1. Adventures in Repatriation: Part II. This time, it's International.

Almond says it was decided at a meeting of the main Australian museums that no one would take any of the shows presently touring the world that are spinoffs from the original plasticated body parts shows of the German anatomist, Gunther von Hagens.

"There is a Chinese exhibition which, as far as we could tell, was coming from executed criminals, and also one that showed a whole room of fetuses, mostly female," Almond says. "We will not support this."

Okay, first: it's plastinated, not plasticated, right?

Second, why are they refusing all the exhibits? I'm pretty sure (from the reading I did about a year ago) that there are at least one or two that have good, documented proof that all of their exhibits came from fully consenting participants.

The executed criminals issue is difficult. As are the rumors that unidentified/unclaimed bodies were used. If the criminals didn't give consent before execution, that's not okay. But the unclaimed bodies? There's no way to know if they would've given consent or not. One person's respectful treatment of a dead body is another person's sacrilege. You're pretty much rolling the dice as far as offending the former owner of the remains, no matter what you do with the body. Should you put it to some positive use rather than letting it go to waste? I personally would rather my body be used as a med school cadaver or plastinated for some museum display than have it buried in some religious ceremony I don't ascribe to. But one shouldn't apply one's personal preferences to everybody else in a blanket manner.

And the guy has a problem with displaying plastinated fetuses? I can see having a personal or religion-based distaste for the idea, but that doesn't mean no one else should be allowed to see it. Again, as long as consent was taken into account as much as possible (difficult in the case of an unborn fetus, but that's another topic).

Also, I hadn't made the connection between treatment of archaeological human remains and the plastination exhibits. I suppose the only difference between the two situations is the amount of time passed since death. But I definitely think descendants have more rights to archaeological human remain than scientists. It'd be nice if the two parties could cooperate for the sake of knowledge and preservation, but if a choice has to be made, I gotta side with the descendants.

2. Sad:

Mr. Kilpatrick promotes the linguistic equivalent of a planned economy. Linguistic rules are to be invented by experts like him, on the basis of rational considerations of optimal communication, and imposed on the rest of us. For our own good, of course.

This view of language always reminds me of intelligent design. Not surprising that if someone ascribes to one, they often believe the other.

most academic linguists that I know are political liberals

Huh. Never thought of that, but the same is true in my experience. Though it doesn't help that most of the linguists/linguistics students I know are somehow affiliated with Brown.

3. The squids have something to teach us: how to anchor a knife blade in Jell-O.

Squid beaks are one of the hardest organic materials known.

They really are gonna rule the planet someday.

The findings offer a potential solution for the longtime engineering struggle to attach mechanically mismatched materials.

Good point. Also, awesome.

the beak's tip is stronger and stiffer than any synthetic polymers.

It's remarkable that the squid beak comprises strictly organic materials, Miserez said. In contrast, mammalian teeth contain up to 90 percent minerals.

That's it. We're doomed.

4. Oh dear. This is gonna be a long one.

A sixteen-year-old named Zach, from Bartlett, Tennessee came out to his parents in 2005. His parents reacted by sending him to the Memphis ex-gay ministry Love In Action, which ran a two- to ten-week teen camp called “Refuge.”

Love In Action’s Refuge program was dissolved in June 2007, and was replaced with a four-day program called “Family Freedom Intensive.”

Still.

Refuge Program Rules
[Greatest Hits]

2. No sexual/emotional misconduct. Any temptations, fantasies, or dreams are to be presented to one’s staff worker only. Sexual misconduct includes viewing pornography, visiting an adult bookstore, emotional dependency, voyeurism, stalking, masturbation, mutual masturbation, or any form of genital or sexual contact with another person.

Emotional dependency? I agree that can be unhealthy. But I hardly think it leads to or promotes homosexuality.

Women: Women must shave legs and underarms at least twice weekly.

Because female body hair is Evil and will drag you to the Dark Side of Lesbianism!

The clients may not wear Abercrombie and Fitch or Calvin Klein brand clothing, undergarments, or accessories.

Ha. Why this specific targeting of brands?

Women: Bras must be worn at all times, except while sleeping.

Pfft. I'm surprised skirts aren't mandatory.

Monday through Thursday, clients must wear pants, a clean shirt, and shoes or sandals with socks.

Now bare feet are a cause of homosexual tendencies?

Women may wear open-toed shoes or women’s dress sandals without socks.

Ahh. Only male bare feet.

Sports bras may only be worn while working out.

Jesus. Is this an indoctrination center or bra-fitting academy?

7. No continuing education while in the program. Home-school Refuge clients may be allowed to continue their studies during the program, pending approval by LIA staff.

Ha.

Because public schools are incubators for the gay community and its Agenda.

10. Absolutely no journaling or keeping a diary outside of the MI process unless directed or approved by staff.

That's not suspicious at all.

