The tenth Symphony of Science offering, "Children of Africa (The Story of Us)" has been released and is well worth a few minutes of your time.
A musical celebration of humanity, its origins, and achievements, contrasted with a somber look at our environmentally destructive tendencies and deep similarities with other primates. Featuring Jacob Bronowski, Alice Roberts, Carolyn Porco, Jane Goodall, Robert Sapolsky, Neil deGrasse Tyson and David Attenborough.
You'd have to have been in a coma for the past 18 years to not know about Veggie Tales, the Christianity-based anthropomorphic vegetable show (and movies) for kids. You'd also have to have avoided a Chick-Fil-A, as it seems there is perpetually some Veggie Tales tie-in with their kids meals. (Chick-Fil-A, of course, being the Christianity-based (and anti-LGBT) fast food chain where actual vegetables are scarce).
Veggie Tales co-creator, Phil Vischer, has created an online network for kids called Jelly Telly. His goal is to grow Jelly Telly into a Christian Nickelodeon of sorts. The venture is partly funded by Focus on the Family, James Dobson's tax exempt non-profit organization founded in 1977. The Southern Poverty Law Center has described Focus on the Family as one of a "dozen major groups [which] help drive the religious right's anti-gay crusade."
Lots of folks would assume that Jelly Telly and its programs are fairly benign, but the association with Focus on the Family should be enough to raise concern about whether any of the 'Christian values' threaded through Jelly Telly's programming also help drive the religious right's ideology into the minds of young children.
One Jelly Telly property that is gaining in popularity is a new DVD series based on the network titled What's In The Bible. The show features a mix of puppetry, animation, and musical performances. Kind of in the same vein as Jack's Big Music Show or The Muppet Show.
In an introduction to the series, Phil Vischer tells us that the Bible is the "most widely owned, least widely read in history. It sits on more shelves, gathering more dust, than any book in the world." I would agree with him there. He continues, "And yet this book holds the keys to understanding our lives." That certainly is the opinion of many.
Vischer says, "We have a crisis in the church today. Sixty-five percent of kids are dropping out of church as soon as they graduate from high school. We need to do something about this."
What's Phil going to do? He continues: "We're gonna walk kids through the Bible all the way from Genesis to Revelation and answer their big questions about who wrote it, and where it came from, and why we can trust it, and what difference does it make."
The series contains 5 DVD's, and I have not viewed the material outside of the clips that can be found online, but from what I can gather, the series steers clear of the tired fundamentalism associated with Young Earth Creationism and biblical literalism. So that is somewhat of a relief.
For example, it was refreshing to see that they describe up front how the Bible is a collection of writings (including letters, poems, etc.) written by over 40 people over the course of 1600 years, instead of insinuating that it's one book written by God which should be taken 100% literally.
However, as a secular parent, I personally am not too crazy about the idea of presenting The Bible in this way to children (Christian or otherwise). While I certainly believe that some of The Bible's themes (i.e. empathy, good will, sacrifice, compassion, etc.) are important to instill in a child at a young age (these are not unique to Christianity, or to any religion), I think many of the Bible's themes, even some of those simplified and presented here in this series, are capable of doing more damage to a child than people realize.
I'm all for religious literacy. I think too many people, including the devout, do not know enough about religion. However, there is a big difference between teaching about religion and religious indoctrination, which is precisely what is going on in What's In The Bible?.
We don't learn from the series that "many people believe X and Y." We learn that, "This is the truth, straight from God, and this is the doctrine you must follow to avoid misery in life." Of course, I expect as much from Phil Vischer and Focus on the Family. He's not teaching Religion 101 to children. This is not a Unitarian Universalist show. He's planting the seeds of Christian faith (and all that comes along with it, good and bad) in the minds of impressionable children who have no reason to reject what they are being spoon-fed.
Phil seems to have taken to heart the Jesuit maxim, "Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man."
