Bill Maher: 'Rick Perry's Solution to America's Problems: 'Yee Haw, Jesus Take the Wheel''

Jesus-like People of Faith Rally to Oppose Anti-LGBT People of Faith in NC

Marriage = 1 obese man + 1 obese woman

On Friday, many kind, compassionate, and brave people of faith will gather in Charlotte, NC for a Faith Community Rally Against Homophobia & Transphobia. This is one of many events across the state to show the faith community's opposition to the anti-LGBT amendment currently being considered by North Carolina legislature.

After going blue in 2008, North Carolina has been experiencing a bit of a GOP backlash, with multiple culture war initiatives harking back to the days of Jesse Helms, an era that many had thought was over.

Last week, the NC Senate passed the poorly-named Women's Right to Know Act, which "requires women to wait 24 hours before getting an abortion within which time they must view an ultrasound or listen to the heartbeat of the fetus and be given printed information about the risks that may be associated with the procedure." The bill should have been named the Woman's Loss of Rights Act.

The state senate also passed a Voter ID bill, requiring all voters to show a photo ID, and eliminating Sunday early voting and same-day registration. Guess which voter demographic is statistically more likely to not have a photo ID, and vote on Sundays after church? You're right.

The Senate has passed more bills recently that set the clock back on North Carolina, but getting back to the anti-LGBT legislation...

The bills, SB 106/HB 777, or the "We Hate Our LGBT North Carolinians Amendment," would amend the state constitution to include a new section that reads "Marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State."

Groups of religious folks who closely resemble their messiah in their attitudes and willingness to stand up for what's right will be protesting those folks who claim to be doing the Christian thing by yelling hateful, embarrassing things and denying the rights of human beings who are being who they are.

Many folks wrongly believe that this bill is only about the word "marriage." That is naive. NC Equality states:

"In addition to limiting marriage to opposite sex couples, as state statute already does, it would prohibit any other form of relationship recognition, such as civil union or domestic partnership. This kind of language has been used in other states to take away private benefits such as health insurance for LGBT couples, unmarried opposite-sex couples, and their children. This is a not a hypothetical issue but a very real one. These amendments have also been used to challenge other private contracts between couples. The amendment would not only write the current discriminatory marriage law into the constitution, it would actually take away rights and responsibilities that are currently available to some couples. Both versions [of the bill] effectively represent divisive, discriminatory and distracting legislation that would actively write discrimination into the state’s founding document by prohibiting some form of legal relationship recognition for gay and lesbian couples."

So, if you are in the Charlotte area, and you are one of the religious folks who actually love your neighbors, let yourself be heard.

From the Standing on the Side of Love press release:

Beginning at 4:30 p.m., several hundred people are planning to march on the sidewalks from the Charlotte Convention Center, where the Unitarian Universalist Association is holding its annual meeting, to gather for a 4:45 p.m. rally in Marshall Park that will feature local, national, and international clergy speaking out against proposed legislation that will marginalize and discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

“Locally, some faith leaders are using religious arguments that demean the inherent worth and dignity of gays and lesbians in an effort to promote writing discrimination into our state constitution,” said Rev. Jay Leach, Sr. Minister of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Charlotte. “This rally is an opportunity for us as religious leaders to demonstrate a climate of inclusion and acceptance for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals and their families. Our faith calls us to stand on the side of love with LGBT people, and honor the challenges they face, no matter where they live.”

“Love is about embracing all people in our communities,” said Rev. Chris Ayers of Wedgewood Baptist Church. “As faith leaders, we have a moral responsibility to remind people that love knows no border, no gender, no race, and no religion.”

Rabbis Sentence Dog To Death By Stoning

Update (6/21/11): The Beth Din financial court has stated that the sentencing never occurred.

Via YNet:

A Jerusalem rabbinical court recently sentenced a wandering dog to death by stoning. The cruel sentence stemmed from the suspicion that the hound was the reincarnation of a famous secular lawyer, who insulted the court's judges 20 years ago.

Several weeks ago, according to the Behadrei Hadarim website, a large dog entered the Monetary Affairs Court near the ultra-Orthodox neighborhood of Mea Shearim. The dog scared the court's visitors and, to their surprise, refused to leave even after they attempted to drive him away.

One of the judges suddenly recalled that about 20 years ago, a famous secular lawyer who insulted the court was cursed by the panel of judges, who wished that his spirit would move on to the body of a dog (considered an impure animal by Halacha). The lawyer passed away several years ago.

