Gilbert, AZ Censors Biology Books the Old-Fashioned Way
nbauman writes The Gilbert, AZ school board has voted to tear out a page from Campbell's Biology (a standard highly-recommended textbook that many doctors and scientists fondly remember), because it discusses contraception without also discussing adoption. Julie Smith, a member of the Gilbert Public Schools governing board, said that she was a Catholic and "we do not contracept." Smith convinced the board that Campbell's violates Arizona law to teach "preference, encouragement and support to childbirth and adoption" over abortion. The Arizona Education Department decided that the pages didn't violate Arizona law, but nevermind. Rachel Maddow generously risked hassles for copyright violation and posted the missing pages as a service to Arizona honors biology students.
The funny thing is that I bet the actual religious authority of the Roman Catholic Church wouldn't agree with this sort of censorship.
Well there isn't much actual discussion of the science behind it - note how it appears before fertilisation has been discussed. On the other hand, it does mention the "rhythm method", which is both Catholic-friendly and a means of birth control. but adoption certainly isn't a means of birth control and wouldn't make sense.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
I'm sorry, but the way things are going in the US, dark ages is probably not all that hyperbolic. The US could become something like the wasteland that fundamentalism has cause in the Middle-East.
Not really.
Most religions seem to be created for let's say purely "domestic consumption". I only really can think of christianity (with all it's offshoots), islam and buddhism where missioning is really a major feature of the religion.
Judaism doesn't seem to encourage converting to it, many other religions probably don't even concern themselves with the question in the first place.
Global Warming backed by data.
Opposition to contraception backed by religious beliefs - i.e. NO data but backed by superstitious belief in God.
Religious beliefs do not deserve respect.
The international perception of the US changed a lot in the past decade or two. When I was young, in the 80s, the US was the place to be. It was the dream land. Freedom, peace and the promise that hard work will make you a rich man.
Today the US are regarded not unlike the USSR was while it still existed, with suspicion and caution. Don't get them pissed off, you know what they can do, and what they have done... Plus, and that hurts me personally quite a bit since I do know a lot of people in the US and found a few very good friends there, the whole religious bit paints the people as somewhat dim witted, naive, if not gullible or even outright dumb. The general sentiment is that in the USSR, the people at least knew their government was bullshitting them, but in the US, they succeeded. The people actually believe that they're living in paradise while in reality they are trapped in a hellhole.
But nobody really would say that openly. Sure, we joke about the US behind its back and make fun of it (mostly the government, less so the people), but nobody would dare say it to their face. In general, the US are regarded as the international politics version of the dim witted schoolyard bully. Nobody would dare speak up against him since we all know he can beat us up good, and if we suck up to him we might even get some spoils when he rips off someone's lunch money, but when he ain't around we're much more happy and we make jokes about how dumb he really is.
It's sad, actually. Mostly because I do know a lot of very good, very intelligent people in the US. What's sadder is that most of them are desperately trying to find employment in Europe with the goal to leave the whole religious cesspool behind them...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.