One would think then that anything to make adoption easier and broaden the pool of the number of people who can provide for children effectively to be a welcome change.

Unfortunately, a family court in Georgia doesn’t see it that way. As covered over at the Volokh Conspiracy, in a March 2010 decision, the court ruled that a late middle aged couple who had been foster parents to an infant girl and decided to adopt her were not suitable to adopt, even after acting as her foster parents for three years. What was the one factor that disqualified them?

They weren’t married.

Interestingly, according to Georgia law, being married is not a requirement for legal adoption. The court, in a rare and flagrant case of conservative judicial activism, decided to ignore the strictures of the law and substitute its own moral judgment, saying: “[the couple were] living in an immoral, meretricious relationship, … and that the adoption and their continued custody is inappropriate.”

Thankfully, a Georgia Appeals Court swiftly reversed the decision. Still, it shows just how far reaching of a hold that religious categories of sexual morality, and specifically a monomaniacal emphasis on marriage as the only appropriate form of sexual relationship, can have even today in the context of a simple legal proceeding. It is remarkable that the hold of those beliefs overpowered consideration for the well-being of the child as well as adherence to the law.

When the Bible says homosexuals should be “put to death; their blood shall be upon them,” the blood is really AIDS. Or so says Jeremy Walters, Republican legislative hopeful, in a series of posts on his Facebook.

Waters is running in House District 67 against state Rep. Kevin McCarthy, D-Des Moines, the second highest ranking Democrat in the Iowa House.

From Walters’ Facebook:

“The Holy Bible says if your ‘GAY’ homosexual they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. This tells me a lot so should we kill them NO. They Need to ask God to forgive them of their sins and mean it turn away from it. They also need to know that when it says that their blood shall be upon them that tells me it is AIDS. That how I feel.”

“homosexual “GAY” is not of God!!!!!!”

He issued an apology, which sounds very heartfelt:

I am not against people having a gay lifestyle, and the statements made on Facebook have been taken the wrong way. The statement regarding gay homosexuality was not meant to be offensive and I deeply appologize.

As far as the quote from Bible; I was replying to someone elses post. It should have been posted as a comment on their page, not my Facebook wall. I appologize for the mistake and if this statement offened anyone. Both postings have been removed and these comments do not pertain to my campaign or the Republican Party of Iowa. My passion is to listen and learn from the people so I can represent them at the statehouse. Everyone makes mistakes, please forgive me.

Yeah, it wasn’t meant to be offensive. We just took it the wrong way. Sure Jeremy.

He’s not against people having a gay lifestyle, he just thinks they offend his God need to repent. Makes complete sense.

If it wants to be forgiven, he should say his remarks were WRONG, not that they were taken wrong. He hasn’t changed his mind, he’s just trying to manage the fallout.

This is the argument that some behavioral scientists have begun to make: That a significant slice of morality can be explained by our innate feelings of disgust. A growing number of provocative and clever studies appear to show that disgust has the power to shape our moral judgments.

Research has shown that people who are more easily disgusted by bugs are more likely to see gay marriage and abortion as wrong. Putting people in a foul-smelling room makes them stricter judges of a controversial film or of a person who doesn’t return a lost wallet. Washing their hands makes people feel less guilty about their own moral transgressions, and hypnotically priming them to feel disgust reliably induces them to see wrongdoing in utterly innocuous stories.

Some of the article reminds me of the book SuperSense by Bruce Hood. There he talks about the Killer’s Cardigan experiment, where he asked people if they would be willing to wear a non-descript jacket for money. Many people raised their hands, but when he suggested that the jacket had previously been worn by a serial killer, those hands automatically went down.

Hood suggests that we have an instinctive feeling of contamination, even when we know – rationally – that there is no justification. I like this idea, since it might explain things like the “purity codes” found in religions. Of course, those feelings may be carried by instinct, but they are shaped by culture:

But to David Pizarro, the most interesting — and perhaps most important — question to answer is how flexible disgust is, how much it can change. Fifty years ago, many white Americans freely admitted to being disgusted by the thought of drinking from the same drinking fountain as a black person. Today far fewer do. How did that change? Did their sense of disgust ebb as they spent more time in integrated restaurants and workplaces and buses, or did they find ways to actively suppress their feelings? Pizarro isn’t sure, but he’d like to find out.