Luckily, secularism won out. The dog managed to escape, and The Let the Animals Live organization filed a complaint with the police against the Rabbi.

The GOP Hopefuls: Islamophobia, Hypocrisy, and the Politics of Fear

During the New Hampshire Republican debate, we heard from two potential candidates who were not at all shy about their reluctance to hire Muslims.

Herman Cain, the former Godfather's Pizza CEO, stated that he would not be comfortable with a Muslim in his administration. Cain said, "You have peaceful Muslims and you have militant Muslims – those that are trying to kill us. And so when I said I wouldn't be comfortable I was thinking about the ones that are trying to kill us."

Cain was backing off from his previous statements to Scott Keyes of Think Progress. Keyes asked, "Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?" Cain answered emphatically: "No, I will not. And here's why. There is this creeping attempt...to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government."

Newt Gingrich jumped in with the following statement: "Now, I just want to go out on a limb here. I'm in favor of saying to people, if you're not prepared to be loyal to the United States, you will not serve in my administration, period." He continued: "We did this in dealing with the Nazis. We did this in dealing with the Communists. And it was controversial both times and both times we discovered after a while, you know, there are some genuinely bad people who would like to infiltrate our country. And we have got to have the guts to stand up and say, 'No.'"

The first thing that strikes me as silly about this debate is the ridiculous hypocrisy. Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich are not comfortable with Muslims in the administration because, in part, they don't want Islamic beliefs creeping into US law, or informing policy decisions. Yet, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich are perfectly fine with their own supernatural beliefs creeping into US law and informing policy decision.

You can't have your pizza and eat it too.

According to Cain and Gingrich, and other GOP hopefuls, it is perfectly acceptable that the President of the United States claim that God chose them to lead the country, that God is the only entity that can give or take rights, and that an immortal soul enters the egg at the moment of conception, but it is entirely not okay if a cabinet member believes in Allah.

Right out of the gate, their comments show a complete disregard for the Constitution's No Religious Test Clause, which states that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." Religious tests, in this case would include asking an appointee if they were a Muslim.

The comments also show a complete disregard for the Constitution's Establishment Clause, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Of course, all of this does not address the elephant in the room. Gingrich and Cain (and many other Americans, for that matter) believe that Muslims are out to kill Americans. It is true that Muslims have been behind attacks on Americans (here, and abroad). We can all agree that Muslims have killed Americans. Muslims will likely kill Americans again (as will Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, and agnostics). But our constitution does not permit us to discriminate against all Muslims simply because some of them have harmed us in the past.

If you apply this logic to any other set of circumstances, it seems absurd. For example, we know, based on sex crime statistics that most child molestations are committed by men. However, knowing this, we can't discriminate against men, denying them jobs where they might be in contact with young children. What we can do in this situation is to take all constitutional and legal precautions to prevent the hiring of someone who might potentially harm these children, or who harmed children in the past. We can perform background checks, check references, conduct numerous interviews, and screen them in any way that is lawful and non-discriminatory. We do what we can do, and then we just have to have faith -- something Cain and Gingrich should know about -- that we have taken the appropriate measures to minimize risk.

We also have to remind ourselves that the remarks of Cain, Gingrich, and other Islamophobes are inflammatory and not reflective of reality.  Let's look at some statistics:

According to a recent study by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, more non-Muslim Americans were involved in terrorist plots last year than Muslim Americans. There were also more than 20 terrorist plots by non-Muslims in the United States in 2010. Twenty Muslim Americans committed, or were arrested for, terrorist crimes last year, which was down sharply from 2009 when the number was 47.

What we ought to be worrying about is non-terrorism-related murder, if we want to protect Americans.  "Since 9/11, there have been approximately 150,000 murders in the United States, more than 15,000 per year," said the study.

With Muslims making up around one percent of the US population, "it is clear that Muslims are engaging in terrorism at a greater rate than non-Muslims -- though at a low level compared with overall violence in the United States."

Foiled attacks or involvement in a terrorist plot by Muslim Americans stand out because they garner so much media attention, "creating the impression -- perhaps unintentionally -- that Muslim American terrorism is more prevalent than it really is," the study said.

The study "puts into perspective the threat presented by domestic radicalization of Muslim Americans," said David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center.

"Americans should take note that these crimes are being perpetrated by a handful of people whose actions are denounced and rejected by virtually all the Muslims living in the United States," he said.