12. Additional (i.e. beyond one per week) one-on-one counseling sessions will be granted by C.O.C. appointment only.

Because, lord knows, we're not actually here to help you.

any belongings, appearances, clothing, actions, or humor that might connect a client to an inappropriate past are excluded from the program. These hindrances are called False Images (FI’s). FI behavior may include hyper-masculinity, seductive clothing, mannish/boyish attire (on women), excessive jewelry (on men), mascoting, and “campy” or gay/lesbian behavior and talk.

Way to further confuse adolescents about their already tenuous self-image.

3. All photographs will be taken for the purpose of sobering re-evaluation.

Oy.

2. While on the LIA campus, Refuge clients must be in phaseat all times, whether indoors or out of doors. A client is “in phase” when he or she is with two or more other clients (whether Refuge or residential,) one of whom must have been in the program for at least eight weeks.

Solitary reflection will NOT be tolerated.

Because healthy and appropriate same and opposite-sex relationships are encouraged, dating and exclusive relationships of any kind are prohibited while in the program.

Random hookups are fine, as long as it's non-exclusive.

1. All new Refuge clients will be placed into Safekeeping for the initial two to three days of their program. A client on safekeeping may not communicate verbally, or by using hand gestures or eye contact, with any other clients, staff members, or his/her parents or guardians. In case of a practical need, Safekeeping clients may write down their question or request and show it to another client, staff member, or their parent or guardian. Writing may only be used when absolutely necessary. Parents and guardians must enforce their child’s safekeeping status at home or in their temporary lodging.

No eye contact? Jesus. Does this have any other purpose besides control and intimidation?

5. Safekeeping clients are required to spend a minimum of two hours (in one sitting) a day alone in their room (note: by “alone” it is understood that parents or guardians can be in the room but are not to interact or disrupt the alone time of the safekeeping client).

Ohhhh, so introspection is not only allowed but required if it's bundled together with an overarching punishment scheme.

1. No discussing therapeutic issues at home.

Huh? Again, not suspicious at all....

5. Refuge clients may only read materials approved by staff.

6. No television viewing, going to movies, or reading/watching/listening to secular media of any kind, anywhere within the client’s and the parent’s/guardian’s control. This includes listening to classical or instrumental music that is not expressly Christian (Beethoven, Bach, etc. are not considered Christian).

Especially avoid Tchaikovsky.

12. Refuge clients must be accompanied by a parent during any trip to a public restroom.

Ha.

18. Refuge clients are allowed a one-time 15-minute maximum closed bathroom door time for shower/grooming purposes. The only other closed-door alone time allowed is for using the restroom.

19. Refuge clients must keep their bedroom doors open at all times, day or night.

20. Proper bedclothes must be worn during nighttime sleeping hours. Appropriate bedclothes include full pajamas (tops and bottoms) or a pair of non-underwear-type shorts and a T-shirt. Nightgowns are not allowed.

What about reinforcing appropriate gender roles? Do real girls sleep in pants?

9. Say “I love you _____” after each person is finished relating.

Heh. Because we're preparing you for healthy and appropriate platonic relationships. Where it's common practice to tell casual acquaintances that you love them.

11. Do not talk at, preach to, or teach one another. Each person should keep the focus on him/herself and how he/she feels.

3. Clients are expected to give back. This includes watching out for one’s brothers and sisters.

So helping each other is frowned upon, but ratting each other out is encouraged!

Places of Honor for Women:

Respect for women may be shown by offering them first priority in a number of ways:

1. Please invite women (not just LIA clients) to be the first in line to eat.

2. Encourage women to accept the more comfortable seats in a room. Men should consider offering a woman their chair when there are none left in the room.

3. Men should think about opening doors for women, both when entering a building and when entering a car. This simply adds a level of respect, consideration, and value.

We encourage antiquat-- er, appropriate gender stereoty-- uh, roles.

Refuge Program — Parental Rules

(Not to be given to client)

Ooh. Secret rules.

3. Respect all Love In Action and Refuge rules. If you do not understand them, support the program in front of client at all times and gain clarification from LIA staff. Do not sabotage or defocus your client.

Mandatory enforcement without comprehension. Interesting.

Consequences for Rule Violation:
3. Program dismissal. This does not need to be addressed with the client (The client may sabotage his/her own program due to purposeful dismissal consequences).

No shit. Who could blame them?

Thankfully, this program no longer exists in this exact form....

5. Yay!

1. Something in my brain is broken. I'm excited about an interactive IPA chart.

2. Another article on the possible link between a Siberian family of languages and Na-Dene (Native American) languages.

Vajda said his research puts linguistics on the same stage as archaeology, anthropology, and genetics when it comes to studying the history of humans in North Asia and North America.

