The View from Number 80

Fox Hunting - when it comes to impartial, fair and balanced news reporting one name that certainly does not spring to mind is Rupert Murdoch's Fox News. This is not just 80's opinion, but one that is shared by many folk - including Sam Kimery. He has invented the "FOX Blocker" a nifty little gadget that you can fit to your TV to keep it clean of that particular contagion. It appears that Kimery, along with most rational, sentient beings decided that Fox news output was right-wing propaganda, a view also shared by FOX Blocker co-founder Joshua Montgomery. He states "We don't believe in censorship." on the Blocker website and adds "I don't have a problem with FOX News. If they would just come out and say that it is rightwing news for right wing nuts (wingnuts) we will take this site down and move on." An added kicker when you buy a FOX Blocker is that "With every order placed, FOXBlocker.com will send an e-mail in your name to the TOP 10 advertisers at FOX News letting them know that yet another subscriber has opted out of FOX News. With a little luck and a lot of volume, we can shut the FOX up!" Naturally this has upset the fair-minded, impartial and balanced individuals who get their worldview from Fox. Montgomery answers them thus,"All you hate mailers out there (750 or so today) quit sending me "CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NPR and the BBC are left wing liberal hippies......." without EVIDENCE. If you are going to send it, send it with FACTS......Just saying it makes you sound like the stupid, ignorant, uneducated hillbilly you are." Neither Kimery or Montgomery are making any money out of this - they just want to make a point - any profits, should they materialize, will be donated to FAIR.org, MediaMatters.org or Lawrence Freenet. If you have $8.95 burning a hole in your pocket get a FOX Blocker and send a message to Fox.

Miracle Babies - the long-running saga continues. Now the latest twist in the Gilbert Deya Miracle Babies scandal involves Deya's right hand man in the UK, pastor Benjamin Mensah, who stoutly defended Deya when the accusations of baby-smuggling started flying. Now it seems that Mensah has had enough of trying to defend the indefensible and has resigned from Gilbert Deya Ministries. Deya is reported here in the East African Standard as showing little Christian charity toward his former deputy saying "...good riddance as he had been a disgrace to the Church". He went on to say "I'm not interested in fighting wars through litigation. I'm a man of God and there is nothing to worry about." The only real mystery in all of this is why this "man of God" is still in the UK and not deported to Kenya where the police are anxious to talk with him about his activities.

A Glass Cathedral - it is a well-known truism that in a debate or dispute when one party begins comparing the other to Nazis any rational discussion flies out of the window and the discourse deteriorates into abuse. Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, in attacking women's right to choose in the matter of abortion has unwisely chosen to play the Nazi card. Unwisely because it not only illustrates the poverty of his argument but also because it brings the focus sharply onto the history of his own church. The Roman Catholics at the top of the hierarchy have always been known for their often cosy relationship with fascists - unlike many priests at the lower end of the scale who suffered for their opposition to oppression. Whether it was accommodating Hitler, Mussolini, Franco or more recently, criminals such as Augusto Pinochet the Roman Catholic church with its unelected and authoritarian hierarchy has shown an affinity for repressive fascist governments. Murphy O'Connor, who is already damned in 80's eyes as a paedophile-shifting hypocrite, has managed to sink even lower with his Nazi mudslinging. Those who live in glass cathedrals should be very careful indeed not to start throwing stones. (For more on the Catholic churches links with political authorities this page makes interesting reading.)

Begging Voice - a bigot rattles the collecting box for your money. Not much, just a mere £75,000, in order to allow Christian Voice (CV) to pursue its blasphemy case against the BBC for showing Jerry Springer - the Opera. So goes a begging letter, (in pdf) that can be downloaded from the CV website (and kindly made available in html by Mediawatchwatch. The writer, the sainted Green the Baptist himself, even tries to answer a question that 80 (and many many others) has asked about his protests, which is "Can't God look after Himself?". Green thinks not, although he feels obliged to say "In truth, God could have struck the BBC electrical system with a thunderbolt as we prayed. He chose not to." How does Green know this? Did the old boy tell him personally? Perhaps the big G is saving his thunderbolts for Green himself, to punish him for his arrogant assumption that he speaks for the deity. No, Green has a different answer, but equally silly. "I believe God is generous enough to involve ordinary believing men and women, with all our weaknesses, in His purpose. He wants us to share His victory. He graciously desires fellowship with us." Including such weaknesses as the aforementioned arrogance. On the subject of arrogance, Green has something to say about it himself, in response to his own rhetorical question " Shouldn't we just forgive those responsible for Springer?" He pays lipservice to the idea of forgiveness for, after all, " I dearly want my trespasses forgiven!" (These no doubt would be the trespasses of homophobic bigotry and bullying a cancer charity, to name just a couple.) What he is actually saying is that we should forgive those who trespass against us,  not out of kindness or understanding but for our own benefit, "...not least because only then will God forgive us our trespasses." So, you forgive only in order to be able to get away with (be forgiven for) some trespasses of your own. How very moral. But the twist comes when Green says that we can forgive those who have slighted us, but not those who have slighted others. For "...when that sin is against the Lord Jesus, what arrogance it would be for us to forgive on His behalf!"  And what arrogance it is to condemn on his behalf. Let's be optimistic, this could be a breakthrough - Green at least understands the concept of arrogance - given enough time he may even realize just how much it applies to him and his crude and offensive zealotry. Meanwhile, in the real world, the BBC governors have vindicated the producers of Springer the Opera - although irritatingly this report still repeats the ridiculously inflated numbers for emails received by the BBC in protest. It is technically a fairly trivial exercise to flood an address with duplicated emails - numbers received should not be taken as an indication of the actual number of complainants.

Ark of the Covenant Discovered in Israel - see here for this amazing story which has parallels with the Oded Golan/James Ossuary affair. "An amazing archaeological discovery has been made in Israel, one that could potentially shake the world of antiquities to its core and signal the upcoming bloodbath of Armageddon, according to Biblical experts. Indeed, what appears to be the Ark of the Covenant referred to in the Old Testament has surfaced in, of all places, the private collection of a longtime antiquities dealer." (thanks to the excellent Explorator)

Dumb Quote of the Day - the struggle to keep US schools' science classes unblemished by religion continues unabated. This particular skirmish in Dover, Pennsylvania has been dragging on for a while now as religionists campaign for the teaching of evolution to be replaced by fairy tales. The same tired arguments are trotted out once more about Darwin's Theory being "just a theory". To many of these religionists theory means little more than a guess - they cannot quite get their heads around what theory actually means in science "A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena." (WordWeb) Now and again something slips out that illustrates quite how ignorant these fundamentalists are, and epitomises just what this struggle is all about. Pastor and parent Ray Mummert, surely unintentionally, put his finger on the real problem when he said, "Christians are a lot more bold under Bush's leadership, he speaks what a lot of us believe. We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." Which by implication means, in the black and white terms so beloved of the fundamentalists, that Mummert and chums are the stupid, ignorant segment of the culture. Now this is hardly news, but it is nice to have it confirmed by the good pastor. (Much thanks to Gerald Gluch for the heads up. Read Paul Krugman in the New York Times (reg rqd) for a reminder that schools science and the Terri Schiavo case are but two fronts in a much wider, and increasingly dangerous and dirty war.)

