Posts Tagged ‘libertarian’

Police Hunt for Boy Fleeing Diet and Exercise

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

Forces nationwide on alert for mom, son who are on the run.
obese
(Image is ubiquitous, represents but does not depict child in question)

Health and faith clashed in the courtroom, with police on the lookout for a Minnesota mother who fled with her obese 13-year-old son rather than consent to a diet and exercise program.

A court-ordered BMI examination on Monday showed that Danny Hoosier is severely obese, with a score of 43, and that he would likely die from the symptoms of obesity if he did not receive physical and diet therapy.

Before she fled, Caileen Hoosier, a Roman Catholic, told a judge that she wished to treat her son’s obesity with spiritual healing methods advocated by an American Spaniard religious group known as the Nameless Band.

Danny has severe childhood obesity, a highly curable form of obesity when treated with a regimen of diet and exercise. But the teen and his parents rejected the regimen after a single workout session followed by having to eat broccoli. The boy’s mother said that exercise and putting healthy substances in the body violates the family’s religious convictions.

Authorities are alerting the public to report the mother and son’s whereabouts, if seen, and that they have frequently been sighted at McDonald’s drive-thrus. 1

Seems silly, no matter how you look at it, eh?2

Isn’t this mother’s action equivalent to post-partum abortion, or should parents be allowed to “care for” their children in whatever manner they feel appropriate? What do the Libertarians say about this?

In addition, isn’t it curious how it seems that religion gets a free pass in many aspects of law and society (e.g., tax breaks, requiring monotheistic belief for public office, hate crimes based on religion, general inability to criticize religion, lighter sentences), but when society doesn’t agree with someone’s specific actions, it condemns those actions, even if they were motivated by sincere religious conviction?

Broken down, here’s what it means: Religion does not give you a free pass. Accepted religion does. That means someone’s dancing a jig on the grave marked “R.I.P. First Amendment.”

Speaking of the First Amendment, does this case threaten to violate it in the reverse respect? In other words, by not allowing someone to practice their religion as they see fit (no matter how kooky we perceive it), isn’t that “prohibiting the free exercise thereof”? Heck, perhaps the First Amendment does need an overhaul. It obviously doesn’t take into account all the wacky religions out there, and all the wacky people who do crazy things in the name of their religion. What the Supreme Court and others say is, “Oh, the founders didn’t mean absolutely no prohibitions! There has to be some reasonable guideline to keep the kooks from doing really crazy stuff.” Hmm, I wonder who establishes those guidelines. Could it be… mainstream Christians?

Either we need to eliminate reading between the First Amendment’s lines, risking religious justification for all sorts of heinous acts, or we need to eliminate religion as a justification for any action. In other words, if an act is harmful, it’s harmful. If it’s not, it’s not. Religious conviction should not be able to adjust that fact.

UPDATE:

Believe it or not, my satire has manifested in reality.

From CNN:
Authorities arrest mom for medical neglect of 555-pound teen

South Carolina authorities have located a 555-pound teenager and his mother, who faces a charge of violating a custody order, police said Thursday.

obese-reality
Alexander Deundray Draper, 14, “is possibly at a stage of critical health risk,” social services said.

Alexander Deundray Draper, 14, of Travelers Rest, South Carolina, and his mother, Jerri Althea Gray, were located at about 4:30 p.m. near a laundromat in Baltimore, Maryland, by the Baltimore County Sheriff’s Office, said Matt Armstrong, a spokesman for the Greenville County Sheriff’s Office in Greenville, South Carolina.

“The understanding was that the individual was of the weight where it was decided by medical authorities that he needed treatment that was not being provided for by his mother,” Armstrong said.

Earlier in the day officials said the boy “is possibly at a stage of critical health risk.”

Gray was supposed to appear in family court Tuesday with her son and failed to do so, the sheriff’s office said. During the family court hearing, the boy was ordered into state custody because of medical neglect, as well as his mother’s failure to appear. The Department of Social Services then contacted the sheriff’s office, authorities said.

The warrant said Gray was served with papers Monday and told to report to court for a hearing in which the department would seek state custody of Draper. “The defendant has avoided the custody proceeding and has concealed the child,” the warrant says.

Wow. Or is this more satire? How can anyone be sure?