A federal judge in California on Wednesday knocked down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, ruling that voter-approved Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution — handing supporters of gay rights a major victory in a case that almost all sides say is sure to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The 136-page opinion, issued by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco, is an initial step in what will likely be a lengthy fight over California’s Proposition 8, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

At stake in the trial was whether California’s ban on same-sex marriage violates gay couples’ rights to equal protection and due process, as protected by the U.S. Constitution.

Hopefully this won’t get overturned.

Hill’s memoir, “Sugarbabe” details her yearlong adventure with a series of so-called “sugar daddies.” The book sold 24,000 copies in her native Australia, according to her publisher, and has just been released in the United States. Holly Hill is a pen name.

“I thought it was men that would like the book,” she says, “But in fact it’s women, because what it says to women is that if your man cheats on you, he still loves you, and he’s probably running about average.”

Allowing their men to stray is a concept that’s difficult for most women to contemplate.

But Hill says that if a woman takes the time to truly examine her relationship and considers Mother Nature’s unerring spell on men’s libidos, she might realize that letting her boyfriend or spouse know she’s OK with him having sex elsewhere is a logical way to prevent him from doing it in secret.

“I think that cheating men are normal,” says Hill. “Monogamous men are heroes. Monogamy does have a place in relationships, but not on the long-term. Men are hard-wired to betray women on the long-term.”

What do you think about “negotiated infidelity”?

(Note from Florien: Since I’m a capitalist, this does not reflect my views.)

I saw this video a few years back and was thinking about it today; it’s basically a mathematics lecture which proves that capitalism cannot work for very much longer as the dominant socio-economic system and why if it does we’re all absolutely screwed.

This simple mathematical lecture explains everything from peak oil to the population explosion. Hope y’all enjoy and it makes you think!

Incidentally, I know that there’s a risk of apocalyptic Christians abusing this post, but hey, they’re idiots so I don’t care :-)

Bellevue Baptist Church pastor Steve Gaines told his congregation Sunday that any church leader found in serious sin would have been prohibited from coaching in the church’s athletic leagues, just as a woman who acknowledged she is gay.

“You have to have certain standards for leadership,” Gaines said in a video posted on the Internet. “Leadership is not a right. Leadership is a privilege.”

Of course — leadership is for bigots like Steve!

“We all know that every coach is a sinner, every player is a sinner. We understand all of that,” he said. “It’s not that we are trying to have a sin-free ball league.”

He noted if another coach was currently an adulterer, cohabiting with someone, hooked on pornography, or participating in “the sin of homosexuality,” they would suffer the same fate.

What Steve means is admit to those sins. But rarely do religious bigots admit to their secret sins, so most of his flock will be fine.

Could you imagine if they banned everyone who looked at porn? Steve would be without any coaches. I wonder if his standards apply to the other biblical sins too… does he ban people who are fat (gluttons)? Does he ban anyone who lies (which would be everyone)?

By the way, this is the same Steve Gaines who failed to report one of his ministers molesting his own son:

An assistant prosecutor said Bellevue Baptist Church Pastor Steve Gaines may have committed a crime if he knew the “moral failure” a church staff member confessed to him six months ago involved child molestation. [...]

Gaines has admitted that Paul Williams, a minister on staff at the Memphis, Tenn., mega-church for 34 years, told him in confidence about inappropriate behavior that occurred 17 years ago.

While Gaines did not disclose details of the confession, a Web site critical of his leadership alleged Williams molested his own son. Church leaders have suspended Williams and launched their own investigation, due to last a month.

Way to go, Steve. You’re a role model for bigots and bastards everywhere!

It’s hard to believe that hitting kids in school is still allowed, but I guess when you’re into hitting defenseless children it’s hard to give up. A new bill hopes to ban it:

Legislation to ban corporal punishment in most public and private schools was introduced in Congress Tuesday.

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) introduced the “Ending Corporal Punishment in Schools Act,” which would impose the ban on all public and private schools with students that receive federal services.

Though there is no evidence that corporal punishment has any beneficial effect on students, and much evidence that it harms kids, 20 states still allow it.

School districts generally have their own rules for administering corporal punishment, or, in layman’s terms, whacking a kid. Sometimes the rules specify the number of times a kid can be hit, and usually they identify which part of the body can be struck (usually the buttocks but sometimes the hands, too). You can see some of the rules in a recent post here.

