Bull in Chinashop of Law

Oompa, Doompa, Doompa-dee-Doo!

By yesterday morning, in fact, Mr. Bush’s arguments for keeping Mr. Libby out of prison had become an unexpected gift to defense lawyers around the country, who scrambled to make use of them in their own cases.

“The president of the United States has come in on his own and said, ‘30 months is not reasonable in this case,’ ” said Susan James, an Alabama lawyer representing Don E. Siegelman, the state’s former governor, who is appealing a sentence he received last week of 88 months for obstruction of justice and other charges.

“It’s far more important than if he’d just pardoned Libby,” Ms. James said, as forgiving a given offense as an act of executive grace would have had only political repercussions. “What you’re going to see is people like me quoting President Bush in every pleading that comes across every federal judge’s desk.”

The iphone era begins...

Isaiah Washington, dick-face. Associated Press:

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- "Grey's Anatomy" star Isaiah Washington said racism was a factor in his firing from the hit ABC series after he twice used an anti-gay slur.

Washington said he lost his "Grey's Anatomy" job partly because he was an assertive black man.

Washington, who initially used the epithet during an onset clash with a co-star, told Newsweek magazine that "someone heard the booming voice of a black man and got really scared and that was the beginning of the end for me."

He tried to make amends by expressing remorse and volunteering to enter a counseling program to understand how the confrontation got out of hand, he told Newsweek.

"My mistake was believing that I would get the support from my network and all of my cast mates across the board. My mistake was believing I could correct a wrong with honesty and sincerity," he said in the interview posted online Thursday.

"My mistake was thinking black people get second chances. I was wrong on all fronts," he said.

His unwillingness to act like a submissive black at work was part of the problem, Washington said.

"Well, it didn't help me on the set that I was a black man who wasn't a mush-mouth Negro walking around with his head in his hands all the time. I didn't speak like I'd just left the plantation and that can be a problem for people sometime," he said.

[emphasis mine]

Really? This is your message?

As a completist, I should note that iTunes 7.3 also includes a new warning notification when it is unable to find album artwork. There.

Greenwald:

That, of course, is the defining mentality of the Authoritarian Mind, captured in its purest essence by Jonah. Our Leaders are Good and want to protect us. Therefore, we must accept -- and even be grateful -- when they prevent us from knowing what they are doing. The less we know, the more powerful our Leaders are. And that is something we accept and celebrate, for our Leaders are Good and we trust that the more powerful they are, the better we all shall be.

Greg Packer, iphone-line-frontman, is a professional Man on the Street (2004 article) - he gets comments from himself into the media.

Roger Ailes: "A Field Guide to Several Men Named Beck"

I need more of these.

In Agreement

David Kuo has had enough.

I am waiting for conservative Christian activists to denounce Ann Coulter. I'm waiting and waiting and waiting and I'm waiting. This does not seem like a tough one, after all, Coulter has now publicly said of presidential candidation John Edwards she wished, "he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."

Christians involved in politics must do the hardest thing of all - they must push for their positions in such a way as to bring glory to God. If they don't do that, if they don't sublimate their politics to God something horrible happens - politics becomes their God.

History is replete with examples of how this works well - the Underground Railroad, abolition, the civil rights movement, women's suffrage - this is not one of those times. Too many conservative Christian activists are behaving as if God is subordinate to their political desires...or worse that he is simply a pawn to be used in their desires.

Ann Coulter is a perfect little example of this problem. Countless conservative Christians embrace her and groups like the so-called Family Research Council feature her at banquets. And when she says things like wishing death upon a presidential candidate the Christians say nothing at all.

Who will step forward first? A lot of people are waiting...

With all my pro-atheist talk here, I love championing the words of an evangelical christian.

Understanding the United States Now

The greatest political writer I know, Glenn Greenwald, had his new book released yesterday. I'm about 100 pages in, and I can't recommend it highly enough.

Pogue finally posts his iphone review, and I can't help giggling at pogue-style jokes:

I’ve walked around with an iPhone in my pocket for two weeks, naked and unprotected (the iPhone, that is, not me), and there’s not a mark on it.

Josh Marshall

There's a certain danger in parsing the recent legal arguments coming out of the administration, and that's crediting ridiculousness by engaging it. But anyway, follow us down the rabbit hole.

The NY Times posted an extremely irritating op-ed a few weeks back called Death By Veganism, where a "nutritionist" pointed at the child that was starved to death by his parents, and used it as a platform to blame veganism.

On Sunday, the Public Editor Clark Hoyt of the Times criticized the some aspects of publishing the piece - not for presenting an opinion, but for presenting a one-sided opinion in a topic where the other side ("vegan children can be raised in a healthy, nutritionally-conscious way") is so rarely presented.

Op-ed pages should be open especially to controversial ideas, because that’s the way a free society decides what’s right and what’s wrong for itself. Good ideas prosper in the sunshine of healthy debate, and the bad ones wither. Left hidden out of sight and unchallenged, the bad ones can grow like poisonous mushrooms.

[...]

This wasn’t the case, however, with a May 21 op-ed by Nina Planck, an author who writes about food and nutrition. Sensationally headlined “Death by Veganism,” Planck’s piece hit much closer to home than Yousef’s. It said in no uncertain terms that vegans — vegetarians who shun even eggs and dairy products — were endangering the health and even the lives of their children. A former vegan herself, Planck said she had concluded “a vegan pregnancy was irresponsible. You cannot create and nourish a robust baby merely on foods from plants.”

Her Exhibit A was a trial in Atlanta in which a vegan couple were convicted of murder, involuntary manslaughter and cruelty in the death of their 6-week-old son, who was fed mainly soy milk and apple juice and weighed only 3.5 pounds. The column set off a torrent of reader e-mail that is still coming in — much of it from vegans who send photos of their healthy children or complain bitterly of being harassed by friends and relatives using Planck’s column as proof that their diet is dangerous.

If there was another side, a legitimate argument that veganism isn’t harmful, Planck didn’t tell you — not her obligation, Rosenthal and Shipley say. But unlike the Middle East, The Times has not presented another view, or anything, on veganism on its op-ed pages for 16 years. There has been scant news coverage in the past five years.

There is another side.

When the original op-ed was published, I was so angry I could hardly write, and ended up not mentioning the piece here.

It was wonderful to see Mr Hoyt question the validity of Planck's nutritional claims.