April 5th 2005

Darfur and the Culture of Life - the UN security council has voted to refer war crimes suspects involved in the government-enabled murder, rape and torture in Darfur, Sudan to the International Criminal Court (ICC). About bloody time too - at last the US managed to get over its fear of supporting the court in The Hague by abstaining in the vote along with China, Algeria and Brazil. Strange company for the Bush administration and its "culture of life" but at least things may get moving now and this horrible ordeal for the people of Darfur will end. Anne Patterson, US deputy ambassador to the UN is quoted by the BBC as saying "It is important that the international community speak with one voice in order to help promote effective accountability." which is pretty rich considering it was the US that held things up over referral to the ICC in the first place. 80 wonders how many more folk will have been killed because of Bush's prevarication and paranoia. Early last month 80 quoted Captain Brian Steidle on the atrocities in Darfur perpetrated by the Janjaweed militia. Steidle, a former US Marine who was a ceasefire monitor for the African Union tells of his tour of duty in the UK Independent,"In the six months I spent in Darfur as a "ceasefire observer", I saw entire villages burned down with Sudanese locked inside their huts. I saw villagers with their eyes or ears plucked out, or men who had bled to death after being castrated. I interviewed women who had been gang-raped while out collecting firewood." Culture of life? Don't make me sick. Bush and cronies make a loud enough noise over the Terri Schiavo case and other causes dear to right-wing conservative Christian voters, but the lives of the people of Darfur are obviously not so important. You may ask how come 80 singles out  the US and not China, Algeria or Brazil, the other abstainers? Because 80, perhaps foolishly, expected better of the United States. What the hell have they been doing since September last year, when then Secretary of State Colin Powell called what was happening in Darfur genocide? The US administration's hypocrisy sits well next to the outraged squealing of the Sudan government in this report from Islam Online.

Naked Fear - when John Ashcroft let his nipplephobia get the better of him (they keep following me round the room) and had the nude statues in the Great Hall of the Justice Department's headquarters draped at the taxpayers' expense 80 thought he was a uniquely sad little man. This was wrong - he is not unique after all, he has a soulmate in the form of Frank Butler, a zoning inspector for Bartholomew County, Indiana. Butler has ordered that classical-style statues at White River Truck Repair and Yard Art be moved out of the public view. Asked why, this silly little official said, "They have nudity ... and that should not be in the view of a minor." It seems Indiana's obscenity law prohibits the display of nudity where children might see it. You wonder about the moral danger breastfed babies must be in - unless you blindfold them at dinnertime of course. To be honest, it is unfair to have a go at Butler as he is only doing his job - the two creeps that complained to his department in the first place are the real weirdos.

The Company You Keep - can say a lot about you. 80 often employs this maxim when looking at, say, a website that makes health claims that appear questionable or unsubstantiated. Just check the other sites that this site links to, and you can get a feeling for where they are coming from. This assessment by association can work in other areas, such as capital punishment. A recent Amnesty International report has found that "During 2004, more than 3,797 people were executed in 25 countries and at least 7,395 were sentenced to death in 64 countries.." Of course this only includes recorded, judicial executions as opposed to widespread, coordinated murders taking place right now in places like Dafur. Also many countries announce a much smaller number than other evidence would lead one to expect, such as global leader in executions, China. According to the Amnesty report "China executed at least 3,400 people, but sources inside the country have estimated the number to be near 10,000." On the other hand it does also strike a hopeful note, saying that there is a "..worldwide trend towards abolition..." but also stresses the "..ongoing need for concerted action by the international community to consign the death penalty to history." This BBC page helpfully publishes a graph of the top six countries in the world judicial murders league - and it is here that the "company you keep" exercise can be employed. In decreasing order of executions are China, Iran, Vietnam, US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Strange company indeed for a country like the US, with a president who blathers on about a "culture of life"........

On the bottom words are shallow.
On the surface talk is cheap.
You can only judge the distance by the company you keep

Joe Walsh - The Confessor

Gone But Not Forgotten - all over the world the late Pope is being eulogized in such adulatory terms that 80 thought it only fair to mention some of his achievements that have gone strangely unremarked. Damage to the environment caused by the increase in human population, a population in many countries forbidden contraception by this man. Thousands dead and dying from HIV AIDS because they were forbidden to use condoms by this man. Unknown numbers of women dead or seriously injured in backstreet abortion clinics because abortion was forbidden by this man. Thousands of children abused by the Catholic priesthood, a scandal never fully acknowledged by this man. Gays and lesbians worldwide condemned as "... part of a new ideology of evil" by this man. Even now, the old autocrat's  work is still not done, although he himself is dead. He has packed the Conclave of Cardinals with men possessing the same stern conservative views as himself, thereby doing his best to ensure his successor will be in the same mold. (To emphasise business as usual, Cardinal Law, who resigned as Archbishop of Boston in 2002 following accusations that he covered up sexual abuse of children by priests, will be leading a memorial mass for the dead pope. A support group for the victims of priestly abuse will be there, armed with leaflets. This BBC report reminds us "In February 2004, a report commissioned by the Church said more than 4,000 US Roman Catholic priests had faced sexual abuse allegations in the previous 50 years, in cases involving more than 10,000 children - mostly boys.")

