The criminalization of homosexuality

The wildly homophobic right-wing would love nothing more than to criminalize homosexuality. In 2005, 45% of Mainers voted against giving people equal rights simply for being gay. This was after three attempts where a majority voted to deny people rights. It’s astounding that so many people can be, frankly, so stupid. A moment’s pause: nearly half of Maine would prefer to have the right to fire people from their jobs at Home Depot, the fire department, Wal-Mart, the grocery store, etc simply for being gay. It’s absurd. This will be a hard one to explain to the grandchildren.

As late as 2003, there was laws on the books banning sodomy. Some applied to all sodomy, some to sodomy between unmarried people, and others specifically to male sodomy. At any rate, the vast majority of these laws were designed to criminalize homosexuality. In 1998, Houston police actually arrested two men (which then led to the 2003 Supreme Court case) for having anal sex. Oh, the horrors of consensual, adult sex! Of course, some conservatives actually maintained that the government had a right to invade the privacy of one’s home in this way. Antonin Scalia, the worst legal mind in the nation, actually wrote his dissent on the basis that it would be inconvenient for other law. That’s right: sodomy should remain illegal because other case law has already been built upon that notion. It’s a terrible legal argument, but it’s a worse lie. He’s just another known homophobe.

Scalia’s dissent represents the epitome of what the right-wing social movement wants (and really, Scalia makes almost all his decisions based upon his social views, not anything remotely related to law). It wants to make homosexuality illegal. Since there are constitutional protections in the United States, however, they’ve had to move on to Uganda.

Last March, three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about “curing” homosexuals have been widely discredited in the United States, arrived here in Uganda’s capital to give a series of talks.

Rick Warren has also been involved in telling Ugandans evil lies about homosexuals, comparing them to pedophiles and other things more fitting for systematically sexually repressed priests. But it gets worse. Much, much worse.

Now the three Americans are finding themselves on the defensive, saying they had no intention of helping stoke the kind of anger that could lead to what came next: a bill to impose a death sentence for homosexual behavior.

This is about one step further than what they want. They do want homosexuals to be viewed as far, far – far – less than human. I doubt most homophobes want death, but they do want to see homosexuals stripped of all rights, of all personal liberty. There is obviously no concern for rights among these monsters. The Ugandans pushing for this bill are just the next logical step in the systematic abuse of rights as they pertain to homosexuals: They aren’t human and they do harmful things. Kill them to stop them.

The three Americans who spoke at the conference — Scott Lively, a missionary who has written several books against homosexuality, including “7 Steps to Recruit-Proof Your Child”; Caleb Lee Brundidge, a self-described former gay man who leads “healing seminars”; and Don Schmierer, a board member of Exodus International, whose mission is “mobilizing the body of Christ to minister grace and truth to a world impacted by homosexuality” — are now trying to distance themselves from the bill.

Lively, Brundidge, and Schmierer are scum. Pure scum. And, Christ, they are paranoid. Look at the Amazon description for Lively’s book.

A concise, practical guidebook for parents who wish to protect their children from pro-homoesxual indoctrination and the possibility of recruitment into the homosexual lifestyle.

He thinks there is some actual agenda to make more people gay. Despite what the fucked up right-wingers think, one does not just become gay, just as one does not just become straight. It doesn’t work like that. If religion didn’t offer such a childish view of sexuality, that would be a bit more clear to these people.

Human rights advocates in Uganda say the visit by the three Americans helped set in motion what could be a very dangerous cycle. Gay Ugandans already describe a world of beatings, blackmail, death threats like “Die Sodomite!” scrawled on their homes, constant harassment and even so-called correctional rape.

“Now we really have to go undercover,” said Stosh Mugisha, a gay rights activist who said she was pinned down in a guava orchard and raped by a farmhand who wanted to cure her of her attraction to girls. She said that she was impregnated and infected with H.I.V., but that her grandmother’s reaction was simply, “ ‘You are too stubborn.’ ”

When a nation starts treating part of its citizenry as somehow intrinsically less worthy, you get thousands of these Ugandan grandmothers.

