The Last Little Abortion Clinic in Mississippi 1

Another good ‘un from Goad

___________

The hoarsely ululating throats of the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” movements screamed at each other outside a small abortion clinic in Jackson, Mississippi last week as a federal judge cock-blocked a state lawand allowed the clinic to stay open for now. The law would have effectively shut down the Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which is Mississippi’s last remaining abortion clinic.

Few political issues are as supercharged with moral hysteria as abortion. What’s moral, as always, is in the eye of the moralizer. Outside the clinic and in the comments section of every online news story about the case, there were the requisite dueling accusations of moral turpitude and hypocrisy, of which side values basic human dignity and which doesn’t. The pro-lifers spoke of a legal holocaust of unborn fetuses while the pro-choicers bemoaned state-sanctioned reproductive slavery.

One side warned of bloody coat hangers from back-alley abortions, while the other toted garish picket signs of legally aborted shredded embryos. And all of it was a relentlessly bloody power struggle for the moral upper hand: On one extreme you have those who believe one drop of spilled male semen is an abomination before the Lord, while on the other were the super-empowered mega-sluts who instead choose to sacralize their “sexuality” and blithely eject unwanted fetuses from their wombs with the regularity of old toasters disgorging the morning’s burnt toast.

More…

Remaking Marital Law Reply

By Roderick Long

Minimizing Marriage: Marriage, Morality, and the Law, by Elizabeth Brake, Oxford University Press, 240 pp., $24.95.

Opponents of same-sex marriage are quick to raise the specter of polygamy. If “everybody should have the right to marry,” Rick Santorum asked on the campaign trail earlier this year, then “what aboutthree men?” While Santorum clearly intended this quip as a reductio ad absurdum of calls for marriage equality, the Arizona State University philosopher Elizabeth Brake argues in Minimizing Marriage that recognizing polygamous and polyamorous unions is not only required by justice but doesn’t go far enough.

For Brake, marriage not only should not be restricted to opposite-sex couples, or indeed to couples at all. It constitutes unjust discrimination, she argues, to restrict marriage to romantic or sexual relationships. Instead, the social and legal status of marriage should be available to “caring relationships” of all kinds (though not to Santorum’s further bugaboos of “man on child” and “man on dog” unions, since parties to marriage contracts must be legally competent). Moreover, the terms of such marriages should be flexible, rather than fixed by a state-imposed one-size-fits-all model; one might, as in one of Brake’s examples, choose to cohabit with a lover but confer one’s spousal health care benefits on an impoverished relative, and authority for end-of-life decisions on a close friend. The result is what Brake calls “minimal marriage”: marriage with minimal requirements for recognition.

More…

The Rise of Southern Nationalism Reply

From the Missouri Tenth

Any discussion concerning the natural rights of man in relation to state sovereignty, independence from tyranny,  self-determination, and de-centralization, certainly wouldn’t be complete without bringing awareness and understanding towards today’s important cause of Southern Nationalism.

John P. George, a member of the League of the South who holds a B.A. degree in sociology and philosophy from the University of Georgia, an M.A. degree in historical sociology from the University of New Brunswick, and a Ph.D. from Mississippi State University, writes that, “Southern independence is based on the belief that there are basic and distinct differences in culture, religion, political ideology, and ethnicity that form a nation distinct from the North. Ethnically the white population of the South has been predominantly from Great Britain and Ireland and northern Europe and Protestant Christian in religion. Politically the South has long been more conservative than the North or West, and regardless of ethnic background (e.g., black, Cajun, or Cherokee) all Southerners share a common history and certain similarities in cuisine, language, and music.”

More…

Islam’s Role in Slavery Reply

From TakiMag: Jim Goad on the Trans-Saharan slave trade.

___________

While filling my car with gasoline possibly derived from Middle Eastern oil, I spotted a billboard for a local clothing store called US ARABIA. Though the sign’s head-swaddled male and female models appear to be Caucasian, palefaces are scant in the area around this gas station, so I’ll presume the ad is targeted at an overwhelmingly black local population.