Rachelle Leesen, a clinical nutritionist at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, told me that Planck’s article “was extremely inflammatory and full of misinformation.” She and her colleague Brenda Waber pointed me to a 2003 paper by the American Dietetic Association, the nation’s largest organization for food and nutrition professionals. After reviewing the current science, the A.D.A., together with the Dietitians of Canada, declared, “Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood and adolescence.”

Planck said she was aware of the A.D.A.’s position but regarded it as “pandering” to a politically active vegan community.

I won’t rehash the scientific dispute in a case in which Planck has her experts and the A.D.A. paper cited more than 250 studies, but I think The Times owes its readers the other side, published on the op-ed page, not just in five letters to the editor that briefly took issue with her.

I even question Planck’s Exhibit A, poor little Crown Shakur, who was so shriveled at his death that doctors could see the bones in his body. His death, she wrote, “may be largely due to ignorance. But it should prompt frank discussion about nutrition.”

Maybe, if by nutrition you mean a discussion about whether you feed a baby anything at all.

The prosecutor argued — and the jury believed — that Crown’s parents intentionally starved him to death. News coverage at the time said that the medical examiner, doctors at the hospital to which Crown’s body was taken and an expert nutritionist testified that the baby was not given enough food to survive, regardless of what the food was.

Charles Boring, the Fulton County prosecutor who handled the case, told me it was “absolutely not” about veganism. Planck and Shipley said they were aware of the prosecutor’s contention. Shipley said, “We were also aware, though, that the convicted couple continues to insist that they were trying to raise their infant on a vegan diet.”

But the jury didn’t believe them, and leaving that out put Planck’s whole column on a shaky foundation.

Glad to see this clear-headed coverage.

horseshoe crab

horseshoe crab, originally uploaded by avaDarlene.

Been a while, but I finally got another image in my flickr "horseshoe crab" feed - so here I post it, to celebrate. Thanks, aveDarlene!

Michael Stickings:

I know I shouldn't even bother asking this question, but:

What the hell's wrong with Chris Matthews?

As if his man-crush on Fred Thompson. weren't enough, his sexualization of politics came through once more, and as blatantly as ever, on his eponymous show yesterday.

"Okay, let's put the gender thing in here," he said. "I love gender politics, guys. We have two women here all the time to make sure we're balanced on this show." Fantastic. He must feel so good about himself. Some of his best friends are women, surely.

And then it got bizarre. He brought up "last supper scenes," pointing out (as if it needed pointing out) that the Last Supper -- you know, Jesus's -- was "all men". (Seriously, I'm not making this up. Check out Media Matters.) But just when you think Dan Brown was about to show up with a counter-theory, he leapt from Jesus's Last Supper to Hillary's lunches. Yes, that's right. (I'm not making this up!) Hillary Clinton's lunches, which are "all women". (Does this make Hillary the anti-Christ? Chris, you must explain. Otherwise, we'll have no choice but to call you a fool.) At these lunches, he claimed, Hillary is -- and here one imagines how threatened Chris must feel -- "advertising her sisterhood". (Say what? Yes: "advertising her sisterhood," like her campaign is one big episode of The View. Have I mentioned that I'm not making this up?)

Today's Dinosaur Comics wisdom:

Honestly, why give James Bond a gun that shoots piranhas if he's never going to fire it?

Does Tom DeLay actually believe, in his heart of hearts, that Michael Moore is afraid of him?

I would pay $50 to watch that debate on PayPerView.

This is not the NASA that brings inspiration to my heart. NASA Administrator Dr. Michael D. Griffin:

I see a day in the not very distant future, where instead of NASA buying a vehicle, we buy a ticket for our astronauts to ride to low-Earth orbit, or a bill of lading for a cargo delivery to space station by a private operator. I want us to get to that point.

Privatizing social security, who needs public schools, private "contractor" armies in Iraq...the dismantling continues.

Sadly, No!:

No, chillens, you simply cannot make this shit up. The big brains at AEI are actually debating whether the linchpin of modern biology is compatible with their bizarro political views. Coming next week: “Newton’s Universal Law of Gravitation: Does it Lend Credence to the Flat Tax?”

I'm totally fucking paranoid these days.

So, on the same day that Congress defies Bush and approves an expansion of a federally-funded embryonic stem cell bill, setting up a veto that lawmakers will most likely not overturn, an article floats around net reporting on how scientists are makin' organs an' stuff from skin!

I'm just paranoid.

From its lofty origins as a blog of chelicerata pics, ad watching, and fort greene stories, my blog devolves into PZ Meyers and Greenwald worship.

Here's Greenwald today:

It is vital to emphasize repeatedly that the havoc wreaked on this country by George W. Bush is, first and foremost, the work of America's so-called "conservative" movement, which venerated Bush to a degree unseen in the modern presidential era. Here was not a mere President, but "our" Commander-in-Chief during a Time of War, and to criticize him was to criticize America. There were multiple culprits-in-arms along the way -- principally the news media -- but the right-wing movement now seeking to re-invent itself as dissatisfied victims of the Bush presidency in search of a "Real Conservative" to lead it are the ones who bear full responsibility for the devastation this presidency has wreaked on the country.

Can I vote for him for something?

Hoffmania: "Do these jackholes really think we're not going to remember what they say from month to month?"

Vatican's going to install solar panels on the roofs of some buildings of the Holy See:

The roof of the Paul VI auditorium will be redone next year, with its cement panels replaced with photovoltaic cells to convert sunlight into electricity, engineer Pier Carlo Cuscianna said.

[...]

A feasibility study for the planned conversion, published recently in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, found it made economic sense. It quoted from Benedict's speeches defending the environment and noted that his predecessor, the late John Paul II, also championed the safeguarding of natural resources.

Cuscianna recalled a speech in which Benedict lamented "the unbalanced use of energy" in the world.

Last summer, Benedict called on Christians to unite to take "care of creation without squandering its resources and sharing them in a convivial manner." He said lifestyle choices were damaging the environment and making "the lives of poor people on Earth especially unbearable."

In other news, I love the fact that "popemobile" is an acceptable term to the AP.

The Music Had Nothing to Do With the Values

More fun from Blogs4Brownback:

You’re all heard lots of great stuff about Mitt Romney, no doubt. He’s quickly become the darling of the East Coast elite media establishment. And why not? He’s rich, handsome, successful, more stable than Giuliani, and….not all that conservative. He makes himself out to be a family values kind of guy, but if you look at the name of his pet, you’ll see that 60s hippie values still have a strong hold on him: his dog, who recently passed away, was named Marley. As in Bob Marley. As in pot-smoking, America-hating, Jamaican radical.

