ChaoSkeptic

In America there are strange norms when it comes to sex. There is a constant shroud of silence when it comes to what goes on in bedrooms. Every church (and until recently even the government) constantly preached that sex is a dirty bad thing that should be saved for marriage. There is a supernatural mystique when it comes to virginity (especially for women). It is not considered a state of mind but as a physical thing that you can lose like a sock in the dryer. We even have Purity Balls where fathers and daughters worship her virginity like a fetish doll. We have to be the most sexually dysfunctional country in history.

And that's why I get a perverse thrill out of American sex studies. They have a way of ripping off the veil for everyone to see how we actually feel about sex and not just the company line we mouth when the children are around.

My favorite all time favorite study was released by the Guttmacher Institute in 2007. It was entitled "Trends in Premarital Sex in the United States, 1954–2003". The title alone makes me giddy with excitement. The most important part of the study says this:

Of those interviewed in 2002, 95% reported they had had premarital sex; 93% said they did so by age 30. Among women born in the 1940s, nearly nine in 10 did. At the same time, people are waiting longer to marry; 2005 data show median age at first marriage is just over 25 for women and 27 for men.

That's right. All of us are horny hypocrites. It is almost a guarantee that every single abstinence-only educator and pontificating preacher had sex before they were married. (Hell, your grandparents most likely had sex before marriage. Wrap your head around that!) The same people saying that sex before marriage will leave you a sad husk that no one will love anymore and that you will get every single STD simultaneously did the horizontal mambo before marriage and turned out just fine.

This is one of the reasons I've been against abstinence only education for a long time. It's not just that is scientifically proven to not work and in many instances increases the number of teen pregnancies and STD rates. It is unrealistic model of how the world works. It's an outright lie. And if you lie to kids you'll have to face the D.A.R.E. effect where kids can no longer tell the truth from the propaganda and end up making bad decisions.


And I said all that to talk about a new study by Guttmacher that came out today called "Religion and Contraceptive Use". Another great title. The key findings of this study were:

• Among all women who have had sex, 99% have ever used a contraceptive method other than natural family planning. This figure is virtually the same among Catholic women (98%).

• Among sexually active women of all denominations who do not want to become pregnant, 69% are using a highly effective method (i.e., sterilization, the pill or another hormonal method, or the IUD).

• Some 68% of Catholic women use a highly effective method, compared with 73% of Mainline Protestants and 74% of Evangelicals.

• Only 2% of Catholic women rely on natural family planning; this is true even among Catholic women who attend church once a month or more.

The big things I want to point out are that 98% of Catholic women use contraception and only 2% use the "rhythm method". 98%! Try to wrap your head around that because I can't. For those not up on Roman Catholic dogma, contraception is considered a mortal sin. Pope Paul VI called it "seriously evil". The current pope, Benedict XV, said that handing out condoms "aggravates the problems" when it comes to AIDs.

And 98% of American Catholic women are collectively saying, "Fuck the motherfucking pope". They would rather risk the fate of their soul than be told how to control their bodies. To that I say, "You go, girl!" (Do people still say that?) But I also say, "Why the hell do you put up with this shit?" Obviously a bunch of old men in dresses who've (allegedly) never had sex shouldn't be giving other people marriage advice. People need to stand up and tell them to be more realistic.

Oh, that's right! Women aren't allowed to have leadership positions in the Catholic Church. Silly me. Maybe several centuries from now they'll change their minds about the whole thing. There might not be anyone left to care at that point.

My Facebook feed is a very interesting place. On top of 65 Discordian friends that I've picked up online, I'm friends with at least three preachers and one chiropractor. This isn't because I have a freakish number of Facebook friends either. I have never let my number of friends get over 300. I like keeping my number of friends small so I don't have to wade through a long string of jackasses to get to people I actually care about. The preachers and the chiropractors were people I just happened to go to high school with. This wasn't a big high school either. My hometown currently has just over 7000 people, my graduating class was less than 120 and according to Google, there are roughly 40 churches within the city limits. Typically Small Town, USA, I suppose.

And, unbeknownst to me until now, there are four chiropractors in my hometown. (It seems odd to me that a town would have 4 chiropractors and zero OB/GYNs but there is neither here nor there.) One of these is an osteopath carrying on his father's business so I'll let him slide, for now. However, the one that I am friends with on Facebook appears to have gone over to the woo-side. (I'll refrain from mentioning names because I have no personal beef with her and don't want to appear to libel her.)