At the local Dunkin’ Donuts and Walgreens, I’ve noticed a surge of Georgia-born blacks in Muslim apparel. The festive Afro-nationalist dashikis so popular among American blacks twenty years ago have been replaced with what seems like a dress rehearsal for the global caliphate.

Although Islam and black nationalism share a flame-belching, sword-swinging hatred for Western Civ, it’s an odd pairing when you consider history. American blacks who dump Christianity and shack up with Islam seem to think they’re flipping the bird at the creed that enslaved their ancestors, but they’re only swapping it for a religion that has enslaved their ancestors for far longer.

The idea of collective historical guilt is often wielded as a psychological weapon, and civilizations that allow themselves to be inoculated with the Guilt Germ can be conquered without a shot being fired. Islamic apologists and Western oikophobes scoff and spit and snort that anyone would dare draw equivalencies between the transatlantic and the Arab slave trades, yet the historical record laughs in their faces.

More…

Why Libertarians Should Oppose Conspiracy Theories 3

By Dan Bier and David Bier

“Bilderberg conspiracies have become a handicap for the Liberty Movement,” says conservative commentator Jack Hunter in a recent article. “Bilderberg conspiracy theorists have become a political handicap. The Birthers probably have a few interesting points to make, but this doesn’t change the fact that their argument is toxic. It doesn’t change the fact that their rhetoric damages conservatives’ reputations every time a Birther opens his mouth.”

Hunter is right, and we do appreciate that someone else is speaking out against conspiracy theorists, but at the Skeptical Libertarian, we oppose conspiracy theories not merely because they are bad press for libertarianism, but because they are not supported by the facts. If the libertarian movement gained influence as a result of its proclivity for paranoid conspiracies, we would still oppose them. First and foremost, our commitment is to reality—popular or not—and to a conversation based on reason and evidence. Intellectual honesty is our core value, and scientific skepticism is the surest way to preserve that integrity.

More…

Romney losing ground to Obama without support from Paul Nation Reply

This analysis is consistent with my own. The combination of widening class divisions and demographic and cultural change means the Repugs are screwed.

By Kevin Kerwick

National Republicans may have some serious thinking to do. Their presumptive nominee, Mitt Romney looks to be in serious trouble on multiple fronts today.

Governor Romney has lost ground to President Obama and is now trailing in all of the national polls with the exception of the Rasmussen Reports poll which has been the poll most favorable to Governor Romney. Governor Romney is now tied with President Obama in the latest Rasmussen poll, which is asteep decline in that poll for Governor Romney relative to President Obama since early June.

In battleground states, Governor Romney is seeing similar declines. According to the poll numbers at Real Clear Politics, Governor Romney is behind in Florida, Iowa, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Obama groups are running hard-hitting television advertisements against Governor Romney in several battleground states that appear to be having an impact. The ads are portraying Governor Romney as a vulture capitalist whose business practices created a net job loss instead of a jobs gain, which is a narrative that is challenging the cornerstone of the Romney campaign strategy. If the Romney job creating narrative is tarnished, he may not be able to find another narrative on which to run.

Swinging sex parties slowly finding a place among Saudi Arabia’s foreign residents and elite 1

rt.com

AFP Photo/Getty Images

AFP Photo/Getty Images

Swinging sex parties are slowing finding a place among Saudi Arabia`s foreign residents and elite. One foreign couple gave a sneak peak into their private lives that could cost them their freedom or more in the conservative Islamic kingdom.

The couple, living in the capital Riyadh, says they organize so-called “wife-swapping” parties once a month with up to five couples participating.

“It is something we do and we are not ashamed of it,” said Tara, who asked that her full name not to be disclosed. Partner swapping is the best way “to find out more about ourselves sexually,” she argues.

More…

Circumcision ruling condemned by Germany’s Muslim and Jewish leaders 3

From The Guardian.

Boy being circumcised

Personally, I like this ruling.

______________

by Kate Connolly

Jewish and Muslim leaders were united on Wednesday in their condemnation of a German court’s decision to in effect outlaw the circumcision of boys after a judge deemed that the religious practice amounted to bodily harm.

Representatives of the two religious communities called the ruling insensitive and discriminatory, saying it was an attack on centuries of religious tradition.