While I am sure that many children enjoy the series (there are quite a few children's reviews on YouTube, many of which aren't terribly convincing), and while I'm sure that many of Vischer's young viewers will grow into fine grownups, I can't help but think about the ones that are being primed for a life of Christian exceptionalism. To be indoctrinated at a young age with the belief that there is only one route to salvation, and that thinking differently will lead to misery and damnation, is to be primed for intolerance (not to mention undue anxiety and guilt). Sure, this is just a t.v. show, one that does the same thing that Sunday school did for previous generations, and many of us turned out just fine. But Sunday school was never presented with such production value, and quite honestly most of us didn't pay much attention. Vischer's intention is to get the child's attention by imitating the entertainment they see on Clubhouse Disney and Nick Jr., and then start in with Genesis, Exodus, and Leviticus.
Granted, much of children's programming is irreverent, abstract, and sometimes a little creepy (Barney, anyone?), but I would think some of this series' segments could be rather terrifying to a child, because the show speaks about the child -- about her life (and afterlife), her soul, and her fate as it relates to her behavior and her beliefs. This, when you think about it, is really quite heavy, and quite disturbing for children's programming. The child is presented with concepts that appear to have serious implications. Yo Gabba Gabba it's not.
For example, if we view the section on Genesis below, from a young child's perspective, we learn that God is male, that we shouldn't trust ourselves (it will make God angry at us), and that sins are small terrifying monsters that will attack you, ride around on your back forever, and cause facial blemishes.
I kid (sorta), but young children do not need to be saddled with supernatural concepts of salvation, eternal damnation, and sin. Young children can be taught to be moral, compassionate, and ethical without invoking the supernatural, and without employing guilt, insecurity, and fear.
The truth is, even the above segment, which is actually some fucked up shit to lay on a toddler when you think about it, is tame in comparison to what's really in the Bible.
My point in bringing up those barbaric passages is that, despite the fact that the Genesis clip above does not contain killing or raping or slavery does not make it any less distressing to a child. In fact, describing how ancient civilizations committed barbaric acts for their god is much more abstract and less harmful to a child than saddling them with the concepts of sin, damnation, and pleasing an all-knowing, always-watching, supernatural man in the sky who holds their very fate in his hands.
What do I suggest as an alternative to What's in The Bible? What alternative means do we have to instill our children with morality, ethics, and compassion? We can best serve our children by teaching them, in real world, non-supernatural terms, why it is important to treat others with compassion and respect, and why it serves society to act morally. We can best serve our children by teaching them about the world around them -- its people (and their wide range of beliefs), its cultures, and its beauty. We can explain to them why humanity rewards compassion and honesty, and why harmful actions are rejected. We can even point to examples of this that predate monotheism. We can draw from religion, for sure (religious literacy, after all, right?). Many religious traditions feature wonderful stories that highlight the merits of being a moral person -- they are literature, after all. But there are just as many, if not more, wonderful stories (or other means of teaching) that fall outside of religion, and which are just as effective (and which don't have those pesky raping, killing, slave-holding parts to avoid).
While many atheists and secularists believe that children should be shielded from religion, I tend to believe that they need to learn about it. Our culture, especially here in America, is steeped in religion. Our wars are based partly on religious clashes. Clashes the world over have at their root religious disagreements. To shield a child from knowledge of religion is not much different than shielding them from history or biology. However, the key is teaching children about religion in the way that we teach them about different cultures. Muslims believe X. Buddhists believe Y. Christians believe Z. Etc., etc. Teach them that even within each religion, there exists an entire spectrum of beliefs. Teach them that religion can be used for good and evil, and provide them with examples. And most importantly teach them that they can choose what (or if) they believe when they feel they wish to make that decision. And most importantly, that they can change their minds.
So, I say, "Thumbs down, Phil Vischer." "Thumbs down, What's In The Bible." I appreciate that you're not telling children that the earth is 6,000 years old, that people cohabited with dinosaurs, or that homosexuality is an abomination. But I do think that you're putting blinders on children. (I also realize this might be your intention.)
If there were a way to groom children into a life of Christian exceptionalism, serving up religious dogma masquerading as a Nick Jr.-style musical puppet show wouldn't be the worst way to go about it.
The Establishment Clause prohibits the federal, state or municipal establishment of an official religion or other preference for one religion over another, non-religion over religion, or religion over non-religion.
Additionally:
In the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion."
Take a look at the latest promotion for 'The Response.'
If it wasn't clear enough exactly who the Governor wants to join him at his non-denominational, non-political rally, today it was established that only Christians are allowed.