William Saleton, writing at Slate, describes Cain's Islamophobia as strikingly hypocritical, given his personal experiences with group exclusion:

Cain is familiar with this kind of group exclusion. It was done to him 60 years ago. He had to sit in the back of the bus and drink from "colored" water fountains. He graduated second in his high school class but was refused admission by the University of Georgia. It didn't matter how smart Cain was or how hard he worked. He was black, and the white society around him had decided that blacks were inferior. He was treated as a member of a group, not as an individual. In a word, he was prejudged.

Today, the Ku Klux Klan is still around, but its racism has become more sophisticated. It uses data. "The black male is the greatest perpetrator of both petty crimes and violent crimes in the black communities," says a Klan Web site. Even "Jesse Jackson said that when he's walking down the street at night and he hears footsteps behind him, he's relieved to turn around and see a white person instead of a black person." From this, the Klan concludes, "Minorities … as a people (though there are always exceptions to the rule) are incapable of maintaining or even comprehending the rule of law and order."

That's how prejudice works in the information age. You use statistical averages to generate stereotypes and ultimately to justify differential treatment of people by category.

This is what Cain is now doing to Muslims.

Newt Gingrich stated in the NH debate, "The Pakistani who emigrated to the U.S. became a citizen, built a car bomb which luckily failed to go off in Times Square was asked by the federal judge, how could he have done that when he signed – when he swore an oath to the United States. And he looked at the judge and said, 'You’re my enemy. I lied.'"

I believe Gingrich, on three occasions, swore to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness or in health, to love and to cherish 'till death do him part. So much for loyalty oaths.

Newt is out of his skull to believe that he is going to pull some Minority Report shit and preemptively filter out individuals who are going to do harm to the United States. If that were the case, we would have needed a way to prevent rich white men from being hired in presidential administrations. But that's discrimination, Newt, even if it might have saved thousands of American lives (we've lost almost 3 times as many Americans in these oil wars as we did on 9/11).

The Islamophobia of the GOP hopefuls recalls the same scare tactics they have used to rally voters for decades. This is our Red Scare. Like clockwork it crops up every election cycle, this fear of the unfamiliar.  If it's not Commies, it's the gays, or drugs, or illegal immigrants, or socialism, or the Black Panthers.  They use it because fear is visceral. Nothing gets people riled up like the fear that something is out to destroy their American way of life, especially if you can threaten their religion and their lives in one fell swoop. There is now a cottage industry in peddling the fear of Sharia Law, and Gingrich and Cain are in the thick of it.

The bottom line is, if we wish to preserve the freedom guaranteed by our constitution, there is some amount of risk that must be accepted. If we want to go down the road of discriminating against people based on their religious beliefs, then that's a slippery slope. Which beliefs are considered to be indicative of danger to America? And if we are to start equating religious beliefs with danger, I would argue that many Evangelical Christian beliefs are dangerous, and that we should not allow Evangelicals into positions in government administration.

Is it not dangerous enough that we had a President who made war decisions (which led to thousands of American deaths) based on Biblical prophecy?  Is it not dangerous that we have three potential Republican presidential candidates who have each claimed that God sent them messages encouraging them to run for president? Isn't it dangerous enough that Michele Bachmann believes that if the United States turns its back on Israel, "a curse" will be placed on the land, citing Genesis 12:3? Isn't it dangerous that Rick Santorum strongly believes that Intelligent Design should be taught in school, and that the "right to privacy...doesn’t exist in [his] opinion in the United States Constitution" when it comes to sexual behavior?

This bunch at the NH debate is in lockstep with the extreme Christian Right -- moreso than any group of candidates in history. Their concern about dangerous religious ideas infiltrating government is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.

Wikipedia's Awesome List of Common Misconceptions

I'm fascinated with misconceptions. We all have them. We are gullible people, and if anything is true, it's the fact that if something is repeated enough times, it becomes "true" to us.

Obviously, the very nature of Wikipedia, which relies on the general public to keep its entries accurate, would seem a likely place to find misconceptions. (And we saw just recently that people will change entries to reflect some people's misconceptions.)

But if there are any pleasant surprises that came with the Internet age, it was the realization that a public-produced, and -policed online encyclopedia will be surprisingly accurate, fair, and ridiculously up-to-date. (And if you want a particularly bizarre meta experience, read the Wikipedia entry for Wikipedia.)

One particular page on Wikipedia that I find fascinating, as someone interested in mythology, human gullibility, and misinformation, is their entry called List of Common Misconceptions.

