancies, they bleed to death. Although thankfully this is very uncommon as we have ultrasounds that identifies these pregnancies very early on, surgery or medication to treat them, and blood transfusions just in case.

The recommended treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is surgical removal or systemic methotrexate (a cancer drug that kills the rapidly dividing trophoblasts, which are in many ways like cancer cells). According to the latest Cochrane review (Interventions for tubal ectopic pregnancy, 2009) there is insufficient data to support expectant management, i.e. watch and wait is not standard of care.

But the Catholic church doesn’t care what is standard of care. It cares about the sacred trophoblasts.

Yes, some Catholic ethicists argue that the catholic “Directives” preclude physicians at Catholic hospitals from managing ectopic pregnancies in a  way that involves direct action on the embryo. So a woman can have her whole tube removed (an unnecessary procedure that could reduce her future fertility), but she can not have the pregnancy plucked out (as is done with the standard therapy, a salpingostomy, where a small incision is made in the tube and the pregnancy removed) and she most certainly could not have the methotrexate.

How common is this practice? Well, it is pretty sad that someone had to study it. According to a study from 2011 by Foster e. al., (Womens Health Issues, 2011) some Catholic hospitals refuse to offer methotrexate (three in this study of 16 hospitals). The lack of methotrexate resulted in changes in therapy, transferring patients to other facilities, and even administering it surreptitiously. All of these expose women to unnecessary risks, expense and are, quite frankly, wrong.

I’m glad to hear it’s only 3 out of 16. I hope that number is representative. It ought, however to be zero. None.at.all.

It amazes me that with ectopic pregnancy, such a clear-cut case of life of the mother with therapies well supported in the literature, that any physician or hospital could have any other moral or ethical agenda than delivering the right medical care.

Putting religious beliefs ahead of urgent/emergent medical care in never right and I shudder to think how the management of ectopic pregnancies would change should a national personhood amendment pass.

It’s a stinking outrage, and I’m doing what I can to get it on the agenda of secular and atheist and humanist organizations.

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

Hey, those Florida Humanists feeding the homeless? There are parts of Florida that frown on that kind of thing. And by “frown on” I mean “criminalize.” Orlando for example.

Over the past week, twelve members of food activist group Food Not Bombs have been arrested in Orlando for giving free food to groups of homeless people in a downtown park. They were acting in defiance of a controversial city ordinance that mandates permits for groups distributing food to large groups in parks within two miles of City Hall. Each group is allowed only two permits per park per year; Food Not Bombs has already exceeded their limit. They set up their meatless buffet in Lake Eola knowing that they would likely be arrested as a result.

Goddam class warriors.

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

From the Humanists of Florida:

Lakeland, Florida

Humanists Help the Hungry

Today, on Giving Tuesday, the Humanists of Florida Association (HFA) is proud to announce its new initiative: Humanists Helping the Hungry. The HFA is seeking donations to support Secular Humanists throughout Florida who are in financial need. This fund will go towards providing the basics, especially food, to those who need it most.Donations are tax deductible.   We will be providing gift cards from local supermarkets for those that qualify for the program.  Applications are available in the link below.

Please consider giving $100, or about the cost of what your family would spend on a nice dinner. It is a most humanistic way to say “thank you” for your own well-being.

Stand by your fellow Secular Humanists in Florida and donate to make a difference in their lives.

To donate to the fund on-line:
www.bit.ly/donateHHH

To donate to the fund by check:
Make it out to the Humanists of Florida and designate it for “HHH”
Send to the HFA at PO Box 5072, Lakeland, FL 33807.

To make an inquiry about receiving a grant for yourself or another:
www.bit.ly/applyHHH

For more information, please contact
EllenBeth Wachs, President
at info@floridahumanist.org or 321-300-6545.

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

Now that’s really funny. The things people dream up!

Richard Sanderson ‏@RichSandersen

Anyone else reckon @CarriePoppyYES resigned from #JREF because of the abuse from #FTBullies?

Right?

What abuse? And if there were any abuse, why would it prompt Carrie to resign from JREF? It would be like resigning from your job at NASA because someone tailgated you on the Evergreen Point bridge. It would be like quitting a job at The Mayo Clinic because the counter person got your order mixed up at an Albuquerque McDonalds. It would be random, dude.