No offense to anyone who likes Bob Marley’s music. I like the songs No Woman, No Cry and Jammin’. But it’s one thing to listen to a man’s songs on the radio and quite another to endorse his values by naming a pet after him.

This ought to be the final nail in the coffin of Romney’s supposed appeal to social conservatives. There’s not many of us who worship “Ja” or entertain crazed conspiracy theories about the CIA.

(My emphasis)

Greenwald on the deeply depressing central myth keeping Democrats from stopping Bush's war: that "defunding the war" will somehow lead to soldiers in the field suddenly running out of bullets. He cataloged the details of the myth before, but this time he examines how a myth came to define the debate about the war.

And yet exactly this nonsensical notion was permitted not only to take hold, but to become unchallengeable conventional wisdom in our public debate over the war. The whole debate we just had was centrally premised on an idea that is not merely unpersuasive, but factually false, just ridiculous on its face. That a blatant myth could be outcome-determinative in such an important debate is a depressingly commonplace indictment of our dysfunctional media and political institutions.

But the real reason this happened is because Democrats not only allowed it to occur, but eagerly helped it. As much as anyone else, even leading anti-war Democrats such as Carl Levin and Barack Obama continuously equated de-funding with a failure to "support the troops."

Time and again, even those Democrats who supported a mandatory troop withdrawal would talk about de-funding like it was some sort of grotesque act of betrayal ("oh, absolutely not, we will not de-fund the war. We will support our troops").

For HIm Before They Were Against Him

Glenn Greenwald:

The media's function is not merely to pass on self-serving conservative propaganda but to report actual historical fact, to point out when such propaganda deviates from objective truth. The 'conservative movement' now desperately trying to depict Bush as an anti-conservative vigorously argued the exact opposite for the last six years. No account of the conservative movement's chicanery can be remotely accurate without prominently highlighting that fact. George Bush is tied irrevocably around the neck of the right-wing movement because they tied themselves to him when they thought doing so would be politically beneficial.

Actor and Reagan-Hopeful Fred Thompson:

Some people think that our planet is suffering from a fever. … NASA says the Martian South Pole’s ‘ice cap’ has been shrinking for three summers in a row. Maybe Mars got its fever from earth. If so, I guess Jupiter’s caught the same cold, because it’s warming up too, like Pluto. This has led some people, not necessarily scientists, to wonder if Mars and Jupiter, nonsignatories to the Kyoto Treaty, are actually inhabited by alien SUV-driving industrialists who run their airconditioning at 60 degrees and refuse to recycle.

(via Treehugger)

Humility

I've just realized a distinction that's been lurking in my mind recently and muddling my sorting ability. What I've been hesitant to give up in "faith" is actually humility.

And like realizing that morality isn't something that you can only get as a "special gift" with your purchase of religion, humility does not have to come through trusting that something is true without having an evidence that it is.

If I want humility - and value it in others - I can go to it and look for it directly. Humility is, in my book, one of the highest virtues of humankind.

Humility often seems attached to faith because when you have faith, you admit to your limited knowledge. Admitting to not having the whole picture is an excellent example of humility - I just don't think I need to go through religion to get it.

There's more to say on this topic. But I'm glad to have recognized that humility and faith are distinct concepts for me.

PZ wins the best headline of the week:

They were only athier, we're the athiest!

FAQ with Dawkins

Here are just a couple of questions from an interview with Richard Dawkins on desicritics:

Religious people claim they derive their morality from religion. Where from an atheist derive his morality?

Religious people do not derive their morality from religion. I disagree (with the interviewer) on this point. Almost all of us do agree on moral grounds where religion had no effect. For example we all hate slavery, we want emancipation of women - they are all our moral grounds. These moral grounds started building only a few centuries ago and long after all major religions were established. We derive our morality from the environment we live in, Talk shows, Novels, Newspaper editorials and of course by the guidance of parents. Religion might only have a minor role to play in it. An atheist derives his morality from the same source as a religious people do.

But all the religious books have given moral guidance to the people, like not killing the neighbors. Why do you think they are still bad?

The religious books do talk about not killing your neighbors, at the same time they talk about not showing skin of women or killing the infidels. The God of the Old Testament, as I described, is not at all a good 'person'. The God is certainly a lot better in New Testament. However, when you pick and choose the good verses out of a religious book, the parameters, those you use, does not certainly come from the religion itself. For example, when you say New Testament is better, you are certainly not using Christianity as a judge. The parameters you use, are the effect of the morality that is already with you, assimilated from different sources in your life time.

Reason #4421

The internet exists for showing the Flinstones hawking Winston cigarettes.

Doo d'doo...Saturday afternoon, toasty hot, and I'm all "Wha?"

At least one U.S. warship bombarded a remote, mountainous village in Somalia where Islamic militants had set up a base, officials in the northern region of Puntland said Saturday.

The attack from a U.S. destroyer took place late Friday, said Muse Gelle, the regional governor. The extremists had arrived Wednesday by speedboat at the port town of Bargal.

What's with that? Perhaps the US Secretary of Defense can shed some light.

At an international conference in Singapore, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters who asked about the Somalia reports on Saturday, "Frankly, I don't know exactly what was going on. I've been on the road. And I wouldn't be commenting on operational activities anyway."

Aww, no worries. I'm sure it was a good idea.

Nightmare!

Tailless Whip Scorpion

Tailless Whip Scorpion, originally uploaded by Destinys Agent.

So beautiful. Destinys Agent has a few more pictures of his new pets on his flickr page.

Brownback, Theocrat

I'm so in awe of PZ Meyers' marvelous post yesterday in response to the Brownback "Evolution" op-ed that I am posting some of my favorite moments from it here:

I know the scientific method. Faith isn't in it, or anywhere near it, although you could make a good case that doubt and suspicion are everywhere in it. The scientific method is a tool to counter faith and intuition and other such misleading biases that investigators bring to their research.

There is also some confusion about what faith can accomplish. I reject faith, yet somehow I have value and meaning in my life, I feel empathy for those who suffer, and I love. I do not need your dogma to understand those matters. I do so by observing my own life, the lives of others, the consequences of actions on people—by considering just the material world, not assuming an irrelevant supernatural one.