There is no doubt that Rick Perry is gunning (no pun intended) for the presidency. And he is clearly gunning for the far-right Christian conservative population. There is nothing that motivates people to vote more than fear, and Perry is peddling fear like a late-night infomercial: Fear immigrants, fear Islam, fear Obama, fear the secular left -- they want to take away your right to pray to Jesus.
There are plenty of crazy GOP hopefuls. But Perry may just be the only one crazy enough to shoot the First Amendment as if it were a coyote, and then brag about it.
A video for LGBT youth around the country and the It Gets Better Project, featuring U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
I can't help but notice the dearth of R's in that list. That sends quite a message of its own, don't you think?
Rick Santorum: Liberals want marriage equality in order to ‘undermine faith' (ThinkProgress)
Pat Robertson says God will destroy America because of gay marriage. (Right Wing Watch)
Ohio state rep wants to ban abortion because China has too many smart kids (Right Wing Watch)
Michele Bachmann's fans quickly revise Wikipedia entry for John Quincy Adams to match Bachmann's assertion that he was a Founding Father. (ThinkProgress)
Bryan Fischer weighs in on Michele Bachmann's "John Wayne" gaffe ... by claiming that all the Left is doing by mocking her is "reminding us of the clear connection between homosexuality and pedophilia." (Right Wing Watch)
Bryan Fischer (he's on a roll!) says fidelity in gay relationships "just doesn't happen" and that it is common for gay men to have 500-1000 partners in their lifetimes (Right Wing Watch)
An Oregon couple who treated their infant daughter with faith healing rather than take her to a doctor were sentenced to 90 days in jail and three years probation. (Oregon Live)
N.Y. town clerk won't sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples. I suppose she should find a new job? (Daily Kos)
Chuck Colson says that “the tyranny of tolerance” will drive America into a totalitarian state (Right Wing Watch)
Catholic Church denies funeral mass to San Diego gay businessman (LGBT Weekly)
Authorities find bomb apparently targeting immigrants in Arizona (SPLC Hatewatch)
Michele Bachmann stands by claims that ‘Founding Fathers’ ended slavery (Raw Story)
Poor Michele Bachmann can't catch a break. It makes you wonder if Sarah Palin is holding out on announcing her candidacy just so Michele Bachmann can serve as the whipping post for a bit.
On the heels of her latest gaffes, Bachmann told CNN, "I’m a substantive, serious person and I have a strong background...I'm introducing myself now to the American people so that they can know that I have a strong academic scholarly background, more important I have a real life background."
Yesterday, Bachmann had a little bit of a run-in with a convicted serial killer. As you've probably heard by now, Bachmann, while in Waterloo, IA, told a Fox News reporter, "Well what I want them to know is just like John Wayne was from Waterloo, Iowa. That's the kind of spirit that I have, too."
As if her day couldn't get any worse, Tom Petty is reportedly issuing a cease and desist letter for her use of his song 'American Girl' during her rally.
The song, it has been noted, was also sung by the kidnapped politician's daughter was in "Silence of the Lambs."
Michele Bachmann, the scholar, appears not to have studied the lyrics to many of the songs played during her rally (and don't be naive, those songs are not pulled out of a hat). The Atlantic has compiled a list of questionable lyrics from the songs, which included "Start Me Up," "Let's Get Loud," and "I Got You (I Feel Good)."
Bachmann has also been using Katy Perry's 'Firework,' which anyone knows, unless you live under a rock, is somewhat of an LGBT anthem. Bachmann the scholar, is ridiculously anti-LGBT. As Richard Roeper stated, "'Firework' is "all about acceptance and tolerance and celebrating our differences. Perry dedicated the video (which has nearly 200 million views on YouTube) to the “It Gets Better” campaign, which is dedicated to fighting harassment of gays and lesbians."
Of course, all of this will lead Bachmann and her supporters to decry the "lamestream media" as sexist haters who are ready to put her every move under a microscope. Sound familiar?
Hold on, folks. We're only one day into the 'official' Bachmann campaign. There's a whole lot where yesterday came from.
This video has been making the rounds recently. When it was first posted, not many could verify its legitimacy, or any details surrounding its origin. Except that it was really cheesy and was probably created sometime in the 80's. But we're starting to see some information surface.