I'm not entirely comfortable with that characterization. It's been tried before, with poor results. And language change is by no means regular or consistent, so it makes an unreliable tool for determining anything time-related. But they might have something here. I doubt I'm informed enough to judge one way or another.

3. First, the town is named Effingham. That's always been good for a cheap laugh in my book.

Secondly, re: skunks as domestic pets:

“Once you have the animal descented, which is a nonevasive procedure done early in the animal’s life, having one is a complete joy. It’s like a cross between a house cat and a calm monkey[.]”

Just what everyone wants in their home. A calm monkey.

4. This is sad, mostly because my parents have Papillons.

But the hawk story sounds made up to me. Its much more likely some random passer-by snatched the dog. Or the dog daycare center did something shady with the dog and had to concoct a cover story. Still, it's an amusing image.

5. I don't know if this is lazy/sloppy journalism or bad linguistics/anthropology:

since body art is a form of communication, this implies that the Neanderthals could speak

Communication does not imply speech. Communication implies...communication. And possibly language, but not necessarily speech.

d'Errico, who presented his work on 15 March at the Seventh Evolution of Language Conference in Barcelona, Spain.

Anyone wanna pay my way to go to next year's conference?

"The archaeological record does not show that they ever attained the cultural level of the humans who could talk as we do," says Phillip Lieberman, a linguist at Brown University, Rhode Island, US.

"Neanderthals possessed language, but their linguistic and cognitive ability was inferior to the humans who replaced them," he says.

Hey! It's Lieberman! I took his evolution of language class. We watched a video of him talking weird on Mt. Everest. Anyway. He, or the article's author, forgot to mention that Neanderthals also probably lacked the anatomy necessary for speech.

1. Some scientists decided to basically duct tape a camera to an elephant's tusk. This is one of the resulting photographs. I don't know why that amuses me so much. It might be the idea that the boar is staring back at the elephant-camera hybrid and wondering what the fuck is going on.

2. There have been excavations going on at Orcas island, and I wasn't invited!

3. Come on, people. Surely we've progressed beyond this.

At least the guy is doing something reasonable about it and not just throwing lawsuits left and right:

Wade said he wants to make sure all the employees at the restaurant receive disability awareness training,

He said, "Little People of America is going to write a letter on my behalf stating that they do some type of disability awareness training."

According to the franchise owner's statement, all her employees will receive additional training to ensure they serve all customers with respect.

4. Again. Aren't we past this yet?

During an August 1998 episode of the show, Turner reminded Hannity that were it not for the graciousness of the white man, “black people would still be swinging on trees in Africa[.]”

And then:

We’re teetering at the edge of believing that you’re a secret society, a massive collection of sleeper cells just waiting for your chance to do serious harm to the rest of us. You’ve made it possible for us to believe that.

Um, I think the paranoid bigots who want to believe that already believe it, regardless of what black people say or do.

5. Yet another record-breaking find for paleoanthropologists. When is a hominid fossil not a significant finding lately? I don't get it.

But anyway, this one is significant because:

"It is the oldest human fossil yet found in Western Europe," said co-author Jose Maria Bermudez de Castro, director of Spain's National Research Centre on Human Evolution (CENIEH) in Burgos.

I'm a fan of how (relatively) thoroughly the article covers the dating methods used:

The Spanish researchers used three different techniques to date the new fossils: palaeomagnetism, cosmogenic nuclide dating and biostratigraphy.

Also, re: the chart at the bottom of the article, I'm a bit confused. Last I remembered, homo erectus was thought to be direct descendants of homo sapiens, not related side-branch? Maybe I'm mis-remembering.

Another decent job at explaining dating methods:

The complex of fossils allowed scientists to use a variety of methods to confirm the age of the fossils, including magnetic analysis, radioactive dating, and geologic studies of the clustered bones and artifacts—a necessity because the dating of human fossils remains a controversial area of research.

1. From the TWoP recap of Dancing with the Stars:

Backstage, everyone is chanting for the Gute. I think they all had a little too much sugar before the show.

No, I still think Penn started it.

Penn pretends to fall down while walking backstage because he can't not be the center of attention.

Ha. So true. But so entertaining.

2. An amusing take on the taboo of criticizing religious beliefs.

The most common excuse is to claim that non-adherents of a religion should not "offend" religious believers by criticizing their faith. This argument is based on the idea that criticism of a belief system is the same as a personal attack on the believers. Sometimes, and in some cases, such a connection may be valid -- but for the most part it is not.

Good point.

3. Your God must be a real dick.

4. This is a good idea, actually. And why am I not surprised that they're based in Oregon?

5. Is Atheism Only a Bundle of Sentiments?

exposing atheism “more as a bundle of sentiments than a coherent doctrine.”

I don't know about anyone else, but part of the reason I'm an atheist is because there isn't a doctrine. Atheism, to me, is a loose group of ideas or ways of thinking. That's all. But that's a good thing.