The list is divided into sections: History, Science, Sports, etc., and even the most self-assured will find something that they did not know.

Some notable entries that fall within the subject matter often covered on these pages (the below examples are truncated -- see the Wikipedia entry for full explanations):

• The forbidden fruit mentioned in the Book of Genesis is commonly assumed to be an apple, and is widely depicted as such in Western art, although the Bible does not identify what type of fruit it is. 

• The historical Buddha was not obese. 

• The Buddha is not a god. 

• The Immaculate Conception is not synonymous with the virgin birth of Jesus, nor is it a supposed belief in the virgin birth of Mary, his mother. 

• Nowhere in the Bible does it say exactly three magi came to visit the baby Jesus, nor that they were kings, rode on camels, or that their names were Casper, Melchior and Balthazar. 

• The word "jihad" does not always mean "holy war"; literally, the word in Arabic means "struggle". 

• A fatwā is a non-binding legal opinion issued by an Islamic scholar under Islamic law [it does not mean 'death sentence'] 

• Vaccines do not cause autism. 

• The word theory in the theory of evolution does not imply mainstream scientific doubt regarding its validity. 

• Humans did not evolve from chimpanzees or any other modern-day primates. 

• Evolution is not a progression from inferior to superior organisms, and it also does not necessarily result in an increase in complexity. 

• Evolution does not violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

And some random entries that are entertaining:

• In ancient Rome, Romans did not build rooms called vomitoria in which to purge themselves after a meal. 

• There is no evidence that Vikings wore horns on their helmets. 

• Contrary to the popular image of the Pilgrim Fathers, the early settlers of the Plymouth Colony in present-day Plymouth, Massachusetts did not dress in black, wear buckles, or wear black steeple hats. 

• Marie Antoinette did not actually use the phrase "let them eat cake." 

• George Washington did not have wooden teeth. 

• The signing of the Declaration of Independence did not occur on July 4, 1776. 

• Entrapment law in the United States does not require police officers to identify themselves as police in the case of a sting or other undercover work. 

• Swallowed chewing gum does not take seven years to digest. 

• It is commonly claimed that the Great Wall of China is the only man-made object visible from the Moon. This is false. 

• Lemmings do not engage in mass suicidal dives off cliffs when migrating. 

• The notion that goldfish have a memory span of just a few seconds is false. 

• Bats are not blind. 

• It is a common myth that an earthworm becomes two worms when cut in half. 

• Poinsettias are not highly toxic. 

• Sharks can actually suffer from cancer. 

• It is not harmful to baby birds to pick them up and return them to their nests. 

• Bulls are not enraged by the color red, used in capes by professional matadors. 

• Eating less than an hour before swimming does not increase the risk of experiencing muscle cramps or drowning. 

• The Coriolis effect does not determine the direction that water rotates in a bathtub drain or a flushing toilet. 

• A penny dropped from the Empire State Building will not kill a person or crack the sidewalk. 

• George Washington Carver did not invent peanut butter. 

• Thomas Crapper did not invent the flush toilet. 

• Thomas Edison did not invent the light bulb. 

• Henry Ford did not invent either the automobile or the assembly line.

Of course, some of these entries could be misconceptions.

Flying Spaghetti Monster Spotted Over Argentina

A carb-heavy apparition has been spotted in the Argentina skies. Could this be the source of recent Oregon church vandalism?

The Batshit Files: News Roundup | 6.15.11

 A whole buttload of crazy:

• Citing the Bible, a government recreational facility in Kentucky forced two gay males with developmental and intellectual disabilities to leave the premises. (KYEquality)

• Family Research Council: Gay-straight alliances make kids unhealthy (Right Wing Watch)

• Rick Perry says he's a prophet and that's why Texans don't like him much. (Houston Press)

• American Family Association's Bryan Fischer: Gay adoption is a "social disaster." (Right Wing Watch)

• More than 70,000 so-called "moral police" officers have been deployed in Tehran to enforce a government approved dress code. (Al Jazeera)

• Southern Baptists still totally (and officially) believe in Hell. (Associated Baptist Press)

• Rush Limbaugh is launching his own line of tea, featuring Limbaugh as Paul Revere on the label. (Raw Story)

• Tea Party camp. For kids. Really. (Crooks & Liars)

• Texas Republican says it is ‘very insulting’ to use Spanish in his presence. (Raw Story)

• Glenn Beck, huge Ayn Rand fan, despises Ayn Rand. (Huffington Post)