David Miscavige, the leader of the Church of Scientology, appears prominently in the video.
The Village Voice has compiled a 'who's who' to accompany the video:
At the 2:40 mark, you'll see everyone together warbling their guts out. Our tipster provided the following playbook:
Blonde with brown top and black jacket is Shelley Miscavige -- who is now missing. To her right -- Ray Mithoff, Former Inspector General for Tech RTC, reported to be in The Hole. To his right -- Mark Yager, Former Inspector General for Admin RTC, reported to be in The Hole. To his right -- Mark Ingber -- Former Commanding Officer of CMO = Commodore Messengers Org, reported to be in the Hole. To Ingber's right and behind him, Mike Rinder Former Commanding Officer of OSA, currently blown and speaking out against the cult. Front and Center -- David Miscavige [the little dude] wearing weird Hermes/goatse shirt. To DM's right and behind him -- Heber Jentzsch, Former President of the C of S, now reportedly in the The Hole. To DM's right -- Greg Wilhere -- Inspector General, reportedly still working for DM. To Greg Wilhere's right-- Marty Rathbun, Former Inspector General for Ethics RTC, now out and speaking out against the cult as well as running the "Independent" Scientologists. To Marty's right -- Guillaume Lesevre Executive Director Int. reportedly in the The Hole.
So many friends of Miscavige, now either defected and speaking out against him or disappeared to Scientology's "RPF," the prison "hole" that has swallowed up so many of his top loyal friends.
Take a gander, before David Miscavige's minions have the video removed. You know damn well they will.
Despite his growing role as a kingmaker in Republican politics, not many people know about Bryan Fischer. His name is benign-sounding, like a cross between a chess player and a washed up 80's pop singer. But don't be fooled. This guy is arguably more dangerous than Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and any other batshit GOP politician you could name.
The scariest thing about Bryan Fischer is that, despite the fact that he spews hateful bile on a daily basis (via his talk radio show and via his role as spokesperson for the American Family Association), GOP politicians continue to cozy up to him, and (seemingly) none of them seem to believe he should tone it down.
Responsible politicians wouldn’t fawn over an unhinged activist who opposes civil rights and religious freedom for minorities, wants to make being gay a crime and decries his personal rivals as enemies of God, right? But that is exactly what is taking place today in the Republican Party, as likely and declared GOP presidential candidates line up to win the approval of Bryan Fischer...
Fischer’s unabashed bigotry is on full display throughout his writings and on-air rants. His entire career is based on leveling venomous attacks against gays and lesbians, American Muslims, Native Americans, progressives and other individuals and groups he detests. He wants to redefine the Constitution to protect only Christians, persecute and deport all American Muslims, prohibit gays and non-Christians from holding public office and impose a system of biblical law.
While Fischer’s views are undeniably shocking, what is most disturbing is his growing influence within not only the Religious Right but also the Republican Party.
Scary stuff.
Here's a partial list, pulled from PFAW's report, of why Bryan Fischer is full-on batshit and dangerous:
He claims that bullying-prevention programs will be used for the “brainwashing” of children to make them gay, arguing that “homosexuals cannot reproduce, so they have to recruit; it’s the only way to swell their numbers.” For example, Fischer believes that the television show Glee is “glamorizing homosexual behavior” and “promoting deviant sexuality,” as well as idolatry.
He warned, after DADT was repealed, that the military would “now be feminized and neutered beyond repair” and insisted that “the world is now a more dangerous place for us all.”
He said Native Americans cannot be considered full-fledged American citizens until they convert to Christianity.
He said Native Americans “remain mired in poverty and alcoholism because many native Americans continue to cling to the darkness of indigenous superstition instead of coming into the light of Christianity and assimilating into Christian culture."
He says American Muslims are a “toxic cancer” to American society and that Muslim Student Associations are “parasites.”
He believes that the Founding Fathers only wanted to extend rights to different Protestant denominations.
He denies the existence of the separation of church and state, and believes that states and localities should be allowed to establish official religions.
He says President Obama is tyrannical, anti-Christian and intentionally weakening the country so the U.S. can join “every other nation which has ignored God or kicked him to the curb.”
