Republican barrel-scraping: Ben Carson’s running for President

May 4, 2015 • 11:10 am

Should we take into consideration someone’s religion when we decide to vote for him or her? I’ve decided that we should. All things equal, an atheist (especially one who gives good reasons for nonbelief) is preferable to a believer, especially an ardent one. And, among believers, some are more delusional than others: I’d prefer, for instance, a Unitarian Universalist over a Mormon, or a Quaker over a Jehovah’s Witness.

It’s especially important when one’s religion dictates beliefs that are in palpable conflict with reality. That includes, of course, creationism, but also religiously-motivated opposition to things like birth control, anthropogenic global warming, and mandatory vaccinations. I see it as perfectly proper to ask a candidate things like, “Do you think creationism is a valid view of the origin of life?”, and then, if they say “yes,” to ask, “Why?”

Those religions that we should worry about among politicians are those that mandate specific actions or views that we find invidious. It’s no worse to take into account that a candidate is a Mormon than his belief in UFOs or alien abduction. In both cases people believe foolish things on no good grounds, and that speaks to their probity and ability to evaluate evidence. A candidate is free to believe anything he or she wants, but we don’t have to dignify those views with our vote.

One of the Republican Presidential candidates has in fact expressed his religiously-mandated denial of reality: former pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who’s just declared that he’s a Republican candidate for President. Carson, now a surgeon emeritus, is also a Seventh Day Adventist and a creationist (his faith rejects evolution). Carson has claimed that evolution erodes morality (though he later denied he said that), that being gay is a choice, and of course he even denies that evolution happened. I’ve posted about him many times before (see here).  Let’s review just two of his comments on creationism and evolution:

From 2004 interview in the Adventist Review: 

How does this happen? What are the consequences of accepting evolutionary views of human origins? How does this affect society and the way we see ourselves?
By believing we are the product of random acts, we eliminate morality and the basis of ethical behavior. For if there is no such thing as moral authority, you can do anything you want. You make everything relative, and there’s no reason for any of our higher values.

. . . A few closing thoughts?
Ultimately, if you accept the evolutionary theory, you dismiss ethics, you don’t have to abide by a set of moral codes, you determine your own conscience based on your own desires. You have no reason for things such as selfless love, when a father dives in to save his son from drowning. You can trash the Bible as irrelevant, just silly fables, since you believe that it does not conform to scientific thought. You can be like Lucifer, who said, “I will make myself like the Most High.”

Lucifer! Later, in his 2012 commencement address at Emory University, Carson said this:

“Let me just at the outset say that I know that there was some controversy about my views on creation and somebody thought that I said that evolutionists are not ethical people. Of course I would never  say such a thing [JAC: but he did!] and would never believe such a thing nor would anybody with any common sense; so, you know, that’s pretty ridiculous. But any rate, enough said about that.”

Can you prove evolution? No. Can you prove creation? No. Can you use the intellect God has given you to decide whether something is logical or illogical? Yes, absolutely. It all comes down to “faith”–and I don’t have enough to believe in evolution. I’m too logical!

He doesn’t have enough faith to believe in evolution, for which there’s much evidence, but he does to believe in Lucifer, for which there’s none. The man is delusional.

Carson became a public figure when he dissed Obamacare at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast, endearing him to Republicans. (Why do we even have a “Prayer Breakfast” in a supposedly secular country?). It’s also a plus that he’s black, for Republicans are traditionally rejected by black voters, who know which party cares more about the disenfranchised.

In fact, as I’ve noted before, every Republican Presidential aspirant refuses to affirm the truth of evolution, though some of them waffle more about it. But there’s no waffling for Carson, whose faith affirms creationism. That’s reason enough to reject him.

Finally, if you have any remaining respect for the Wall Street Journal, it should be gone by now, for they’re published an editorial endorsing Carson for President! Read an excerpt from that endorsement, “Ben Carson for President“, which extols Carson for his Two Big ideas. What are they?

