All the US is like Texas

Just like all Australia is like Queensland.

This is the story in question regarding Tegan Leach who is currently charged with procuring drugs for an abortion.

This article from the Courier Mail states that the laws that she is being charged with are actually over a century old.

Now the issue isn't "Why does Australia have such crappy abortion laws" but it's in fact "Why does Queensland have such crappy abortion laws". The issue of abortion is not a Federal issue, but a state one. In general whatever isn't explicitly stated in the Constitution as something the Federal Government is in charge of is the job of the States to deal with. That is why Marriage law is dealt with on a Federal level, but de facto relationships are dealt with on a State level.

Now to be fair, the state I live in (South Australia) actually has some rather crappy laws regarding abortion compared to other parts of Australia. Wikipedia has a nice picture summing it up here.

Queensland does not even allow abortion in rape cases.

Victoria and the ACT allow abortion on request (there might be limits I don't know about though...) and they are basically the polar opposite of Queensland in this sense.

With time, and also from the reactions that people have against those who firebomb the houses of people charged with violating the abortion laws, the view should change and Queensland should start to come in line with the rest of the country.

Crackergate

In case you don't know, it's finished.

On July 24, 2008 at 2:00 PM most likely PZ time, PZ Myers reported that he went through with his claim and desecrated a (blessed?) Eucharist, a Koran and a copy of The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.

I guess it is really over. I've been wondering if it should be called "crackergate" and a Google search shows that others have used it.

I think the -gate suffix is so overused (cross reference Iguanagate) that I think that it should only be used when something stupid comes out of it.

PZ reported recently that Michael Edmonton, of "Beware the Believers" video fame created this:



So I think that enough stupidity has come out of this to call it "crackergate".

However I would like to express my outrage.

How dare PZ desecrate a copy of The God Delusion?

That's like desecrating a copy of the Koran, or, or, or a Eucharist.

I mean how could he, what does he think he is a fundie? A joker?

I hope he dies horribly.

Take A Look At This

If you don't read pharyngula, then I think that you should either a) start to, or b) at least check out his Friday Cephalopod.

It's so cute, and yet, so deadly.

They're also the reason why I was told when I was younger to never pick up cans on the beach, they might be hiding in there to kill you.

The Catholic League Is Silly

From the Catholic League. Apparently they are pissed because PZ Myers wrote this and want him fired or reprimanded or something.

Well guess what happened to him?

Yep. PZ Myers received hate mail and death threats and so on and so forth.

I'm not going to say what Myers was thinking or not because he makes that rather clear in the first place.

People went up in arms because some guy took a "cracker" that would no doubt have tasted like cardboard anyway for some reason that it seems only he knows.

Myers wrote in the first post of his ("this") that I linked to:

So, what to do. I have an idea. Can anyone out there score me some consecrated communion wafers? There's no way I can personally get them — my local churches have stakes prepared for me, I'm sure — but if any of you would be willing to do what it takes to get me some, or even one, and mail it to me, I'll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare. I won't be tempted to hold it hostage (no, not even if I have a choice between returning the Eucharist and watching Bill Donohue kick the pope in the balls, which would apparently be a more humane act than desecrating a goddamned cracker), but will instead treat it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web. I shall do so joyfully and with laughter in my heart. If you can smuggle some out from under the armed guards and grim nuns hovering over your local communion ceremony, just write to me and I'll send you my home address.

That is what annoyed the Catholics in the US the most.

I think he had a rather relevant point to begin with.

The guy in question didn't actually do anything except not relish in the taste of cardboard.

Quick digression, on paper anyway I am a Roman Catholic, I went to a RC schools, and have been to more masses then I care to count or remember. I know what the Eucharist wafers taste like and it is not Jesus or bread.

I probably would have suggested the same thing (Except as pointed out here I thought of something far more grandiose), because the whole issue is stupid.

Ok, so yes the doctrine of transubstantiation says that it does become the body of Christ, except that testing it still shows that it is round edible cardboard. I was always under the impression that it was something of a symbol and that you had to actually believe that it was the body of Christ for it to work.

I guess I musn't have paid enough attention in RE class.

It's like the Catholic League saying this:

Myers was angry at the Catholic League for criticizing the student.

Really? It doesn't read that way, unless you consider sending death threats to the student part of the "Catholic League official criticism guidelines".

It's like trying to get Myers reprimanded because you can access his blog through the university that he works at.

Guess the Catholic League didn't read the guidelines very well then.

The guidelines only apply to pages that are hosted by them. Pharyngula isn't hosted by them so they are not responsible for whatever Myers posts at all on his own blog.