This semester, I learned that one of my colleagues is teaching our Sociology of Religion course with two supplemental texts, neither of which could be characterized as sociological in nature.

Since when do texts used in social science courses have to fit strictly into their specific little subfields? And notice the word "supplemental" up there? Yeah. That means they're extra, not the core of the readings. You said it yourself, dude.

And then there's this:

Back in my days as an atheist, speaking truthfully on a panel would have required a public admission that I rejected Christianity largely because it would not have allowed me to continue getting drunk and high every night while splitting time between four girlfriends.

Because one guy's reason/s for being an atheist is surely the same as any other person's reason/s. [The same argument applies in reverse, though. One guy's idiotic reason for believing in god doesn't mean that all believers are equally idiotic.]

This did make me think, though, about why I'm usually reluctant to talk about my personal reasons for being an atheist. When it comes down to it, I think it's a combination of three factors. 1) I suck at arguing/debating anything, 2) I don't want to offend the usually religious person I'm talking with (which is nigh unavoidable since many religious people think the very existence of atheism is a personal attack against them), and 3) I've been burned too many times already.

Don't get me wrong. I've had it relatively easy. I've never lost real friends or a job due to my nonbelief. But I grew up in the Midwest. I've experienced enough friction over this topic to make staying in the closet often preferable to confrontation.

1. Wow.

At first, I was thinking how it was great that the museum allows these guys to lead their tours there. Then I realized that was hypocritical. Of course these guys should be allowed to lead their tours. They're not actually harming anyone. Just criticizing.

That doesn't mean their critique is in any way informed, however. Check out the bit at 4:08. I love it when people delude themselves into thinking they understand archaeological dating methods.

2. When all else fails, go north.

3. Also you're Asian.

4. Hubbard vs. Astley:

Rickrolling has also come to mean a disruptive blast of the Astley song in a variety of situations. Former Scientologists protesting against the church, for example, have been playing and singing the song this year outside Scientology offices in London, Washington, Seattle and other cities.

My money's on Astley.

5. Finally, some recognition for The 'Foe.

I really hope that's EW's attempt at acknowledging Easter.

Jeff Gordon goes all in!

What do you wanna bet that Penn started the "Gute! Gute! Gute!" chant for Gutenberg.

Also, the intro for the music for Penn's dance??! Oy.

1. Yay!

The plan is part of a wider programme launched by the Saudi monarch a few years ago to encourage moderation and tolerance in Saudi society.

Hopefully sanity will continue to gain ground.

2. Holy shit.

Because of Steve Irwin, every single stingray-related incident in the world is going to get huge media coverage, right? Sad.

But the thing killed her while she was on a boat. Jesus. Granted, it died too.

Death by Suicidal Stingray?

3. Easter vs. Commercialization.

Yet, we still have this. All is right with the world.

4. Dammit. Well, at least they got one thing right -- going to church can feel like a punishment.

Hopefully this guy would've gone to church anyway and isn't feeling pressured to do so by the law?

5. Still. Goddammit. Please please please let this be temporary.

1. Don't kick the baby.

2. I hope this doesn't apply to my Volvo.

3. Yay!

I didn't know Thomas Harris was connected to the case.

4. More bullshit about being so impressed/shocked that Marlee Matlin can dance without hearing the music. Oy.

5. Some covrage of the Expelled vs. PZ Myers incident, for those who haven't already read about it ad nauseum.

1. More archaeology, this time in Florida.

Thus the way was opened for a deal that will see the building of a cultural museum on the site.

Sweet. Much better than condos.

possibly the most important Native American treasure trove on the continent

Only because of the comparison to Stonehenge, I'd wager. What about Cahokia? Or Chaco Canyon? I suppose this site may predate those.

It is the only known evidence of a permanent structure cut into the bedrock in the United States, and considerably predates other known permanent settlements on the East Coast.

Ah. There we go.

The developer Baumann, keen to continue construction of his condominium, offered to pay to relocate the circle to another site for preservation

How the hell were they planning on pulling that off? It's a structure carved into the bedrock.

Also it has been suggested that the holes were for either standing stones or totem poles, though there has been no evidence forwarded to support this.

I think totem poles are only found in the Pacific Northwest. So yeah, it's doubtful that a couple dozen showed up in southern Florida.

Here's the site on Google Maps.

And just for fun, here's Cahokia.

2. Hee. Reminds me of the first snow some of my Brown friends saw.

3. Fuck. Hope the margin doesn't get any narrower.

4. Starmageddon?

Some were curled up, their spiny feet pointing towards the sky.

Sad.

"In the Thames estuary they were once regarded as pests, and fishermen used to try to kill them by slicing them in half and throwing them back. But, of course, all they were doing was doubling the numbers."

That's actually kind of scary.