A judge at a Cologne court said that the circumcision of minors went against a child’s interests because it led to a physical alteration of the body, and because people other than the child were determining its religious affiliation.

Religious leaders said the court had stepped into a minefield with its decision, which undermined their religious authority and contravened Germany‘s constitution.

Ali Demir, chairman of the Religious Community of Islam in Germany, said: “I find the ruling adversarial to the cause of integration and discriminatory against all the parties concerned.”

Dieter Graumann, president of Germany’s Central Council of Jews, called it “an egregious and insensitive measure” which amounted to “an unprecedented and dramatic intervention in religious communities’ right of determination”.

The ruling followed a lengthy legal battle, sparked when a Muslim couple decided to have their son circumcised, specifically for religious reasons, by a Muslim doctor in Cologne. The doctor, identified only as Dr K, carried out the circumcision on the four-year old boy in November 2010, before giving the wound four stitches. The same evening, he visited the family at home to check up on the boy. When the boy began bleeding again two days later, his parents took him to the casualty department of Cologne’s University hospital. The hospital contacted the police, who then launched an investigation. The doctor was charged with bodily harm, and the case was taken to court.

While the court acquitted Dr. K on the grounds that he had not broken any law, it concluded that circumcision of minors for religious reasons should be outlawed, and that neither parental consent nor religious freedom justified the procedure. It ruled that in future doctors who carried out circumcisions should be punished.

The court weighed up three articles from the basic law: the rights of parents, the freedom of religious practice and the right of the child to physical integrity, before coming to the conclusion that the procedure was not in the interests of the child.

More…

SCOTUS: Render Unto Caesar … er, Kaiser Permanente Reply

By Thomas Knapp

Well, here it is, folks: The Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the “individual mandate” provision in the Affordable Care Act, aka “ObamaCare.” As of 2014, all Americans will pay a portion of their taxes to an insurance company of their choice instead of to Uncle Sam (or Uncle will come calling).

Canned consternation from the usual critics on the right, of course — you know, the people who brought you HMOs, Medicare Part D, and RomneyCare, all in the name of “free enterprise.” Forcing you to buy “insurance,” whether for yourself or someone else, is only bad when Democrats or New York’s “Five Families” do it.

In reality, the right should be celebrating CannibalCare … er, ObamaCare. Not only did Republicans lay three decades of its groundwork, not only was the template for the law laid down by none other than GOP presidential Mitt Romney, not only was the deciding SCOTUS vote cast by a George W. Bush appointee, Chief Justice John Roberts, but it’s the ultimate triumph of “privatization.”

Huh? What? Yes, “privatization.”

More…

Living with Savages Reply

By Gavin McInnes

When libertarians, paleocons, neocons, and Republicans are confronted with a shrieking liberal they usually shoo it away. That’s easy if you don’t live in New York City, Berkeley, LA, or Madison, but those of us mired here in the jungles of hysteria have to come up with other solutions.

It takes a certain type of masochist to live this Sisyphean lifestyle. We can’t bitch about Obama’s ridiculous spending because Bill Maher told them Obama has spent less than any other president. We can’t rail against Fast and Furious because Chris Hayes told them Obama is pro-gun. Whenever you criticize the president, their trained response is that you can’t handle his blackness—oy vey!

I’ve found the only way to calm this yelping beast is to speak to it in its own language.

More…

Religious circumcision of kids a crime – German court Reply

From Russia Today

A German court has ruled that parents can’t have their sons circumcised on religious grounds in a move which has angered Muslim and Jewish groups in the country.

­The court in Cologne decided that a legal guardian’s authority over a child does not allow them to subject them to the procedure, which the court called minor bodily harm, reports The Financial Times Deutschland.

More…

Jimmy Carr is morally right 3

From The UK Libertarian.

Davy, the UK Libertarian, hoists moralistic tax-happy statists on their own petard. Logical, potent, and apt, if emotionally-oversaturated at times.