Hari's Game - 80 has mentioned Johann Hari and his sane and rational articles before. Now, in common with the rest of the world (or so it seems) he has written about the late Karol Wojtyla. He suggests that despite all the excessive adulation for the man he will be seen eventually in the same light as one of his predecessors, Pope Pius XII, as "a deeply malign force". Hari's articles are archived on his website here, and are definitely worth reading. Almost as interesting, however, are the discussions that follow further down the page - although 80 doubts whether some of the contributors are quite what they claim to be. There is one particular correspondent who so fits the profile for a right-wing, religious, homophobic twit that he must surely be a caricature. Anyone that manages to defend the likes of Franco and Pinochet, (they kept those godless commies/socialists in check) and simultaneously maintain an irritating holier-than-thou attitude has to be a fake or a nutter. Here is an example of this person's thinking on the church's condom/AIDS lies, "Condoms are a perversion of sexual intercourse, which is intended for procreation. In discrediting condoms, the Church was not attempting to spread disease, but rather to emphasise that the one truly acceptable course is in fact to abstain from sexual activity altogether, outside of marriage. That message is theologically sound and it is the surest way to prevent disease. The Church is not in the business of advocating condoms as a second-best strategy, because second-best doesn't cut it with God." The thought that this person, assuming they are for real, is out there walking the streets is too worrying to contemplate. There are also those whose postings give 80 the old "I wished I had said that" feeling, a mixture of admiration and jealousy. One of the papal apologists' favorite, and poorly substantiated, claims to absolve Wojtyla in spite of his awful record (see Gone But Not Forgotten) is that he spoke out against communism (mild version) or singlehandedly brought the Berlin wall crashing down (loony version). As Phil, another contributor says, "..even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day". The last word is Hari's, looking at the catalog of Wojtyla's achievements and the nauseating obsequiousness of his funeral rites and tributes, "If we want to talk about respecting the dead, today we should grieve not for one peddler of superstition, but for the tens of thousands who - thanks to him - did not live to see this day. I do not believe John Paul II will face a Judgement Day in "Heaven". But one day, the fatuous tributes of the past week will rot, and his name will be cursed here on earth."

Funereal Flummery - here is an excellent piece by Polly Toynbee  (in the Guardian) expressing disgust at the world leaders fawning  over a corpse in Rome today. As 80 has attempted below, Toynbee adds a desperately-needed counterbalance to the crawling coverage in the media of Karol Wojtyla and his legacy. As Toynbee so eloquently puts it, " Today's saccharine sanctimony will try to whiten the sepulchre of yet another Pope whose obscurantist faith has caused pointless suffering; it is no defence that he was only obeying higher orders."

TV Ghost Frauds - well worth a look is Tony Youens' Commentary on the stupid TV ghost/psychic shows, in particular the fatuous "Most Haunted Live". In Psychic Dumbing Down Tony asks the question, how may health and safety legislation apply to ghostly "hazards" featured in this show, which is described in the publicity blurb as "...terrifying" and comes away with some interesting observations. The unwelcome spread of such shows has as much to do with the cheapness of production as with the gullibility and ignorance of the target audience. A low light camera system, some "performers" and a bucket load of bullshit and you are there.

Of Teacups and Intolerance - sometimes what appears to be a storm in a teacup can presage something far more serious. Take the row going on in the English village of Lyneham in Wiltshire. What seems to have started it was Mitch Hawkin's website www.lynehamvillage.co.uk - or more particularly his references to the late Pope and a spoof ad that he ran for a successor. Hawkin's comments strike 80 as amusing and also to the point - "Fancy a new job? The Vatican is now looking for a new Pope now that the current one has snuffed it. Let's hope the next Pope can do a better job. Better still, why not abolish the position of Pope, as religion, at the end of the day, causes more wars than anything else." Certainly nothing offensive here in 80's view, but that view is not shared by another village resident, one Andy Humm, who coincidentally has his own, rather more conventional and sedate website www.lynehamvillage.com. Not only does Humm think Hawkin's site "shames" Lyneham he told the Guardian "What Mr Hawkin has said about the Pope is disgusting and outrageous. Mr Hawkin should be charged." (Perhaps Humm should have look at Number 80 if he wants to fret about disrespectful coverage of the dead Pope) It seems Humm and a local Tory councillor, Allison Bucknell, are keen for Hawkin to be served an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) for daring to mock Wojtyla. The Wiltshire police are said to be investigating. The first observation to make is to wonder whether some of Humm's spluttering outrage is owed to the fact his site visitor numbers have likely dipped - the publicity about the threatened ASBO has no doubt boosted Hawkin's site instead. But aside from the amusement to be had from this, let's face it, petty squabble, there is an important principle at stake. Just because Hawkin has not joined in the nauseating adulatory coverage of the late Wojtyla, but rather expressed, via humor, his opinion of the whole religious circus, should he be gagged? Certainly not. If not given enough scrutiny and opposition Humm and Bucknell might actually succeed in making an ASBO do the job of the (currently shelved) religious hatred law. The idea of these little Englanders dictating what one can or cannot say is in itself "disgusting and outrageous" and should not be permitted to happen. Even if you don't find Hawkin's pages particularly funny, visit his site and show your support. Voltaire's (possibly apocryphal) saying, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" definitely applies here. The use of an ASBO to stifle free speech could well be the thin end of a very nasty wedge. (Thanks to New Humanist for the heads-up on this)

Top Marks for Cain - in the left margin of this page you will find many interesting and useful links, this is the story of one of them. A long time ago, in a galaxy far away, The View from Number 80 started life as a space advocacy page - as you can see it has changed a lot since then, although a vestige of the original purpose still exists further down this page - see Case For Space. Also mentioned on this site since its inception is an internet newsletter called Universe Today, (UT) which is also the source of the syndicated Space News that 80 still runs. Universe Today, now well past its 1000th edition, is the brainchild of Fraser Cain. It has grown over the years from a plain text newsletter to the illustrated, professional product we see today. Apart from running space news and releases, these days UT offers high quality downloadable desktop images and original interviews, book reviews and ads for space-related businesses, an indexed archive from 1999 and a lively forum on a number of space-related topics. Now Cain is running an experiment in Podcasting, (an audio file, usually MP3, that can be downloaded for listening to either on your pc or a portable player when you want). To kick off the service is a short interview with Scott Gaudi at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics about Sedna's lack of a moon. (Sedna is a recently-discovered planetoid three times farther away from Earth than Pluto, and named for an Inuit goddess). To check out the podcast, catch up on space news, discuss space and astronomy, find out how to run Space News on your own site, and enjoy Cain's occasional wry humor, cut along to Universe Today - highly recommended. (Update - UT now has an RSS link to which you can subscribe so that you will automatically hear show updates. For more information visit UT)

Mourners and Shakers - my, what a wonderful place the papal funeral was for bringing people together - there was Prince Charles shaking hands with the dictator of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe and, even more touching, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad shook hands with Israeli President Moshe Katsav. Sadly the warm glow shed on it all by this Reuter's report fails to mention that Charles claims he was "caught by surprise" (pre-nuptial jitters maybe?) and Khatami denies any of it ever happened. Syria does not deny a handshake took place but "this did not change Syria's position on the Jewish state." Officially they are still at war with each other. Sigh..............