And the arms aren't just for moving. The tip contains a primitive eye that allows it to see light and dark - and detect movement[.]

Whoa. I didn't know their arms had eyes on the ends.

5. People who believe in God are happier than agnostics or atheists, researchers claimed yesterday.

Using data from Britain and Europe

Isn't there a significantly lower percentage of religious people there (than in the US)? Would that fact affect these findings?

Believers, for example, were less likely to look for a new job if they were out of work.

Huh?

Countries with a more religious electorate had lower unemployment benefits.

Which seems strange given the previous statement. So, more religious countries are chock full of people who get fired but don't find new jobs and receive no unemployment benefits? ...Let's just say I never excelled at statistics.

less than a sixth of churchgoers in Britain believe it is better to divorce than stay in an unhappy marriage.

Oy.

1. Vote for Penn!

2. This makes me even sadder that optional gender-neutral housing at Brown never worked out. Hopefully it will someday.

And some of these parents, under a doctor’s supervision, have even begun to administer hormone blockers to prevent the arrival of secondary sex characteristics until a “gender variant” child is old enough to make permanent choices.

This is where I start to hesitate. What are the long-term consequences of hormone blockers? This reminds me a little of the Ashley Treatment, which is not a good association in my mind. Well-intentioned, but possibly not the best thing to do?

students will often use gender-neutral pronouns like “ze” and “hir”

Good luck with that. It's been tried before, and it's never stuck.

But today many students who identify as trans are seeking not simply to change their sex but to create an identity outside or between established genders — they may refuse to use any gender pronouns whatsoever or take a gender-neutral name but never modify their bodies chemically or surgically. These students are also considered part of the trans community, though they are known as either gender nonconforming or genderqueer rather than transmen or transmale.

I'm all for expanding the gender binary. Other cultures have done it. But I suppose my attitude is just a by-product of my indoctrination at that liberal brainwashing factory of a college I attended. One too many anthropology courses, I suppose.

In the first week of September, he found out that his roommates had complained to the college’s freshman housing director about being asked to share their rooms with a man. They wanted Rey to find somewhere else to live. According to Dorothy Denburg, the dean who spoke to Rey about the situation, these young women were disturbed when Rey told them on the first day “that he was a transboy and wanted to be referred to by male pronouns.”

One of the reasons we need optional gender-neutral housing in dorms.

Part of the couple’s sangfroid is generational — she and Rey see themselves as genderqueer rather than gay. For them, sexual orientation is fluid. Like some of their peers, Melissa and Rey want to be — and sometimes imagine they already are — part of the first generation to transcend gender.

As long as they realize that plenty of people are still perfectly happy identifying with traditional gender roles. And don't look down on those who do.

While many gender-nonconforming students don’t have “top surgery” in their freshman years, they may still struggle with their colleges’ medical services, not because they want specialized treatments but because they want health care that is sensitive to their new identities. As one gender-noncomforming student complained to me, he hated that health services insisted on treating him “like a girl.”

They're in the medical field. They're not gonna lie about your anatomy. But maybe some sort of staff orientation about gender identity wouldn't hurt.

“gender identity” was recently dropped from the 2007 Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA.

Wait, what? It was in there, but then they took it back out? The hell.

Earlier at lunch, Melissa joked about whether they were even in a relationship, “I’m not sure: Rey doesn’t do labels.”

Heh. I liked the guy until that point, but people who "don't do labels" tend to piss me off.

“Some transmen want to be seen as men — they want to be accepted as born men,” he said. “I want to be accepted as a transman — my brain is not gendered.["]

Well, no, it's not. The word 'gender' refers to societal constructs that correspond -- to varying degrees -- to physical/biological states. Not the biological state itself.

3. An interesting piece about atheism and raising children (via Friendly Atheist).

I really like the author's approach. The more I think about it, when/if I have kids, I'd want to expose them to as many different religions/beliefs as possible. Go visit different churches, temples, etc., and discuss them all. Excluding the more extreme, fundamentalist groups. Children don't need to be exposed to fundamentalism. Churches should be given movie ratings. I'm not sure if Westboro would be R or NC-17. Any votes?

4. Kansas strikes again.

5. "There is no way that modern humans, I believe, could have evolved from a species like Neanderthal," Sawyer said. "They're certainly a cousin - they're human - but they're one of those strange little offshoots."

Does anyone believe humans evolved from Neanderthals? I wasn't aware that anyone who knew anything about paleoanthropology still thought that.

1. This is pretty awesome. It'll be interesting to see if it's proven in the future or not.

2. Cute.

Though of course, I have to nitpick.

And lead us not into supernatural explanations, deliver us from denial of logic.

Is it hypocritical of me to agree with eschewing supernatural explanations but not with relying solely on logic? I mean, logic is, after all, dependent on human intelligence, which is obviously fallible. But that doesn't mean we should make stuff up to fill in the gaps, either.

