Remember to vote on November 7th! We need to get rid of some of these threats to freedom and democracy. For a profile on how your Congressional representatives have been doing, go to the Secular Coalition for America’s scorecard. Compare their performance with what you know of their challengers’ beliefs and vote accordingly. There are few ideal candidates, so in most cases you’ll have to accept the lesser of two evils.

I usually lean toward third-party candidates, because the two major parties are so corrupt. They really are more concerned with preserving their way of doing business than they are with voting their conscience. For the 2006 election, though, the Democrats should get our votes in most jurisdictions.

The country has been under the control of the radical wing of the Republican party for too long. Even moderate Republicans vote with the extremists, because the system they’ve set up protects the seats of every party member who plays ball. Yes, the Democrats set up the same type of system when they have the chance, but they’ve never damaged the country to the extent that the current brand of Republicanism is doing.

Let’s work on taking power away from the fundies on this election. Then if you are inclined to work on fixing the broken parts of our two-party system, or if you have a plan for restoring the good traits of the Republican party, you can work on that later. You’ll have the time then. Right now, the radical Republicans are destroying more of our civil rights every day. We have to remove the cancer before we can even think about curing the patient’s cold.

A lot of funny or insightful things fly around the internet and land in our email boxes. For the most part, I don’t reprint any of them here. Many of you may have already seen them, I don’t want anybody to think that I’m claiming credit for them, and I like to keep the site populated with original content.

I sometimes get one that is especially good, so I will go ahead and break my rule (Egads! This is the second post in a row where I’m violating my own rules. At least I don’t invent goofy consequences for violations, such as burning in hell for all eternity. I’m mean that’s just plain stupid!).

Anyway, Cabbie X received this from the divine intelligence that is the internet, then he forwarded it to me.

Ten Reasons Gay Marriage Is Wrong

1. Homosexuality is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets, because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if homosexual marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Homosexual couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry, because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

Okay, this post deviates from the focus of this web site, but sometimes I can’t help myself. It is indirectly related, as I’ll explain in a moment.

I was wandering around Ebay (or “eBay” as they seem to think it’s spelled; maybe that’s a moron attractor) looking for some novelty magnets. They have a category called “Collectables”. It should be “Collectibles”, spelled with an i, not an a. Again, that’s another moron attractor, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at what I find on the site.

They have a sub-category called “Weird Stuff”, and a sub-category under that called “Really Weird”. I didn’t see a category called “Retarded Sellers”, which is where the product belongs. Anyway, I came across the following novelty refrigerator magnet:

That’s right, the actual magnet is NOT radioactive!

Why do I feel like I’m doing Jay Leno all of a sudden? (Speaking of moron attractors!)

That’s right, folks. Here is a fun little magnet. Oh, joy! It has the radioactive symbol on it! Har har! This ought to dress up the old fridge. Wait! I can’t buy that! It’s radioactive!

Jesus F—ing Christ, people! Are you all a pack of retards? It’s a God-damned refrigerator magnet, not a piece of industrial waste! Not only that, but don’t you think there might be, oh I don’t know, dozens of laws it would violate to make, sell, and mail such a product if it were radioactive?

Morons! I’m surrounded by morons!

In the seller’s defense, I suspect that he has offered these for sale in the past and received numerous queries about the product’s half-life:

Q: “Is it safe to carry this thing in my pants pocket?”
A: “Yes, but only in your back pocket.”

But if I were the seller, I’d just throw those emails away. I wouldn’t feel right selling them the product. You shouldn’t take money from the terminally stupid.

How does this relate to the theme of this web site? Sadly, all too well. This auction is an example of the lack of critical thinking skills that permeates our society. It may be the worst mental epidemic we’ve ever faced. Far more widespread than illiteracy or innumeracy, and far more devastating in its effect.

People who cannot think critically believe in all sorts of hogwash, such as astrology, homeopathy, chiropractic, prayer, angels, miracles, and creationism.

As a follow-up to my last post, I couldn’t resist going in search of the Daily Show segment on gay penguins. But first, watch this CNN report for background:

Now watch Samantha Bee:

I’m a little behind in my reading. There are a lot of good blogs out there. One of my favorites is God is for Suckers. Here’s a post from two weeks ago about animal homosexuality. Here is the original news article.