I knew something was up when I saw her promoting immune boosters and anti-vax BS on Facebook several months ago. No, I take that back. I'm naturally suspicious of chiropractors due to it's rather dubious beginnings when a magnetic healer named D. D. Palmer claimed to have cured a deaf man by cracking his bones. As we saw during the Simon Singh incident there are still chiropractors willing to "happily promote bogus treatments" while refusing to back up their claims with scientific evidence.

Where was I? Oh yes, my Facebook friend. This afternoon she suggested that all of her friends (and presumably all of her patients since she uses a picture of her office as her Facebook profile pic) to watch the movie "The Beautiful Truth." Just like you, I had never heard of this movie since it had an extremely short run in very few theaters. Long story short, it is about an Alaskan home-schooled teenager who is a True Believer in Gerson therapy. Despite trying to be a well-rounded skeptic I had never heard of Gerson therapy so I did the requisite research. SkepDic has this to say about it:

Gerson therapy is the name given to a regimen that claims to be able to cure even severe cases of cancer. The regimen consists of a special diet, coffee enemas, and various supplements...

Gerson says he started on the road to his regimen when his migraines went away after going on a vegetarian and salt-free diet. The diet in the regimen eventually came to include lots of juice from organic fruits and vegetables, and to exclude coffee, berries, nuts, dairy products, tap water; bottled, canned or processed foods; and cooking in aluminum pots and pans. The supplements came to include linseed oil, acidophilus-pepsin capsules, potassium solution, laetrile, Lugol's solution (iodine/potassium iodine), thyroid tablets, niacin, pancreatic enzymes, royal-jelly capsules, castor oil, ozone enemas, vaccines, and vitamin B12 mixed with liver...

Gerson believed that the need to detoxify resulted not only from the internal generation of poisonous substances but also from the external supply of toxins created by the use of insecticides and herbicides in commercial agriculture. Accordingly, his dietary regimen emphasized the use of food grown organically. He reasoned that treatment for cancer must replenish and detoxify the entire body to allow its innate healing mechanisms to be restored.

He maintained that the coffee enemas helped to stimulate the flow of bile, thereby increasing the rate of excretion of toxic products from the body.

That's right. Using vegetables, a handful of supplements, and coffee enemas to cure cancer. It's a bit of the naturalistic fallacy, a touch of the toxin gambit mixed with a whole lot of conspiracy theories about Big Pharma not wanting to cure cancer. The therapy has been tried by several famous people including Sacramento newscaster Pat Davis and comedian Pat Paulsen. Unfortunately both of them died while seeking treatment at the Gersons' institute in Tijuana. I should mention that their clinic is located in Mexico because it is currently illegal to offer the Gerson treatment as a cancer cure in the United States. I'm sure that is all Big Pharma's fault.

At any rate, Orac has a great takedown of the movie over at Respectful Insolence with clips from the trailers if you'd like to know more about it. He compares it unfavorably to the Ben Stein hit piece "Expelled".

Back to chiropractic friend. I felt like I needed to interject a little skepticism into the conversation so this happened:


Now, was this the right tact for me to take? Maybe, maybe not. There is a high likelihood that the comment will get deleted and I will be de-friended PDQ. It made me laugh so that's what I did. (And I have poor impulse control.) I'm hoping that opening with some levity will take the conversation somewhere. I don't have my hopes up that it will change her mind about pseudoscience completely. She is obviously already committed to that position and has financial incentive to not change her mind. At the very least it will get some passersby to think and I will try to warn her that recommending Gerson therapy is very dangerous and currently illegal. I will keep you updated if this goes anywhere.

Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK is wrong with people? This whole "Ground Zero Mosque (that isn't really a mosque and isn't really at Ground Zero)" debate has turned people into mindless idiots. We used to be a country that believed in freedom, liberty and justice, right? Did we at some point not freak out when someone slightly different from us moved into the neighborhood? We used to believe in the Constitution, didn't we?