Thought of the day

In short, there is plenty of reason to challenge religions and contest their doctrinal claims, not just as an academic exercise, but as a matter of real urgency. Atheists and sceptics should deny the authority of religious organisations and leaders to pronounce on matters of ultimate truth and correct morality. This will require persistent, cool argument, but also moments of outright denunciation or even unashamed mockery of religion’s most absurd actions and truth-claims.

~Russell Blackford

Pouring a coat of sugar

PZ Myers has a post on cancer and the quacks and filthy liars who try to take advantage of the disease.

Barbara Ehrenreich had breast cancer, and ugly and frightening as that disease is, she found something else that was almost as horrible: the ‘positive thinking’ approach to health care. People are stigmatized if they fail to regard their illness as anything other than an uplifting, positive life experience, an opportunity to examine their lives and identify what is most important to them…and also, most disturbingly, if they fail to appreciate that the attitude that they bring to the problem will determine whether they live or die. It’s the Oprah-zation of medicine.

I can’t help but think of the Andreas Moritz’s and naturopaths of the world who are genuinely dangerous to the well-being of people struggling with cancer and other diseases. Some of these people are sincere, I can grant that. But sincerity does not equate to qualified. It does not equate to safe. And in the case of someone specifically like Moritz, it’s pure charlatanry. That adds a loathsome level to the situation, but the effect is precisely the same as a naturopath or janitor or Deepak Chopra ‘treating’ the disease.

Besides, it takes effort to maintain the upbeat demeanor expected by others – effort that can no longer be justified as a contribution to long-term survival. Consider the woman who wrote to Deepak Chopra that her breast cancer had spread to the bones and lungs: “Even though I follow the treatments, have come a long way in unburdening myself of toxic feelings, have forgiven everyone, changed my lifestyle to include meditation, prayer, proper diet, exercise, and supplements, the cancer keeps coming back. Am I missing a lesson here that it keeps reoccurring? I am positive I am going to beat it, yet it does get harder with each diagnosis to keep a positive attitude.”

Chopra’s response: “As far as I can tell, you are doing all the right things to recover. You just have to continue doing them until the cancer is gone for good. I know it is discouraging to make great progress only to have it come back again, but sometimes cancer is simply very pernicious and requires the utmost diligence and persistence to eventually overcome it.”

It’s disgusting. The man is preying on vulnerable people and he knows it. There isn’t an honest bone in his body. To make matters worse, he isn’t doing a damn thing to help the cancer-ridden bones (and lungs and livers and breasts and…) of anyone. Anywhere. Ever.

I thoroughly despise these sugar-coating, money-grubbing scumbags.

Never mind, Cedric

Turns out that, in addition to updates on this being surprisingly frequent, Cedric the Tasmanian devil is not immune to the cancer afflicting his population.

Two coin-sized tumours were cut out of his face and, although it is hoped he will make a full recovery, it casts doubt on much of the research work conducted over the past two years, the BBC’s Nick Bryant reports from Sydney.

Double update update: Actually, I was getting articles from a recent blog post which had out-of-date references. Cedric proved to be a dead-end close to a year ago.

Devil cancer update

The devastating cancer spreading through the Tasmanian devil population has so far met resistance in at least one devil (Cedric), and possibly in his brother (Clinky).

Both were injected with dead tumours by scientists. Clinky produced no antibodies, but Cedric did and appears to have built-in defences against the mystery illness.

The experiments have now moved up a gear.

Researcher Alex Kriess says the pair have had live cancer cells inserted into their faces.

“They haven’t developed a tumour so far,” he said. “We injected very few cells so it might take a while until they develop anything that we can see.”

The next step is to see why Cedric may be resistant to the disease, which Jerry Coyne has deemed “can be regarded as a separate organism, genetically free to undergo independent evolution.” (The syntax is correct, but for clarity, it’s the disease that can be regarded as a separate organism.)