Late in his talk he dropped two very un-PC ideas. The first is an unusual case for a flat tax: “What we need to do is come up with something simple. And when I pick up my Bible, you know what I see? I see the fairest individual in the universe, God, and he’s given us a system. It’s called a tithe.

Yep, a Biblically-endorsed flat tax. Sadly, the Bible (at least the New Testament) especially favors the poor, which is the opposite of what a flat tax does. 25% tax to a poor person is a much bigger burden than to a billionaire.

Here’s the other “good idea” in Carson’s words:

“Here’s my solution: When a person is born, give him a birth certificate, an electronic medical record, and a health savings account to which money can be contributed—pretax—from the time you’re born ’til the time you die. If you die, you can pass it on to your family members, and there’s nobody talking about death panels. We can make contributions for people who are indigent. Instead of sending all this money to some bureaucracy, let’s put it in their HSAs. Now they have some control over their own health care. And very quickly they’re going to learn how to be responsible.”

Well, what kind of “contributions” are we talking about? If they’re enough to ensure decent medical care, then he’s actually endorsing Obama’s plan. But I’m sure he doesn’t mean that. What he’s favoring is the notion that you’ll get decent medical treatment only if you earn enough to afford it.

The only good thing about all this is that Carson is too gonzo for even Republicans, and doesn’t stand a chance of being nominated.

Don’t forget the book contest

May 4, 2015 • 10:00 am

I think we need more entries for the Win-the-Albatross Contest, which closes next Sunday (May 10) at 1 pm. There are lots of good stories so far, but Professor Ceiling Cat wants more. And what do you have to lose? You tell others a bit about your past, and for writing one short paragraph you can win a free hardback of Faith versus Fact, autographed and illustrated with a cat (no d*gs!). Here are the rules again:

Recount the funniest or most embarrassing thing that ever happened to you. (Note: it doesn’t have to be embarrassing if it’s just funny, or it can be both.)

Do post your answers on the original page; in fact, I’ll disable comments on this post so you won’t make the mistake of putting your entry here.

I’ll remind people one more time, probably around the end of the week.

Google Doodle celebrates Bartolomeo Cristofori

May 4, 2015 • 8:45 am

Today’s Google Doodle celebrates the 360th birthday of Bartolomeo Cristofori (could he be an ancestor of Astronaut Sam?). You know who he is, right? (I didn’t.) But we all should, for he invented the piano. As the Guardian explains,

According to Encyclopaedia Britannica, the instrument Cristofori invented was referred to during his lifetime as a harpsichord that plays soft and loud, from which its name is derived. In Italian, the phrase is gravicembalo col piano e forte.

It added: “Being able to change the volume was a major breakthrough. And that’s exactly what doodler Leon Hong wanted to highlight in this interactive doodle.”

Cristofori’s entry in Encyclopaedia Britannica notes that little is known of his life and that his invention was not well known in his lifetime, even if it has since become ubiquitous.

It reads: “Cristofori apparently invented the piano around 1709, and, according to contemporary sources, four of his pianos existed in 1711.”

The Google page features an interview with creator Leon Hong. One Q&A:

What is your favorite part about the finished doodle?

My favorite part of the doodle is the animation of Cristofori playing when the volume is set on forte. If I had more time I would have put even more bounce to his bottom. I hope people decide to do more research after playing with the doodle and learn more about him.

Click on the screenshot below to go to the page and listen to “Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring“. You can vary the speed and volume (and the player’s vigor and bottom-bouncing) by moving the slider on the right:

Screen Shot 2015-05-04 at 7.59.06 AM

Readers’ wildlife photos

May 4, 2015 • 8:00 am

We have a new contributor: reader Karen Bartelt from my own state. She sent a passel of bird photos and some commentary:

I have been enjoying WEIT for about 6 months.  Though my photos in no way compare in quality with some of the wonderful shots on WEIT, an experience last week prompted me to send a few along.
I live in Washington, IL, near the IL River, in an area that was restocked with wild turkeys [Meleagris gallopavo] about 15-20 years ago.  The reintroduction was quite successful, and for the past dozen years we have shared our 20 acres with hundreds of them, from tom turkeys courting in our driveway and ruining a patio door by pecking the reflected “rival” to death, to hens and chicks eating all of our blackberries.  However, until last week, I had never seen a brooding hen.  In honor of Mother’s Day, here are two photos.  We only found her because my husband almost stepped on her.  She never moved a muscle, even with two people clicking away from about 8 feet.  Obviously, I would have loved a clearer shot, but I didn’t want to disturb her further.  We check on her every day, and as of this morning, she was still sitting.
P1040128cr
P1040134cr
I realized that I had a few other Mother’s Day birds, so I’m sending those along, too. Early spring brings quite a few rose-breasted grosbeaks [Pheucticus ludovicianus].  Here are two pictures of a female grosbeak, one with a couple of admirers.
P1000345c
P1000282cr
In late winter, I got a couple of photos of a female red-bellied woodpecker [Melanerpes carolinus] in a tree and on our feeder.
P1030117cr
P1030120cr
Lastly, a couple of recent photos on the IL River.  The first is a shot at the limit of what my puny lens can capture.  We see the white pelicans [Pelecanus erythrorhynchos] migrating on the river in spring and fall.  This was part of a group of about 50 who have been here for about a week now.  To keep in the Mother’s Day theme, I think there are 4 females and 2 males (a little brighter with a knob on the beak).  Finally, a pair of tree swallows [Tachycineta bicolor] courting along the river.  She’s sure to be a mother soon by the look of things.
P1040156cr
P1040192cr

Two gunmen killed after attacking Muhammad cartoon exhibit

May 4, 2015 • 7:00 am

The news that I got on my CNN feed last night was a bit ambiguous: the two people killed in the attack on the exhibit of Mohammad cartoons in Garland, Texas were actually not attendees, but the attackers themselves. Both were apparently killed by police after opening fire; one policeman was wounded in the leg but has been released from hospital.

If anything was “provocative,” this was. The event was organized by Pamela Geller of the right-wing American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI)— an Islamophobe if anyone is—and featured Geert Wilders as a speaker. As the New York Times reports:

“As today’s Muhammad Art Exhibit event at the Curtis Culwell Center was coming to an end,” the [City of Garland’s] Facebook posting said, “two males drove up to the front of the building in a car. Both males were armed and began shooting at a Garland I.S.D. security officer.”

The Garland Independent School District said in a statement that its security officer, Bruce Joiner, was shot in the ankle and taken to a hospital. He was later released.

The Daily Mail suggests that Muslims were involved, which is a reasonable guess, but it’s based on one tw**t and so is premature:

In a series of tweets and links, a jihadist named as Abu Hussain AlBritani, which SITE said was British IS fighter Junaid Hussain, claimed that ‘2 of our brothers just opened fire’ at the Prophet Muhammad exhibition in Texas.

I have no great love for Ms. Geller, and don’t consider this exhibit nearly as admirable as Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons, which were intended to mock religion—not believers themselves—and defend immigrants. Geller does indeed intend to provoke, and from what I know of her she aims to criticize not just Islam, but Muslims. Wilders has been accused of the same, though I haven’t followed his actions as closely. Regardless, both have the right to say what they want without fear of violence, and I’ll defend that right.

In the meantime, the osculators are already beginning to cry that the event brought the violence on itself. At the ever-osculating Huffington Post, for instance, the recriminations appear in an article reprinted from artnet News called “Texas ‘Draw the Prophet” contest is shameless Muslim-baiting.” (So much for objective journalism.)

An image announcing the contest riffs on Norman Rockwell’s most famous self-portrait, showing Muhammad painting a self-portrait and thus aiming to highlight the contrast between traditional American values and the beliefs of Islamist extremists. By enlisting Rockwell’s saccharine vision to her cause, Geller only underlines her simplistic version of America.