But now everyone has turned into a spineless jellyfish because a group of Muslims that are in no way associated with terrorism wants to build a community center within walking distance of Ground Zero. It wouldn't be so laughable if they didn't pick on the most liberal imam in America. This guy is literally the Muslim version of Rick Warren. He's been on several interfaith tours for the State Department preaching tolerance, for chrissake! (Yes, he basically says "no comment" when it comes to Hamas but he has the right to say that.) It's like telling Joel Osteen  that he can't build a church in Oklahoma City because the Christian Identity movement was behind the Murrah Building bombing.

Instead of treating this like a local zoning issue people in this country are shitting their drawers. They are willing to infringe on the rights of their fellow Americans because of fear. They are willing to strip away religious freedoms, free speech, property rights, the freedom of assembly, and even the concept of innocent until proven guilty. We have become a nation of easily manipulated cowards who run scared anytime an Arabic-looking man walks down the street. All over a fucking building that 99% of them will never be within 100 miles of.

All of this just proves that terror and fear still work, even 9 years after the fact. People are too easily swayed by emotionally charged language from cynical politics looking for a vote. We too easily are willing to give up our liberty in order to slay the scapegoat du jour. And above all, there is no way to have a rational political conversation in this country any more. Sixty percent of our population has given up their senses in order to feel a little safer at night.

ADDENDUM: And while we are at it, let's stop this foolish talk about "hallowed ground". No piece of land is sacred no matter what happened there 10, 50, 100 or 500 years ago. Land is land.

If you are one of the half dozen long time readers that I still have left then you will no doubt remember my ground breaking post on the OSS Simple Sabotage Manual from last year. According to StatCounter it is the most popular post that I have ever written and still gets hits via Google every couple of days. (My post on The Book of Dirty Tricks, not so much.)

Since everyone in the audience loved the sabotage post so much I decided to share another little gem with the class. While browsing through Scribd recently it suggested a short pamphlet entitled "Sabotage: The Conscious Withdrawl of the Workers' Industrial Efficiency" by Elizabeth Gurley Flynn. Flynn was a labor leader for the International Workers of the World and feminist who helped found the ACLU. (And later in life, chairwoman of the United States Communist Party.) As you can imagine, she was full of spunk and probably accused of being uppity many times.

In 1916 she wrote "Sabotage" after being arrested during the Paterson, NJ silk strike. In it, she showed how sabotage can be used as an effective protest strategy instead of, or in conjunction with, workers' strikes:

The strike is the open battle of the class struggle, sabotage is the guerrilla warfare, the day-by-day warfare between two opposing classes.

I happen to like her definition of sabotage:

Sabotage means primarily: the withdrawal of efficiency. Sabotage means either to slacken up and interfere with the quantity, or to botch in your skill and interfere with the quality, of capitalist production or to give poor service. Sabotage is not physical violence, sabotage is an internal, industrial process. It is something that is fought out within the four walls of the shop. And these three forms of sabotage -- to affect the quality, the quantity and the service are aimed at affecting the profit of the employer. Sabotage is a means of striking at the employer's profit for the purpose of forcing him into granting certain conditions, even as workingmen strike for the same purpose of coercing him. It is simply another form of coercion.

She then goes on to give examples of how to effectively use sabotage to your advantage including "an unfair day's work for an unfair day's wage", interfering with the quality/durability/utility of the product, being brutally honest with the customer you are providing service to, and one of my personal favorites, "Work-to-Rule".

Reading through this gives you a real feel for how bad class struggles were even in the early 1900s. It's hard to imagine a day when workers had to fight for not only decent wages and benefits but also adequate sanitation, ventilation and even lighting. Say what you want about the sometimes bloated union organizations of today but a hundred years ago they were still very much needed for the health and well being of the everyday worker. If you work in a safe work environment with good pay and a 40 hour work week, then you have people like Elizabeth Gurley Flynn to thank. If you don't, then...

I am not going to attempt to justify sabotage on any moral ground. If the workers consider that sabotage is necessary, that in itself makes sabotage moral.

You can read "Sabotage" on Scribd, on IWW's website, or even listen to the audio version on Librivox.

