Recent Comments
RSS feed
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s speech to the Israel Knesset
January 21, 2014 — xanthippaThis truly is a great speech!
Part 1:
Part 2:
John Stossel – Economic Freedom and Prosperity
January 10, 2014 — xanthippaThis video is loosely related to that famous speech by Margaret Thatcher where she unmasked the leftists hypocrisy on wealth: that caring about wealth distribution, the size of the difference between the very rich and the poor in any given country is politics of envy and hate of wealth, because it says nothing about the state of the poor themselves. After all, if the poorest people in a society are not hungry, cold or unhealthy, what does it matter how rich the rich are?
Accommodating sexism?
January 9, 2014 — xanthippaIn the Fall 2013 semester, a York University student asked to be exempt from taking part in a workshop with fellow students because some of them were female and his religion practiced gender apartheid:
‘“One of the main reasons that I have chosen internet courses to complete my BA is due to my firm religious beliefs, and part of that is the intermingling between men and women,” he wrote, adding “it will not be possible for me to meet in public with a group of women (the majority of my group) to complete some of these tasks.”’
The professor thought about it, consulted an Orthodox Jewish scholar and two Islamic scholars (all three thought the accommodation was not required), talked it over with other faculty members, did a ‘hypothetical’ survey on it in another class… and ultimately decided he could not institutionalize sexism and explained his reasoning to the student:
‘After getting wind of the resolution — as well as Mr. Grayson’s stated refusal to honour his accommodation — the student cheerfully backed off.He attended the group session without protest and even wrote a memo to Mr. Grayson thanking him “for the way you have handled this request.”
“He’s a reasonable guy,” said Mr. Grayson.’
In a reasonable world, that would have ended the matter, non?
But, York University dean/administration is not in a reasonable world…
‘Nevertheless, the rejection incensed university brass. According to Mr. Grayson, on October 18, he received a letter from the Dean of the Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional Studies ordering him to accommodate the student’s wishes.…In an October 18 email, the Dean specifically told Mr. Grayson that if he was worried about the “course experience of our female students” he would make sure they “are not made aware of the accommodation.”’
In other worlds, it’s OK to marginalize girls women as long as you don’t worry their pretty little heads about it, right?!?!?
There has been a lot of discussion of this – and guesses about the unnamed student’s religion. Professor Greyson himself consulted Orthodox Jewish and Islamic scholars and, given the Canadian demographics, it’s dollars to doughnuts he hit the bulls-eye. But, there is a big difference between the teachings of Islam and Orthodox Judaism: Orthodox Jews must adhere to their religious laws regardless of where they live while Muslims must only adhere to their religious laws while they live in an Islamic country.
And, since the student accepted the professor’s explanation that the requested accommodation could not happen under Canadian law happily and cheerfully and submitted to the secular law without any problems – I believe this student is a Muslim.
This is something that is very important, but, which is not really being brought up in any of the discussions of this case that I am aware of.
A little background: when I came to Canada in my teens and was in an ESL (English as a Second Language) class, I became best friends with Neda. She came to Canada with her family from a Sharia adherent country.
Her father, a pious, Mosque-attending Muslim, explained it in the following way:
In Sharia-adherent countries, women are treated like cattle (that was the word used – it shocked me when I heard it). He did not want his daughter to be treated like that, he wanted her to grow up as a free and equal human being. But, that would not be possible in an Islamic country.
In his wisdom, Mohammed taught that when Muslims are in a non-Muslim country, they are bound by the laws of that country. If the laws of that country transgress against Sharia, a good Muslim must still try to follow Sharia. BUT, if this would be difficult or if it would make the Muslims look bad in the eyes of the non-believers, then, Allah is merciful and he revealed that the Muslim may break the rules of Islam in order to get along/fit in/conform.
Even if it were to drink alcohol or eat pork, if no transgression was intended, then none was incurred!
So, by bringing his daughter to Canada, she could integrate into Canadian society and live a life as a free person, and as long as no transgression is intended, none is incurred and she would not be punished and go to hell!!!
Back to the York situation: it may be that this student (if, indeed, he were a Muslim) did exactly that! He asked for an accommodation because he was trying his best to follow Sharia in a non-Islamic country. When the accommodation was refused, he was happy to comply with the Canadian law that prohibits discrimination based on gender – as per Mohammed’s teachings.
The student did his best to follow Sharia, but could not – and thus he did not transgress!