Beetle Honor - here is an amusing little item - Two former Cornell University entomologists, Quentin Wheeler and Kelly Miller have been busy naming new species of slime mold beetles and have chosen some striking names for three of them. These unfortunate little critters have been named for George W Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. When asked why, the scientists said it was out of admiration for the principles (?) of the three gentlemen and not because the beetles looked like them. As if anyone would assume otherwise.......

Promises To Keep - here is an op-ed in the New York Times (reg rqd) from Kofi Annan, secretary general of the UN, on the pledges made recently by donor countries to aid those suffering in Sudan and particularly in Darfur. It is one thing to promise aid - it is another thing to keep the promise. As Annan points out "...in 1992, donors pledged $880 million for Cambodian war rehabilitation; three years later, only $460 million had been delivered. Nearly a year after donors promised $1 billion to deal with the devastation caused by the 2003 earthquake in Bam, Iran, less than 20 percent of the money had been delivered." He also reminds us that monetary aid is useless without an end to the atrocities still being committed every day. The sooner the Janjaweed and their government backers stand trial for their actions the better. Meanwhile President Bush's hopelessly inappropriate and insulting nominee for ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, is having a hard time attempting, and failing, to justify his past contemptuous remarks about the institution. Bolton is also tainted by his politicizing of information and fighting to keep blatant inaccuracies in a speech on Cuba's weapons program. This was attempted by intimidating those who felt adherence to the truth was still important, even within the Bush administration. A former intelligence chief, Carl Ford, described Bolton as ""kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy", who tried to bully government analysts into producing the intelligence he wanted." according to the Guardian. Sadly the general feeling is that Bolton will get the job - if so, it will be the equivalent of Bush and his neocons giving the UN the finger - yet again.

Vanquished Virgin - the prize for daft headline of the week must go to a BBC news page with "'Vision of the Virgin' vandalised". (To be fair they do get 8 out of ten for alliteration) This vision, like all the other Virgin apparitions, was strictly in the eye of the beholder, as only the eye of faith/gullibility could discern a human figure in what was just a stain on a concrete wall in a Chicago underpass. This leads to the question, can one vandalize a salt stain? The answer has to be no. One Victor Gonzalez has been accused of daubing the wall with the words "big lie" in brown paint which may well be vandalism, but vandalism of a concrete wall and not some imagined image. This "image" of the Virgin is but one of a succession of such. The old girl has turned up as fencepost in Australia (this one was "vandalized" too), and on windows and toast in the US. As 80 has observed before, this minor Christian deity has nothing on the showy tribal god of Old Testament times - at least he could manage a burning bush and a pillar of fire. Personally 80 thinks thinks they are all true manifestions of the blessed Saints Rorschach and Pareidolia.

Medium Ghoul - one deeply unpleasant activity of some who call themselves psychics or mediums (others might say fantasists, liars or con artists) is to gain some cheap publicity by "looking" for missing persons and attempting to involve themselves in police investigations, with the concomitant stress on relatives and waste of police resources. One exponent of this ghoulish and disgusting practice is the American medium Allison Dubois whose "experiences" form the basis for an NBC show called, unsurprisingly, "Medium". The callous self-publicist is given an uncritical plug in a nauseating article in the Arizona Daily Star. This poor excuse for a newspaper, and its poor excuse for a reporter, Carla McClain, (no relation to Shirley?) compounds the offence by citing Gary Schwartz, a gullible researcher, as authenticating Dubois' supposed abilities. Ray Hyman, who along with James Randi, gets a small mention, no doubt in the interest of "balanced reporting", has shredded Schwarz's findings and his laughable experimental protocols. See How Not to Test Mediums. The Daily Star also gives Schwarz a platform to make disparaging remarks about Hyman and Randi but offers them no right of reply. So what is Dubois? Some might say she is a fraud validated by an incompetent, but 80 couldn't possibly comment. These psychic ghouls are not confined to the US by any means and Tony Youens takes a scathing look at another of this vile bunch, from Northern Ireland. Youens has also conducted his own investigation into another case - see Did a medium identify a murderer? For more on Schwarz (who may be a dupe or merely incompetent) and his investigative methods see A Critique of Schwartz et al.'s After-Death Communication Studies by Richard Wiseman and Ciaran O'Keeffe. (see The Skeptic's Dictionary for a good overview of the whole sordid Psychic Detective business and also What If Gary Schwartz Is Right? It seems that Schwarz does not limit his investigations to psychics, he is not averse to a little energy medicine as well.)

Smithsonian Institute Blues - when 80 read about this the other day it seemed as if the silly season had arrived early. It appears that the Smithsonian Institute's National Museum of Natural History will be hosting the premiere of a movie on the subject of Intelligent Design - note that 80 says subject, not theory, as ID makes no testable hypotheses, relies upon the argument from ignorance and offers the non-explanation of the origin of life on Earth and its complexity by saying "God did it". This is why ID has to rely upon publicity stunts and legal action via school boards rather than scientific arguments to put its case. The ID crowd are careful not to use the G word (this would scupper the campaign for ID to be taught in science class) but there is plenty of evidence that the Designer they have in mind is the Judaeo-Christian god and not some super advanced ETs such as Rael's Elohim. The movie is called "The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe." Even the title is questionable - how can one say one particular planet is "privileged" (whatever is meant by that term), unless a suitably large sample of planets has been studied. We are only at the threshold of the detection of extra-solar planets and can say nothing detailed about them beyond the basics of their orbits, let alone whether they too are "privileged". The unwelcome news that all is not well in the nation's attic was reported in the New York Times (reg rqd) and also in a supplement to the James Randi Educational Foundation's newsletter. The Times's headline is nonsensical in itself - "Smithsonian to Screen a Movie That Makes a Case Against Evolution" - this is exactly what ID cannot do. The report continues in the same vein, referring to the backers of the movie, the Discovery Institute, as "..a group in Seattle that supports an alternative theory..." to evolution. This illustrates the ignorance of the reporter, John Schwartz, as to what a scientific theory actually is. ID is not by any stretch of the imagination "A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena." Schwartz then compounds the error by describing the movie as a "documentary". Wrong again - this film is not a documentary by any recognizable definition of the word. It is certainly not "A film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event" or "A film that deals directly with fact and not fiction, that tries to convey reality as it is instead of some fictional version of reality." Facts are conspicuous by their absence in ID "theory". So, what on earth can have induced a scientific institution to show such a movie? It seems, even for the Smithsonian, that money talks, even if in this case it is talking gibberish. The Discovery Institute is paying $16000 for the use of the Baird Auditorium but it is getting much more than the chance to screen a movie - it is getting, for a remarkably cheap price, the cachet of promoting its nonsense in the heart of a scientific establishment. Such publicity is priceless for an organization that has no real science to offer and it is bound to be milked for every last drop of coverage by them and their more blatantly creationist brethren - see here. If all you have to offer is hot air, the oxygen of publicity is vital. If the Smithsonian is so desperate for funds that it will sell its integrity for a mere $16000 the JREF has offered to bail them out by stating it "...is willing to donate $20,000 to the Smithsonian Institution if they agree to give back the "Discovery Institute" $16,000 and decline to sponsor the showing of the film. And the JREF will not require the Smithsonian to run any films or propaganda that favor our point of view..." which sounds like a pretty good bargain. In the NYT a museum spokesman, Randall Kremer, is quoted as saying "It is incorrect for anyone to infer that we are somehow endorsing the video or the content of the video." The problem is, Mr Kremer, that is exactly the impression that is being given and one the IDers, like the pseudoscientists they are, will plug ad nauseam. He also said "We're happy to receive this contribution from the Discovery Institute to further our scientific research." If you don't feel happy about the Smithsonian's embarrassing lapse from its usual high standards why not let Mr Kremer know - you can email him by clicking here. You may want to point out that ID, at heart, is a religious "explanation" and therefore contravenes the Smithsonian's own rules regarding such things. Kremer claims that "..staff members viewed the film before approving the event to make sure that it complied with the museum's policy, which states that "events of a religious or partisan political nature" are not permitted". Which staff members were these, the janitors?