And in response to Brownback's "Biologists will have their debates about man's origins, but people of faith can also bring a great deal to the table," he says:

Name one thing of value that "people of faith" bring to the table. One thing. Make sure it's something that people of reason do not bring.

This is the heart of it. Not that "people of faith" are somehow lesser, per se, than people "without" faith, but that both are equally able to make ethical choices and believe in compassion for their fellow human beings.

Sam Brownback Is Muddled

Update 5pm: I wrote PZ Meyers about this op-ed this morning, telling him I was looking forward to hearing his comments. Witness the master.



Sam Brownback, GOP candidate for president, writes an excruciatingly irritating op-ed in today's Times, trying to explain why he raised his hand at the first debate when the candidates were asked if they "believe in evolution." It's a textbook example of watery evolution/faith muddiness, of political doublespeak.

Saying it to make it true? Check.

The heart of the issue is that we cannot drive a wedge between faith and reason. I believe wholeheartedly that there cannot be any contradiction between the two. The scientific method, based on reason, seeks to discover truths about the nature of the created order and how it operates, whereas faith deals with spiritual truths. The truths of science and faith are complementary: they deal with very different questions, but they do not contradict each other because the spiritual order and the material order were created by the same God.

The scientific method, based on reason, seeks to discover truths about the nature of the created order and how it operates, whereas faith deals with spiritual truths. The truths of science and faith are complementary: they deal with very different questions, but they do not contradict each other because the spiritual order and the material order were created by the same God.

Use of the nonsense term "microevolution" and strawmanning evolution? Check.

The question of evolution goes to the heart of this issue. If belief in evolution means simply assenting to microevolution, small changes over time within a species, I am happy to say, as I have in the past, that I believe it to be true. If, on the other hand, it means assenting to an exclusively materialistic, deterministic vision of the world that holds no place for a guiding intelligence, then I reject it.

Misunderstanding evolution as producing things by "chance?" Check.

The most passionate advocates of evolutionary theory offer a vision of man as a kind of historical accident. That being the case, many believers — myself included — reject arguments for evolution that dismiss the possibility of divine causality.

Ultimately, on the question of the origins of the universe, I am happy to let the facts speak for themselves. There are aspects of evolutionary biology that reveal a great deal about the nature of the world, like the small changes that take place within a species. Yet I believe, as do many biologists and people of faith, that the process of creation — and indeed life today — is sustained by the hand of God in a manner known fully only to him. It does not strike me as anti-science or anti-reason to question the philosophical presuppositions behind theories offered by scientists who, in excluding the possibility of design or purpose, venture far beyond their realm of empirical science.

"Small changes that take place within a species?" How can you POSSIBLY sensibly draw that line. That's pathetic.

I'm continuing to understand better why Sam Harris has such anger for the religious moderate position, as it seems to much more intellectually dishonest. Just saying you don't want there to be a contradiction between things doesn't make that contradiction go away. Science class is where we say we only believe things that we can prove. We don't decided what we believe and then pick and choose facts to support that prior decision. We go where observations lead.

Sure, that's not all there is to the world. We don't do this in English class. We don't do this in music. You don't have to do it in Sunday School.

Continuing on...

False dichotomy? Check.

Biologists will have their debates about man’s origins, but people of faith can also bring a great deal to the table. For this reason, I oppose the exclusion of either faith or reason from the discussion. An attempt by either to seek a monopoly on these questions would be wrong-headed. As science continues to explore the details of man’s origin, faith can do its part as well. The fundamental question for me is how these theories affect our understanding of the human person.

But always hidden under all this talk about "Some of my best friends are reason" is the fact that he fundamentally rejects the most basic guideline of science - that there are no a priori truths. Brownback reveals that for him, science is a tool to prove the conclusions he has already reached: man's "unique and intended place in the cosmos." That is not science, that is not reason, and that means he does not understand the significance of evolutionary theory.

The unique and special place of each and every person in creation is a fundamental truth that must be safeguarded. I am wary of any theory that seeks to undermine man’s essential dignity and unique and intended place in the cosmos. I firmly believe that each human person, regardless of circumstance, was willed into being and made for a purpose.

And then Brownback just lets loose with it. He says it outright. If science confirms what he already believes, he's cool with it. Otherwise, it's false - it's "atheist theology posing as science." My dear, what the fuck do you think science is?

While no stone should be left unturned in seeking to discover the nature of man’s origins, we can say with conviction that we know with certainty at least part of the outcome. Man was not an accident and reflects an image and likeness unique in the created order. Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as an atheistic theology posing as science.

A stunningly revealing post about the mind of Sam Brownback.

Crooks and Liars:

These paragraphs, from an article in The Politico yesterday, are so common they barely register anymore.

Giuliani has tried to appeal to social conservatives, embracing their agenda by pledging to appoint “strict constructionists” to the Supreme Court, using Justices John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr. as examples. Conservatives expect “strict constructionists” to determine that the Constitution does not mandate abortion rights.

But, like Dwight Eisenhower’s in 1952, Giuliani’s national security stature after the Sept. 11 attacks more likely explains his continued popularity within the religious right, whose voters have long held hawkish positions on the issue. (emphasis added)

Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II. Giuliani was mayor of New York on 9/11. Eisenhower’s national security stature was earned by defeating the Nazis and helping save the world. Giuliani’s national security stature is a media creation, bolstered by clever public relations. To put the two in the same sentence is comical.

(Final bold sentence my own emphasis)

Yes he appeared on TV after the attacks, and he appeared steady. We were calmed by his presence. But it is a disgrace to those who died and served on that day to let guiliani make a "presidential" or "electable" or "tough on terrorism" persona of himself on the backs of those victims.

To celebrate the new iTunes Plus DRM-free launch this morning, I bought the recently released LCD Soundsytem record, and am digging it so far. Consistently strong lyrics, like this from the title track "Sound of Silver":

Sound of silver talk to me
makes you want to feel like a teenager
until you remember the feelings of
a real life emotion of teenager
then you think again

The top service industry offering I'd rather not receive as "faith-based" is medical care.

I don't have the money for it, but if I did, pretty close on medicine's heals would be construction.

(to be fair, they seem like relatively grounded folks)

Scorpion Portrait

Scorpion Portrait, originally uploaded by Shaolin Tiger.

This photographer clearly respects chelicerata! Nicely done, Shaolin Tiger...

Wingnut Watch: So who's going to suggest that we invade Venezuela for disbanding independent media?