It’s like the #FTBullies hijacking all over again. Let’s just blame #FTBullies for everything – the weather, food we don’t like, bad movies, traffic, Rush Limbaugh, everything.

Also – seriously – Carrie hasn’t had any “abuse” from Freethought bloggers. Really.

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

In October Archbishop William Lori explained how good the church had been about the whole thing and how nicely it co-operated with the police and how all right everything was really so everybody please dig deep and put a lot of money in the plate.

The archdiocese conducted its own investigation to identify other possible victims and was in regular contact with the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s office, sharing information that it learned during the course of its investigation. Merzbacher was convicted in June 1995 and sentenced to four life terms plus 10 years. Plaintiffs filed civil claims against Merzbacher, the Catholic Community School, and the archdiocese in 1994. Those claims were dismissed by the courts.

Because of course the archdiocese was above reproach, always, no matter howmuch.

Surprisingly, readers are allowed to comment there. The comments are blistering.

JeanOctober 20, 2012 at 14:00 PM

The A of B did not work with the Baltimore Police Department on this case. Information was given to the AofB from a victim and was kept, never shown to the police and when the victim requested the info back…all of a sudden it can’t be found? Coincidence? I think not.

Christina Kovacs Stalnaker October 20, 2012 at 14:19 PM

Once again, these articles attempt to rewrite the history of terror at the Catholic Community Middle School of South Baltimore. The fact remains that the Archdiocese of Baltimore, Sister Eileen Weisman, as well as Father Herbert Derwart knew of the abuse during Merzbacher’s employment. We know that they were informed by a teacher during my three years in that torture chamber from 1972 to 1975. The teacher resigned after being told to remain silent. As well, Sister Eileen, herself, witnessed instances of rape and abuse with her own eyes. Students were threatened with sexual abuse, beatings, guns, and knives, along with being put into Shepherd Pratt for uttering one word. Also, why did it take eight years after the Merzbacher’s case to remove Sister Eileen as principal from the Cathedral School?

Katrina ArmstrongOctober 20, 2012 at 18:19 PM

The mere thought of the possibility of John Merzbacher being released from prison is outrageous. The notion that he would even deserve to be offered a plea bargain after the lives he has destroyed is ridiculous. We unfortunately seem to be living in a society where the perpetrators of such heinous crimes are obviously protected more than the victims. While I was not a sexually abused by him, John Merzbacher abused everyone he came in contact with…in one way or another. His demeaning daily comments to those who turned out to be his victims left me horrified and I was petrified to go to school.

Mary LewandowskiOctober 20, 2012 at 22:31 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how the Archdiocese of Baltimore continues to trivialize the trauma and abuse that occurred under their unGodly watch in the 1970′s. Children were tortured, raped, molested and verbally and emotionally abused every day while they allowed John Merzbacher to run the Catholic Community Middle School. They allowed the devil’s son to run their Catholic school and chose to turn their heads to the countless complaints, suspicions and even their own eye witness to his numerous criminal acts against children.

And more. It’s horrifying.

H/t AnneMarie

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

Because if you botch it he could bleed to death, that’s why.

A four-week-old boy “bled to death” after a home circumcision carried out by a nurse, a court has heard.

Goodluck Caubergs died the day after nurse Grace Adeleye carried out the procedure without anaesthetic, Manchester Crown Court was told.

…

Mrs Adeleye, of Sarnia Court, Salford, was paid £100 to do the operation as Goodluck’s parents did not know the procedure was available on the NHS.

It is alleged the defendant, who is also a midwife, left a “ragged” wound that bled and her post-operative care was inadequate.

All that for a procedure that isn’t medically necessary in the first place.

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

Speaking of the…oddities of the Catholic church, there’s one order in Australia in which 70% of the bros are suspected of child abuse. Seventy percent.

Up to 200 victims have sought compensation from the St John of God order  after alleging they had been abused in special schools and homes run by the  brothers in NSW, Victoria and New Zealand.

Last week a Melbourne inquiry into child abuse heard allegations that  Brothers had drugged and pack-raped boys at their operations in Victoria.

Claims were also made that two boys had allegedly been beaten so badly they  were thought to have died but their deaths had not been reported to  authorities.

