Saturday, April 10, 2010

Where I rant pointlessly about religion and injustice

 A few things have come over my computer in the past weeks, all relating to the repugnance of organized religion.  Odd how when you spell check 'repugnance' you get 'Republican' in the list of options.  Coincidence?

The first I am sure everybody has heard about by now.  It is old news about some stupid inbred church in the stupid inbred backwoods of the cold dark state of Wisconsin.  In this place, we have a less broken priest named John Hartwig who had the indecency of suggesting that within the Lutheran church, perhaps the fundamental belief that "women should not have authority over men" might not be ok.  In response, the men men men in Authority at this particular church held a meeting to fire this infidel evildoer priest at which women were not only not allowed to vote, but were not allowed to speak at the meeting either.
"While congregational leaders acknowledge Mr. Hartwig's fine administrative skills and recognize the personal admiration many parents have for him, our overriding concern is for maintaining sound biblical doctrine and practice," Fricke's said in a written statement.
Women who wanted to ask questions at the meeting were told to write them on a piece of paper and have a man read them aloud. But some, including Hartwig's own daughter, said their questions were never read.
So fuck these people in their little dark age church.  I feel no desire for constructive criticism at this point...

Speaking of the Dark Ages, our friends at the Catholic church have risen to the challenge and provide us with two examples of just how craven and corrupt they are as an institution.

First we start with a favorite subject of the church - child abuse.  More specifically the problems that the church seems to have with priests having sex with children, and the establishment covering up the acts.  In an act of uncontrollable blovating, so brazen that even I was taken aback, the Bishop of Tenerife has taken to blaming the victims of this abuse.  From Pharyngula:

His comments were that there are youngsters who want to be abused, and he compared that abuse to homosexuality, describing them both as prejudicial to society. He said that on occasions the abuse happened because the there are children who consent to it.

"There are 13 year old adolescents who are under age and who are perfectly in agreement with, and what's more wanting it, and if you are careless they will even provoke you", he said.
 This callus, disgusting attitude provoked a response from our friends at Pharyngula which I reproduce whole cloth since I can not do better myself:
Oh, it is so hard to be a noble heterosexual man in this society, with every woman, every gay man, every child, every moist orifice, every knothole, every small animal burrow on the ground, every lemon meringue pie, every velvety wrinkle in the Pope's cassock, all just taunting and teasing and tantalizing you, begging you to stick your penis in them. And then when you finally give in and let them have what they want, despite all your insistence that you're doing it for their benefit, not yours, what do they do? They cry rape, or lock you up for child abuse, or the Vatican dry cleaning service sends you an extravagant bill.
If only they would lock these bastards up, but somehow that never gets done.

Finally we move to Baltimore where the Catholic church is suing the city claiming oppression because the city is forcing organizations providing services to pregnant women to be overt about the services they (do not) provide:
The ordinance requires that a "limited-service pregnancy center" post an easily readable sign, written in English and Spanish, stating that the center does not provide or make referrals for abortion or birth-control services. A center failing to comply within 10 days of being cited could be fined up to $150 a day.
We are talking about the sort of "services" providers who traditionally post "Pregnant, call us" signs then browbeat or delay services till carrying to term is the only option.  I say screw the church for claiming oppression about not being able to lie to people about what is (not) being provided.

As a last tiny taste, here in WI (again!) there is a sheriff threatening jail time to any sex ed teacher who talks about condoms:
The new law "promotes the sexualization - and sexual assault - of our children," Southworth wrote in a March 24 letter to officials in five school districts. He urged the districts to suspend their sex education programs and transfer their curriculum on anatomy to a science course.
"Forcing our schools to instruct children on how to utilize contraceptives encourages our children to engage in sexual behavior, whether as a victim or an offender," he wrote. "It is akin to teaching children about alcohol use, then instructing them on how to make mixed alcoholic drinks."
The sheriff Southworth, it typical spineless neocon jackoff gobldygook bullshit states:
He disputed claims by Roys and Grigsby that he was inciting fear in teachers or trying to promote his political views, saying he had an ethical obligation to tell districts his interpretation of the law.
"If I'd wanted to be ideological, I would have said in the letter you shouldn't have sex before marriage because that's the Christian perspective. I'm an evangelical," Southworth said.
What is wrong with these fucking people?   Even after it has been proven that the sort of bullhsit abstinence only education increases pregnancy and the instance of STDs, we still have $250 Million in the upcoming 5 year budget for this program.