Peace One Day - September 21st is the UN International Day of World Peace designated as a day of global ceasefire and non-violence. Idealistic, unrealistic, pie in the sky? This would be the reaction of many people, including 80, a hardened cynic if ever there was one. But stop for a moment and think what a symbol such a day could be for those who live daily with the organized murder happening in Darfur, Iraq, Afghanistan, Congo and countless other less well known slaughterhouses around the world. Any movement for change has to start somewhere, and for it to have any real chance it must be supported at grass roots. This page is full of ideas and suggestions of how to get involved and raise awareness. An old friend of 80's, singer/songwriter Jack Pound (see Sound As a Pound) has become involved at just such a local level. This coming week two venues in Kent, UK will be showing the movie, Peace One Day, by British director Jeremy Gilley, which documented and inspired the establishment of the United Nations International Day of Peace. On Thursday, June 9th at The Grand, Folkestone, Kent there will be a screening at 2.00pm and again that evening 6.50pm in nearby Canterbury, at Cinema 3, Gulbenkian Theater, University of Kent. Admission is a paltry £4/5. The latter showing will also feature the added bonus of Jack Pound playing and singing from 6.00pm. (Further information on these screenings can be had from Phillipa on 01303 264869). Those from elsewhere in the world who would like to obtain a copy of the DVD of Peace One Day can buy online here. Also available is a range of T-shirts (designed by Stella McCartney) and posters, buttons and leaflets. If you are staging events in support of Peace One Day let 80 know. Jeremy Gilley's film will also be showing at the venues listed below - (check this page for other locations.)

African Shame - it is reported in the Guardian that "The International Criminal Court said yesterday it was considering bringing charges of genocide against government officials in Sudan because of the atrocities that had occurred in the western region of Darfur." Considering? It is common knowledge that the murderous Janjaweed militias have the backing of the Sudanese government. It is over 8 months since then US Secretary of State Colin Powell labelled what was happening as genocide. How many more people have be murdered, raped and tortured before these bastards are brought to trial? Meanwhile George "Culture of Life" Bush repays Tony Blair's unwavering support for his botched invasion of Iraq by failing to give any backing to the push to double aid for Africa. As this New York Times (reg rqd) editorial puts it "President Bush kept a remarkably straight face yesterday when he strode to the microphones with Britain's prime minister, Tony Blair, and told the world that the United States would now get around to spending $674 million in emergency aid that Congress had already approved for needy countries. That's it. Not a penny more to buy treated mosquito nets to help save the thousands of children in Sierra Leone who die every year of preventable malaria. Nothing more to train and pay teachers so 11-year-old girls in Kenya may go to school. And not a cent more to help Ghana develop the programs it needs to get legions of young boys off the streets." Thanks a lot George. The same piece reveals how ignorant the American people are of how much the world's largest economy gives in foreign aid. "According to a poll, most Americans believe that the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries; it actually spends well under a quarter of 1 percent. As Jeffrey Sachs, the Columbia University economist in charge of the United Nations' Millennium Project, put it so well, the notion that there is a flood of American aid going to Africa "is one of our great national myths." " Bush badly needs to improve his image around the world but his miserly inaction has done the exact opposite. The American public need to made aware of this kind of penny-pinching hypocrisy - it may be representative of the government but not the people, who surely would feel embarrassed and angry if they knew the truth.

Magic Talisman - to aid exam students. Apparently wearing a wristband with a magic phrase written on it is not cheating and it would "...give young people courage and hope at such a demanding times (sic) of their lives as exams represented." The real question though is not whether it is cheating, or even whether it works, but just which irresponsible, creepy bunch of supernaturalists is pushing this weird idea?

Carnivorous Hypocrites - here is an article in the Guardian that highlights the yawing void between many eaters of meat and acknowledgement of what has to occur before the steak hits their plates - an animal has to be slaughtered. Now that most meat can be purchased either pre-packaged for cooking with the minimum of preparation, or as fast food for immediate consumption the carnivores among us are becoming even more divorced from the reality of how that chunk of animal reaches them. The BBC are planning to air a one-off documentary about a family-run abattoir called "Slaughterhouse - the Task of Blood" and are already bracing themselves for the inevitable outcry from a squeamish British public. Yet the same anthropomorphists that made sentimental heroes of a couple of pigs who absconded from an abbatoir didn't seem to give a damn for all the other porkers who don't make it over the wire - or not enough to put them off their bacon sandwiches and pork scratchings. BBC executives are already reported to have asked for cuts "... to be made to the footage after they became nervous about the content." The documentary will also be shown after the watershed hour so that children won't be put off their Big Macs and KFC by learning about where their favorite fast food actually comes from. There is no doubt that animals experience fear and pain and to pretend otherwise is rank hypocrisy. A trip to an abbatoir (especially a kosher or halal one) should be part of the school curriculum and form part of a wider debate on our exploitation and treatment of animals, wild and domesticated. It is obscene to see the likes of George W Bush and Tom DeLay emoting over a few  human cells when our nearest cousins are being slaughtered to the point of extinction for bushmeat. By all means eat meat - just be aware of the steps taken to put it in front of you. If you can't stomach the unpalatable truth and refuse the red pill then 80 has a nice tofu burger waiting for you.