Sabotage

(As always, ChaoSkeptic does not explicitly endorse the use of sabotage in everyday situation. If legal troubles should arise due to the use of techniques from this or any other work posted on ChaoSkeptic then you are on your own, Mister)

Several Discordian leaders today were outraged today by the announcement that US Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs has decided to allow pagan prayer circles close to where Christian chapels are already in place. They are asking their fellow Erisian Brothers and Sisters to cry out in protest over this affront to our nation's Discordian Heritage™. Rev. Thomas "Tommy" Reinard of the First Methodist Church of Discordia sent out this message:

What we label today as "pluralism," Eris called "idolatry." The first commandment from Eris was, "You shall have no other gods before Me. The rest are pure rubbish and usually drunk all of the time." There is no evidence that Eris has changed Her mind on the subject. To openly violate this most basic law is to invite Eris's judgment upon our nation. Eris has judged idolatry in the past through military invasions, earthquakes, floods, and an occasional attack of explosive diarrhea. The book of Omitterre Libellus prophesies that Eris will employ the same agents of Her wrath during the final seven years of earth's history. There is no reason to think Eris is on hiatus during this present age.

"But doesn't our Constitution demand that all religions be treated equally?' you might ask.

Since Eris is not an American, there is no reason to think She has a particular affinity for our ideas about the separation of church and state. Nevertheless, although the First Amendment guarantees the right of every American to worship however they choose, it does not require government to provide a chapel for Christians - even if the same government provides a stone monument to facilitate the worship of Eris.

I don't know the cause of the Haitian earthquake, the Indonesian tsunami or 9/11. But I can say without hesitation that any nation that officially embraces Christianity is openly inviting Eris's wrath.

This past week government officials testified they are "certain" of another terrorist attempt on our soil within the next three to six months. One would think this would be a good time to seek Eris's protection rather than kindle Her anger.

Hat tip to Right Wing Watch.

I've had a lot of time lately to do some recreation reading so I've been trying to bone up on Game Theory. You know, "the study of the ways in which strategic interactions among rational players produce outcomes with respect to the preferences (or utilities) of those players, none of which might have been intended by any of them". Just some light reading to keep me busy, nothing big. Anyways, I came upon the interesting concept of the Free Rider Problem. As Chris Firth put it:

Ernst Fehr has studied more complex economic games – called Common Good Games – in which many people play together. If everyone cooperates by putting their own money into the system, then everyone gains. But there are always a few people who behave unfairly. These are the free riders, players who realize that they can benefit from the fair behavior of other people without needing to donate any of their own money. Once free riders appear in the group, people gradually stop cooperating. Even the most generous player doesn’t see why she should go on supporting someone who is putting nothing into the system. As a result the group finishes up with less money than they could have gained with full cooperation. (emphasis mine)

This all sounded very familiar to me. Then it hit me! The Teabaggers are the Free Riders in our society. They are people that want to reap the benefits of living in a collective society without having to put in their share of contributions. They want to evade paying taxes while enjoying public roads, parks, police, firefighters, clean water, etc. But wait! There is a solution to the Free Rider Problem.

This is where altruistic punishment comes in. Ernst Fehr and Simon Gächter allowed players to punish the free riders. This was altruistic punishment since it cost $1 to punish another player, but that other player lost $3. When this punishment of the free riders is possible, then cooperation in the group steadily increases and everyone gains.

So there you have it. All we have to do is convince the government to sell permits to legally bop Teabaggers over the head with foam weapons. People would line up around the block for an opportunity like that. And just think, if we sell enough of them we can finally get rid of that nasty multi-trillion dollar deficit hanging over our heads. It's just crazy enough to work!

One of my most popular posts that still gets hits almost daily from Google was my piece on the OSS Simple Sabotage Manual from back in June. Since it was such a big hit with everyone I thought that I would post another interesting government document about fucking things up on purpose. This one is from the child of OSS, the Central Intelligence Agency. It is a little bit more nefarious than the Simple Sabotage Manual too. While The SSM merely talked about breaking machinery and gumming up the cogs of bureaucracy, the CIA Book of Dirty Tricks advises chemical warfare, fraud, property damage, and other downright nastiness. For instance:

Classified advertisements in your local newspaper are inexpensive little bullets that can cause major wounds to the mark's psyche if properly aimed. For instance, suppose you had a score to settle with some bitchy neighbors. You could insert a classified ad to "sell" their automobile. Price it five hundred dollars less than market value, instruct callers to call after midnight (shift work is the explanation you can offer), and explain in the ad that quick cash is needed for an emergency. That will bring in the phone calls.