And Fairfax Media has obtained documents revealing that in the 1960s and  1970s dozens of boys were brutally assaulted at Kendall Grange, the order’s school for mentally and physically impaired boys at Morisset on the NSW central  coast.

Michelle Mulvihill is a psychologist who was employed by the order to meet victims.

Dr Mulvihill, who is based in Sydney, worked with the order for nine years  from 1998, sitting in on meetings involving negotiators from the order and 150  victims in NSW, Victoria and New Zealand.

But she says she quit the job in 2007, fearing that suspected paedophile  Brothers still wielded too much power in the order and were interfering with  victims’ compensation and treatment.

On Sunday she described the order as hosting Brothers who were responsible  for “the worst examples of child abuse I have ever heard of” and said of the 40  to 50 Brothers who had been in the order around the time she was involved, about  75 per cent had been the subject of allegations.

Another scene out of nightmares.

H/t Ian MacDougall.

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

Tomorrow in Oxford – a panel discussion on circumcision. The event is organised by Oxford Atheists, Secularists and Humanists.

John Dalton: John Dalton is the lead researcher at NORM-UK, whose mission statement is, “To advance the education of the public in all matters relating to circumcision and other forms of surgical alteration of the genitals, including alternative treatments and offering information and advice on such matters.” The organisation has a very informative website at http://www.norm-uk.co.uk/ . Mr Dalton will speak about Principles of Consent and Autonomy in Relation to Circumcision.

Dr Antony Lempert: Dr Lempert is chair of the Secular Medical Forum, http://www.secularmedicalforum.org.uk/ “Our main objective is to limit the harm done to patients by the imposition of other people’s religious views on them. We seek to present a secular opinion on present-day medical and health care practices throughout the UK.” Dr Lempert will present the medical case against circumcision, “The Secular Medical Forum believes that genital surgery (such as male circumcision) should only ever be performed on children where there are compelling medical indications.”

Rabbi Eli Brackman: Rabbi Eli Brackman is Oxford University’s Rabbi. Rabbi Eli’s blog at http://www.oxfordchabad.org/ his frequent speakers, events and discussion groups, and his (unusual amongst non students in Oxford) ability to use Facebook, have very much made him a recognisable feature of the wider Oxford scene. Though the majority of Oxford’s circumcisions are carried out by Muslim practitioners, Judaism is the faith most closely associated with circumcision and is also most likely to suffer persecution and stigma.

Brian Earp: Brian Earp is an Oxford Philosopher, Psychologist and Ethicist, who writes for the Practical Ethics blog, including posts about circumcision.  Brian Earp can also be found on YouTube, challenging Sam Harris and US Ethics Professors, as well as impressive musical theatre performances.

I would go to that if I could.

Update: more information on the event’s Facebook page.

Tuesday 27th November, at 7.30pm. Exeter College, Saskatchewan Room

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

The jaw drops.

The Catholic-school teacher had a pre-teen student pinned to the ground in his Baltimore classroom, the girl’s blouse open and her chest exposed when the doorknob suddenly turned and the school principal — a nun — burst in.

The screaming girl thought she was about to be rescued, according to court records that describe the scene at the Catholic Community Middle School in Locust Point. But Sister Eileen Weisman, who had a key to the room, merely chastised the teacher, John Joseph Merzbacher, for locking the door.

“[Weisman] looked down and her exact words were ‘John, oh John, I told you never to lock the classroom door,’” Linda Tiburzi, who described the incident in a civil court deposition in the mid-1990s, said in a recent interview. “And then she looked at me and said ‘I never want you staying after school again.’ … That’s all she said, that’s all she did, there was nothing, there was no investigation, there were no questions.”

That’s the school principal.

That incident is one of several outlined in court documents, analyzed in a Baltimore Sun investigation, indicating that Weisman and other Catholic officials were aware of the lay teacher’s sexual abuse of students in the 1970s but did not report it until Merzbacher was criminally investigated in the 1990s.

Recent accounts from more than two dozen former pupils and a review of hundreds of pages of documents describe several situations in which critics claim the church had opportunities to protect schoolchildren from Merzbacher, but did not notify police of the allegations against the teacher.

John, oh John, never lock the classroom door.

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

Ron Lindsay has an interesting post about the fad for shunning fellow atheists and skeptics.

