What Obama says

Word from the Democratic presidential candidate on the recent announcement from Sarah Palin (among other rumors):

“Let me be a clear as possible: I have said before and I will repeat again, I think people’s families are off limits, and people’s children are especially off limits. This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as governor, or her potential performance as a vice president.

“And so I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18, and how a family deals with issues and, you know, teenage children, that shouldn’t be the topic of our politics and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that’s off limits.”

The issues here should not be “OMG her daughter is pregnant out of wedlock”, but “What are the candidates proposed policies for dealing with the issue of teen pregnancy?” That Palin’s daughter is pregnant should not be of any concern to either campaign; that Palin’s policies of an active maintenance of reproductive ignorance are manifest failures is.

(By the way, I notice I have something in common with Obama: my mother was also 18 when she had me!)

From the horse’s mouth

Here’s the other side: Sarah Palin made some policy statements in her run for governor, so we can see what to expect. She’s pro-ignorance and anti-civil rights all the way, opposing gay marriage, sex education, and reproductive rights for women. No surprise at all, I know. Here are some answers that jumped out at me:

2. Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?Why or why not?

SP: Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught.

She wants kids to be taught only what the parents believe, which is a disaster for education. It dictates that the next generation can be no wiser, barring exceptional effort from the kids themselves, than the previous. This is an angle to give religion a trump card over science, and jingo priority over history, by making it easy to prevent kids from being exposed to reality.

10. Do you support the Alaska Supreme Court’s ruling that spousal benefits for state employees should be given to same-sex couples? Why or why not?Why or why not?

SP: No, I believe spousal benefits are reserved for married citizens as defined in our constitution.

The constitution once reserved voting rights to men, and allowed people to be held as slaves. So?

And this last one is simply hilarious.

11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?

SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.

See Question 2 above. Do we really want stupid people dictating what people should learn?

Here’s another answer from Palin that suddenly has more significance:

3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

Now, are you ready to hear this?

Sarah and Todd Palin say their 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant.The couple said in a statement released by John McCain’s presidential campaign that Bristol will keep her baby.

I’m flummoxed. Here’s another personal issue that is none of the voters’ business, that will distract the media from discussing the issues, yet it speaks directly to Palin’s support for bad reproductive and educational policy.

14 more reasons to vote for Obama

By now, you must have heard that ScienceDebate 2008 had submitted a list of science and technology policy questions to our presidential candidates. So for, only Obama has answered them, while McCain has been silent (maybe he’s waiting for input from his creationist VP choice). Obama’s answers are pretty darned good, although we have to keep in mind that these are campaign promises, many of the proposals look rather expensive, and with the economy going as it is, implementation may be problematic. But the attitude is positive, at least.

Obama recognizes the problem that the US is a fading star in international science, and sees that the answer requires more investment in research and in science education. He sees that global warming is real, that the country must reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and that this is an economic opportunity…and a research opportunity. He sees that our national security benefits from technology. He has the right idea on the importance of genetics and stem cell research, and is going to lift the ban on creating new stem cell lines.

His answer on what he’s going to do to improve education contain many good ideas, too, including a specific education committee within the Office of Science and Technology Policy (which advises the president — we also need such an office for Congress).

I’ll give him a thumbs up on this one, with some reservations that maybe he’ll address later. In particular, I can’t help but notice that in all the general discussion about better science education, not once is a major stumbling block, evolution, mentioned. I hope this is just a small specific oversight in an admittedly general policy survey, and that there isn’t any aversion to the “e” word.

Now I really want to hear what the Republican answer to these questions might be. Perhaps after the convention this week McCain/Palin will get around to it?

Moore screws up

Michael Moore, in an interview with Keith Olbermann, joked that “This Gustav [the storm heading towards the Gulf Coast] is proof that there is a god in heaven”. Yes, he was joking, and he was laughing, and we all know that it is not proof and isn’t even evidence of such a thing, so it’s somewhat different than when some fundagelical preacher tries to use calamity as a sign from god…but it’s not that much different. It’s tasteless to laugh as people are frantically trying to prepare for another dangerous onslaught.

Can we agree that it is ironic, but not funny, please? Moore’s written comments on the subject are much more appropriate; his television appearance hit precisely the wrong note.

Shame on Minnesota

My state is practicing anti-democratic, anti-liberty tyranny right now.