And that is one of the tamer entries. Most of it is mean-hearted stuff that will easily gain you scads of enemies and/or jail time. Still, it is an interesting read that let's you see inside the brain of a sociopath bent on revenge. Enjoy!

CIA Book of Dirty Tricks

(As always, ChaoSkeptic does not advocate you doing anything mentioned in this document. Especially since most of it is highly illegal and immoral. Plus some of it is outdated and/or intentional misinformation. If you end up in the slammer I will not come bail you out.)

There are many paths to becoming a holy man in this lifetime. The so called traditional route is to take six to ten years out of your life studying from other holy men, absorbing their lessons, engrossing yourself in the holy book of your forefathers, constantly meditating on the meaning of life. After many years your teacher will have to decide whether you are truly worthy to wear the holy vestments and lead a flock of your own.

Or you could be like me and get yourself ordained online. That's right, there are several organizations out there that are willing to declare you a fully ordained minister if you are willing to fill out the proper forms. I went with the Universal Life Church Monastery because who doesn't like the word "monastery"? They will ordain you for free over the internet in exchange for your legal name, e-mail, and address. (Don't worry, they do not spam you unless you ask nicely).

If you would like to make the process feel more complete you can head over to their online store to buy yourself a Bestowal of Title Certificate with your name and any religious title of your choice (including Pope!) You could be like me and get the sleek looking wallet credential card. Or, if you are feeling especially smart, you can have your own Doctor of Divinity or Doctor of Metaphysics certificates. Sure, this may cheapen those doctorates but it's not like anyone gave them much respect in the first place.

What is the point of all this, you may ask? Well, as the website says you are now free to "perform a wedding, baptism or funeral for friends and family, regardless of your spiritual or religious denomination". Of course, the wedding laws vary from state to state so make sure you do your research before hitching people together in holy matrimony. You may have to register with the county clerk before you are allowed to sign any marriage certificates. Baptisms and funerals are always fair game and are only limited by the beliefs of those being baptized and funeralized.

As an added bonus, as a ULC Minister you have the legal authority to ordain new ministers into the ministry. So make sure to deputize all of your friends and family. Feel free to ordain your pets too. (I don't think that would have any legal backing though.)

Speaking of British countries with shitty laws that infringe on the freedom of speech, Ireland decided to pass a very backwards anti-blasphemy law on Friday. The law makes effectively makes it illegal to criticize any religion. Anyone who dares to speak out against religion could be fined up to 25,000 Euros ($30,000 in real money). The Blasphemy Clause reads as follows:

Section 36

(1) A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000. [Amended to €25,000]

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.

The Irish police force is also allowed to enter into someone's home and confiscate any material that is critical of religion.

Of course, the entire thing is bullshit. It doesn't give a clear definition of what is considered "blasphemous" or even who gets to decide that? This kind of vagueness could end up hurting people of all religions. It could kill all serious religious discussions since it is almost impossible to make a positive claim about one religion without blaspheming every other one. Catholics would not be able to say that Jesus is the only way and everyone else will burn in hell. Christians would not be able to say that Catholics aren't Really Real Christians. Muslims would not be able to say that Jesus wasn't really the son of God. Atheists were basically have to tape their mouths shut or acquire very deep pockets. Irish Discordians would be in an extremely difficult position since Discordianism was founded on blaspheming every other religion as often as possible. Many philosophers, writers, musicians, and stand-up comics would be barred from Ireland forever.

No one knows how the courts will actually enforce this law but there are several people out there already fighting this law including Atheist Ireland, Richard Dawkins, and the creators of the Father Ted tv show. It is a bit of an uphill battle because the Defamation Act of 1961 would have to be amended. I'm not an expert at Irish law so I have no idea how hard that would be. Until then there needs to be clearer guidelines on what can and can't be said.

If you follow any other Skeptic's blogs then you have read enough about it by now about the Simon Singh libel case since absolutely everyone has covered it to death by now. Here's a synopsis if you don't want to click all of those links: Simon Singh is a science journalist for the Guardian newspaper. Several months ago he wrote a column about the British Chiropractic Association and some underhanded advertising techniques used by some of their members. Here is a direct quote from the article:

The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments.