_________________

"[WARNING: The following article contains images that some people may (and should) find disturbing. If you don’t want to see fairly graphic images then stop reading now or scroll down with a soft touch]

David Cameron has described Jimmy Carr as “Morally wrong” for allegedly paying  as low as 1% on his income taxes thanks to a scheme known as K2, advised by his accountant as perfectly legal and used by celebrities on both the left and the right.

But he’s not not behaving unethically, in fact, morally, he’s in the right.

To explain why, I will be asking you to stick with me through a seemingly unrelated tangent but, if we’re lucky, it will tie up in the end.

The following earnings are made up for the sake of simplicity but the logic holds true whether you scale up or down:

To begin let’s suppose Jimmy Carr is a model tax-payer and let’s say he earns £1,000,000 gross profit in the 2012 tax year. Without any exemptions and filing purely as an individual he would expect to pay close to 50% directly to the Inland Revenue. At that rate he is handing over approximately £500,000 to David Cameron’s government.

Let’s take a look at some of the ways that £500,000 will be spent once the government has its (apparently righteous) hands on it:

At least £44,000 of this half a million will go towards “Defence”. The quandry for the informed and ethical man (but not the amoral/immoral) when pondering this contribution, however, is that “Defense” is really just a euphemism for Offense. Still etched in the memories of anybody who takes a passing interest in politics (regardless of which side of the fence they fall) is that spark of defiance in February of 2003 when almost a million people marched through London in protest against the proposal to wage war against Iraq. They chanted “No more war!” They screamed the justification was immoral. Some even cried for people they had never met, guessing before the fact just how horrific the consequences could be. They were right.

More…

Joe The Plumber Stands By Gun Control Remarks, Claims Media Unfairly Spun Holocaust Angle Reply

From HuffPo.

Not seeing how what he said was “offensive”. Any sensible totalitarian disarms their citizenry/”undesirables” to make it easier to oppress and prey on them.

Talk to the JPFO—they’ll fill you in!

Shame he felt the need to backpedal  for being right.

___________________

By Paige Lavender

Samuel Wurzelbacher, better known as Joe the Plumber, stood by controversial remarks he made blaming gun control for the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust.

“All I said was gun control was implemented, and then governments proceeded to violate human rights,” Wurzelbacher said, according to the Toledo Blade. “Nowhere did I mention the Holocaust or was I even talking about it.”

Wurzelbacher sparked controversy when he posted a web video Monday featuring the following remarks:

“In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were exterminated. In 1939, Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945, six million Jews and seven million others unable to defend themselves were exterminated. I love America.”

Wurzelbacher was quickly criticized by the National Jewish Democratic Council, a pro-Democratic group, whose President and CEO David Harris said the congressional candidate’s comparison was “beyond the pale” and called on Wurzelbacher to “apologize and remove this offensive video immediately.”

While Wurzelbacher didn’t respond to that criticism, he did tell one Twitter user who hit Wurzelbacher’s “ignorance” that he was “obviously not watching my video.”

Manga images ‘not child porn’: Supreme Court Reply

Swedish courts in sensible verdict shocker!

Read all about it at The Local.

I also found this tidbit—from artist Trevor Brown’s blog—interesting…

i just received a letter yesterday from a fellow swede saying “…his ex tried to get him convicted for sexual abuse of their child so she would get full custody, but when that didn’t work out, she tried to convict him for having child pornography…” – an interesting detail not mentioned in any english report on the case i’ve read

_________________

Japanese manga comics depicting children in sexual poses are not child pornography, Sweden’s Supreme Court has ruled, overturning a high-profile conviction of a Swedish translator.

In a ruling issued on Friday, the court acquitted Simon Lundström, who had been found guilty of child pornography crimes by two lower courts before appealing his case to Sweden’s highest court.

“I’m obviously very relieved, in part because it makes life easier for me personally, but most of all I’m generally relieved for Sweden as a whole,” Lundström told the TT news agency in an email.

“It would have been very hard for me to relate to Sweden as a country if it turned out to be a place that prohibited certain expressions of the imagination.”

According to the Supreme Court’s ruling, the drawings are pornographic and they do portray children.
However, because the cartoons represent imaginary figures there is no way they could be mistaken for real children.