I am motivated to write about this topic for a couple of reasons. First, Russell Blackford has recently announced via Twitter that he will not attend any conference at which Rebecca Watson or PZ Myers is speaking.  Second, in the last few months, a number of individuals have advised me that CFI and its affiliates should never invite certain persons as speakers.  This advice has often been accompanied with a statement such as “If X speaks, I will not attend the conference.”  There was a flurry of such advice around CSICon, the Nashville conference of our affiliate CSI, presumably because our speaker list reminded people of objections they had to this or that individual.

In any event, the list of individuals that CFI has been advised not to have any dealings with is long.  In no particular order it includes: Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, Ophelia Benson, Harriet Hall, Russell Blackford, Edwina Rogers, Rebecca Watson, PZ Myers, and Sharon Hill.  I am sure I am forgetting several more.

I’m so proud.

Of course, there are persons who combine controversial opinions with outrageous, intolerable behavior or express their opinions in such a fashion that they do not allow for a meaningful exchange of views (e.g., their “views” consist largely of a string of racist epithets).  Similarly, there are persons who repeatedly make demonstrably false claims, whose every word out of their mouths, including “and” and “the” (to paraphrase Mary McCarthy), are lies.  Such persons would not be invited to speak at CFI events.

Without scrutinizing every statement that has ever been made by the individuals listed above, I am confident that none of these individuals falls into the “unacceptable” category.  We will continue to invite them to CFI events when warranted.

Actually I do combine my controversial opinions with outrageous, intolerable behavior, but I keep the behavior secret. Only the members of the Outrageous Intolerable Club know about it, and they would never spill.

Let me also respectfully suggest to my long-distance friend Russell that his position that he will not attend conferences where Watson or Myers is speaking does not rest on a sound argument. One has to be very charitable when trying to interpret a tweet, but Russell appears to believe his position is justified, in part, because an organization “supports” an individual by having them speak at a conference.  Not so.

…

And as Russell knows from his own experience of speaking for us, “support” cannot mean financial support because typically we do no more than cover expenses. Occasionally we offer honoraria, but the amounts involved are so small as to constitute mere tokens of appreciation.

I think the “support” idea comes from the – what to call them – the organized haters of the composite monster that haunts their dreams, made up of a few Freethought bloggers and Skepchicks, and now something they call AtheismPlus. They started ranting early about not “supporting” Rebecca (or, rather, Twatson or Becky, because that’s how they roll) by paying to go to conferences. They have a delusion that she gets paid big bucks for speaking, and that we all do. We get paid ZILCH, just as Ron says. That idea gets recycled a lot, and I suspect that’s why Russell echoed it. That’s odd, in a way, since he would know, as the organized haters don’t, that speakers don’t get paid.

If Russell believes that Myers and Watson trade in bad arguments, or perhaps no arguments at all, but just unsupported assertions and accusations, then the best remedy for that is the time-honored one of pointing out the flaws in their claims. Or, if one thinks enough effort has been spent on rebuttal, simply ignoring them. Shunning and boycotting are extreme responses best reserved for truly exceptional cases.  I would hate to see the atheist and skeptic communities dissolve into a snarl of dueling fatwas.

Quite so. And not just shunning; not just public shunning; but addressing the public shunning directly to one of the organizers of the Australian Skeptic event. That’s a great deal too fatwa-like.

Don’t worry though; I’m not feeling smug. Ron linked to a post of Jerry Coyne’s from two years ago -

A couple of years ago Jerry Coyne claimed that CFI had declared war on atheists. No, really. Moreover, he specifically mentioned me as someone who had gone out of his way to criticize CFI’s atheist supporters. No statement by me was provided as evidence. And I assure you this this declaration of war on atheists was news both to me and Tom Flynn, who never suspected we might declare war on ourselves.

- and I had a look and oh what do you know, there I am being very obnoxious to…Melody. That’ll larn me. (Or not, because I’m a brat.) As Ron says -

(Remember when accommodationism and not sexism was the big issue in the atheist community? Ah, the good old days.)

Yes. Lots of allegiances shifted between those two days.

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

The Islamists in Egypt aren’t just taking all this nonsense about separation of powers lying down. Of course they’re not. They’re out on the street in a show of support for Morsi’s decision to declare himself above the law.