Does every white female actress need to remake Stand and Deliver at one point in her career?

YoYoYo

P1010251, originally uploaded by Geezitron.

"Eatin' Good - In the Neighborhood"

My Player 2

Adorable quote from one of the videogame blogs I read:

Forgive me, this has nothing to do with video games, but I still wanted to share it all with you. Last night I asked my girlfriend of two and a half years to become my wife. To accept that while I may be a huge geek and a video game addict, I will also love her for the rest of my life. She said, “yes” and made me the happiest man in the world. There is still along road ahead and many challenges to face. But now I have my “Player 2” so I know I’ll be ok.

When a WFMU DJ cleans out his "GIF-Box," you take notice.

Ann Coulter, kickin' it Coulter-style:

We fought a civil war to force Democrats to give up on slavery 150 years ago. They've become so desperate for servants that now they're importing an underclass to wash their clothes and pick their vegetables. This vast class of unskilled immigrants is the left's new form of slavery.

Happy Memorial Day, Ann!

And this headline makes me want to delete the "tech" category of feeds in my RSS reader: "MyBlogLog Gets Into Tagging"

I don't really know what this Gawker post is talking about, but I'd call it the best headline of the day: "Lead Us Not Into Penn Station"

Isn't the Internet itself already the "social operating system" of the Internet?

Slow Limbs

Whenever I see someone taking their bulldog out for a walk, it makes me think of what it would be like to take a bullfrog out for a walk.

Oligopoly Watch

This is why I read the Oligopoly Watch blog. Did you know that Nike owns Converse? Etc, etc...

Sorry to waste your time with tedious questions you've heard before, but...why the fuck do we have a government where a law changing the minimum wage has to be attached to a law that funds a war?

Does Corporal Punishment Have "Its Fascinations?"

New York Times

But for debates, a visitor goes elsewhere. The Creation Museum offers an alternate world that has its fascinations, even for a skeptic wary of the effect of so many unanswered assertions. He leaves feeling a bit like Adam emerging from Eden, all the world before him, freshly amazed at its strangeness and extravagant peculiarities.

That's all well and good for an adult journalist who views this place as a fascinating assignment, a rich depiction of a subculture. But the place seems not so quaint when you consider that children, forming their views of the world and their ability to THINK critically about the universe around them, are brought here and subjected to this tripe.

Rhetorically, this push to include science-y stuff like fossils and bones and charts is very effective for Young Earth Creationism. When your arguments kinda look like science, there's not Danger Outside the Door that you need to shield your brainwashed followers from. You've already provided them with a response to have when they see this kind of thing: "Oh, yeah, fossils. Those are from the Flood."

Watching a little 10 year-old, on the train on his way to the museum as part of a schoolgroup, in uniform. As I watch, I saw him discover, to his slight confusion, that he found it very satisfying to bounce in his seat and rhythmically slam his upper back against the hard plastic backing of the seat.

Ezra Klein:

The immigration status quo is a worst-of-all-worlds for workers, as illegal immigrants exist outside the wage standards and labor laws that help level the playing field and avoid a high-speed race to the bottom. When these workers' rights can be enforced, they will no longer be so cheap relative to native-born workers, and thus native born workers may see their other advantages -- linguistic, cultural, etc -- win the day. If you really want to screw the low-income workforce though, keep the situation static, and force them to continually compete against a workforce that's paid less than minimum wage and isn't subject to the safety standards and sundry other regulations of legal workers.

This is why it's so damn hard to make things better.

Che Prada

I shouldn't be surprised, but I still thought it was pretty gross to
see this ad in the subway this morning for some luxury housing
complex in wb: "Williamsburg: Radically Chic, Chicly Radical"

Hollow-Tipped Fleas

The new "is it or isn't it a parody?" Blogs4Brownback blog places an example of wingnut logic on the table for review. Gotta Catch 'Em All!

the good news is that each guy we kill is one less guy we have to kill. Sooner or later, the bad elements of Iraqi and Muslim
society will be gone; the people that are left will be able to enjoy the peace and prosperity we've won for them. They're going to owe us big-time, but I'm sure they'll know that, too. One thing I think we can expect from Iraq is gratitude.

Meanwhile, of course, we're going to have to do some killing. And I think we should stop tying our hands behind our backs when we go into battle. I think we need to take the bad guys out. If a few innocent bystanders get killed in the process, I'm very sorry, but that's war. They chose to live with the terrorists nearby, and when you lie down with dogs, you get fleas. If they don't want to buy it with the bad guys, they should leave. We'll let them know when it's safe to come back.

Larry Flynt: My friend, Jerry Falwell (Los Angeles Times):

No wonder that when he started hugging me and smooching me on television 10 years later, I was a bit confused. I hadn't seen him since we'd been in court together, and that night I didn't see him until I came out on the stage. I was expecting (and looking for) a fight, but instead he was putting his hands all over me. I remember thinking, "I spent $3 million taking that case to the Supreme Court, and now this guy wants to put his hand on my leg?"

Soon after that episode, I was in my office in Beverly Hills, and out of nowhere my secretary buzzes me, saying, "Jerry Falwell is here to see you." I was shocked, but I said, "Send him in." We talked for two hours, with the latest issues of Hustler neatly stacked on my desk in front of him. He suggested that we go around the country debating, and I agreed. We went to colleges, debating moral issues and 1st Amendment issues — what's "proper," what's not and why.

In the years that followed and up until his death, he'd come to see me every time he was in California. We'd have interesting philosophical conversations. We'd exchange personal Christmas cards. He'd show me pictures of his grandchildren. I was with him in Florida once when he complained about his health and his weight, so I suggested that he go on a diet that had worked for me. I faxed a copy to his wife when I got back home.

The truth is, the reverend and I had a lot in common. He was from Virginia, and I was from Kentucky. His father had been a bootlegger, and I had been one too in my 20s before I went into the Navy. We steered our conversations away from politics, but religion was within bounds. He wanted to save me and was determined to get me out of "the business."

My mother always told me that no matter how repugnant you find a person, when you meet them face to face you will always find something about them to like. The more I got to know Falwell, the more I began to see that his public portrayals were caricatures of himself. There was a dichotomy between the real Falwell and the one he showed the public.

whatchootalkingbout?

Why is Fox News calling Michael Moore's new film "brilliant and uplifting," demonstrating "a new maturity?" 

I'm totally suspicious. What's their aaaaangle here?