In my never-humble-opinion, many Muslims who do not wish to live under Sharia but are still believing Muslims live in our country precisely because of this specific rule: if the country they live in is not Islamic, not following the strict rules of Sharia is not a transgression.
Really.
It is only the Islamists, the ones who are trying to change the laws of Canada, who demand accommodation and refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer, that are the problem – and by insisting on accommodation even in violation of Canadian law, they commit apostasy. Only the Islamists, who wish to change Canada into a Sharia state will not obey Mohammed’s command to obey the laws of the non-believers countries when there!
It is precisely from these people that Muslims like my friend came to Canada to get away from. We must not fail them now by accepting Islamists as the ones who speak for Canadian Muslims!!!
American Academy of Pediatrics attacks raw milk
December 30, 2013 — xanthippaSurprise, surprise: yet another enemy of real food attacks the traditional diet…
What is interesting in this article (and makes it worth reading) is this bit:
In 2009, former editor–in–chief of the New England Journal of Medicine Marcia Angell admitted that the “evidence-based” studies published in her former publication and most other “scientific” journals are totally unreliable:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
In her bombshell article, Drug Companies and Doctors: A Story of Corruption, she documents how doctors and scientists are bought and paid for by Big Pharma.
“Clinical trials are also biased through designs for research that are chosen to yield favorable results for sponsors,” she writes.
Yet more evidence pouring in that ‘peer-review’ is more of a ‘pal-review’…
For a deeply insightful commentary on the state of science today, see CodeSlinger’s comment here.
Reason TV’s Nanny of theYear 2013: Jailing Photogs and Smokers, Outlawing Chipotle! Plus Halle Berry!
December 26, 2013 — xanthippa
From FightForTheFuture.org
December 17, 2013 — xanthippaA message from Fight For the Future:
Yesterday, a Federal judge issued a fiery ruling condemning the NSA’s bulk phone record collection program as “likely” unconstitutional. Judge Richard Leon went on to call the program “almost Orwellian” and stated in no uncertain terms that it “infringes on ‘that degree of privacy’ that the Founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment.” (1)
This is a huge blow to the NSA’s programs — and one that would not have been possible without the massive grassroots movement that YOU helped us build. We’ve been saying these programs are unconstitutional since even before Snowden came along — it feels good to be vindicated, doesn’t it?
”They’re pushing a bill called the “FISA Improvements Act” that would legalize, and even expand, the very same program that Judge Leon just declared unconstitutional.
Make sure you take action on this one — it’s really important — but also take a minute today to savor how awesome this all is: the NSA’s power is crumbling. They’re taking a beating from the courts, the tech community, and even the UN, who recently de clared digital privacy a human right. (3)
It’s important that we keep the pressure on. We’re working on our campaign to take our privacy campaigns to an epic level in the coming year. There are incredibly powerful interests doing everything they can to muddy the debate and keep the NSA in the shadows. And even if Judge Leon’s ruling is upheld, it’s only a beginning, since it would primarily protect the rights of Americans and we all know that EVERYONE deserves freedom and privacy, regardless of where they live.
When I started writing this email, the first thing I wanted to say was “BOOH YAH NSA!” We have a long way to go, but everyone should savor this moment. It’s another big win to add to our streak.
This fight is in Congress, but if you’re not in the U.S. we still need your help to spread the word. U.S. laws unfortunately affect all of us, so share this image to voice your demands. We’re planning more action soon to tackle government surveillance internationally, so stay tuned.
Glad to have you on team Internet,
-Tiffiniy and Evan
Fight for the Future
P.S. We’re just about to start our year-end fundraising drive. Not everyone has the ability to donate, so if you do, please chip in whatever you can here.
P.P.S. We thought we’d leave you with this awesome quote from Edward Snowden himself about Judge Leon’s ruling. The last sentence will give you goosebumps. Also, be sure to read this fascinating account from a current NSA employee that seriously calls into question many of the government’s’ claims about Snowden.
“I acted on my belief that the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts. Today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans’ rights. It is the first of many.” — Edward Snowden
SOURCES:
1) New York Times, Federal Judge’s Ruling on N.S.A. Lawsuit
2) Maplight, Senate NSA Data Collection Bills -Top Intelligence Contractors Contribute Three Times More to Feinstein Than Leahy
3) United Nations General Assembly, Third Committee Approves Text Titled “Right to Privacy in the Digital Age.”
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 