Egypt’s powerful Muslim Brotherhood called nationwide demonstrations Sunday in support of Islamist President Mohamed Morsi in his showdown with the judges over the path to a new constitution.

A new Islamist constitution, in which no rights will be allowed that are not compatible with Sharia.

The show of strength on the streets by the president’s supporters had the potential for triggering clashes with opponents of the sweeping new powers he assumed on Thursday who remained camped out in Cairo’s Tahrir Square.

Before dawn, the hardcore of liberal activists who spent the night in the iconic protest hub fought off an attempt by Morsi supporters to burn down the 30 or so tents they had erected in the square, witnesses said.

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

You thought Rush Limbaugh was unpleasant – check out Rubina Nasir, a presenter on Leeds based Radio Asian Fever.

She said that homosexuals should be ‘beaten up’ and that a Muslim marrying a non-Mulslim was on ‘the straight path to hellfire’.

The presenter, known as ‘Sister Ruby’, said: “What should be done if they do it? [practise homosexuality].

“If there are two such persons among you, that do this evil, the shameful act, what do you have to do? Torture them; punish them; beat them and give them mental torture.”

“Allah states, ‘If they do such a deed [i.e. homosexuality], punish them, both physically and mentally.

“Mental punishment means rebuke them, beat them, humiliate them, admonish and curse them, and beat them up. This command was sent in the beginning because capital punishment had not yet been sent down.”

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

There’s apparently a lot of discussion on Twitter about something Richard Dawkins said yesterday (on something – a debate with Mehdi Hasan? is that right? – that will be on Al-Jazeera in December). I’ve seen some of it, but also references to more, which I haven’t seen. The origin was a tweet (isn’t it always?) -

Tonight, Dawkins argued that teaching a child about hell is worse than a child being sexually abused, which he said ‘she might feel was yucky’.

Some people pointed out that he said the same thing in The God Delusion, and even supplied the page, so I looked it up.

Here’s the thing. I agree with people who are outraged by the “worse than a child being sexually abused” part, but I agree with Dawkins that the badness of teaching children that hell is real is terrible and that that gets neglected.

I think this means I’ve irritated everyone. So it goes.

I think it’s a big mistake, and especially so for Dawkins and at this stage of the game, to compare it with anything else, and to minimize child sexual abuse. (TGD came out before the Ryan Report. I would guess Dawkins has read the Ryan Report. I think it was front and center at the time of the protests against the pope’s visit. If he has, it seems odd that he’s still arguing that priestly child sexual abuse isn’t always a big deal. He may be right that for some children it really isn’t, but it’s a very dubious thing to argue, especially when the church is still trying to brush it under the carpet.) I think he should just separate the two, and then leave the other one strictly alone. Focus on hell, and leave the child abuse issue alone; that’s my advice.

I do agree with him though that the idea of hell is really really bad. What he was talking about in TGD (starting on page 317) was a letter from “an American woman” who was raised Catholic and had both experiences at age 7 - priestly abuse and terror about hell. A priest fondled her, and a Protestant friend of hers died and went to hell – or so she’d been taught to believe. The second item was “by far the worst.”

Dawkins quotes from the letter.

Being fondled by the priest simply left the impression (from the mind of a  7 year old) as ‘yucky’ while the memory of my friend going to hell was one of cold, unmeasurable fear. I never lost sleep because of the priest – but I spent many a night being terrified that the people I loved would go to Hell.

You see in that tweet above it looks as if “yucky” is Dawkins’s word, and a damn silly one, but in fact he was quoting.

I think he shouldn’t compare the two, especially now, but I do think he’s right about hell.

I look forward to your letters, as Craig says.

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

A Texas high school wants its students to carry ID cards with microchips, so that it can tell where they are.

ID badges containing radio tags started to be introduced at the start of the 2012 school year to schools run by San Antonio’s Northside Independent School District (NISD). The tracking tags gave NISD a better idea of the numbers of students attending classes each day – the daily average of which dictates how much cash it gets from state coffers.

I can’t help thinking it would be better if schools were small enough so that they could have a handle on how many students were attending just by eyeballing the classroom, but hey, I know that would cost more money and education of other people’s children isn’t a priority. So are these badges with tags ok? I don’t know; they seem intrusive to me, but then I don’t have a huge factory full of teenagers to run.