He maintains that Obama “nurtures this hatred for the United States of America” and “nurtures a hatred for the white man.”
He believes that progressives are “unpatriotic” and “un-American,” arguing that they want to muzzle Christians and overthrow the Constitution in order to advance their social and political agenda.
He blamed Sarah Palin’s unpopularity on actual demonic forces that emerged from the political left, calling criticism of Palin “unvarnished demonic evil on full display” and “pure homicidal rage and hate.” He made clear that his charges of demonic conspiracy were not metaphorical.
He urged right-wing activists to have more children in order to give conservatives a numerical advantage in the political and cultural battles of the future.
He demanded, following the tragic news that the SeaWorld whale Tilikum had killed a trainer, that the whale be put to death. He claimed that the courts should use the “ancient civil code of Israel” in dealing with Tilikum.
He blamed a deadly attack by a grizzly bear in Yellowstone Park on the fact that American “culture has jettisoned a biblical view” of animals, and called it a sign that God is punishing America.
He maintains that Christians should not vote for any candidate who supports gay rights in any form because, he says, homosexuality is an “abomination in the nostrils of God” that “no rational society should ever endorse.”
He said that gays should be “ashamed” and “embarrassed,” contends that the “deviancy cabal” is responsible for suicide among gay youth and that “homosexual activists are not wholly innocent in these tragedies.
It's very easy for progressives and moderates to look at Bryan Fischer and assume that someone with these ideas would never be taken seriously, much less garner serious political clout. Those people are forgetting that the same thing has been said about potential GOP presidential candidates Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum, who have been mocked endlessly by the left.
Ben Adler wrote of Bryan Fischer's growing influence in Newsweek:
You might think that attention in the form of mockery is not what a public-policy organization would want. But when your business is waging a culture war, there is no such thing as bad publicity for ideological or rhetorical extremism. Being criticized by liberals in the media raises the profile of a socially conservative organization, and burnishes its credibility among the base. Just ask Sarah Palin, or her fans.
Fischer's radio show is distributed on over 200 stations across the country, and reaches over 2 million listeners. While that may seem like chicken scratch compared to Limbaugh or Beck, Fischer's show attracts some of the GOP's biggest names. Guests on Fischer's show include: Herman Cain, Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty, Haley Barbour, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Jim DeMint, Jim Inhofe, Roger Wicker, Lamar Smith, Steve King, Jack Kingston, etc., etc.
Many of these GOP figures have expressed support for Fischer's bigotry and extremism, even making campaign promises to Fischer to enact legislation supporting some of his views, or to repeal certain legislation he disagrees with.
Aside from the realization that more people think like Bryan Fischer than one would imagine, is the scariest realization of all: This man might actually run for president one day.
Until my dream of an IMAX 3D evolution documentary is realized, we have accessible, educational, and imaginative works by artists like Darryl Cunningham
Evolution is probably the most misunderstood concept on the planet. I still have some misconceptions to this day, I'm sure. I was an English major who grew up in Southeastern US public schools. I have no recollection of evolution being taught, and have been playing catch-up for quite some time.
I never really doubted evolution, for some reason, but I just didn't totally 'get it.' When it finally clicked for me, after a devouring a handful of well-written primers on the subject, it was as if I'd unlocked a whole new way of looking at everything. Which I had. When you fully understand that every living thing shares an ancestor with every other living thing, it has a profound effect on how you view those things. And when you understand how biological complexity arises in nature, you start to see examples of more complex, and less complex, mechanisms all around you. You begin to see that many of the concepts and mechanisms found in evolution also have applications in non-biological areas, such as technology, religion, language, art, etc.
A recent Gallup poll shows that 4 in 10 of Americans do not accept evolution. Granted, most of those who deny evolution do so because of their literal readings of scripture. But, I do believe that, in addition, part of the problem is that people have misconceptions and misunderstandings about evolution. They either have been willfully given misinformation by an opponent of evolution, or they have been the victim of oversimplifications, or flat-out wrong assumptions, such as the much-repeated fallacy that humans evolved from monkeys.
I've often thought that evolution could really use a boost from CGI. I realize that there have been some short, and minor uses of CGI to demonstrate aspects of evolution on television documentaries, but I would love to see either a full-length documentary or a mini-series that really plunges in depth, leaving no stone unturned.