3. You've gotta be kidding me.

SAY ‘BYE-BYE, PLANE’

Last July, 19-month-old Garren Penland – who’d just endured an 11-hour delay at Houston airport – said those words repeatedly (as children will) during the safety briefing on a Continental flight. “The flight attendant said, ‘Okay, it’s not funny any more. You need to shut your baby up,’ ” claimed his mum, Kate. Unfazed, Garren kept going, and mother and son soon ended up on the tarmac.

Would the same kid be kicked off the plane for crying? Probably not. That makes no sense.

And I have to say this makes me think about what would happen if someone with echolalia were on a flight. I suppose there's no constitutionally protected right to sit on an airliner, but still....

4. NAGPRA in action. Locally. Sort of.

The 200-foot-deep portion along Marine Drive eventually will be the site of a Lower Elwha cultural center and museum.

Sweet. This is what all archaeological sites should turn into. So nerds like me can go visit them.

After the first remains were unearthed at Tse-whit-zen, tribal members worked beside archaeologists to remove the burials.

Good, but it would've been better if they'd involved them as soon as they realized it was an occupation site connected to the tribe.

5. Laura Linney makes me proud to be a Brown alum.

NYT: As a graduate of Brown University do you think acting requires intelligence?

LL: No.

1. 38%

2. What precisely is the problem here?

Science museums put small children inside bubbles all the time, and no one cries child abuse there. Perhaps it's an issue of consent?

3. Scientists successfully clone World's Most Terrified Dog.

4. An interesting article on religion and politics.

People choose their religions based on finding those religions reflecting their identities and values back at them.

Well, the smart ones do. The ones who have the wherewithal (and the ability) to choose in the first place.

Religion trades in metaphors that speak to deeper values and ideas. In and of itself, that’s no big deal. The same thing is accomplished in art, literature, bullshitting around the campfire, etc. But what I think helps create chaos is the sense that religion then asks the participants to take some of the metaphors not as stories about something else, but as literal truths.

In fundamentalism, yes. But I doubt you'd find many intelligent, liberal believers out there who take the Bible literally.

What the believers themselves believe and what is just metaphors for what they believe is hard to separate, even for them.

True, though.

Indefensible beliefs that have to be respected in politics is a serious problem in a political system built on the idea of deliberative democracy.

I don't have a problem with beliefs being respected and tolerated (within reason). Making a taboo of analyzing and criticizing those beliefs, though -- that's where we run into trouble. People seem to forget that respectful critique is possible.

5. He used...sarcasm.

1. My first reaction to this:

Bad principal. Bad. No more treats.

Then I realized he's in a really tough situation.

Principal Timothy Voels and a sign language translator were waiting for Cave and Simba at the entrance and laid down the law[.]

First, if the school provided an interpreter at all times, the need for a service dog would be moot. But I can also see how the kid might prefer being more independent, which the dog would facilitate by eliminating the need for a human shadow tagging along all day.

But school officials think the Labrador Retriever could aggravate or serve as a distraction to students with severe allergies and would pose a danger during fire and emergency lockdown drills.

I can understand the worry about allergies. But distraction? After awhile the novelty would wear off. And if the kid knows what he's doing, he won't let people randomly pet and/or interact with his service dog. Lastly, a danger during drills? I don't quite see that. But I'm open to a more specific explanation.

Cave's family countered that the 1,500-student school could be outfitted with air filters.

Now that's a bit excessive, I think. But then again, do they really have students so severely allergic to dogs that they can't stand being in the same classroom with one for, say, one hour a day?

Also, judging by the photo accompanying the article, that dog is not old enough to be done with its training. It looks like a half-grown puppy. I could be wrong about that. And even if I'm right, I'm not sure what the implications for this case would be, other than complicating matters because the dog is in training and therefore not yet an official service animal (though in-training guide dogs are given the same access as trained guide dogs, apparently).

2. Have I talked about this before?

Even if I have, it's worth another mention. I mean, come on. It's Jesus Christ: Vampire Hunter.

3. So the church-sponsored month-long sex-fest is over.

If the goal was to improve marriages, I can't say I agree with their methods. I'd wager that most people's sex drives aren't ideally sated with daily sex. In fact, I'd say that's overkill for most people. Can't the married couples just talk to each other about what their ideal schedule would be? Wouldn't that serve the same purpose? And wouldn't daily sex between an already-incompatible couple only aggravate the problem further? Though I suppose from a practical standpoint, that's probably good. If the marriage isn't working, it's probably best to end it sooner rather than later (except where there are kids involved). And I doubt the church wanted this exercise to result in divorces.

Doug learned that Lorena's top need is spending time together. Lorena learned that Doug's top need is openness and honesty.

"We're finding things out about each other that we didn't know,'' he said. "It's really brought us together as a couple.''

