Sunday, November 06, 2005

Fuckhead Pat Rpbertson is in the dictionary right under “amoral fuck”: Pat Robertson on Sunday said that the tornado in Indiana and Kentucky was God’s way of expressing His anger at the actor Warren Beatty and his wife, Annette Bening for trying to disrupt yesterday’s speech by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger at a campaign rally in San Diego. “By choosing to disrupt this national event, these Hollywood elites have clearly invited God’s wrath,” Robertson said on ‘The 700 Club’ on Sunday. “Is it any surprise that the Almighty chose to strike at a town on the opposite side of the country?” Is it any surprise that the Almighty chose to shove a hemmorhoid right up his stupid ass? What a lying, ruthless “man of God” he is. (Via Suburban Guerrilla.) 7:37:34 PM    comment []

Where did Jesus get His Y chromosome? An aspect of the Virgin Birth you may not have considered: But there's a problem with arguing Jesus came about through cloning or parthenogenesis - he would have been born a girl. In the last few decades science revealed that to be male you need a Y chromosome and the only place you can get one is from a man. “There's a big split over the Y chromosome issue,” says Boston University theology professor Wesley Wildman. One thing Catholics and Protestants seem to agree on is that Jesus was fully human and male, so he must have carried the usual male quotient of DNA. It's not the Y chromosome he needed per se but a gene called SRY normally carried on the Y. Where did Jesus get his DNA? (Via Gullibility isn't in the dictionary.) 1:01:17 PM    comment []

Why Does God Hate Amputees? Marshall Brain asks, Why Does God Hate Amputees? and suggests an experiment: For this experiment, we need to find a deserving person who has had both of his legs amputated. For example, find a sincere, devout, Christian veteran of the Iraqi war, or a devout Christian in your church who was involved in a tragic automobile accident. Now create a prayer circle . . .. The job of this prayer circle is simple: pray to God to restore the amputated legs of this deserving Christian. I do not mean to pray for a team of renowned surgeons to somehow graft the legs of a cadaver onto the soldier, nor for a team of renowned scientists to craft mechanical legs for him. Pray that God spontaneously and miraculously restores the soldier's legs overnight, in the same way that God spontaneously and miraculously cured Jeanna Giese and Marilyn Hickey's mother [victims of rabies and cancer]. If possible, get millions of human beings all over the planet to join the prayer circle and pray their most fervent prayers. Get millions of people praying in unison for a single miracle for this one deserving Christian amputee. Then stand back and watch. What is going to happen? Jesus clearly says that if you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer. He does not say it once -- he says it many times in many ways in the Bible. And yet, even with millions of people praying, nothing will happen. I've yet to read a compelling theistic answer to the amputee problem, many of which are listed by Brain. Frequently the religious will argue that it's no challenge to God's omnipotence to say that He's incapable of doing something that's logicallly impossible, like making a square circle or forcing 1 plus 1 to equal 3. But the theory of most prayer is that He is capable of changing the operation of natural laws, which is the very reason people prayer for cures for cancer and other diseases. Certainly the magic behind altering the internal structure of a cancer cell is no different from regenerating a limb -- why does no one ever even consider praying for the latter "miracle"? (Via The Raving Atheist.) 12:59:21 PM    comment []

Texas to Ban Marriage Tiffany mentioned to me today that Texas is voting to ban marriage today. Proposed constitutional amendment #2 reads, A JOINT RESOLUTION proposing a constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTION 1. Article I, Texas Constitution, is amended by adding Section 32 to read as follows: Sec. 32. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. (b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage. SECTION 2. This state recognizes that through the designation of guardians, the appointment of agents, and the use of private contracts, persons may adequately and properly appoint guardians and arrange rights relating to hospital visitation, property, and the entitlement to proceeds of life insurance policies without the existence of any legal status identical or similar to marriage. SECTION 3. This proposed constitutional amendment shall be submitted to the voters at an election to be held November 8, 2005. The ballot shall be printed to permit voting for or against the proposition: “The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage.” (H.J.R. No. 6) Someone claiming to be the state attorney general’s office has been calling Texas voters to tell them that “shadowy group” was calling people to warn them about this amendment. The “AG’s” recording said that the amendment is to protect traditional marriage. The only problem is that as worded the amendment clearly bans Texas governments from recognizing any marriage as well as anything similar to marriage. The “AG” is clearly wrong about what the amendment literally says. Given that this amendment is being promoted as an anti-homosexual vote, I suspect that it will pass. It will be interesting to see what is going to happen after it passes. (Via De Rerum Natura.) 12:53:03 PM    comment []

The Groovy Age of Horror Just a recommendation for this site, The Groovy Age of Horror. I came of age on low-rent sf and horror novels. This guy reads them, posts reviews and cover scans. Always excellent reading. 12:24:29 PM    comment []

Just a little late. “President Bush has ordered White House staff to attend mandatory briefings beginning next week on ethical behavior and the handling of classified material after the indictment last week of a senior administration official in the CIA leak probe,” the Washington Post reports. (Via Think Progress.) Uh, why not hire people who don't need ethics classes? And who's going to teach them? 12:05:55 PM    comment []

Ahem “The problem with guns that are hidden is you can’t see their smoke.” - Ari Fleischer, 2003 Report Warned Bush Team About Intelligence Doubts A top member of Al Qaeda in American custody was identified as a likely fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims that Iraq trained Al Qaeda members to use biological and chemical weapons, according to newly declassified portions of a Defense Intelligence Agency document. The document, an intelligence report from February 2002, said it was probable that the prisoner, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, “was intentionally misleading the debriefers’’ in making claims about Iraqi support for Al Qaeda’s work with illicit weapons. The document provides the earliest and strongest indication of doubts voiced by American intelligence agencies about Mr. Libi’s credibility. Without mentioning him by name, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Colin L. Powell, then secretary of state, and other administration officials repeatedly cited Mr. Libi’s information as “credible’’ evidence that Iraq was training Al Qaeda members in the use of explosives and illicit weapons. “The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” - Condoleezza Rice, 2003 (Via Oliver Willis - Like Kryptonite To Stupid.) 11:58:22 AM    comment []

Freedom's Warriors Trading Cards (Via Jesus' General.) 11:48:19 AM    comment []

The postmodern Republican Party Here's a disturbing sign of the GOP's turn toward postmodernism under President Bush -- a "close" ally of the White House "admiringly" describing the administration's talent for "making their own reality": But the Bush White House has always been good at what one close Republican ally refers to admiringly as "making their own reality," meaning that the president and his top aides stick doggedly to their political script and agenda, refusing to be knocked off course. What Democrats consider stubbornness and detachment, Mr. Bush's admirers consider determination, and in this case that trait suggests the White House will be in no rush to acknowledge mistakes or to offer detailed explanations that might swamp the president's second-term plans. Are there any Republicans left who are members of "the reality-based community"? (Via Brendan Nyhan.) 11:38:22 AM    comment []

© Copyright 2005 Steve Michel. Last update: 12/2/2005; 7:08:23 PM.