I imagine this thought experiment passage from Richard Dawkins' The Greatest Show on Earth done in CGI -- IMAX 3D, even. Picture it:
I’ll call it the hairpin thought experiment. Take a rabbit, any female rabbit (arbitrarily stick to females, for convenience: it makes no difference to the argument). Place her mother next to her. Now place the grandmother next to the mother and so on back in time, back, back, back through the mega years, a seemingly endless line of female rabbits, each one sandwiched between her daughter and her mother. We walk along the line of rabbits, backwards in time, examining them carefully like an inspecting general. As we pace the line, we’ll eventually notice that the ancient rabbits we are passing are just a little bit different from the modern rabbits we are used to. But the rate of change will be so slow that we shan’t notice the trend from generation to generation, just as we can’t see the motion of the hour hand on our watches – and just as we can’t see a child growing, we can only see later that she has become a teenager, and later still an adult. An additional reason why we don’t notice the change in rabbits from one generation to another is that, in any one century, the variation within the current population will normally be greater than the variation between mothers and daughters. So if we try to discern the movement of the ‘hour hand’ by comparing mothers with daughters, or indeed grandmothers with granddaughters, such slight differences as we may see will be swamped by the differences among the rabbits’ friends and relations gambolling in the meadows round about.
Nevertheless, steadily and imperceptibly, as we retreat through time, we shall reach ancestors that look less and less like a rabbit and more and more like a shrew (and not very like either). One of these creatures I’ll call the hairpin bend, for reasons that will become apparent. This animal is the most recent common ancestor (in the female line, but that is not important) that rabbits share with leopards. We don’t know exactly what it looked like, but it follows from the evolutionary view that it definitely had to exist.
Like all animals, it was a member of the same species as its daughters and its mother. We now continue our walk, except that we have turned the bend in the hairpin and are walking forwards in time, aiming towards the leopards (among the hairpin’s many and diverse descendants, for we shall continually meet forks in the line, where we consistently choose the fork that will eventually lead to leopards). Each shrewlike animal along our forward walk is now followed by her daughter. Slowly, by imperceptible degrees, the shrew-like animals will change, through intermediates that might not resemble any modern animal much but strongly resemble each other, perhaps passing through vaguely stoat-like intermediates, until eventually, without ever noticing an abrupt change of any kind, we arrive at a leopard.
Various things must be said about this thought experiment. First, we happen to have chosen to walk from rabbit to leopard, but I repeat that we could have chosen porcupine to dolphin, wallaby to giraffe or human to haddock. The point is that for any two animals there has to be a hairpin path linking them, for the simple reason that every species shares an ancestor with every other species: all we have to do is walk backwards from one species to the shared ancestor, then turn through a hairpin bend and walk forwards to the other species.
Fortunately, Dawkins' thought experiment is so elegantly written that we really don't need CGI to grasp it, but then again, we have the pesky problem of how to get that 40% of Americans to pick up a Dawkins book.
There are some other really wonderful (and accessible) books by less-controversial figures, such as Jerry Coyne, Sloane Wilson, and many others.
And then we have Darryl Cunningham's forthcoming book, Science Stories, which will feature a version of an amazing comic strip about Evolution (he says the version on his blog is a beta version).
What I love about Cunningham's comic is his approach from the perspective of two people who are discussing evolution. One doesn't understand it, or does not accept it, and the other is very comfortable addressing these questions (all very common questions that we see time and time again). Cunningham allows us to learn about evolution through doubt, which is really how it works in real life for so many Americans.
I hope that Cunningham's strip receives a lot of attention, and hopefully reaches a much wider audience. At least until we have that CGI IMAX 3D movie I've been dreaming about.
Here are a few frames to enjoy. They are excerpted from the middle of the piece, to demonstrate his approach. Please visit his blog for the evolution comic from start to finish:
The Purple One, who once sang the praises of a woman masturbating with a magazine in a hotel lobby is now singing the praises of women who are forced to wear burqas.
"It's fun being in Islamic countries, to know there's only one religion. There's order. You wear a burqa. There's no choice. People are happy with that." When asked about the fate of those unhappy with having no choice, he replied: "There are people who are unhappy with everything. There's a dark side to everything."