A congressional committee recently heard testimony about the subject and here are some of the facts members learned:

*School officials, including teachers, administered corporal punishment to 223,190 school children across the nation during the 2006-07 school year (according to conservative government estimates, the latest year for which national statistics were available).

*As a result of that punishment, 10,000 to 20,000 students requested medical treatment.

*Students are typically hit on their buttocks with a wooden paddle, approximately 15 inches long, between two- and four-inches wide, and one-half inch thick, with a six-inch handle at one end.

*Most students are paddled for minor infractions, violating a dress code, being late for school, talking in class or in the hallway, or being “disrespectful.”

I think this can only be a good thing. Teachers should not be allowed to hit children. Do you agree?

Is it biblically acceptable for a mother to hold a full time job outside of the home?

It can be. It is like the alcohol question, it can be.

Having said it can be, I want to discourage it because mothering and homemaking are huge and glorious jobs. [...]

And, just being able to focus on the home where ministry can happen—not being enslaved by anybody’s clock—you can say, “I want to work my tail off for king Jesus, but I don’t want anybody to pay me for it. I’m going to do it right here in this neighborhood with my husband’s connections and my connections. We’re going to lavish grace on people’s lives.”

So, I’m calling for ministry full-time when I say “don’t work full-time if you have a family.” Turn your family into ministry. Turn your family into a global dream for what this family might become, or what this man might be, or what we might be together as we are home.

Here’s the video:

So he’s discouraging women from working full-time outside of the home, and instead to “work their tails off for King Jesus” at home. Good ol’ King Jesus, always distributing advice from the lips of men.

Is it okay for women to work outside the home? Of course! Is it okay for them to stay at home full-time? Of course! Is it okay for men to stay home full-time and have the wife work full-time? Of course!

You’d think people would realize we’re not in the 16th century anymore.

I guess the next question to ask is, “Is it OK for women to walk outside without a burqa and hijab?” Enlightened minds want to know! What does the holy text say??

(Note: Your answers may or may not be used in a top-secret art project…)

Despite objections from conservative Anglicans, the Episcopal Church will ordain its first openly lesbian bishop Saturday.

The Rev. Mary Glasspool, 56, becomes bishop surrounded by controversy.

Conservative factions in the Anglican Communion, a 77-million member denomination worldwide, have opposed the ordination of gay bishops.

Glasspool is the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church since Gene Robinson took office in New Hampshire in 2004. Episcopalians instituted a temporary ban on gay bishops after Robinson’s ordination but revoked that ban last summer.

The daughter of a priest, Glasspool was one of two openly gay candidates on the slate in the Los Angeles diocese. She has said that her sexual orientation is “not an issue.”

Bishop Jon Bruno of Los Angeles said Glasspool was a “highly qualified and experienced” cleric.

“She’s not afraid of conflict and is a reconciler,” Bruno said, according to the Episcopal Church website.

He added that Glasspool and her partner of 19 years, Becki Sander, are an example of living service and ministry.

But her election drew opposition from Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, who said Glasspool’s ordination would deepen rifts in the church.

It “raises very serious questions not just for the Episcopal Church and its place in the Anglican Communion, but for the Communion as a whole,” said Rowan, according to the church’s website.

The Church of Ireland also issued a strong condemnation. That church is part of the Anglican Communion in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

No applause for the Neanderthals opposing it on grounds of sexuality or gender.

(That might have been unkind towards Neanderthals, and for that I apologize.)

(From ABC’s Hungry Beast…. which is a really weird name, btw.)

They identified a region of the brain just above and behind the right ear which appears to control morality.

And by using magnetic pulses to block cell activity they impaired volunteers’ notion of right and wrong. [...]

The researchers subjected 20 volunteers to a number of tests designed to assess their notions of right and wrong.

In one scenario participants were asked how acceptable it was for a man to let his girlfriend walk across a bridge he knew to be unsafe.

After receiving a 500 millisecond magnetic pulse to the scalp, the volunteers delivered verdicts based on outcome rather than moral principle.

If the girlfriend made it across the bridge safely, her boyfriend was not seen as having done anything wrong.

In effect, they were unable to make moral judgments that require an understanding of other people’s intentions.

I learned pretty quickly as a teenager than there’s something else that can affect moral judgments…