PZ Meyers has a remarkable, impassioned post up about "Christianity's Sins Against Science."

It never hurts to restate these points.

And no, I don't believe that anyone who calls herself a Christian is incapable of performing "good science" - that's question is distinct from this list.

It's not often I find myself face to face with a new species of nutbaggery, but Christian Domestic Discipline:
Loving Wife Spanking in a Christian Marriage leaves me speechless. A taste:

A Christian Domestic Discipline marriage is one that is set up according to Biblical standards; that is, the husband is the authority in the household. The wife is submissive to her husband as is fit in the Lord and her husband loves her as himself. He has the ultimate authority in his household, but it is tempered with the knowledge that he must answer to God for his actions and decisions. He has the authority to spank his wife for punishment, but in real CDD marriages this is taken very seriously and usually happens only rarely. CDD is so much more than just spanking. It is the husband loving the wife enough to guide and teach her, and the wife loving the husband enough to follow his leadership. A Christian marriage embodies true romance and a Christian man a true hero.

I guess it could conceivably be considered in the Purity Ball clade, in a bizarre, negative-space kinda way...

(Jesus' General was the original adventurer that discovered this new species)

You Are Already Deciding For Yourself

Everytime I read or hear about a debate between (usually) Sam Harris and some "moderate" "person of faith," the latter always shapes the debate to be about whether atheists or religious folk have done the worst stuff in history.

Hitler was atheist! No he wasn't! Einstein was religious! Not so!


But to me, Sam's most powerful argument is this:

The greatest objection to atheists that Christians tend to have is "But where is your moral rock, your moral compass? If there is no moral absolute, how do you justify your choices?" Christians fear that atheists just "make it up as they go along," and that internal choice seems oddly unsatisfying to them.

However, Sam simply points out that the sense that "religious" people base their ethics on something outside of themselves - say, the Bible - is already erroenous. That may have been true at some time in the past, but for many of those that call themselves "moderates," they are ALREADY picking and choosing from the notions in the Bible they like and those that they don't. These selections are based on nothing other than their personal convictions and internal understanding.

These people are already shaping their moral view of the universe based on their own personal viewpoint. If you pick and choose what absolutes work for you, then you are not following absolutes.

You are doing what atheists claim is our only option as living, thoughtful, moral beings. Morality can and does exist as a continuous personal choice.

(note: this position has nothing to do with fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are lost to me as humans that could ever communicate outside of their world. If you have relatives like this, just love them and enjoy your occasional dinners with them, and make sure your presidents and your doctors are not of their pursuasion)

A Long Time Ago

I'm digging this Japanese photographer Kirai, A Geek in Japan, and his full-content RSS feed. This shot he took is just one image from an anti-smoking campaign that gets into extreme detail about some objections to the habit.

Definitely click-through - they're all beautiful!

All of Roger Clemens' words about how wonderful an opportunity it was for him to be back with great manager Joe Torre seem to me a bit hollow when you consider the other perk he's getting - $4.5 million per month.

David Horowitz to Lawrence Auster: "I want you to go away Lawrence."

At Memeorandum the other day I stumbled upon an disturbingly-titled piece called "The Truth of Interracial Rape in America," by a human named Lawrence Auster. After reading it in context at a place called FrontPage, I discovered that the content lived up to the revolting suggestion in the title. He's basically saying "the liberal media is not reporting on a terrible, obvious pattern in the US, that most rapes in the US are blacks raping whites!" He ends:

Each story of black on white rape is reported in isolation, not presented as part of a larger pattern. There is never the slightest mention of the fact that white women in this country are being targeted by black rapists. In the inverted world of liberalism, the phenomenon does not exist.

But the reason I'm posting this here is what I discovered when I said "wow, who the hell is this Lawrence Auster guy?" I followed the link at the bottom of the article to his blog, "View From the Right," where the top story was "Horowitz Expels Me from FrontPage".

Now this is entertainment.

He records the events that occurred following the posting of that story on FrontPage, including his email exchanges with David Horowitz (who I guess runs FrontPage), where the latter admits to having decided to stop publishing the former's work a YEAR ago, but never told him. And then this article, about the raping blacks, slipped through because he (Horowitz) had forgotten the decision he had made.

Horowitz writes:

Lawrence you're a big pain in the ass. One article from you takes more time and energy than 50 articles from 50 writers and gets me attacked and now is getting me the third degree from you. We have had many arguments over your racial attitudes as you know. I don't think you're the kind of racist this prick Mills describes you as (and if I can find it I will send you the email I sent him defending your current piece). But I do think you have made statements that are racist. I have a million enemies out there and I don't need attacks waiting to happen by publishing your stuff. I published this piece because I forgot my exchange with Mills last year and my overall impression of your work is that it is interesting if obtuse. I forgot I guess also how difficult you are to work with. I'd like to see you defend yourself against the charges Mills is making rather than attacking me.

There's lots more, and I recommend you read the whole sequence of a few back and forth emails.

It's funny seeing a rightwinger telling an underling that he's too much of a lunatic even for him. I feel like it's a window into a mental process I've never witnessed before.

Bonus: Don't miss some of Lawrence's other articles, with fun titles like "Are We Really a Nation of Immigrants?" and "The Second Mexican War."

Large whipspider, Ecuador

Large whipspider, Ecuador, originally uploaded by artour_a.

Very nice...

About Fear. And Iran.

Tim Dickson, at Rolling Stone National Affairs Daily, writing on McCain's performance in the first GOP debate:

Reflecting his inherited political team, he debated just like Bush used to, as though he were reciting lines from a neocon Hemingway novel. Tiny sentences. About fear. And Iran. And the line item veto.

Whip Scorpion

Whip Scorpion, originally uploaded by fiznatty.

Should I start "Friday Whip Scorpions?"

Hot Women CEOs!!

What a weird promo from Fortune.

The question that I obviously don't need to ask is: Would Fortune ever post a "gallery" of male CEOs?

Nice Line-Up

Nutsiness from the GOP debate:

There were revealing moments that went past the well-rehearsed lines by all the candidates. Three of the candidates — Mr. Huckabee, Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas and Representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado — raised their hands to signal that they did not believe in evolution.

(via)

LAPD Chief Not Even Trying To Deny It

Boing Boing covers much more on the police attacks in LA against the immigration march. LAPD Chief Bill Bratton is quoted as calling the episode the worst he has "encountered in 37 years."