I’m not sure what that last sentence means. It’s clearly critical of the poster, which I actually think is cool (see below), but otherwise reeks of postmodern sanctimoniousness. Remember that Rockwell was famous for his Four Freedoms paintings, depicting the freedoms outlined in 1941 by Franklin Roosevelt. One of them, published in 1943, depicted “freedom of speech”. Here’s that painting in the Rockwell Museum at Stockbridge, Massachusetts, a site I visited with Dawkins and Dennett during the “Moving Naturalism Forward” meeting. It shows an ordinary citizen at a New England “town meeting” standing up to say his piece.

richard-freedom-of-expression

And here’s the poster advertising the Texas exhibit. Note that HuffPo didn’t know what it was doing when it put this up, for the sit has now put itself at risk by its own “Muslim-baiting”! Do they not realize that this is going to anger Muslims? As I said, I actually think this ad is quite clever; pity it was used by Pamela Geller.

o-DRAW-570
Photo: American Freedom Defense Initiative

Here’s the famous original by Rockwell:

TripleSelf

PuffHo continues with some snark in the final sentence:

“The beacon of freedom, the shining light on a hill, is running scared,” Geller told Breitbart Texas of the Western media’s reluctance to publish controversial images like the Charlie Hebdo cartoons (see Accused of Charlie Hebdo Censorship, AP Removes Piss Christ Image,Belgian Museum Cancels Charlie Hebdo Exhibition, Security Threats Force London’s V&A to Remove Prophet Muhammad Artwork, and Why Self-Censorship of Controversial Artwork is Wrong). “We’re holding this exhibit and cartoon contest to show how insane the world has become—with people in the free world tiptoeing in terror around supremacist thugs who actually commit murder over cartoons. If we can’t stand up for the freedom of speech, we will lose it—and with it, free society.”

No word on exactly how free speech is under threat, an especially untenable claim in view of the widespread publication of Charlie Hebdo cartoons.

“No word on exactly how free speech is under threat”? What the bloody hell are they talking about? This very exhibit was attacked by two murderous thugs, as was the Charlie Hebdo office. Just because people reprint the cartoons doesn’t mean that everything is hunky-dory. Whoever wrote that article is clueless.

The noises we’re about to hear are the moans of social justice warriors and religion-coddlers telling us that this exhibit was unduly provocative. They will tell us that it is very different from Charlie Hebdo, and thus indefensible. In one way it is different—in the nature of the organization displaying the cartoons—but in the most important respect it’s not: showing us that the freedom of speech should hold regardless of how much you dislike the ideas expressed, or the intent behind them, and that we should defend that right as strongly as we can. For every strong opinion will offend someone.

What the “cartoon shamers” like Garry Trudeau really mean is that we should simply stop criticizing Islam because the Religion of Peace will kill us if we do. Odious as Geller is, she should be able to promulgate her views without fear. Likewise for the vile anti-Semites who are once again beginning to spew their venom in Europe (see post later today).

Monday: Hili dialogue

May 4, 2015 • 4:52 am

So another week has begun, and it’s going to be a wet one. And only two more weeks till the Albatross appears. The good news is that my back is much better, so I don’t have to utter the cry of the Tibetan woman who discovered she had burned her dinner, “Oh, my baking yak!” (I’ll be here all week, folks.) Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is stalking a flower, perhaps assuming it’s a mowse:

Hili: Shall I hunt down a tulip for you?
A: No, thank you.

P1020643 (1)

In Polish:
Hili: Upolować ci tulipana?
Ja: Nie, dziękuję.

Again? Two more killings at a U.S. display of Muhammad cartoons

May 3, 2015 • 8:32 pm

This just arrived from my CNN news feed:

Two people were shot by police outside of an event billed as the “Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest” in Garland, Texas, on Sunday evening, according to Garland Mayor Douglas Athas, who added, “I believe they are dead.” A security guard was also wounded, according to Athas.

CNN producer Chris Lett, who was covering the event, said there were about 40 people gathered when police announced there had been a shooting. The event, sponsored by the American Freedom Defense Initiative, claimed to have received “over 350 submissions of Mohammed cartoons from all over the world.”

I guess they deserved what they got, for they were clearly punching down. And even if it’s true that the event was hosted by the odious Pamela Geller, that doesn’t warrant murder.