  1. Yes, this is satire. Yes, I have to say it. The real subjects of this insanity are Colleen and Daniel Hauser. Daniel has Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a highly curable form of cancer when treated with chemo and radiation. His parents did, in fact, reject chemo after only a single treatment, and now mother and son are on the run, and the court has issued an arrest warrant for her arrest. [<]
  2. Note that my perhaps even more subtle satire here deals with the fact that in the real case, the mother said that putting toxic substances in the body violates the family’s religious convictions. When I read the story, I wondered how much fast food the kid had eaten (and how much more he’ll be eating on the run). We’re constantly putting toxic substances in our bodies. Quite a bit of it is natural. What the mother really meant to say is that under circumstances of her choosing, she’ll allow her god to kill her child, because that’s what Jesus would do. Or Abraham. Or someone ancient. She shouldn’t interfere. Funny how she still manages to find a way to ingest food. You know, if God wanted her to survive, she wouldn’t have to eat food at all, or take any action whatsoever to preserve her own life. Fucking hypocrite. [<]

Call in Atheist! The Call in Gay Day Was Seriously Flawed

Thursday, December 11th, 2008

Not surprisingly, the campaign to highlight the importance that gay people have in the work environment by having them “call in gay” was not much of a success. The organizers perhaps fail to realize the repercussions of doing so on a small scale: job loss. In this trying economy, there are hundreds of thousands, literally, of people lining up for jobs, and why would any employer put up with a “recognize me because I’m gay, and because I am, I’m taking the day off” employee, when that employer wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) do the same for a Buddhist, a Libertarian, an avid book collector? A gay person might argue that there should be an exception for gays, because, unlike being a Buddhist, Libertarian, or book collector, being gay is not a choice. Irrelevant. Having hazel eyes is not a choice, either, and we’re not boycotting and striking because of that.

Then the gay person might go on to argue that no one discriminates against the hazel-eyed, unlike how people have and still do discriminate against women, ethnic minorities, and homosexuals, so that, in itself, is justification to try to do something about it, to be heard; and showing businesses that without gays, they won’t be able to operate will be a painful lesson to the world that they should respect gays and treat them equally.

Perhaps. But, if it makes it easier, think of it in playground socio-economic terms. Joey is popular, and the other kids like hanging out with him, and he likes the attention, but he can only have ten immediate followers at a time, due to various constraints. His followers are attractive and somewhat popular, themselves. All except for Chris, who is somewhat bumbling and not quite attractive. Joey keeps Chris around because Chris is useful, and gets sodas and runs other errands for Joey. One day, convinced by a few other unattractive nerdy kids, Chris tells Joey that he’s taking the day off from being Joey’s gopher boy, so that Joey and others like Joey will recognize the worth that Chris has, despite his various differences from the others, and that lots of kids just like Chris will be doing the same to their Joeys that very same day, so there. And Joey says, “Don’t come back.” And easily fills in Chris’ former spot.

Brutal? Perhaps. True? Absolutely. When we live in a society where going to vote for the next president is sometimes not an option because you might lose your job or not have enough money to feed your kids, it’s not realistic to ask gay people, or any other people, really, to put their jobs on the line, even if it’s to possibly increase their respect in that society. Some contractors in DC, for instance, actually pay their workers $8 an hour to strike, and many other unions do the same. People taking a day off in protest because they’re gay is not something that will ever be acknowledged as worth paying for by employers while the gay worker population is relatively low (and not, overall, more vital than any other population), and the economy is still in the dumps. Sure, it’s potentially a nuisance while the employer looks for a replacement, but is staining your personal image worth a very slim potential chance for a group image?

It’s good to think of unique ways to protest, but this one just doesn’t cut it. If the number of gays in important positions was amazingly high, and losing those gay workers for one day would bring much of the marketplace to a grinding halt, then it may work. But, of course, if that were the case, gays would, by that very fact, already likely be respected to the level of their satisfaction. That’s not absolute, but more likely. If not, then the campaign would be worth contemplating.

Similarly, I’d never advocate a “call in atheist” day to garner more respect for non-belief. Ultimately, that would just add to the argument that there’s something wrong with us, that we’re a detriment to society, and that we lack morality. One underlying problem is that by protesting in such a manner, it’s almost as if you’re saying “treat me differently,” when what you really want to be saying is, “treat me the same.”

Does anyone else think the call in gay day was an awful idea?

Talk me down.

StOP

What I Love About America

Wednesday, November 5th, 2008

Well, the United States, to be specific.

I am a libertarian, God-denouncing, religious-hating, arrogant activist atheist.

And yet I got to vote. And my vote counted.

That’s what I love about America.

/sappy

-Procrustes

The Suicide Donation Club

Monday, September 15th, 2008

It is the year 2033.

Much has changed.