Something Called "Strength"

Andrew Sullivan, author of "The Conservative Soul," on the GOP debate last night:

As for foreign policy, very little nuance, very little subtlety, almost no fresh thinking. Conservatism now means simply projecting something called 'strength' rather than articulating something called strategy. On the question of thinking through the lessons of Iraq, they seemed frozen. On the question of Iran, they never seemed to include any understanding of what constraints Iraq has placed on us. Just bomb them and kill them and we'll 'win'. That was about as sophisticated as it got (with the modest exception of McCain's endorsement of Petraeus). And these people seem more aware of the Islamist threat than the Democrats. That's the state of the country and those entrusted with its defense.

Okay, Bill, Not Bad

Assocated Press: What is your favorite Reality TV show?

New Mexico Gov. (D) Bill Richardson: "Fox News."

(The rest of the responses are here)

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Fly, little number, fly!

Steve Jobs, 2/6/07:

The most serious problem is that licensing a DRM involves disclosing some of its secrets to many people in many companies, and history tells us that inevitably these secrets will leak. The Internet has made such leaks far more damaging, since a single leak can be spread worldwide in less than a minute. Such leaks can rapidly result in software programs available as free downloads on the Internet which will disable the DRM protection so that formerly protected songs can be played on unauthorized players.

An equally serious problem is how to quickly repair the damage caused by such a leak. A successful repair will likely involve enhancing the music store software, the music jukebox software, and the software in the players with new secrets, then transferring this updated software into the tens (or hundreds) of millions of Macs, Windows PCs and players already in use. This must all be done quickly and in a very coordinated way. Such an undertaking is very difficult when just one company controls all of the pieces. It is near impossible if multiple companies control separate pieces of the puzzle, and all of them must quickly act in concert to repair the damage from a leak.

It seems that the entire coverage of the Immigrant rights marches across the country yesterday was about how it was "smaller" than last year, but what about the rubber bullets that LAPD fired into the crowd to disperse the marches in LA?

CNN Transcript from ThinkProgress:

It was a dramatic and chaotic end to what was otherwise a peaceful day here in Los Angeles. … Police started to move and disperse the crowd and fired rubber bullets, dozens of rubber bullets, into the crowd. People went running and fleeing, trying to get out of their way, and there really was, there didn’t seem to be any warning. Police just took ground and moved forward and started firing on this crowd. … There were a lot of children and families at the rally, in the crowd, and I’ve got to tell you, there really wasn’t a lot of warning.

Dinosaur Comics:

Futurism was an art movement where dudes were all "CARS ARE COOL AND THE PAST IS FOR CHUMPS. LET'S DRAW SOME CARS."

Up There with Snorks

Saturday morning cartoons, better than ever...

Just a Man Talkin'

Bush today:

I invite the leaders of the House and Senate, both parties, to come down, you know, soon after my veto, so we can discuss a way forward.

[...]


“It’s good beef, it’s healthy beef,” Mr. Bush said of the American-grown product. “As a matter of fact, I’m going to feed the prime minister and his delegation a good hamburger today for lunch."

I'm giddy today cuz i just discovered that the first Cocteau Twins album was released on my birthday.

Who Is America?

Inspired by Sifu Tweety's own post on Automan at The Poor Man Institute, a little fodder for the endless question: Who or What Is America?

There is truly no end to the madness. It will continue to get worse until as a country we purge those who are misleading us and determine how they lasted unchallenged for so long.

WASHINGTON - U.S. officials who say there has been a dramatic drop in sectarian violence in Iraq since President Bush began sending more American troops into Baghdad aren't counting one of the main killers of Iraqi civilians.


Car bombs and other explosive devices have killed thousands of Iraqis in the past three years, but the administration doesn't include them in the casualty counts it has been citing as evidence that the surge of additional U.S. forces is beginning to defuse tensions between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.


President Bush explained why in a television interview on Tuesday. "If the standard of success is no car bombings or suicide bombings, we have just handed those who commit suicide bombings a huge victory," he told TV interviewer Charlie Rose.

Emphasis Mine.

(Via ThinkProgres)

I've often written about and linked to David Kuo, an evangelical who worked in the Bush Administration but became disillusioned with their hypocrisy and left. Despite our differences in religious viewpoints, I generally respect the man and his honesty and convictions. David continues to focus more on his "personal relationship with Jesus" (his blog's called J-Walking) and the idea that Christianity is primarily about Helping the Poor than the political power-grab and petty cultural war that the religious right tends to focus on.

That said, I could not disagree with a post more than this one he just posted. Denial of the reality of death is to me the source of terrible delusional motives, not a goal worth raising to a pedestal.

Innocence
My two-year-old daughter Livvy lives in a world without death. Nothing around her - save for the ants we regularly annihilate - has ever died. And even if something did die she wouldn't understand it. Death is completely foreign to her life. Life is all she knows.

Her life is, I believe, how life was meant to be. We aren't meant to be surrounded by death. It is entirely unnatural. We are born to life and oriented to life and know in our souls that we are designed to live - far beyond what we see or smell or understand. Death is the enemy, death is the stalker and even for those who wrap their lives in Jesus and know that death isn't the end, it is still the enemy.

My hope is that I can keep Livvy in her world of life for as long as possible - it is the innocence that matters most.

I suppose this is where I will always diverge from devout Christians. The difference is the Bible.

For me, all my experience of the world around me makes me think that death is quite natural, and quite a given about existence. However, if you toss in one extra element into your "experience" (say, a book that you treat as a user-manual for life, the ol' Message from the Creator) and that book tells you that death is not the end and death is not natural, but in fact is the result of sin - well, given that axiom ("death is not the end"), you must conclude that Death is not the End.

If I had a book I trusted completely that said, say, "Time Runs In Reverse, and Any Sense of Vice Versa is Result of Human Fault," I would dream of maintaining my "innocent" young child in believing that Time Ran in Reverse.

(Remember the root of Darth Vader's transformation into evil? What the Emperor dangles in front of him? Yes, that's right. I've responded to the Christian worldview by reference to a scene in the sixth Star Wars movie.)

Historical Gallup Poll:



(via ThinkProgress)

New York Times: Pentagon Challenged on Lynch and Tillman

Jessica Lynch testifies to Congress

The bottom line is the American people are capable of determining their own ideas of heroes, and they don't need to be told elaborate tales.