Gay animals seems to be one of those topics that a lot of people like to avoid. I guess it raises too many problems, such as destroying any claim that homosexuality is wrong. This pretty much proves that it is part of the natural spectrum of sexual attraction and response.

I have a keen interest in evolution. I even studied biology at one point in my sordid past and came this close (OK, maybe that close) to following that career path. I got derailed when I fell in love with a male grouper.

It was tragedy on a Shakespearian scale. A love that could not be. Society was not ready for us. We decided that if we could not be together in this life, we would have to be together in the next one. There was only one way to eternal happiness. After I helped him to kill himself, I was prepared to join him. Then I got hungry. Damn he was good!

Then I met her. Daisy! She brought me back to life! She brought me back to the world of heterosexuality!

I eventually tired of her. But how to break up? I agonized for weeks over the best way to do it. Then I saw a show about mutton on the Food Network and knew what to do.

I’m back to humans now. No, I haven’t seen any of my girlfriends since we broke up. They all moved out of state and left no forwarding address.

Boys and Gulls

Where was I? Oh, yes, fava beans. Back in the 1980s, one of the classes I took was about AIDS. It was a new disease. I was interested in evolution and population biology, so this was an ideal case study.

I ended up talking to a conservative Catholic graduate student about homosexuality. He was convinced that it was a human deviation. I told him about an article I had read about homosexual seagulls. He dismissed that out of hand. Without having read the article, he just said that the study must have been flawed or the researchers had an agenda. People like him don’t want to hear the facts. (That’s a given, of course. Facts and religion are frequently contradictory.)

The Evolutionary Perspective

Since my interest is evolution, I’ve been curious how homosexuality survives. I’ve heard other hypotheses. The article mentions two:

Still, it is unclear why homosexuality survives since it seems a genetic dead-end.

Among theories, males can sometimes win greater acceptance in a pack by having homosexual contact. That in turn can help their chances of later mating with females, he said.

And a study of homosexual men in Italy suggested that their mothers and sisters had more offspring. “The same genes that give homosexuality in men could give higher fertility among women,” he said.

I’m on a bunch of fundie email lists, in order to keep an eye on these people. This morning, I received the following from Bill Johnson of the American Decency Association:

MySpace.com—”unmonitored monument to our fallen culture”

I ask three questions of Steve Ensley, executive director of American Family Online, regarding the hazards of MySpace.com.

Question 1 —
The Internet is a powerful tool having many benefits. But, Christians need to be discerning as to how they use it and what they use. One concern that has become very alarming is MySpace.com. Are you concerned about MySpace.com and if so why?

So far so good. Nothing wrong with people taking responsibility for themselves in determining what content is appropriate for their family (although it must be horrible to actually grow up in one of those families). Here is part of Mr. Ensley’s response:

I’m not sure there are words that are strong enough to express my concerns about myspace.com, but maybe some examples of what is on the very front page today will say it better. Immediately on the front page, which cannot be avoided if you go to myspace.com, is an interview with Marilyn Manson the convicted killer making him out to be a cult hero.

They don’t need to make him out to be a cult hero. Marilyn Manson is already a cult hero to many, but not for the reasons these two fundie pinheads assume. Barely over an hour later, I received this email from our dear Mr. Bill Johnson:

Correction.

It was Charles Manson that was the convicted murderer not Marilyn Manson. Marilyn Manson is a shock rocker.

My sincere apologies,
Bill Johnson

This is rather comical, really. Maybe BJ should have spent a little time in the ‘90s watching MTV.

So what’s the problem here? Am I making fun of these idiots because of a simple mistake? No. Anybody can make a mistake. If you read this site long enough, you’re bound to find a few of mine. The problem is that neither of these morons caught the mistake.

American Family Online is an internet filter service for the type of parents who are offended by a one-second glimpse of Janet Jackson’s nipple. I’ve never even heard of Steve Ensley, although he clearly is one of the “brains” behind this particular internet nipple-filter. Old BJ makes Ensley out as some sort of authority figure (or cult hero) of internet muff muffling.

If Ensley is such an expert, how did he make this mistake? Did he run his answers by anybody else at his company before sending them to BJ? And if they don’t know the difference between a rock star (even if it is one that they find offensive) and a killer, then how good can their internet filter be?

Why didn’t BJ catch it? Does nobody proofread his screeds before he sends them out? Does nobody vet his articles for accuracy?