Bible Bashing - in both the US and UK recently there has been a fuss over the provision of Christian bibles in hospital rooms, the reason being their possible role as a carrier of antibiotic resistant infections, in particular MRSA. The incident in the UK triggered the inevitable whining from Gideons International who assume they have a god-given right to place these  collections of myths and stories in sick people's rooms. In the face of Gideons' hysterical outbursts that this was "political correctness gone mad" the University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust has backed down. Whether the MRSA bug will respect Gideons International's wishes as well is not known. Another factor supposed to have contributed to the fuss was that some people were quoted as saying the bibles would be removed, not on health grounds but because of offence caused to followers of other faiths (or perhaps even Christians that don't happen to like that particular version of the bible). The only answer to this is to provide larger patient lockers which can accommodate all the religious writings available, in the interest of fairness. To help with this spiritually egalitarian project 80 would like to suggest the inclusion of a copy of Friedrich Nietzsche's The Antichrist for the comfort of those unburdened by religious belief. Alternatively the cheaper and easier option would be to provide no superstitious scribblings of any kind - if you must read such stuff bring your own copy.

Reference This - this week Ben Goldacre, in his excellent Bad Science column, looks once more at irritating pretend nutritionist Gillian McKeith. To be accurate he does not look so much at the bullshitter herself but at her latest attempt to appear scientific by giving references for points made in her newsletter. The result is more than a little sad. McKeith does not seem to understand that the purpose of citing references is for them to be relevant and accurate, whether they are surveys, peer-reviewed papers or whatever. Instead, like a child pretending to a be grownup, she mimics the form of supplying references without grasping that it is the content that it is important. If a child, say, plays "shops" with pretend money then this can be endearing - when an adult does the same it arouses concern for their mental health. Goldacre is, quite rightly, merciless in his skewering of Channel 4's very own charlatan - if she wants to mix with the adults she will have to learn how science really works - pretending is just not good enough. (Some of Goldacre's Bad Science columns are archived here, see the left margin)

A Win for the Whiners - here is a perfect example of how the all-inclusive, multicultural agenda can be so easily hijacked to suit the purposes of religionists. Tulsa Zoo, in Oklahoma will feature a creationist exhibit "...depicting God's creation of the world in six days and his rest on the seventh, as told in Genesis, the first book of the Bible." This moronic move follows agitation (read whining) from Christians who felt slighted that the zoo reportedly features a statue of Ganesh, the Hindu elephant god outside the elephant enclosure and a marble globe inscribed with a Native American saying, "The earth is our mother. The sky is our father." Perhaps the answer in this case should be not to include the Christian creation myth in the zoo but merely to dump ALL displays perceived as having religious connotations - they have no place there at all, although a nice statue of, say, Charles Darwin would be perfectly fitting. The Tulsa resident who initiated the whining for "fair play", one Dan Hicks, (not the excellent musician) said "I see this as a big victory, it's a matter of fairness. To not include the creationist view would be discrimination." A victory for dunces like Hicks maybe, who have recently learned to manipulate and subvert the ideals of a fair society to push their narrow little world view. This article from CNN notes that the elephant exhibit is "...meant to show the animal's image among cultures. The same exhibit includes the Republican Party's elephant symbol." Can we now expect the Democrats to push for a statue of an ass? The assumption that the Genesis rigmarole, with all that it implies, especially in the America of today, is somehow equivalent to the Ganesh figure or the Native American saying is plain ridiculous. But if that is the ploy adopted by the fundamentalist knuckle-scrapers then, so be it, away with any symbol that is not directly associated with zoology. The exhibits will be all the poorer for such a move, but at least we would know who to blame.

Let's Talk Blasphemy - or at least when Joan Bakewell can keep you on subject. At the Hay Festival in England Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry met, ostensibly to debate the subject of blasphemy with other guests,  particularly in light of the Blair government's misguided religious hatred legislation. As it turned out there were no other guests and much more than blasphemy was covered, but this matters not at all, it is a joy to hear three intelligent people discuss their own lack of belief and their concern regarding the increasing intrusion of religion into society. The whole thing can be heard here - the sound quality leaves a lot to be desired and broadband is probably necessary but it is worth the trouble - particularly just to hear Fry's closing speech, which is as superb and passionate a summation of humanism as you are likely to hear. There is much more from the festival archived on site including interviews with Terry Pratchett and Philip Pullman. Highly Recommended!

Hating Religion - On the subject of the proposed British religious hatred laws read comic actor Rowan Atkinson's excellent speech to the House of Lords on the subject - "..I question the inarguable nature of the phrase “religious hatred”, afforded by the use of the highly emotive word “hatred”. So I thought I would modify the name of the proposed measure, by changing the terminology but retaining the meaning and use the dictionary definition of the word hatred, which is: intense dislike. Incitement of Religious Intense Dislike. Isn’t it strange how that small change makes it seem a much less desirable or necessary measure? I then found my self asking a strange question. What is wrong with encouraging intense dislike of a religion? Why shouldn’t you do so, if the beliefs of that religion or the activities perpetrated in its name deserve to be intensely disliked? What if the teaching or beliefs of the religion are so out-moded, hypocritical and hateful that not expressing criticism of them would be perverse? The government claim that one would be allowed to say what you like about beliefs because the measure is not intended to defend beliefs but believers. But I don’t see how you can distinguish between them. Beliefs are only invested with life and meaning by believers. If you attack beliefs, you are automatically attacking those who believe the beliefs. You wouldn’t need to criticise the beliefs if no-one believed them." Also see 80 on Religionist Hatred.

