Our Descent Into Madness

Sunday pug blogging on a Saturday this week, as I won’t have access to the internet tomorrow.

A whole new frightening angle.

Nadine Jarvis has succeeded in making pencils from people’s cremains.

240 pencils can be made from an average body of ash - a lifetime supply of pencils for those left behind.

Via Boing Boing.

Today Alternet has an interview posted between Pam Spaulding and ex-anti gay Christian attorney for the American Family Association, Joe Murray. The interview originally appeared at Pam’s House Blend. Some of the best parts, all of which are in response to the first question:

Pam Spaulding: As a Christian (and a conservative), describe your own evolution in thinking about homosexuality, the LGBT community, and how it has informed your politics and beliefs.

…the issue of gay rights has been weighing heavy on my mind for quite some time. The gay issue is a human issue, and thus I strongly believe that it must be approached with concern and compassion. Furthermore, the individuals engaging in the debate must recognized that behind the theories there are real life human beings that are made in the image of the Creator.

After adopting the AFA party line for some time, something in the back of my head kept tearing away at my conscience. How could AFA, an earthly organization, declare the divine intention of God and condemn the souls of homosexuals? How was it that men could make the declaration of who was getting into Heaven, and who was getting the one-way ticket to Hades?

I thought who are these people to say who is getting into Heaven and who is not? I thought of the story of Joan of Arc, who, when she was being burnt at the stake, was asked the question of whether she would go to Heaven.

Her response? “If I am not, may it please God to put me in it; if I am, may it please God to keep me there.” In other words, it is God, not man, who decides who gets to pass through the gates of Heaven. So, how could groups like AFA even hint that gays were doomed to hell? This smacked of the politics of man, not the divine mercy of God.

Then there was the fact that the gay issue had become over simplified — a sure sign that some facts were missing. Where was the Biblical authority for the condemnation that all homosexuals were to bury in the fires of Hell? In order to answer that question, I decided to take an in depth study of the Bible to determine if what these conservative theologians were preaching was sound.

As I studied the Bible, I found that the word “sodomite” that was used in Corinthians and Romans referred not to all homosexuals, but largely to the promiscuous behavior of the Roman/Greek bathhouses and the use of boy prostitutes.

Take for instance, 1 Cor. 6:9-10, a verse commonly referred to support the argument that all forms of homosexuality are immoral. As I understand it, the Greek word translated as “boy prostitutes” may refer to catamites, i.e., the boys or young men kept for purposes of prostitution and the term translated for “sodomites” refers to all homosexual males who engaged in such practices with such boys. In other words, the condemnation of homosexuality in that passage, thus, refers only to homosexual males who engage the services of boy prostitutes — it is a very narrow definition.

To argue that this verse condemns all homosexuality ignores the true meaning of the words used. Rather than embrace the true meaning of the words and explore the possibility that some homosexual conduct may be permissible, such as that between two consenting adults, fundamentalists have opted to hijack this verse and fill in the gaps with the wisdom of the world. In other words, the definition was not as broad as many fundamentalists would argue, thus it left a huge opening as to whether gays in a committed relationship would be damned to hell.

How could preachers preach such vehement messages towards gays when it was clear that the Bible was unclear at best, and silent at worse, on the issue? Why recklessly condemn a group of individuals? Why fixate on them when your congregation is knee-deep in divorce (Jesus had some pretty clear words on that issue)? And as for gluttony, how can preachers lecture gays on restraint, when churches host pot luck dinner after pot luck dinner, and not be deemed hypocritical?

It was this hypocrisy that caused me to open my eyes.

The whole gay issue is no longer about the quest for the Truth; it is about fear and loathing. It is about shame and sorrow. It is anything but Christian.

Way to go, Joe! Now, about your “pro-life” stance…

I cant really say why, but this video made me laugh uncontrollably.

Via Boing Boing.

Dr. Eric Keroak (the completely unqualified and idiotic anti-choicer Bush appointed to oversee federal reproductive health programming) has resigned! Hallelujah!

Update! Let Bush know that Americans wants Keroack’s replacement to support contraception and reproductive justice.

(And yeah, I’ve seen the South Park episode).

San Francisco is the first city in the U.S. to ban killer plastic bags.

San Francisco’s board of supervisors - the equivalent of a city council - voted 10 to 1 in favour of the ban, which would oblige supermarkets with annual turnover of more than $2m (£1m) to implement the change within six months and pharmacies with more than five outlets to do so within a year.

The bill’s sponsors hope to see a major switch to biodegradable, compostable plastic made from corn starch as opposed to the most prevalent current kind made from oil products. Some critics worry, however, that supermarkets will resort instead to paper, which will impact the environment in a different way because of it will require more trees to be chopped down.

“We can take steps to make our economy a little more soulful in San Francisco,” the ordinance’s chief sponsor, supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, told reporters after Tuesday’s vote was taken. “We can’t sleepwalk into the future. The end of the era of cheap oil is here.” San Francisco generates an estimated 180 million plastic bags each year. California as a whole uses more than 19 million - or more than 500 per resident. Worldwide, the figure is somewhere between four and five trillion. The bags are hard to recycle, blow into trees and waterways, choke animals and birds and take up increasingly large amounts of space in landfills.

Awesome.

Maybe. Too bad the line “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex” is so damn controversial; otherwise this could all have been over with 84 years ago when the bill was first introduced to congress.

Federal and state lawmakers have launched a new drive to pass the Equal Rights Amendment, reviving a feminist goal that faltered a quarter-century ago when the measure did not gain the approval of three-quarters of the state legislatures.

“I think we’ve made a lot of people think about this and say, ‘Yes, this is the right thing to do,’ ” said Arkansas state Rep. Lindsley Smith (D), who sponsored the ERA and has vowed to bring it up again when the legislature reconvenes in 2009. “The question I get most frequently is ‘Lindsley, I thought this already was in the Constitution.’ “

It’s embarrassing that it’s not. One more reason our nation has to be ashamed.

“It has really hampered women’s ability to get fair treatment in the workplace and other aspects of their lives,” she said.

For more about this and the backwards thinking opposition (ahem, Schlafly), see this post.

This guy is collecting pictures of people holding apples if they believe that biological evolution is a reality, and lightbulbs if they believe in creationism. Once he receives a suitable number of submissions, he’ll edit them together to create an animated video. Click the link for specifics. And let’s get more apples than lightbulbs out there, people!

And, if you’re an atheist looking for something similar and aren’t already all over the Blasphemy Challenge, get on it!

I plan to send something in for both some time this week.

Via Pharyngula.

Hmm.

While I’ve been busy calling her Hillary “middle ground on abortion” Clinton, NOW has been busy endorsing her.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is just such a leader. She has a long history of support for women’s empowerment, and her public record is a testimony to her leadership on issues important to women in the U.S. and around the globe. She has eloquently articulated the need for full economic, political and social equality for women in every institution of society, taking action throughout her career — as a lawyer, community leader, First Lady, Senator and candidate for the presidency — to advance the civil and human rights of women and girls.

That is why I am proud, on behalf of over 500,000 contributing members of the National Organization for Women, to announce the NOW PAC’s enthusiastic endorsement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for president of the United States.

Uh. Okay.

Clinton certainly isn’t evil, but what on earth makes her the best candidate for feminist support? Her uterus?

Totally weird.

Check out Joy Nash’s “A Fat Rant” on Youtube. It’s great.

Via Alas.