“The criminalization of possession of the drawings would otherwise exceed what is necessary with regard to the purpose which has led to the restriction on freedom of expression and freedom of information,” the court said in a statement.

Lundström, described by Swedish media as a top manga expert, was found guilty by two lower courts of having 39 drawings portraying figures in sexual poses stored on the hard drive of his computer.

In his initial trial, he explained that he had retrieved the pictures in order to stay up to date with the latest developments in the Japanese comic genre.

A district court fined him 25,000 kronor ($3,500) but an appeals court lowered the sum to 5,600 kronor.

During the Supreme Court trial, the images were shown on large screens in the courtroom. The pastel-coloured pictures showed children in different states of undress.

More…

The Second Sexism: don’t judge a book by its press Reply

From the New Statesman.

The Second Sexism: don't judge a book by its press

Might be a worthy read for those interested in modern men’s issues.

__________

By Ally Fog

Anyone who has ever debated male-specific gender issues will probably have experienced an encounter like this:

Bloke: “Yeah, but men can also be victims of violence and injustice, why aren’t we talking about that too?”

Feminist: “Of course they can, and if you guys want to campaign on those issues, I’ll applaud you.”

In practice, it doesn’t always work out like that. This month, moral philosopher David Benatar published his book The Second Sexism to an excitable flurry of comment. Before discussing what Benatar says, let’s be quite clear about what he does not.

Despite what you’ve probably read in the Observer, the Guardian, the Independent or even here in the New Statesman, Benatar is not a Backlash merchant. He does not argue that men have a worse time than women; that feminism has gone too far; that men are now the oppressed sex; or that sexism against women does not exist. On the contrary, he repeatedly details the many forms of injustice faced by women across the world, and applauds efforts to address them. Indeed the clue is in the title: not “The New Sexism” or “The True Sexism” but “The Second Sexism.” Second, meaning in addition or secondary to the first sexism which is, of course, against women. Benatar does not blame feminism for anti-male discrimination, rightly noting that most such injustices long predate the women’s movement.

He certainly doesn’t suggest positive discrimination, instead devoting an entire chapter to arguing that such policies are unethical and ineffective as a response to any form of sexism. Perhaps the chapter title “Affirmative Action” may have confused any critics who only read as far as the contents page.  

Nor, BBC Online readers, is Benatar a champion of the Men’s Rights Movement. In the book he notes astutely that men’s groups can become “fora for self-pity and for ventilating hyperbolic views that are not checked or moderated by alternative opinions.”  

Benatar’s actual argument is that, in most societies, men and boys face several specific and serious forms of wrongful discrimination, and that these are not only injustices in their own right, but also contribute to discrimination against women. The issues he highlights include military conscription and combat exclusions; male circumcision; corporal punishment, victimisation in violence and sexual assault, and discrimination in family and relationship disputes.

More…

Future of Freedom Foundation June 17, 2012 Reply

MIGRATION
Are Immigration Laws
Like Jim Crow?

by David Bier
Foundation for Economic Education
WELFARE STATE
Big Lies in Politics
by Thomas Sowell
LewRockwell.com
MONETARY POLICY
How the Euro Will End
by Gerald P. O’Driscoll Jr.
Cato Institute
ECONOMICS
Hayek on Individualism
by Sheldon Richman
Foundation for Economic EducationThe Nature and Origin
of Subjective Value

by Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk
Ludwig von Mises Institute
WAR ON TERRORISM
Game of Drones
by Gene Healy
Cato Institute
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Should We Let Law Enforcement Drone
On and On?

by A. Barton Hinkle
Reason
FOREIGN POLICY
The New Obama Doctrine
by Nick Turse and Tom Engelhardt
Antiwar.comJack of No Trade,
Masters of War

by Joseph R. Stromberg
Independent Institute
U.S. MILITARY
Romans 13 and
Obeying the Government

by Laurence M. Vance
LewRockwell.com

Dissident News Update June 17, 2012 Reply

CONGRESS MAY TURN OVER INTERNET REGULATION TO UN

The US House of Representatives will vote on a measure this week as to whether or not they will hand over regulation of the internet to the United Nation’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Other nations such as China, Russia, Brazil and India among other UN members are backing a proposal to put the control of internet regulation in the hands of the UN. This would give the United Nations control…