Protesters here in Minneapolis have been targeted by a series of highly intimidating, sweeping police raids across the city, involving teams of 25-30 officers in riot gear, with semi-automatic weapons drawn, entering homes of those suspected of planning protests, handcuffing and forcing them to lay on the floor, while law enforcement officers searched the homes, seizing computers, journals, and political pamphlets. Last night, members of the St. Paul police department and the Ramsey County sheriff’s department handcuffed, photographed and detained dozens of people meeting at a public venue to plan a demonstration, charging them with no crime other than “fire code violations,” and early this morning, the Sheriff’s department sent teams of officers into at least four Minneapolis area homes where suspected protesters were staying.

This is a disgrace. I’d like to think this kind of political thuggery would come to an end if Obama were elected, but of course this is being done to ‘protect’ the Republican National Convention, and the tactics were just as bad in Denver.

Surprise! McCain doesn’t persuade me to switch my vote with his VP choice

So McCain has picked Sarah Palin as VP. Supposedly she has some credibility as a good choice for dealing with energy issues, but near as I can tell she’s of the drill-in-marginal-areas school, not someone who’s going to pursue alternative energy sources, and is going to be a favorite of the oil companies — Dick Cheney with a less evil face. Worst of all, from my perspective, she also has a history of pandering to creationist ignorance, promoting the bogus ‘teach the controversy’ nonsense in the absence of any real scientific controversy.

Guess I won’t be voting Republican this year.

Don’t vote for Dole in North Carolina

Every time I see the disregard the Democratic party shows for secular values — which is painfully frequent — I wonder why the heck I’m even voting for these addled con artists. But then the Republicans remind me by showing up and being even worse. The latest is from the Elizabeth Dole campaign in North Carolina, which has decided to vilify her opponent, Kay Hagan, because she dares to actually meet with atheists. How horrid! Hagan has probably got godless cooties now. Here’s what a Dole press release says, expressing disgust that Hagan is actually going to meet with the Secular Coalition for America.

“Kay Hagan does not represent the values of this state; she is a Trojan Horse for a long list of wacky left-wing outside groups bent on policies that would horrify most North Carolinians if they knew about it,” [Communications Director Dan] McLagan said. “This latest revelation of support from anti-religion activists will not sit well with the 90% of state residents who identify with a specific religious faith.”

Fair enough, actually. It does represent a difference in values: that Hagan may not be an atheist but is willing to speak with them says one thing about her values, and that Elizabeth Dole thinks atheists are un-American says something else about her values. It also says a lot about Dole that she is willingly affiliated with the party of bigotry and incompetence, the Republicans. These are choices made by candidates that are legitimate issues to help voters decide who they should elect.

It says to me that people should vote for Hagan, or almost any other Democrat, over almost any other Republican.

The right of the people to peaceably assemble

The Democratic National Convention is going on in Denver, and I’m really not at all interested in what’s going on inside the convention center: it’s a bunch of people saying feel-good platitudes to get themselves elected, all studiously avoiding saying anything substantial that might annoy a voter. It’s much more interesting to see what’s going on outside the convention, where people are trying to make their real opinions heard. That is actually a bit troubling.

[Read more…]

Two tactics for dealing with religidiots

An elementary school in Missouri has been allowing the Gideons to distribute bibles to students on their lunch hour. It’s crazy stupid, a clear violation of the separation of church and state (not that fundie churches care about that anymore). Fortunately, Americans United is on the ball.

In its brief, AU asserts that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that school district promotion of religion puts pressure on nonbelievers or dissenters and is unconstitutional.

“In the cafeteria, students who choose to take Bibles and those who choose not to will be visible to much, if not all, of the student community — a prospect made more likely given the school’s small size, 427 students,” the brief said. “Any child visibly ignoring the availability of the Bibles or returning to class empty-handed will stand out to his peers and thus feel pressured to take a Bible.”

The Gideons distribute the Bibles “to encourage the children to accept Christ as their personal savior.” The Bibles distributed at South Iron also include a place for students to sign under the written statement: “My Decision to Receive Christ as My Savior.”

That’s a sound, frequently-used strategy. May I suggest another? Next time the Gideons invade the school, dispatch a crack team of radical atheists to the lunch room to:

  • Show students where the racy/violent parts of the bible are.

  • Teach them how to fold an origami pigasus from the pages.

  • For students with less dexterity, to referee paper airplane flying contests.

Let’s teach students to disrespect foolishness!