Politics

From the December 2, 2006 issue of The Economist (subscription required for full article): Gay marriage is legal in Belgium, Canada, Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, and the U.S. (Massachusetts). Gays have the same rights as married heterosexuals, but only in civil unions or partnerships rather than marriage in Britain, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the U.S. (California, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont). Gays have civil unions or partnerships with lesser rights than heterosexual marriage in Argentina (1 state), Czech Republic, France, Germany (3 states), Hong Kong, Ireland, Luxembourg, and the United States (Hawaii, Maine). UPDATE (December 18, 2006): Stephen Frug has pointed out that even in U.S. states which have legal gay marriage or legal gay civil unions, they are still not equivalent to marriage, in part because of the U.S. federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed into law by Bill Clinton. As a result of a provision in this law, the spouse of former Rep. Gerry Studds (D-MA), the first openly gay federal lawmaker, has been denied his pension benefits. UPDATE (December 19, 2006): The December 9 issue of The Economist (p. 66) points out that the inclusion of Hong Kong on the list of countries with gay civil unions is a mistake. Hong Kong “is reviewing its laws in this area,” but doesn’t currently allow them.

After a year of careful analysis of Judge Jones’ decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, the Discovery Institute has determined that the Judge made considerable use of the plaintiff’s Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law when writing the section on intelligent design as science in his decision for the plaintiff. Somehow, they think that this common practice of using the Proposed Findings of Fact from the winning side in crafting a decision makes Judge Jones a puppet of the ACLU, even though he’s a conservative justice appointed by George W. Bush. The Discovery Institute has issued a press release touting their findings as though it discredits the decision’s reasoning. This press release demonstrates that they are still smarting over the loss in Dover, still spending their time doing things that have nothing to do with scientific research, and that they have as much credibility on legal matters as they do on scientific matters. More by attorney Timothy Sandefur at the Panda’s Thumb. This press release by the DI was telegraphed by a talk given by Michael Behe earlier this month in Kansas. UPDATE (December 13, 2006): Ed Brayton analyzes the DI report in more detail, including responding to its claims that Judge Jones incorporated “errors” from the ACLU into the decision. UPDATE (December 14, 2006): More responses: Timothy Sandefur, “Is John West Dishonest or Just Ignorant?" and “Casey Luskin–Not Too Bright” at the Panda’s Thumb. UPDATE (December 20, 2006): Wesley Elsberry has looked at how much of the plaintiff’s Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law was actually used in Jones’ decision (and how much of that section of the decision came directly from the plaintiff’s filing). Ed Brayton summarizes at Dispatches from the Culture Wars. Casey Luskin has attempted to respond with a defense, but as Ed Brayton shows, he just keeps digging a deeper hole.

A school in Virginia was threatened with a lawsuit by the Christian legal group Liberty Counsel if they didn’t permit a Baptist church to send home flyers with students. The school permitted this to happen, and in order to comply with the First Amendment, they permitted other religious groups to do the same. Now that a local Unitarian Church has sent home a flyer advertising a look at the history of December traditions (apparently including the contributions of Christianity, Judaism, and pagan religions) and “a Pagan ritual to celebrate Yule,” there is outrage. It’s hypocrisy to suggest that gays who seek to be able to marry and not to be fired because of their sexual orientation are demanding “special rights,” while actually demanding that one religion be given special privileges that others must be denied. That hypocrisy is on display at the WorldNetDaily. There are two reasonable, constitutional policies for the school–permit all religious groups to submit flyers for distribution, or not permit any of them to do so. (In my opinion, schools shouldn’t be sending home anything with students that isn’t from the school itself.) More at Dispatches from the Culture Wars.

(Via Bitchasaurus.)

The Republicans dumped the job of straightening out the government’s remaining spending bills for 2006 on the Democrats, who have responded by declaring that they will remove all of the earmarks from them: "‘There will be no congressional earmarks,’ Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., said Monday in a statement announcing their plans, which were quickly endorsed by incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev."Looks like the Democrats are, for the moment, going to be more fiscally responsible than the Republicans. Not hard, given how the Republicans have spent money while they’ve been in power, but this is great news.