Seems rather tame doesn't it? It can easily be proven that several chiropractors are making claims that they can't back up and that the BCA has done very little about it. Now instead of reprimanding their members for writing checks that their ass can't cash they decided to sue Simon for libel.

In America (and most sane countries) this would get laughed out of court. However, the libel laws in Britain are pure shite. The burden of proof is completely backwards from most other legal systems: the defendant is considered guilty until proven innocent. As you might guess this makes it very easy to squash someone else's freedom of speech. If someone says something about you that you don't like all you have to do is drag them to court and engage them in a long legal battle where they are at a disadvantage before they even walk in the door. With the added advantage of everyone else thinking twice before they criticize you.

Thankfully the Guardian has stood Simon so far and has paid all of his legal fees. He's already lost one cause because the judge decided to completely redefine the word "bogus" to mean "knowingly fraudulent" instead of the dictionary definition of "counterfeit". He's appealing that ruling to a higher court though where he will hopefully have a better judge.

He has also started a campaign called "Keep Libel Laws Out of Science" to help prevent this from happening to anyone else. Maybe something good will come out of this yet.

Oh ho, those crazy East Europeans! According to an article in something called Mosnews (it's on the internets, so it's gotta be true!) a Latvian finance company is offering loans with a very interesting catch. You can use your immortal soul as collateral:

Riga-based firm, named Kontora, does not require credit history record or proof of employment. It grants loans of 50 to 500 Latvian lats ($100 to $1,000) to any adult after he or she signs the a very short agreement.

According to the agreement, the only security required of the borrower is their immortal soul, which they are asked to confirm as their previously unmortgaged property.

As the song goes, "If I sold my soul for a bag of gold to you, which one of us would be the foolish one?" Plus I'm sure you could default on the loan if you can convince the courts that you are morally bankrupt.

It's been awhile since I've covered any Discordian literature so I thought I'd talk about an odd little book that wasn't technically written by a Discordian but should still be considered an important part of any Discordian's library. The book I am speaking of is unique among Discordian holy books in the fact that it was actually written by an arm of the US government.

The OSS (Office of Strategic Services) was the United States' main intelligence agency during World War II. After the war was over the agency was split between the Departments of State and War. Part of that eventually became the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency). Just last year the National Archives released all of the OSS's documents to the public. The names of 24,000 spies were revealed, including tv chef Julia Child, baseball player Moe Berg, and director John Ford.

Hidden among millions of pages of documents was a short book entitled "Simple Sabotage Field Manual". The purpose of it was to help dissenters on the other side of enemy lines to slowly take down the system from within. The book is a handy guide on how to commit corporate sabotage. It includes such epic passages as:

Where destruction is involved, the weapons of the citizen-saboteur are salt, nails, candles, pebbles, thread, or any other materials he might normally be expected to possess as a householder or as a worker in his particular occupation. His arsenal is the kitchen shelf, the trash pile, his own usual kit of tools and supplies. The targets of his sabotage are usually objects to which he has normal and inconspicuous access in everyday life.

It includes helpful tips on how to recruit other saboteurs and together chip away at the Machine until it topples over. It is a fairly short book and should be read by all Discordians.


And thanks to Scribd I can do stuff like this:

OSS Simple Sabotage Manual
(WARNING: Chaoskeptic advises you to not use any of the methods suggested in the OSS Simple Sabotage Manual. If you are caught doing anything illegal, Chaoskeptic will disavow all knowledge of said agent. The revolution has abandoned you - You're on your own now.)

EDIT: The original person who posted this on Scribd deleted their copy. Since this post has been getting a lot of hits via Google I have decided to take matters into my own hands and upload a copy onto Scribd. Sorry for any inconveniences.

Waaay back in February I mentioned that Regent University finally got their own Democratic student organization. I didn't realize it at the time but Liberty University, the college started by the late Jerry Falwell, was getting it's own Democratic organization at almost the same time. Well, that didn't last very long:

Liberty University will no longer recognize its campus Democratic club because, officials say, the national party's platform goes against the conservative Christian school's moral principles.

Officials at the private Lynchburg school, which was founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell, said they made the decision after receiving complaints from trustees, parents and donors.