That's like someone trying to sue The Adelaide Index because my blog has a link there and I've published a copyright violation.

And on top of that Myers wasn't representing his institution on his blog anyway, all the thoughts are his. The Catholic League found a few lines of the guidelines that supported what they wanted, but they also disregarded quite a bit of other guidlines, like how the page is supposed to look.

At times like this it would be a good idea to see what Jesus has to say

Are They Getting Stupider?

I've stayed out of the PZ Myers getting kicked out of the Expelled screening while Richard Dawkins got in, but now I have more of an opinion rather then "Silly Creationists, you're acting like hypocrites".

Panda's Thumb reports that Uncommon Descent has added their own Argument from Ignorance to the whole thing.

Apparently you are not allowed to use identification which does not have your actual name on it.

This is actually assuming that Dawkins was actually registered at all. Or that he "sneaked" into a private screening.

Panda's Thumb once again shows us that the people who supposedly knows what is going on don't. Unless a public website that you can RSVP to is actually some ruse to get people to sign up to a movie that they might not be allowed to go to...

Now here is where I would like to point to many, many sites that point out that PZ was in the right but I fear that I will lose my train of thought, instead I'll let you read it from the pen (How can it hold a pen?) of a PZ Myers.

Now if you haven't bothered reading the UcD blog. I would say that the funniest part has to be:

"Dawkins was fully aware he was sneaking into a private screening to which he wasn’t invited and attempted to hide his presence by using his legal first name in the registration."

Really?


So if I were to say go to his Wikipedia page and look at what is immediately on the screen will I find that his first name is Clinton?

Hmmm...

Did you know that he was born in Nairobi?

And that he holds the Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science?

Not going to well at the moment...

What's this bolded text at the start of the article?

Clinton Richard Dawkins

Well I'll be, it is.

And the point of that rather pointless set of words that will grace the infinite internet until it blows up or I decide to delete it?

Well it's like complaining that someone used their legal first name by registering with their legal first name. I would have at least thought if there was such a problem with using your first name instead of the name you use more often there would be some law preventing you from using your actual name.

I wonder if J.E.B. Stuart ever had that problem?

Random Guy: "Uh, you're not on the list"
J.E.B. Stuart: "Yes I am, I'm right there" *points out name on list*
Random Guy: "No, that's for Jeb Stuart, the General. This says 'James Ewell Brown Stuart'"
J.E.B. Stuart: "I implore you, the name I pointed out is me"
Random Guy: "Please leave before I call the police"

It only gets stupider from here.

I could write one about L. Ron Hubbard (the "L" stands for "Lafayette")

Why is it that if it was supposedly a "private" screening that PZ Myers family, Dawkins and and assorted other group of people that were accompanying them were allowed in?

Must be a selective definition of "private" which probably means something along the lines of "Not public, as in people who appear in the movie they are trying to get in to can't enter but everyone and their dog can".

So in the end we come down to two possibilities:

1. Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers are scheming lying people who sneaked into a private screening of Expelled for mischievous purposes.

Or

2. The whole ID Movement is now in damage control because they royally screwed up and acted rather hypocritically considering their view that mainstream science supposedly censors their proponents but their actions at this one screening managed to get a story in The New York Times, and are trying to find a way to discredit the people involved who don't support their viewpoint.

I'll let you decide.

News on the Frivolous Front

If you remember the lawsuit that PZ Myers was going to go through then you should also know that nothing will happen. Through common sense and the pressure of Peter Irons in pointing out pretty much all the deficiencies in the suit.

So Pivar has dropped the suit and apparently Mr. Little, Pivar's laywer, is threatening to sue Irons for some silly reason.

All I can say is congratulations PZ Myers.

I guess that since this battle is over we should probably look at the damages for both parties:

PZ Myers

• Probably down a few dollars in legal fees
• Gained more readers (I know I have started reading his blog more)
• Held and holds the morale high ground
• Is still an excellent blogger
• Has increased the usage of the word "crackpot"
  

Pivar

• Most likely lost more money on a lawyer that doesn't seem to be very good
  
• Has now managed to get himself laughed at by the entire internet
• Would not have sold any copies of his book
• Quit the suit in a really wimpy way
• Will most likely now be known as "crackpot" for ever and ever

So as we can see PZ Myers clearly won this battle nearly all his points that are there are good ones, so we can give him +4. Pivar on the other hand has many negative points (you can see the bias...) so he gets -5. So the difference is 9, which would be say, an 'Epic Victory', in a complete and arbitrary point of view.