Shouldn't they have known that already, without forced sex as a catalyst for disclosure?

The same goes for Paul Wirth, the pastor at Relevant Church. He and his wife of 16 years, Susie, took the challenge to refocus their relationship and inspire others, using the Bible as their guide.

Are they saying the Bible encourages daily sex for married couples? Can I see a citation, please?

4. An interesting discussion of legalization of prostitution. Before, I'd probably say I was for legalization, simply because I don't think government should prohibit victimless behaviors for the sake of moral policing. But there are some compelling arguments here:

The Netherlands formally adopted the legalization model in 2000, and there were modest public health benefits for the licensed prostitutes. But legalization nurtured a large sex industry and criminal gangs that trafficked underage girls, and so trafficking, violence and child prostitution flourished rather than dying out.

And again, Sweden comes to the rescue:

In contrast, Sweden experimented in 1999 with a radically different approach that many now regard as much more successful: it decriminalized the sale of sex but made it a crime to buy sex. In effect, the policy was to arrest customers, but not the prostitutes.

Some Swedish prostitutes have complained that the policy reduced demand and thus lowered prices, while forcing sex work underground. But the evidence is strong that the new approach reduced trafficking in Sweden, and opinion polls show that Swedes regard the experiment as a considerable success.

Interesting approach.

I think that the problem with legalization schemes is that prostitution is more, for the majority of the customers, about buying the opportunity to treat a woman like utter trash.

Sadly, this is often the case, I'd wager. But it's definitely not 100%. And what about male prostitutes? Or dominatrixes? They're paid to be the treater-like-trash, not the treatee.

Which is why I tear my hair out at the people who focus on the exceptions, like Kerry Howley arguing that prostitution is about women who love sex so much they want to make it a career.

Meh. I think that's a weak and possibly false argument. Though there are probably a few cases that would confirm it.

There’s probably a few high class hookers that fit the “love sex so much I do it for a career” model, and probably even more that are just really good looking women who figure it’s easy cash, even if they don’t have any illusions that it’s a great time having sex with the kind of assholes who pay for it.

I'm actually going to come to the defense of people who pay for sex here, strangely. I doubt they're all assholes. What if someone just wants an honest sexual experience without worrying about the emotional pitfalls otherwise (often) inherent in the process? The fact that it's not an experience I would seek out doesn't mean I have the right to condemn those who would seek it.

5. Didn't this already happen a few years ago? Anyone else remember that?

1. Deep sea awesomeness.

2. Tribute via Excel?

3. The poor frog just wanted a hug, people. Get your minds out of the gutter. Sheesh.

(The duck does look thoroughly scandalized, I admit.)

4. The bulk of these are pretty fucking disgusting. However, I confess that I enjoy the Bruce Willis a la Van Gogh and the Elvis.

5. Oh Ben Stein. Ben Stein, Ben Stein, Ben Stein.... I used to like you. I watched your show.

[N]ew science standards...for the first time use the term "evolution" instead of such terms "as changes over time" for the scientific theory. They also require teaching evolution in more detail.

Scientists and teachers say the new standards will help students improve their education and better prepare for high-tech jobs.

Isn't this the argument I made yesterday? Sell it as a necessary evil if you must. Social currency.

The bill would allow public school teachers to present views that are contradictory to the theory of evolution.

The bill's language does not require teachers to present alternate views[.]

Oh good. So it's just luck of the draw whether you get the Jesus freak bio teacher who spends time teaching Intelligent Design instead of preparing you for college and adult life.

As a compromise, the Board last month approved compromise language calls for teaching the "scientific theory of evolution."


How many times do we have to go over this?

Gravity is, after all, just a theory.

Sex and the Church

1. British lawmakers vote to abolish blasphemy laws

Sweet. Even a country with a state religion can legislate sanely.

2. Sometimes, frogs can be sad.

3. On the surface, House Bill 2211 (RTF file) sounds like a nod to religious freedom. A good thing.

If they can argue that one should be able to opt out of science curriculum due to religious freedom, then one should be able to opt out of using Standard English due to freedom of speech. If you're gonna go for one, go for the other. They use the same argument. Yet somehow I don't think the Spanish and non-Standard English speakers (who are mostly non-white) will get quite as much sympathy as the religious fundamentalists (who are mostly white).

Simplest solution: admit that learning Standard English and evolution-based science is a necessity for getting a job in this country. That doesn't necessarily mean the standard is better or more valid; it just means that it's endorsed by whoever's in power at the time.

4. “Kevin and Mandy had been married 18 months and worried that they had not conceived a child.

“It turned out they had never had full intercourse.”

Not to worry -- Church of England to the rescue!

Officials decided to write the book because of concern about the high number of divorces.