"They really are great kids and good friends of mine," said Jerry Falwell Jr., who became the school's chancellor after his father died in 2007. "It's just an issue of what Liberty's mission is."

I guess the liberty to have an opposing political view is not in Liberty's mission. Liberty later decided that the Democratic club could use the college's resources if certain conditions were met:

According to Falwell, whose father founded LU in 1971, Democratic clubs have existed at Liberty University over the last several decades but as unofficial student clubs not endorsed by the school.

Then, last fall, the College Democrats asked the university to officially recognize their club, thus granting them permission to use Liberty University’s name, hold public events on campus, and receive a small financial subsidy that only officially recognized clubs are eligible for.

To be recognized, however, Liberty asked the club to insert two clauses into their constitution – one stating that they are a pro-life organization and the other that they support the traditional view of marriage.

Translation: You can have your Democratic club as long as all of the members are Republicans.

The drama doesn't end there though. Americans United for Separation of Church and State has decided to get in on the act:

Americans United for Separation of Church and State is asking the IRS to review the tax-exempt status of Liberty University after the school’s decision to “unrecognize” the student-run College Democrats.

In a letter to the IRS, Americans United (AU) president Barry W. Lynn said he believes Liberty University (LU) may have violated federal tax law in denying recognition to the College Democrats while extending it to a Republican organization.

“As a tax-exempt institution, Liberty is barred from intervening in elections or showing preference for one political party over another,” Lynn wrote in the letter, dated Wednesday.

“By banning a Democratic club while permitting a Republican club to exist and offering funding to the latter but not the former, university officials appear to be operating in violation of federal tax law,” he added. “I urge you to investigate this matter and ensure that the law is enforced.”

Meanwhile Liberty University did the legal equivalent of NO U by filing their own complaint against Americans United:

Liberty Counsel plans to file a complaint on Monday, June 1 against Americans United for Separation of Church and State on behalf of Liberty University in response to claims that the University did not abide by IRS regulations for a nonprofit organization when it dropped endorsement of the school's College Democrats club.

Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, said Liberty's recent action "had nothing to do with the political nature of the club" and was "solely based upon the moral issues of abortion and marriage."

"Liberty will not lend its name or funds to support any group -- Republican, Democrat, Independent or non-political -- that supports abortion or same-sex marriage," he said. "Liberty's action has nothing to do with favoring Republicans or Democrats."

So round and round it goes. Where it stops, nobody knows...

For once I actually agree with the Dobsons, just not for the same reasons. Next Thursday, which just happens to be the National Day of Prayer and my birthday, James and Shirley will join Congressman J. Randy Forbes (R-VA) will hold a press conference to introduce a bill entitled "The Spiritual Heritage Resolution". If you follow House resolutions closely (and who doesn't??) you might recognize it by its former name of House Resolution #888. The first part of the resolution is to reaffirm "the rich spiritual and diverse religious history of our nation's founding and subsequent history" which is obvious dog whistle language for "America is a Christian nation no matter what Obama says!!!" Obviously I don't agree with this part since it plays right into the right-wing theocratic wannabes' desire to completely rewrite American history in their own image.

The part of resolution I do agree with is the fourth part which "expresses support for designation of a 'American Religious History Week' every year." I love this idea because we, as Americans, don't talk honestly about religious history enough in this country. I know too many people who just go along with whatever right-wing meme is floating around. And lord knows our high school textbooks have been sanitized within an inch of their life! What we need to do is go back through the history of the continent and discuss where religion has gotten us.

We should start with the fact that the Pilgrims were batshit crazy enough to get thrown out of both England and the Netherlands. We could also point out that many of the Founding Fathers were Deists, including Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and Thomas Paine. We could have a whole day dedicated to Jefferson's thoughts on the Separation of Church and State. Might want to throw something in there about the time Jefferson took a pair of scissors to the Bible to make it more appealing to him. We'll have to have something on the Treaty of Tripoli which very clearly states "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion". Follow that up with the fact that the Protestant doctrine of Manifest Destiny helped to spur on the genocide of millions of Native Americans. And we can't forget to mention how Christians ended up on both sides of the slavery issue with many denominations (including the Southern Baptists) splitting off thanks to it. We could round all of it off by talking about the Utah War, where members of the Latter-Day Saints church actively fought against the US government and killed about 120 people at the Mountain Medows massacre. We wouldn't want anyone to feel left out.