Most troubling, and my real complaint, is the brevity of BJ’s correction. Does he explain how the mistake occurred? Does he tell us what steps he is taking to ensure that further rants will be more accurate? No.

That’s what’s wrong with these people. They don’t care about the facts. They’re so sure they’re right that they don’t need to double-check. First impressions are good enough for them. If it supports their preconceptions, don’t look too hard. They wouldn’t want to be confused by the facts.

It is funny, though. BTW, here is a screenshot of MySpace. You’d have to be a total retard to think that they’re talking about Charles Manson or murder. BJ and Ensley are probably so far removed from mainstream American culture that they think that Danny Elfman is the Travelocity gnome.

You would think that a Republican politician in nominally-liberal California would wait until he won the election before announcing to the world that he’s a wacko fundie. But I guess if you are already guaranteed defeat, you have nothing else to lose.

I was barely even aware that Senator Dianne Feinstein was running for re-election. Her win is so much of a lock that she hasn’t been campaigning much. Today was the first I ever heard of her opponent: A scummy little weasel named Dick Mountjoy.

Here are a few of his favorite positions (actually, I think fundies are only allowed one: Missionary):

• Opposes abortion
• Believes marriage should be only between a man and a woman
• Supports George W Bush’s unconstitutional subversion of our civil rights. (His actual quote was “The government must have the tools necessary to root out terrorist cells in America. I fully support President Bush’s anti-terrorism plans.”.)
• Supports the anti-American PATRIOT act
• Wants to stay the course in Iraq
• Believes that Saddam may have had WMDs
• Supports a hard line with Iran, including war if necessary

He’s conservative, but he’s not the wackiest to hit the political scene; not by a longshot. I’m concerned about his willingness to destroy America by shredding our civil rights under the guise of saving us from terrorists. The biggest terrorists are in Washington. We have lost many of our civil rights because of people like Mountjoy. As bad as crashing airplanes into skyscrapers is, far more damage has been done to our lives by the Republicans in the White House and Congress, and by their Democratic enablers. (Mountjoy’s opponent, Dianne Feinstein, voted for the war, for example.)

Erasing the Fourth Amendment is hardly this guy’s only crime. I’m particularly concerned about his attitudes on social issues. Here’s a typical quote of his:

The forces of godless secularism are corrupting our core values on every side. Abortionists murder more than a million babies a year. […] The promoters of homosexuality are attacking the ageless and universal tradition of marriage as a union of one man and one woman.

First, he cites some vague “forces”. Then he cites vague “core values”. Then he claims that Vague 1 has Vague 2 surrounded. (“She’s taking on water fast, captain! We can’t last much longer!”) Then he uses the word “murder” incorrectly, as he also does with the word “babies”. Where are the offices of the “promoters of homosexuality”? Is it a non-profit, or can I buy stock? Marriage isn’t quite ageless or universal; other definitions are old and widespread. Every phrase in that paragraph is suspect. These are the sorts of people we elect to office. (Well, not this specific person, because he’s going to lose!)

But get a load of this steaming pile:

God and prayer belong in our private AND public places.

Liberal judges have expelled God from our public schools, and the education establishment forces our children to submit to “sex education” that glorifies not only premarital sex but immorality of every sort. The enemies of God are constantly working to remove any mention of his name from public places. The courts have stripped prayer from our public schools, thrown the Ten Commandments out of our courthouses, torn crosses off of county seals, buildings, mountains and war memorials. The Boy Scouts of America are under constant attack because of their belief in God.

The principle that has guided me through my life is my supreme belief in the Savior of mankind, Jesus Christ. We were created by God and placed on this earth to please and glorify him—not just in the privacy of our homes and churches but in everything we say and do. This belief has guided my actions in my 32 years of political life. My criteria for decision making has been: First, is it right with God, and second, is it Constitutional?

Debunking this speech is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.

I would like to call your attention to that last sentence, however: “First, is it right with God, and second, is it Constitutional?” He is telling us that he will not “support and defend the Constitution” (this phrase is contained in the Senate’s oath of office). If he believes that something is contrary to his particular interpretation of his particular religion, then that takes priority, Constitution be damned. That fact right there disqualifies him from office.

I am hardly a fan of Dianne Feinstein, but in this case the decision is easy. Apparently most Californians agree. Feinstein leads Mountjoy by a 2-to-1 margin in opinion polling.