A former House page who was sent an instant message by Mark Foley asking him his penis size forwarded it to Arizona Rep. Jim Kolbe back in 2001. When the scandal broke, that former page called Kolbe and asked him what he should do. He says Kolbe told him that “it is best that you don’t even bring this up with anybody…. There is no good that can come from it if you actually talk about this. The man has resigned anyway." The House ethics committee found out about it anyway, prompting Kolbe to call the former page and leave a message saying, “it looks like you did some talking." More detail and excerpts from the House ethics committee report at TPM Muckraker. UPDATE (December 9, 2006): Here’s Kolbe’s response.

The “Campaign to Defend the Constitution,” or “DefCon,” describes itself as “an online grassroots movement combating the growing power of the religious right. We will fight for the separation of church and state, individual freedom, scientific progress, pluralism, and tolerance while respecting people of faith and their right to express their beliefs." They just sent out a mailing calling for people to ask Wal-Mart to stop selling the game “Left Behind: Eternal Forces." What Wal-Mart sells in its stores is irrelevant to defending the U.S. Constitution. The fact is, this is a crappy game that won’t sell well, despite some initial media attention due to its absurd premise. As GameSpot reviewer Brett Todd observes (in a review that rates the game 3.4–bad–on a scale of 10), “Don’t mock Left Behind: Eternal Forces because it’s a Christian game. Mock it because it’s a very bad game." Let the market handle this one, DefCon, and stick to issues that actually have relevance to your mission. Giving it more attention and treating it as a threat is likely only to sell more copies. UPDATE (December 13, 2006): DefCon’s campaign has successfully created more media coverage for this game. UPDATE (March 21, 2007): Looks like the market has spoken. Left Behind Games’ stock peaked at $7.44 in November and closed today at $0.31 (up from $0.18 yesterday). Their financial auditors’ 2006 report questioned their “ability to continue as a going concern." UPDATE (October 9, 2007): Left Behind Games is now sending out cease and desist letters to bloggers who have given the game negative reviews. (And their stock closed today at $0.11.) ...

Mike Newdow, the atheist doctor/lawyer who has been working a new case regarding the Pledge of Allegiance up to the Supreme Court since the Court sidestepped the key issue in the case last time around, has put together a song and video about the presidential oath of office and “so help me God” being appended to the end of it. He’s also recently had an article printed at WorldNetDaily responding to former Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore about whether “In God We Trust” on money violates the First Amendment (hat tip to Ed Brayton). Here’s the video:

Declan McCullagh reports on the FBI using remote activation of cell phone microphones to eavesdrop on nearby conversations. He comments on a few models that are particularly vulnerable to exploitation: Nextel and Samsung handsets and the Motorola Razr are especially vulnerable to software downloads that activate their microphones, said James Atkinson, a counter-surveillance consultant who has worked closely with government agencies. “They can be remotely accessed and made to transmit room audio all the time,” he said. “You can do that without having physical access to the phone."Nextel says that they didn’t participate in the eavesdropping on a couple of mobsters who were allegedly listened in on using this technique–both using Nextel cell phones. The same story reports that a 2003 lawsuit revealed similar monitoring of conversations occurring in cars featuring OnStar. UPDATE (December 5, 2006): Bruce Schneier has commented on this story, and his readers have some interesting comments.

In five parts: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Also see these resources and Matt Taibbi on 9/11 conspiracy theorists. qwertyxyz (2007-01-15): The guys from popular mechanics kicked their asses! If i was one of the guys from loose change i would be ashamed of myself from that ass kicking. Their only defense was by cutting into what the popular mechanics guys where saying with stupid "oh yeahs" and shit like that. They are a couple of guys from who the hell knows where vs some of the smartest people in America. 8====D----- All over loose change! ...