Prince began embracing religion around 2001, when he became a Jehovah's Witness (a move that many fans think ruined his music).
"I was anti-authoritarian but at the same time I was a loving tyrant," he told the Guardian. "You can't be both. I had to learn what authority was. That's what the Bible teaches. The Bible is a study guide for social interaction.
"If I go to a place where I don't feel stressed and there's no car alarms and airplanes overhead, then you understand what noise pollution is. Noise is a society that has no God, that has no glue. We can't do what we want to do all the time. If you don't have boundaries, what then?"
The full interview will appear on The Guardian's Film and Music section on Friday.
As you may have heard by now, the winner of the Miss USA Pageant, Alyssa Campanella (Miss California), was one of only two out of 51 contestants who fully affirmed their belief in evolution and that it should be taught in schools (Alida D’Angona, Miss Massachusetts was the other).
The rest either confused the question with evolution of species (versus the intelligent design debate), or stated that they thought both should be taught in school, according to Scientific American.
Campanella and Alida D’Angona from Massachusetts were the only two contestants to state that they fully believed in evolution.
There had been concern, leading up to the pageant, that questions about evolution were too controversial and caused undue anxiety.
For those of you who are interested in the pre-recorded answers provided by each of the 51 delegates, the video has been released for your viewing pleasure.
You may wish to encase your skull in foam before watching. Some answers may lead to banging head on desk.
2. He wears a pair of cowboy boots emblazoned with the words "Freedom" and "Liberty."
3. He believes the economic crisis is happening for a purpose; so that the nation will return to biblical principles and free us from our slavery to the government.
4. As the gulf oil spill, which Perry stated was an "act of God," entered its third month, he issued a proclamation calling on his constituents to pray to "ask [God] for his merciful intervention...in this time of crisis." Dear God, please stop the leak that you started. Amen.
5. He stated, "Homosexuality is about sex. Do you agree?...Well, then why don’t they call it something else?" apparently forgetting that heterosexuality also contains 'sex,' and that in both cases 'sex' is referring to gender, and not 'doing it.'
8. In April, as Texas fought several wildfires, Perry issued a proclamation for a 3-day "Prayer For Rain." As Native American writer Sherman Alexie said, "Do you know why the Indian rain dances always worked? Because the Indians would keep dancing until it rained."
9. His 'Response' prayer rally, which he describes as "a non-denominational, apolitical Christian prayer meeting," is powered by politically active Religious Right individuals and groups who are hell-bent on injecting their extremist religious views, including degrading views of non-Christians and the LGBT population, into American politics.
From the mind that brought us the wonderful Symphony of Science mash-ups, featuring Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, and many other great minds, comes Ali G's 'The Science Rap.' Not quite as wise as Hawking and Sagan, Ali G nonetheless shares their curiosity about the world around him.
Untrue, according to the Beth Din financial court.
“There is no basis for stoning dogs or any other animal in the Jewish religion, not since the days of the Temple or Abraham.
“The female dog found a seat in the corner of the court. And the children were delighted by it; there were hundreds outside the court. They are used to seeing stray cats but most have never seen a dog before. The only action we took was to dial the number of the Jerusalem Municipality to get the people in charge to take it away.
“There was no talk of reincarnation, a lawyer has never been mentioned, either now or 20 years ago, and there was no stoning. Such inventions are a kind of blood libel, and we wonder why the inventor of the story did not continue to describe how we collected the blood of the dog to make our matzah.”
It's unclear how the original story came to be, but when it was picked up by news sources, it quickly enraged people around the globe, becoming one of the BBC's 'Most Read' items, and generating nearly 2,000 comments on Yahoo! News.
The fifth freedom is freedom from ignorance. - Lyndon B. Johnson
Poor Michele Bachmann can't catch a break. It makes you wonder if Sarah Palin is holding out on announcing her candidacy just so Michele Bachmann can serve as the whipping post for a bit. 
Evolution is probably the most misunderstood concept on the planet. I still have some misconceptions to this day, I'm sure. I was an English major who grew up in Southeastern US public schools. I have no recollection of evolution being taught, and have been playing catch-up for quite some time. 