So there, doesn't an American Religious History Week sound like fun? Make sure to contact your representative now to make sure this passes.

Looks like the James Randi Educational Foundation is back and running on YouTube. The ban happened because of a little copyright issue as Randi explains here:



This still doesn't excuse the fact that the JREF's videos were blocked for four days. Especially since the issue was over a copyright that the copyright owner had no problem releasing to the JREF. YouTube's terms of service and the DMCA are still crap. There should be a better way for Youtube channel owners to resolve copyright issues without the Ban Hammer falling without warning. This has been happening too often lately and is quickly becoming a disturbing trend. If Youtube insists on being so draconian with their rules than another video hosting site will quickly overtake them. To paraphrase Gregg Easterbrook: There is no immutable law that says YouTube will always be the most popular video site on the internet.

Apparently Randi has made himself some rather annoying enemies. The James Randi Educational Foundation has it's own account on YouTube. Or rather it did until some time earlier today. According to the JREF's website:

Our YouTube account has been suspended, which means all of the Randi Speaks and other JREF videos are temporarily unavailable. We're researching the problem, and will be back online as soon as possible. Thanks very much for your patience.

It's too early to speculate on exactly what caused this problem, but I've got a couple of quick guesses: 1) Flag bots hit the channel hard and tripped YouTube's automatic ban system 2) Someone filed a DMCA complaint which automatic suspends an account (ala the whole Thunderf00t - PCS saga). Either way the whole situation stinks to high heaven. If you want to complain to YouTube about how they are handling it then click here: http://www.google.com/support/youtube/.

Even more of importance, contact your favorite member of Congress and tell them that the DMCA is a complete joke with too many loopholes that can be misused for censorship.

And now I shall present to you a dramatic reading that I have entitled Fundie Telephone Game. Please enjoy.

CONGRESS: Hey! Because of that whole church state thing colleges can't use bailout money to repair any religious building. LOL, SORRY!

Jay Sekulow, ACLJ: ZOMG!!1 Congress is totally discriminating against Christians. Religious organizations deserve the right to use those buildings. You can't take that away from them!!

CONGRESS: LOL, wut?

OneNewsNow (while lashing self): Persecution!!!

CONGRESS: Hai, guyz! Did you even read the thing?

Sen. James DeMint: Democrats hate Christianity and eat babbys!

CONGRESS: I thought you was one of us...

James Dobson: JIHAD, MOTHERFUCKER!!!

CONGRESS: *facepalm*

And scene!

Some time later on this spring the Supreme Court of the United States will hear the rather interesting case of Pleasant Grove City (Utah) vs. Summum. For those who have never heard of Summum, they are a religious group based in Salt Lake City founded by a man named "Corky" Ra. It's sort of Gnosticism meets Mormonism meets Scientology. Weird but mostly harmless.

Back in 2003 they petitioned the government of Pleasant Grove, Utah to ask if they could erect a monument to their “Seven Aphorisms of Summum” next to a thirty year old monument of the Ten Commandments in the city park. The city, of course, said no and Corky, of course, filed a law suit saying that his free speech rights had been violated. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit agreed with Corky, stating that since the park is a public forum and that the Ten Commandment monument was private speech from the original donor Corky is allowed to erect his monument. The city appealed it to the highest court in the land which that brings us around to today.

Interestingly enough, Pleasant Grove is being represented by Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law & Justice, a right wing Christian group that often fights against the separation of church and state. I say interesting because the ACLJ is going against their usual argument that religious groups should have equal access to public property. They are actually arguing that the original Ten Commandments monument is government speech rather than private speech and that the park isn't a public forum. This means if they win there would be a precedent in the legal system saying that monuments on public property are government speech and every single Ten Commandments monument in America would be subject to removal.

However, if Summum wins it could also be a huge win for all minority religions and irreligions. All public property that currently has a religious monument on it could be considered an open forums that would have to accept almost any religious monument. Discordians could argue for a monument to the Law of Fives. The Pastafarians could argue for even more Flying Spaghetti Monster statues. Atheist could ask for a monument to... um... nothing? It would be just like the chaos in the Washington state capitol last December times several thousand. Sounds like a great idea for a GASM to me.