Legislative Lunacy - The Blair government has achieved something of a miracle with the introduction of a bill to outlaw incitement to religious hatred - it has managed to unite humanists, atheists and many religionists in condemnation of not only its obvious shortcomings but also in questioning the need for any such legislation in the first place. Adjustment to existing law is all that is necessary in the view of many. The major group who are in favor would appear to be those Muslims who misguidedly believe the laws would protect their religion from criticism - it won't. This BBC page has comments (scroll down) from readers of all kinds of faiths and none, and the general impression given is that the laws are far from welcome. Another BBC page has statements from the Muslim Council of Britain in support of the bill and the National Secular Society against. One paragraph from Inayat Bunglawala, speaking for the Muslim side, 80 finds particularly chilling. "It is not the prosecutions that are important, it is the symbolic value of the law itself and the culture that it creates." (Reminiscent of the Inquisition finding it necessary only to show Galileo the instruments of torture - the threat alone was sufficient to secure recantation.) A culture that is stifled, that cannot speak its thoughts for fear of prosecution, whether that prosecution is brought to a successful conclusion or not, has no place in Britain - or anywhere else in the world for that matter. The idiotic results of prosecutions under such legislation in a parliamentary democracy can be seen in the example of Australia - a fiasco which Blair, Clarke, Goggins and the other fools have ignored. It seems that they think the need to court the Muslim vote (if such a thing exists in Britain) in the wake of joining Bush's invasion of Iraq, outweighs commonsense. For an eloquent and damning assessment of the whole sorry mess do read Polly Toynbee writing in the Guardian, in which she defends "My right to offend a fool". In the Daily Telegraph is another condemnatory article by Joshua Rosenberg, the paper's legal editor. It is far less effective than Toynbee's piece and contains much nonsense. In complaining that the Bill fails to define "religious belief" Rosenberg descends into tabloid hyperbole by claiming that this would mean that the exorcist churches currently in the news in Britain over instances of cruelty to children could not be prosecuted. To put it bluntly, this is crap - laws already exist covering child abuse, regardless of motivation. Another silly statement in the same vein is "Satanists, pagans and atheists would be protected." Why he has singled out these three groups in particular is a puzzling, unless it is to frighten his right-wing middle class readership. Satanists are entitled to their beliefs, which are no dafter than those of any other religion, so long as they do not harm others - such harm, again, is covered by existing legislation. The same goes for pagans, who in 80's view, are a lot less offensive than fundamentalist Jews, Christians or Muslims. If you are a polytheist the live and let live ethos would seem to be an integral part of your belief, the very opposite of the Abrahamic faiths. The inclusion of atheists in this list of believers reveals the government's misconception that atheism is a belief (despite wording to the contrary) - the whole point of atheism is that there is no belief. So-called hate crimes rarely, if ever involve atheists (or humanists) - they are the preserve of religionists. Atheist suicide bombers, agnostic white supremacists, humanist queerbashers are thin on the ground, even nonexistent.

t looks as though this bill will become law as the government has stated its intention of ramming it through the House of Lords, the only body that could have opposed it. This, of course, will not be the end of the matter as those who have a low opinion of religions, 80 included, will not shut up. The culture of cowed silence to which Inayat Bunglawala looks forward will not prevail.  We are all asked not to offend others but organized religion by its very nature is offensive. Take the three big ones, the so-called religions of the book, the Abrahamic gang of three, Islam, Christianity and Judaism. They each claim to have THE answer, which of course means the others are wrong, even wilfully so. Yet so divisive is this practice that the reference above, to a mere three religions, is wrong - even under a microscope of moderate power it is obvious that they are each composed of smaller components, sects, heretics, different communions, all still proclaiming they alone are the ones who have found the truth - whatever that means. 80 is reminded of the words of Mark Twain, "Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion - several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight".

Even in communities where differing religious doctrines are no longer the real cause for division the labels remain, as in Northern Ireland, in order to conveniently identify the others, the ones who are not us. This perception of different religious groups as other, as wrong, as deliberately erring, as outside your special revelation is, as so often in the past, the first step in dehumanizing those seen as different, and so becomes an excuse for their persecution. In 80's view organized religion deserves no respect whatsoever for continuing the propagation of cruel myths and superstitions. The "book" (actually a fairly haphazard collection of writings) that supposedly links the big three, and which survives in various forms as the Christian Old Testament, the Torah and in garbled versions in the Koran, is full of violence, cruelty, bigotry, misogyny, racism and homophobia. There are some beautiful and admirable things as well, but their benign influence is more than outweighed by the rest. 80 will continue to criticize and mock the myths in these books. If these "scriptures" were viewed merely as interesting and valuable ancient texts (though nowhere near as ancient as believers like to think) there would be little problem, but they are taken literally by many religionists, religionists who wish to make their beliefs law, or at least make a law that attempts to render their superstitious nonsense unassailable. (For more see 80's Rant For the Day and here is a roundup of newspaper editorials condemning the legislation.)

Not So Fast - it seems it is not yet time for closure on the Terri Schiavo affair (see Footnote below). Jeb Bush, Governor of Florida, wants to keep it going. The President's brother, and sadly, his intellectual equal, wants an investigation into exactly how soon after her collapse did Terri Schiavo's husband Michael call 911. While understandably vague about clock times given the stress he must have been under, Schiavo in all his testimony has consistently stated that he ran without delay to make the call immediately after her collapse. One has to wonder just what Bush is after here - is he trying to divert attention from the fact that the autopsy shows that his intervention, and that of the other political and religious busybodies, was entirely unjustified? Or is it that he is just too dumb to know when to let go of something that reflects so poorly on his own judgement? When Bush says that his latest move is not meant to suggest wrongdoing by Michael Schiavo who the hell does he think he is kidding? His actions suggest that he is supporting the vendetta by the Schindlers, Terri's family, who do not accept the facts of the autopsy. Their situation is tragic but the lack of evidence of abuse as indicated by the autopsy removes any logical reason for the continuance of their stance. Perhaps in light of this the Bush request for an investigation into the timing of the 911 call fifteen years ago is just an instance of this dim, bandwagon-chasing politico helping the Schindlers clutch at a straw. If true, then by doing so he displays something else he has in common with his brother - the inability to face fact. (For one of the more bizarre commentaries on the Schiavo affair is this piece from Slate by Steven E. Landsburg, "Imagine Terri Were a Toaster … An economist considers the Schiavo case."

Footnote - to a private tragedy that was hijacked by outside political and religious interests. An autopsy of the late Terri Schiavo shows that "There was massive neuronal loss. The damage was irreversible." This is according to Jon Thogmartin, chief medical examiner for Pasco and Pinellas counties, quoted in the Philadelphia Examiner, He added that "no amount of treatment" could have repaired her brain damage. While this is no consolation for those who grieve for her, perhaps, if we are lucky, it will go some way to shutting up offensive bigots calling for the execution of Judge Greer, who presided over the Schiavo case. One in particular who can shut his trap on that subject is the deeply unpleasant individual called David "Pastor" Brown who writes View from the Pulpit which is featured in an unpleasant little rag called The Valley Citizen. This publication states  "Our editorial content includes an affirmative focus on traditional family values, business, free enterprise and constitutional government." The "constitutional government" line sits uncomfortably with Pastor Brown's hysterical pulpit rant, "Judge Greer is guilty and deserves the death penalty. Why? Because God's law takes precedence over man's law!" Brown is one of those people who is obviously so keen to meet his Maker that you wish he would just get on with it, rather than hang around here blighting other people's lives. For more see The Stealing of America.