The most interesting aspect of all this is that Cedric comes from the side of the island not yet especially devastated by the disease. As more research is done, it will be interesting to find out if there is any sort of special history with cancer, even this specific cancer, that Cedric’s part of the island has had. That could be one driving cause behind the genetic difference to consider in addition to simple drift or geographical barriers.

Image via Jerry Coyne

Gene therapy for color blindness

How’s this for weird? This past semester I did a paper on color blindness, citing the different types, where the mutations occur, and the newest research. I was just about to post about one specific breakthrough when I got distracted by a list of the top scientific breakthroughs of 2009. As it turns out, number one has to do with gene therapy.

Two boys with X-linked adrenoleukodystrophy, a disease that ravages the brain, are doing well after French doctors gave them a gene that helps to maintain the delicate myelin coating on their nerve cells. A woman with Pachyonychia Congenita, a painful skin condition, watched one of her sores fade after doctors switched off the offending protein with a newer kind of gene therapy called RNA interference. Twelve patients who were blinded by Leber’s congenital amaurosis showed signs of recovery after getting a genetic treatment in one of their eyes. Italian researchers announced that most of the 10 patients who received gene therapy for severe combined immunodeficiency, or “bubble boy disease,” are doing very well eight years after the procedure that repaired their defenses against infection.

I especially love the implementation of RNAi. I strongly suspect its use will only increase in the coming years, especially in the fight against cancer.

Also this year, researchers at the University of Washington cured two adult monkeys of colorblindness by giving them injections of a gene that produces pigments necessary for color vision. After the treatment, the animals scored higher on a computerized color blindness test.

This one hits especially close to home. I also ‘suffer’ from color blindness, so I find it incredibly uplifting that I may not feel like I’m missing out on the things everyone else is seeing for the rest of my life. It isn’t that I can’t see color – I can – but colors become far less vibrant to me in lesser lighting. This happens to all humans, but it happens to those with color blindness sooner. I also cannot make fine distinctions, like the ones you see (literally) in the Cambridge Colour Test for color blindness. Take this for instance.

Most people will see a “6” there. I can make out some discoloration and the vague shape of a 6, but I wouldn’t be able to guess it without already knowing what to expect. I am likely deuteranomalous. It’s a pretty common type of color deficiency and it doesn’t especially affect daily life – I didn’t know I had it until 3 or 4 years ago during a routine eye exam (which I no longer need thanks to LASIK).

(And blah blah blah your monitor may suck or you may suck at coming up with a balanced coloring, so that test may not show up correctly in the first place.)

Devil Facial Tumour Disease

Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD) is a particularly nasty tumor currently afflicting Tasmanian devils. It is responsible for the destruction of around 70% of the island population. One step, fortunately, has been made through the discovery of its specific cause.

The research collaboration, led by Australian scientists, has found that DFTD originates from cells called Schwann cells, which protect peripheral nerve fibres.

The results have been published in the journal Science.

Through the discovery, the team has now identified a genetic marker that could be used to accurately diagnose the perplexing cancer, which has seen the devil listed as endangered and facing extinction.

What happens is that these devils – so appropriately named – tear into each others’ faces because, well, that’s what they do. They’re about as nasty as the tumor itself. This then transmits the disease from one animal to the next. The research, in fact, has shown that the tumors all share the same characteristics, thus showing that it’s essentially the same faulty genes that are getting passed around, not new, individual tumors. Once the disease is passed, a massive tumor grows on the face of the unfortunate devil. If it doesn’t die directly from the cancer first, it starves from its inability to eat with a massive growth all over its face.

Associate Professor Greg Woods from the University of Tasmania’s Menzies Research Institute said the Schwann cell find was an important step in the process to further understand the disease.