No, This Doesn't Help

Blogs for Bush offers this definition:

Victory in the War on Terrorism: When no State dares to shelter or support any group which uses terror as a means of attaining political goals.

How can Mark Noonan write this and not realize that this is nonsense? That it is could be no more clearly a statement that the "war on terror" will never end?

This the last time we'll define it - and that means you never need to ask us to define it again.

Therefor, all comments which ask for a definition of victory from this point on will be deleted and people who annoy us by continually asking for definitions of victory will be banned or made severe fun of, whichever we feel like doing at the moment in a very arbitrary and dictatorial manner.

No More Limbo

Roman Catholic Church:

Our conclusion is that the many factors that we have considered ... give serious theological and liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptised infants who die will be saved and enjoy the beatific vision (of God).

Note how they use language that suggests this were a rational, evidence-based conclusion.

(via Atrios)

A good roundup of the terrible things that some rightwingers have been saying about the V Tech shooting. I just don't know what to say.

McCain Thinks It's Funny

John McCain decides it's funny to sing, to the theme of the Beach Boys' "Barbara Ann":

Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran

(via ThinkProgress)

No Place In The Myths

Roger Ailes

What Reason Do You Need To Be Shown
Those searching for an explanation for the shootings at Virgina Tech are out of luck. The young man who killed his classmates was mentally ill and there are mental illnesses we cannot cure, control or understand. Human understanding, in its present state, cannot supply an answer to why such assaults occur.

Which might explain why so many wingnuts are desparately seeking (non-existent) connections between the shootings and Islam or race or co-ed dorms or depraved secular culture and the decline of 'The West.' (You've already seen those links.) Anything but mental illness. Because mental illness can't be blamed on godlessness (and, more specifically, Biblical-godlessness). In fact, in the logic of the wingnut view, mental illness, because it exists, must be part of God's plan. And because it is an involuntary infliction, it can't be explained away as a deliberate rejection of godly principles.

Of course, it's more fun to bitch about foreigners or violence in the media than to rationally address the need for more and better mental health research and treatment. Or to wallow 'inside the mind of a killer' for fun and profit (oh, if only there was a way to lure potential serial killers to the DatelineNBC house for some sexy talk with Chris Hansen!) But don't imagine you'll accomplish anything with such exercises, and don't pretend you're even trying.

Yes.

Shorter Everyone On the Internet:
The senseless massacre at Virginia Tech basically confirms everything I’ve been saying all along.

And if you don't know the "Shorter" writing concept already, follow the explanative links at the bottom.

David Kuo wrote this morning:

Turn it off today. Turn off CNN and Fox and MSNBC. Don't go surfing for more information. Don't listen to all the people talking. Don't let the media do it for you.

Oh, BibliOdyssey, how i love thee so...

Bush to NRA: Don't Worry

Associated Press:

A White House spokesman said President Bush was horrified by the rampage and offered his prayers to the victims and the people of Virginia. "The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed," spokeswoman Dana Perino said.

Glenn Reynolds illustrates one kind of reaction to the terrible tragedy at Virginia Tech this morning - the sense that it somehow results from there being not enough guns!

Sitting on a bench in a subway station this morning, waiting for my train. I notice that the young woman next to me is eating a Snicker's bar. "Hmmm, " I say to myself, "Strange how people have some wildly varying views of what's To Eat in the morning." I close my eyes and focus on the music.

A few minutes later, I open them and notice that the woman is...opening another Snicker's bar to, apparently, continue her breakfast.

USA Today

"This thing just exploded in a full-on, frontal attack," family friend Chris Thomas told the newspaper. "It jumped out of the water at her and hit her head on."

Home from Portland

Mountpanther-12, originally uploaded by The Only Ronster.

Jill and I just got back from Portland. We had a great time.

What Year Is It?

Saw a sign in the window of a laundromat last night. It read: "Dachshunds available. All immunized and microchipped."

Um, wha?

As a Biologist...

Tom DeLay pipes up:

Firstly, as a biologist I have always felt that the science behind ‘global warming’ and man-made climate change was absolute hokum, and it distresses me to see a majority of justices on our Supreme Court embrace it.

Update: I must confess that I first posted this because it cracked me up to watch Tom assume the authority of a "scientist" - like the classic Frist offering his medical opinion by watching the Terri Schiavo videotape - but staring me right in the face was his choice of branch of science! As a "biologist," he offers his view on climate change? I guess, maybe, as a stretch a biologist could consider the response that biological beings could have to climate change, but when we're talking about the evidence for the human-influence in the runaway climate changes occuring right now..? This is not the domain of a biologist.

I think he got his nonsense mixed up. What he meant to say was" I have always felt that the science behind ‘evolution’ and monkeys changing into human beings was absolute hokum..."

Ugugugugu-wha?

Sometimes it feels like there just need to be separate countries.

This excerpt is from an interview with Sam Harris ("The End of Faith") and Rick Warren ("The Purpose-Driven Life") in Newsweek this week. I applaud Sam for his patience in the interview. But MY, sometimes it just feels like it's not worth trying to explain this stuff to someone who's not listening.

HARRIS:I am terrified of what seems to me to be a bottleneck that civilization is passing through. On the one hand we have 21st-century disruptive technology proliferating, and on the other we have first-century superstition. A civilization is going to either pass through this bottleneck more or less intact or it won't. And perhaps that fear sounds grandiose, but civilizations end. On any number of occasions, some generation has witnessed the ruination of everything they and their ancestors had built. What especially terrifies me about religious thinking is the expectation on the part of many that civilization is bound to end based on prophecy and its ending is going to be glorious.

WARREN: I believe that history split into A.D. and B.C. because of the Resurrection. And the Resurrection is not only the resurrection of Jesus Christ, it is the hope of the world: it says there's more to this life than just here and now. That doesn't mean that I do less, it means that this life is a test, it's a trust and it's a temporary assignment. If death is the end, shoot, I'm not going to waste another minute being altruistic.

HARRIS: How do you account for my altruism?

WARREN: You have common grace. Even in people who don't believe in God, there is a spark God has put in you that says, "There's got to be more to life than just make money and die." I think that that spark does not come from evolution.

It's like in a science fiction movie when you discover that your friend has been "assimilated" or turned into an android. I would die of despair to be continuously confronted with this viewpoint.

That all said, I am incredibly grateful to Rich and Sam both for agreeing to sit down and discuss this, and for giving each other (at least as it was transcribed) and opportunity to respond. I recommend you read the whole thing.