Look! Up in the Sky! It’s a Bird! It’s a Plane! It’s a Frog! It’s…

Seeing the writing on the wall, I guess Mountjoy felt that the only thing left was to ask for help from Daddy. Skydaddy that is!

I read this Associated Press article in the San Jose [California] Mercury News. (BTW, that link probably won’t work for long. They throw stuff behind a paywall pretty quickly.)

Mountjoy asks for prayers in his Senate race against Feinstein
[…]
Republican Dick Mountjoy, who faces popular Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, e-mailed a “campaign prayer request” to his supporters Monday asking them to pray for him. The conservative former state lawmaker has little money and scant support from his own party.

“We know that prayer is the most powerful and effective weapon there is,” Mountjoy writes in the message that is signed “Yours in Christian Faith.”

He’s destined to lose for sure, since there is no evidence that prayer works. But the real problem is right there in black and white: “Yours in Christian Faith.” I have no problem with his being a Christian. I have a problem with him waving it around and telling everybody that that’s how he makes decisions.

The next line in the article is a hoot:

Attached is an endorsement letter from Focus on the Family founder James Dobson that criticizes Feinstein’s “ultra-liberal record.”

HA!! “Ultra-liberal”? Dianne Feinstein? “Ultra-liberal”? Oh, my sides ache! Make it stop! Make the laughter stop!

Dianne Feinstein is so conservative that she’s to the right of Bill Clinton! Man, we are in big trouble if the Republican party thinks that people like Dianne Feinstein are ultra-liberal. Check out a few choice highlights of her profile by OnTheIssues.org:

• Voted YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq
• Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007
• Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act
• Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping
• Voted YES on Amendment to prohibit flag burning
• Voted YES on declaring that memorial prayers and religious symbols on public school campuses do not violate the First Amendment
• Voted YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends
• Voted YES on phasing out the estate tax

Of course she’s liberal on a lot of issues, but the list above should be proof enough that she’s no “ultra-liberal”. I guess we’re stuck with her, and we should be grateful. The alternative is a fundie who would govern first by what he thought his mythical skydaddy wanted.

Lim Leng Hiong is a graduate student in Singapore. He writes a blog called Fresh Brainz. It’s interesting to see the world of science and other aspects of life through his lens.

He has an excellent post about the fallacy of irreducible complexity. He gives a brief overview of 18th-century theologian William Paley’s watchmaker’s analogy:

Hey, living things are complex things too! In comparison to a watch, a human being contains way, way more parts. All these parts must fit together perfectly in order for a person to be alive. Since brass watches are made by smart people, living things must be made by an even smarter “person”, why, this is the ultimate proof of the existence of an intelligent, Designer God!

Hiong doesn’t mention the logical hazards of arguing by analogy, so I will. Analogies are a great way to illustrate a point, but you have to know where it breaks down. Almost all analogies break down at some point, some earlier than others. Also, there are often assumptions built into the analogy that may bias your reaction. This is probably one reason they’re effective arguing techniques. When you hear an analogy, ask yourself how far the analogy can be extended, and what assumptions are built into it.

In the case of the watch, yes, watches are complicated and humans are more so. The analogy can’t be taken very far, because watches aren’t alive. Watches don’t reproduce. There’s a whole host of differences. One of the assumptions built into this analogy is that the only way something complex could come into existence is if it is intentionally created by an intelligent, sentient being. That forces the listener to only think along that one track. It makes the argument seem compelling. It is, however, ridiculous. There are other ways complex things can be created.

Snowflakes are complex and very ordered. How does something ordered come out of the random swirls of water vapor and low temperatures? A living creature is, of course, way more complicated than a snowflake, but this simple example shows how order can arise from chaos, complexity from simplicity. All that evolution requires is small, incremental steps.

In fact, this illustrates the absurdity of taking an analogy too far. Snowflakes are complex. Snowflakes were formed in the clouds out of water vapor. Humans are more complex than snowflakes. Therefore, humans were formed in the clouds out of water vapor! (or supernatural clouds out of cosmic water vapor)

The Fresh Brainz Approach

The above was my anemic attempt to refute the watchmaker’s analogy. I think that Hiong does a better job with his comparison of a watch to a baby. Go check it out. You can read the entire article at his blog.

(Thanks to Cabbie X for this tip!)