“Devils develop tumours of all different types and the genetic markers we have identified are useful for telling apart the tumours that occur in DFTD from other kinds of tumours,” Associate Professor Woods said.

The propensity for devils to develop cancer so easily is distressing. They’re like the anti-naked mole rats. I would specifically be interested in learning about the quality of contact inhibition of the devils. My suspicion is that it simply sucks.

The sensitivity of crybaby Muslims

A Somali man was shot after trying to murder a Dutch cartoonist.

A Somali man believed to have ties to terrorist groups was shot as he allegedly tried to enter the home of Danish political cartoonist Kurt Westergaard — known for his controversial depictions of the Muslim prophet Mohammad — on Friday, police said.

The man was only shot in the leg and hand and will survive, but it’s unlikely that his injuries have caused him more harm than the cartoon. Not real harm, of course. He’s just another crybaby Muslim who is demanding undue deference for his insane beliefs. He has no basis, no evidence, no good logic, no method by which to come to any sort of intellectual satisfaction for anything he seems to think (as is the case with Christians, Buddhists, Scientologists…), so he lashes out when anyone dares to confront his ideas. As is the case with those who crafted the Irish blasphemy law, he cannot handle any sort of religious criticism. He hates the idea of individual liberties and free speech. He’s a selfish, small man. The worst of it is that he’s just the cry – the whine – for religious respect embodied.

The biggest irony of this all is that Westergaard was actually criticizing people for exploiting Muhammad in order to legitimize terrorism.

The Irish Blasphemy Law

An Irish law against blasphemy goes into effect today.

It defines blasphemy as “publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted”.

It’s clearly absurd. Ireland is seeking to protect (bad) ideas and no individuals. It’s obvious that those who crafted this piece of abhorrent tyranny have no concept of personal liberty.

Fortunately, Atheist Ireland has published 25 blasphemous quotes. It seems they do have a good idea of what it means to have any liberty at all. Here are some of the better quotes.

I’ve been reading about reincarnation, and the Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fuck the Buddhists. ~Bjork

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. ~Richard Dawkins

(If defamation of religion was illegal) it would be a crime for me to say that the notion of transubstantiation is so ridiculous that even a small child should be able to see the insanity and utter physical impossibility of a piece of bread and some wine somehow taking on corporeal form. It would be a crime for me to say that Islam is a backward desert superstition that has no place in modern, enlightened Europe and it would be a crime to point out that Jewish settlers in Israel who believe they have a God given right to take the land are, frankly, mad. All the above assertions will, no doubt, offend someone or other. ~Ian O’Doherty

Taking down Big Floss

In an effort to prove that I am not a shill for Big Pharma, I present this case against the Big Floss industry.

We’re supposed to believe that we benefit from this meddling with the natural order. Really? So please explain how the human race survived just fine to this point without Big Floss. Clearly we didn’t need toothbrushes to survive and even thrive. So why, suddenly, should we be gullible enough to believe that every person should brush his or her teeth after every meal? Has there been even a single randomized controlled double blind study that proved that brushing saves teeth? No, there hasn’t.

It should be abundantly clear that Big Floss is just out to pick the pockets of rich, toothy Westerners. Think about it. Why do you think there is such a low presence of dental care in third world nations? Clearly Big Floss doesn’t want to waste its time where it can’t make a buck. Believe you me, if more of those children on those sad commercials asking for donations would smile, you would see big, full sets of teeth. And think about the very fact that people are asking for money to feed these people. Clearly they wouldn’t be asking for food if they didn’t have teeth to chew it. The proof is in the pudding.

It’s time to unite and fight the corporate conspiracy of Big Floss. No more toothbrushes, no more toothpaste, and no more visits to the dentist. Let’s live as Nature intended with no artificial colors or preservatives. Let’s care for our teeth naturally for as long as they last.

If naturopathy has taught me anything, it’s that anything which makes anyone a buck is bad and a conspiracy. Big Floss is just another example. Down with real medicine, longer lifespans, and Big Science!