Outsourcing Censorship - it seems that this modern practice goes both ways with the news that the hardline oppressive Chinese government have outsourced part of their web censorship operation to evil capitalist Microsoft. It's a funny old world - but all of a sudden much less funny for Chinese bloggers with a yearning for free speech. On reflection, it is really little different from media mogul Rupert Murdoch dropping the BBC's World Service Television from his Star satellite TV service, which has a large Chinese "footprint". It seems the BBC kept mentioning taboo subjects (Tiananmen anyone?) so Murdoch, despite his bullshit about satellite TV changing the totalitarian states of the world for the better, caved in. Nothing is more important than the ol' bottom line for him - or, it seems, Bill Gates. (also see Beijing's Bitch)

PBS - the independence of PBS in America is under attack from right-wing politicians and religious groups for a perceived bias - ie not following the Bush party line and actually giving independent and truly-balanced news reporting and analysis. To the White House in particular this is not acceptable - despite whining about "liberal media" it is true to say that the administration could not have gotten away with a string of lies and deceptions (WMD, Downing Street Memo, extraordinary rendition, false news reports) without a compliant press and TV news. It is also not too much of an exaggeration to say that for fair coverage of US and World news the BBC, PBS and NPR are pretty well the only sources the average American TV viewer and radio listener has - and now PBS is in danger like never before. If anyone needs reminding of the value of PBS and its promotion of a rational point of view take a look at this page of excellent short movies excerpted from Frontiers and fronted by Alan Alda. They each deal with subjects that have cropped up many times in 80's pages and the treatment they are given is a breath of fresh air compared to the credulous pseudo-documentaries and other pap endlessly peddled by the big networks. A wide range is covered from chiropractic, dowsing, herbal medicine to therapeutic touch and Roswell. Each video subjects the claims made to proper evaluation based upon evidence - no celebrity endorsements, no flashy SFX just intelligent and informative programming. Priceless. (Update - good news for PBS in USA Today, although the battle is far from won, "After a week of furious lobbying by PBS supporters .... the House of Representatives voted Thursday to restore $100 million in threatened cuts from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting funding.") Update - here is a thoughtful analysis of the threat to public broadcasting from Frank Rich, writing in the New York Times (reg rqd). "The intent is not to kill off PBS and NPR but to castrate them by quietly annexing their news and public affairs operations to the larger state propaganda machine that the Bush White House has been steadily constructing at taxpayers' expense."

Chilling Outlook - here is a detailed, well written and very depressing piece from The Economist on the the religious right in America, called "You ain't seen nothing yet". If you don't feel deeply worried at the implications of that title you really haven't been paying attention. The combination of powerful evangelical groups and what is no more or less than their political wing, the Republican party and the Bush administration, have already effected many political and cultural changes, in 80's view not one of them beneficial, but there is, it seems, plenty more to come. From the appointment of conservative judges to the harrassing of PBS there is not one corner of American life that is not affected by this unholy alliance. Already gays find themselves attacked on many levels and women's reproductive freedom is under threat. The policy regarding the latter is not an outright ban on abortion but a steady chipping away at the safeguards and rights that women have gained in the last 30 years. As George Bush's pal and overseer of the southern Baptist's public policy, Richard Land, puts it "You eat an apple one bite at a time." Even if the next administration is Democrat many of the changes that have been made possess a momentum of their own - The Economist piece quotes a White House adviser addressing a private gathering of social conservatives, "The average age of the judges the president has appointed is 46, they are going to last a long time." In response it seems the Democrats can either go down the secular route and lose votes or they can embrace a more moderate religious position, being careful not to end up in a battle with the Republicans to prove which party is the natural home of the Christian god. We may yet see the USA become a theocracy in everything but name and although as this is being written it is a beautiful, balmy summer day, 80 is aware of a distinct chill in the air.

No Account Bigots - most people would not associate the banking world with principled behavior but the Co-operative bank in the UK is no ordinary bank. It has long been known for its ethical stance and a policy "..which publicly supports diversity and dignity in all its forms for our staff, customers and other stakeholders." It is because of this that the bank has given whiny, bigoted, fundamentalist hate group Christian Voice notice to close its account and move on. The reason given is Christian Voice's rabid homophobia although other activities, such as threatening a cancer charity would perhaps have done just as well. Naturally Christian Voice is protesting unfair treatment - creepy little groups like this always crave the protection of the very civil liberties they would deny everyone else. The leader of the group (see here for more) Stephen Green is quoted in the Guardian as saying "The Co-op bank, for all its fine words, is discriminating against us on the grounds of conscience and religion." No, Green, the Co-Op bank, as would any other civilized institution or individual, finds that your position on homosexuality is discriminatory and unacceptable. Take your money and go. (If confirmation is needed of what an ignorant, arrogant individual Green is, read this interview from MediaWatchWatch. It reveals him to be typical of his kind, from his smug certainty in his own righteousness to the quotations from the Christian bible that he fondly (and risibly) imagines give his archaic, blinkered attitudes authority. 80 looked at Christian Voice and its unpleasant tactics in No Still, Small Voice and Non Vox Populi.) Update - it is noteworthy that the Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association take a different view of the Co-op bank's action "Gays have been subjected to this kind of petty discriminations in the past, with banks saying that we couldn’t have accounts because we were socially unacceptable. It is ironic now that it’s the other way round and fundamentalist Christians are being penalised for being ‘undesirable’. We are uncomfortable with this decision and much as we despise Mr Green and his organisation, we cannot call for freedom for ourselves while at the same time denying it to others. If we want to be allowed to vigorously criticise religion, we must be prepared to have religious criticism directed at us. So long as he operates within the law, he should be allowed to protest in his own way, and be entitled to the same services as the rest of the community." Another view is that Green, aka Christian Voice, is fully entitled to his prejudices but this in no way obliges the Co-op to do business with him. It is not the case that he is being oppressed or denied his freedom of speech - the bank merely wishes not to handle his business.

Update - to the above. Here is a press release from the Co-op bank acknowledging the support it has received for its ethical stance. "We have been inundated with messages of support for our stance after Christian Voice issued a press release, which has received national coverage on radio, TV and in the newspapers. In response we are vigorously asserting our customers’ ethical policy." Meanwhile the fundamentalist hate group that occasioned the bank's action is calling for a Christian boycott of the Co-op. Happily the Brits, Christian or not, tend to take a dim view of such creepy fanatics. In 80's view the Co-op has little to fear.