But one student refuses to wear the things because they’re of Satan.

Hernandez refused to wear the tag because it conflicted with her religious beliefs, according to court papers. Wearing such a barcoded tag can be seen as a mark of the beast as described in Revelation 13 in the Bible, Ms Hernandez’s father told Wired magazine in an interview.

That’s not a good reason. If that’s a reason, then another student could say that homework can be seen as a mark of the beast. If something that “can be seen as” whatever is a valid reason for refusal, then anything can be a valid reason for refusal. Hence the need for secularism. Once you can just paste the word “religious” on whatever you want to do or refuse to do, we’re screwed.

The Rutherford Institute said the NISD’s suspension violated Texan laws on religious freedom as well as free speech amendments to the US constitution.

But if “religious freedom” covers everything, then we’ll get paralysis.

The court’s willingness to grant a temporary restraining order is a good first step, but there is still a long way to go – not just in this case, but dealing with the mindset, in general, that everyone needs to be monitored and controlled,” said John Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute in a statement.

Mr Whitehead said student tagging and locating projects were the first step in producing a “compliant citizenry”.

“These ‘student locator’ programmes are ultimately aimed at getting students used to living in a total surveillance state where there will be no privacy, and wherever you go and whatever you text or email will be watched by the government,” he said.

But that’s a different argument. It’s a different kind of argument. It’s got nothing to do with a mark of the beast. I think he has a point, but it’s a secular point. They should make that point, and leave Revelation 13 out of it.

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

Bjarte Foshaug did a toon. It made me laugh.

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

Another Very Young Girl spots the unfairness in gender stereotyping in the toy department.

A six-year-old girl wrote Hasbro to let them know they only have bros (HIGH FIVE!) in their game, Guess Who. You know, the game that’s like memory but all the characters have googly eyes, dodgy mustaches, and bad toupees? Well, guess who’s not in the game? Women. Actually, no, that’s not fair, there are five girls and nineteen boys. Five girls and nineteen boys.

What is it with that? I swear, I think there are actually people who think women are a small fraction of the population.

Her letter is short and to the point.

Dear Hasbro,

My name is R______. I am six years old. I think it’s not fair to only have 5 girls in Guess Who and 19 boys. It is not only boys who are important, girls are important too. If grown ups get into thinking that girls are not important they won’t give little girls much care.

Also if girls want to be a girl in Guess Who they’ll always lose against a boy, and it will be harder for them to win. I am cross about that and if you don’t fix it soon, my mum could throw Guess Who out.

My mum typed this message but I told her what to say.

Check out what Hasbro replied.

Dear R___,

Thank you for your email. Please find below an explanation which I hope your mummy will be able to explain to you.

Guess Who? is a guessing game based on a numerical equation. If you take a look at the characters in the game, you will notice that there are five of any given characteristics. The idea of the game is, that by process of elimination, you narrow down who it isn’t, thus determining who it is. The game is not weighted in favour of any particular character, male or female. Another aspect of the game is to draw attention away from using gender or ethnicity as the focal point, and to concentrate on those things that we all have in common, rather than focus on our differences.

Omigod did Chris Stedman get a job with Hasbro?!?!

Seriously. That is so fucking weaselly. The idea is to draw attention away from gender so that little pests like you won’t notice that we think there should be five times as many boys as there are girls in our game.

Yes, and another aspect of the game is to draw attention away from using money or power or class or status as the focal point, because some of us have a lot more of those than others, because we have rigged things that way, so kindly concentrate on those things that we all have in common, rather than focus on our differences, before we call Homeland Security.

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

This is from two years ago, but so what – it’s still on point.

One wonders why the video that has a FEATURED label at the top of the right hand column is the one titled Anti Feminist, which features someone who 1. calls herself Trish 2. appears to be imitating a Barbie doll 3. says “like” every third word. It’s funny the way people who aren’t good at talking think it’s a good idea to make vlogs.

Anyway. Anita Sarkeesian, before all the Iago syndrome.

Update: before all the Iago syndrome that prompted misogynists to do everything they could to degrade and silence her, was what I meant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZn_lJoN6PI

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