READ MORE…

Voters Warned Not to Tweet Ballot

High-ranking members of both political parties were unaware that posting photos of completed ballots on Facebook or Twitter is illegal in Wisconsin, and they promised to quickly take down the posts Friday after election officials reminded voters of the law. The law bars voters from showing their completed ballots to anyone. The intent is to prevent people from selling their votes and then showing their ballots as proof they voted…

READ MORE…

VIDEO BANNED BY YOUTUBE ON HOMOSEXUAL ‘MARRIAGE’ HOSTED BY BREITBART NEWS

The following video produced by sixteen-year-old Madeleine McAulay has been banned by YouTube because it did not meet their “community guidelines.” The video, which had garnered over 20,000 hits in only a week, was submitted to Breitbart News for consideration when it was first released. As editor of Breitbart TV, the video curating division of Breitbart News, I receive dozens of daily submissions from talented and thoughtful citizen journalists. Many…

READ MORE…

More…

Roberto Unger, Obama’s Former Harvard Law School Professor, Says The President ‘Must Be Defeated’ Reply

From the Huffington Post

One of President Barack Obama’s former professors appears to have turned against him, according to a recent YouTube video.

“President Obama must be defeated in the coming election,” Roberto Unger, a longtime professor at Harvard Law School who taught Obama, said in a video posted on May 22. “He has failed to advance the progressive cause in the United States.”

More…

Let Them Drink Coke Reply

By Paul Gottfried

New York Mayor Bloomberg has recommended that a 16-ounce limit be placed on the size of soft drinks sold at city restaurants, movie theaters, stadiums, and arenas. This seemed necessary because of an epidemic of obesity in his municipality, where over 50% of the residents are now judged to be overweight. I’m not sure what “overweight” means for NYC officials, but I’ve noticed lots of fatsos waddling around on their streets.

Over the last thirty years Americans have been increasing their food intake by almost 300 calories daily. Limiting soft-drink consumption would ostensibly help combat this public danger in the same way that earlier measures such as posting calorie counts on restaurant menus and prohibiting trans fats in restaurant food aimed to trim New Yorkers’ waistlines. Apparently, these earlier measures hadn’t done the trick, so Bloomberg is now pulling out the big guns against soda pop. Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson has confidently assured us that “People will come to see this very much in the interest of public health.”

“Where were these journalists when it came to criticizing much bigger infringements on individual liberties?”

There is no reason to think that Bloomberg’s law will have much effect on the average New Yorker’s girth. At least for now, consumers will be allowed to purchase as many sugary drinks as their money and appetite will permit. Although it may cost more to buy these additional high-calorie drinks, New Yorkers will not be prevented from doing so.

I’m probably sugar-averse, a natural condition that has allowed me to reach my present age without the diabetes that afflicts other family members. If all the Pepsis and other foul-tasting drinks in stores and restaurants disappeared overnight, it wouldn’t bother me.

More…

An Echo, Not a Choice Reply

By Paul Gottfried

A recent syndicated column by Peggy Noonan makes useful observations, together with one rather questionable point. Noonan blithely assumes that while the president has “fully absorbed the general assumptions and sympathies of the political left,” his opponent Mitt Romney reflects “the general attitudes, assumptions and sympathies of the political right.”

Noonan may be seeing something in Romney that eludes me. Of course, she can find support for her view in the invectives of those liberal journalists, who have begun to depict the former Massachusetts governor and Republican nominee as an incipient fascist. But the right-wingers I meet, who are the ones who tried to keep Romney from winning the nomination, do not believe that he shares their “general attitudes, assumptions and sympathies.” They are going along with the candidate of the GOP regulars and Noonan’s Wall Street Journal because they think Obama may be worse.

Despite this undeserved plug for her newspaper’s editorial choice, Noonan does correctly underline the foolishness of Obama’s recent straying in the direction of the hardline social left. She notes that Obama is “actively bad in politics,” as opposed to being a politically clever ideologue. “Anyone good at politics does not pick a fight with the Catholic Church during an election year.”

More…