Well, lack of sexual compatibility can lead to divorce. But guess what can lead to lack of sexual compatibility? Abstaining from intercourse before marriage so you don't know if you're sexually compatible, perhaps?

5. The Vatican to the rescue: It's A Sin Not To Do It.

Another chapter likely to raise eyebrows unearths theological justification for post-coital masturbation for women who fail to achieve orgasm during intercourse.

Next thing you know they'll be advocating sex for non-procreative purposes!

1. Tacoma is 12,204 elephants away from Seattle.

2. This has got to be fake. It's just too perfect.

3. Evidence that common sense and basic morality can exist without religion? If so many different religions came up with the same rule, it can't be exclusively inherent to or dependent on the religions themselves.

And of course, a smartass response to the above.

Found at www.friendlyatheist.com.

4. [P]rejudice against Catholicism is the last acceptable bias in America.

Oh really?

I'm not even going to justify that with a response.

5. Also found at www.friendlyatheist.com:

Atheism will lead to the extinction of the human race!

Today's lesson: Mormon Masturbation

First, that photograph is laughable.

The truth is that not everyone does it (and most of the websites that tell you otherwise are trying to make money off ads related to sex).

So a pro-masturbation stance equates with profiting from the porn industry. Got it.

Thus prophets anciently and today condemn masturbation. It induces feelings of guilt and shame.

And they never considered that those feelings of guilt and shame might be related to the fact that the Church tells people to feel guilty about it?

Luckily, the Mormon Church provides some helpful tips for those attempting to overcome addiction to self-stimulation.

1. Never touch the intimate parts of your body except during normal washing and using the bathroom.

Because self breast exams are the medical establishment's ploy to lure us all to the Dark Side.

2. Avoid being alone as much as possible. Find good company and stay in this good company, especially when you are feeling particularly weak.

By all means, eliminate all opportunities to reflect on your behavior in a rational manner. If you surround yourself with "good company," you're less likely to do something detrimental like think for yourself.

The problem must be taken OUT OF YOUR MIND for that is where it really exists.

Whatever you do, do not think about pink elephants. Those sexy, sexy pink elephants.

6. If the temptation seems overpowering while you are in bed, GET OUT OF BED!

What about wet dreams? Are those just as bad as masturbation? People who say wet dreams are natural and unavoidable are obviously making money from the sex industry.

BUT KEEP THE PROBLEM OUT OF YOUR MIND BY NOT MENTIONING IT EVEN IN YOUR PRAYERS. KEEP IT OUT of your mind!

NO pink elephants. Got it?

Remember it is essential that a regular report program be agreed on, so progress can be recognized and failures understood and eliminated.

But while you're composing and conveying these reports to your Priesthood Leader, KEEP THE PROBLEM OUT OF YOUR MIND.

It is important to turn your thoughts away from the selfish need to indulge.

Yes, catering to biological imperatives is selfish and indulgent. Does the Church also have a program to overcome unnecessary eating or sleeping?

7. Be outgoing and friendly. Force yourself to be with others and learn to enjoy working and talking to them. Use principles of developing friendships found in books such as How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie.

By all means, change your entire personality if you happen to be an introvert. God doesn't want you to be yourself. He wants you to Win Friends and Influence People.

If you associate something very distasteful with your loss of self-control it will help you to stop the act. For example, if you are tempted to masturbate, think of having to bathe in a tub of worms, and eat several of them as you do the act. It sounds goofy, but it actually works!

Sexual pleasure will then be forever associated with cringing disgust. This makes for a strong, healthy marriage.

12. During your bathroom and shower activities leave the bathroom door or shower curtain partly open.

Because encouraging exhibitionism and voyeurism is better than touching yourself.

13. Get out of bed immediately in the mornings. Do not lie in bed awake, no matter what time of day it is. Get up and do something. Start each day with an enthusiastic activity.

IGNORE morning erections. They are a figment of your imagination. They do not really exist.

14. Keep your bladder empty. Believe it or not, having a full bladder can cause you to feel sexually stimulated. As strange as it sounds you may find that going to the bathroom often makes it easier to refrain from masturbating.

But doesn't that entail touching yourself more often?

18. It is sometimes helpful to have a physical object to use in overcoming this problem. A Bible, for example, held firmly in hand, even in bed at night has proven helpful in extreme cases.

Unless, of course, your Bible is battery-operated.

That would be awesome. Someone should make a Bible vibrator. To the three people who will read this: get on it.

1. Oh noes!

2. If Scientology were to ever become an actual religion, it'd be through the influence of these people. I always like it when I see people analyzing and critiquing their belief system of choice. Not because I hope they'll decide it's bullshit, but because it means they'll interpret and apply its teachings intelligently and conscientiously. Translation: these people don't become fundamentalists. So I like them.

3.



More info here.

I've reserved my ticket. You?

4. Portable When Carried would make a good band name.

5. My typical weekend.