I can take this no longer.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

I get mail

Register Today! Q2 2010 IT Security Auditor Roundtable Webinar

 Join Our Webinar:
 Thursday, April 29th, 2010
 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM ED

http://xxx.xxx.xxx/ccccccc

 Are you prepared for this changing database audit environment? Join our webinar and listen to leading audit firms discuss some of the biggest database audit challenges today and present tips that your organization can implement to ensure compliance and database security.

 Please join us!

 Register Today!

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Death from Above?

 One of the excellent legacy policies inherited by the Obama administration was the public assertion of the right of the US Government to hunt down and kill, you know, evildoers.  In the excellent tradition of using technology to distance ourselves from messy problems, the US has been (for the better part of a decade) been using unmanned drones to hunt and kill said evildoers.  Or people who look like them.  Or people near them.  Or other folks who happen to be there.  Or folks targeted by accident.  Or accidents, lies or misrepresentations.  But I digress.

Don't think that being a US citizen will help you either, since the US government is an equal opportunity killer.

Well, the ACLU got it in their heads that we as citizenry have the right to be informed about the actions of the military due to that whole "civilian control" thing, and filed a FOI in January asking about the pesky legal basis for such killings. 
In particular, the lawsuit asks for information on when, where and against whom drone strikes can be authorized, the number and rate of civilian casualties and other basic information essential for assessing the wisdom and legality of using armed drones to conduct targeted killings.
"The public has a right to know whether the targeted killings being carried out in its name are consistent with international law and with the country's interests and values," said Jonathan Manes, a legal fellow with the ACLU National Security Project.

"The Obama administration should disclose basic information about the program, including its legal basis and limits, and the civilian casualty toll thus far."
The Defense Department has ignored the FOI request and hence won the right to be sued by the ACLU.

I am dumbfounded that we are even having this discussion, but in a time and place where torture is not denied, but redefined and used on non-persons held outside of legal captivity, it should not really surprise me.  That is a topic for a much longer rant.

But the way, the quote above is from the "myfoxdc.com" web site which titled it U.S. Civil Liberties Group Questions 'Legal Basis' Of Using Drones To Kill and filed it under International News.  That pesky 'Legal Basis'.

Feh.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

MySpace takes your lunch money

Just a data point to keep in mind as we plug away in our web-bound semi-anonymous persona's: MySpace has jumped into "bulk user data sales".  This means that if you happened to post any of the following: user playlists, mood updates, mobile updates, photos, vents, reviews, blog posts, names and zipcodes for the sales period, it will be available to anybody.

For what it is worth, this does not include friend lists...

In case those Facebook and Twitter users are feeling smug abut now think again.  There is absolutely no reason why they will not do the same since anything you have ever posted - every letter and image - is owned whole cloth by the respective service provider.  It is not like something as quaint as morality has ever gotten in the way of the bottom line.

Saturday, February 13, 2010

Free Lunch

There are so many other importaint things to write about than what I am about to partake in, but my willingness to dig deep is curtailed by my tiredness.  I have work to do as well but it involves something called eigenspaces which might give you some idea as to why I am strolling along complaining to the internets...

So my Esteemed Employer, like so many other establishments, will be moving it's email infrastructure to Google.  This is not unusual and represents a growing trend for IT departments within buisness, education and government who are facing huge budget cuts and growing expectations for service and features. 

All I ask for people is to think for a moment - what will Google really get from this?  Ultimately they are a corporation driven by their shareholders desire of maximizing stock value and profitability.   "There is no such thing as a free lunch" a grumpy old Econ teacher used to say and I am wondering where this will ultimately come to rest.

Mrs. set.element has completed another day of study so perhaps we might enjoy a spot of wine.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Yumm

I have a brief respite from the snow and cold.  Back "home"...
Stopping for a beer every time my feet became tired.  One pint of "Death and Taxes" at ACME, then two pints of Red Spot at Jupiter.  Yummm.


Back home tomorrow.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

One small step...

The one major study typically touted by anti vaccination groupies has been officially retracted by The Lancet who stated that they should never have published it in the first place.
"It has become clear that several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield ... are incorrect,” the internationally renowned scientific journal said in a statement Tuesday. “We fully retract this paper from the published record.” 
About time.