You are getting old, but still have a lot of life left in you. Well, you would if it weren’t for your failing kidneys. The law has become much more liberal, more laissez faire, more libertarian. The law allows you to go to a Donation Center to acquire fresh and healthy organs. Since suicide has become legal and even desirable in certain social groups (for many reasons, one of which is the idea that by committing suicide, it helps cut down the human population, which eases the strain on an already overcrowded planet (in certain areas)), the Donation Center has negotiated with the Suicide Club to provide healthy organs for those in need. This system, in the years since its inception, has saved hundreds of thousands of lives, and prolonged the lives of many of civilization’s finest members. There are, of course, factions that disagree with this donation method, but the traditional wait list for organ transplants has been abandoned in favor of this more efficient system. All donors do so voluntarily, and the underground organ harvesting market has all but ceased to exist. In addition, since the entire economic system has been revamped, it doesn’t cost anyone anything to get an organ transplant, which makes high bidding for organs obsolete.

Out of curiosity (and perhaps necessity), you visit a Donation Center to learn what it’s all about and to evaluate your options.

The way the system works is that you have the choice of whether or not to meet your donor (and that also depends on the urgency of the transplant necessity). Meeting the donor has often helped transplant recipients understand that the donor is doing everything voluntarily. Other organs from the donor are distributed as necessary to those in need. The high population of the planet as well as advances in modern medical technology have allowed for organs to be extracted and maintained in stasis indefinitely, and are more compatible with a wider variety of recipients. It’s a clean and regulated system, and there is 100% disclosure on the part of the Center and the medical regulators.

Your options:

1. Accept the kidney donation, which will end the life of the voluntary donor (and the donor is well aware of this), and you will live at least 20 more years (if not more).

2. Do not accept the kidney donation, which will result in your death via kidney failure within a few days.

Sub-options: (you should choose either main option and you should also choose either sub-option, no matter what main option you chose)

a. Meet with your donor.
b. Do not meet with your donor.

[so, for example, you can pick 1.a. or 1.b. or 2.a. or 2.b. (Yes, you can meet with your donor even if you choose not to go through with the transplant.) ]

Accept all the statements of the hypothetical to be true.

What option do you choose, and why?

Follow-up questions:

1. If you chose to meet with your donor, what questions would you ask?

2. If you chose not to meet with your donor, why did you choose not to?

3. If you were executive leader of a country whose legislature was about to pass a law to allow such a system, would you veto that law? Why or why not?

4. If you could live forever (no dying of “old age”) (without harming anyone to do so), would you?

5. If you could live forever, but at the cost of a voluntary donor for every ten years of life, would you?

6. If you could live forever, but at the cost of a single involuntary donor, would you?

7. Would you ever consider being a donor in a system like this? (with the stipulation that it’d be pretty much the last thing you ever do)

8. If the hypothetical were altered such that the system were identical except for the fact that recipients had to pay donors directly, in whatever amounts they negotiated, would you pass such a system into law?

9. If you were “running the government”, and you had the choice as to whether to make this system into a “free universal health care” covered system, an “insurance” system, or a “pure libertarian” (citizens/doctors/hospitals/recipients/donors figure out on their own how to pay or not pay) system, which would you choose, and why? Or do you have a different type of economic system with regard to the donation system that you’d implement?

10. Do you see an analogy between this scenario and prostitution?

11. Is suicide immoral? Why or why not?

StOP

Catholic World Youth Day 2008

Thursday, July 17th, 2008

The 23rd World Youth Day celebrations are currently being hosted in Sydney, Australia from the 15th to the 20th of July. The official World Youth Day (WYD) 2008 site describes it as “the largest youth event in the world… attended by the Pope and hundreds of thousands of young people from all over the globe… to celebrate and learn about their faith on a more regular basis”.1 It is the religious equivalent of a week-long music festival, complete with services, entertainment acts, a welcome from the Prime Minister, and Pope Benedict XVI’s first official public appearance in Australia ever to an anticipated crowd of 500,000.2

People walking over the Harbour Bridge, as they will during World Youth Day 2008

The estimate of the taxpayer cost for this event is currently at AU$160 million with AU$86 million coming from the NSW state government, well beyond the proportion of funds contributed by past host cities. Meanwhile, the Catholic Church is putting forward only AU$115 million, with AU$75 million expected to be recouped from attendance fees.3 The number of people converging on the CBD is expected to go well beyond that experienced in the 2000 Olympics.4 Road closures and disruptions are expected to exceed the inconveniences caused during the 2007 APEC summit,5 and the lead-up to the event was beset by anxieties over the ability of Sydney’s underfunded infrastructure to cope with the load of so much human traffic.6 7

While this all might suggest that Australia is quite fond of organised religion, particularly Roman Catholicism, the statistical data evinces a different scenario. Though Catholicism is the largest denomination in Sydney, it is still only a minority of less than 30%.8 This year, an international study revealed many striking features of religion in Australia, including the significantly high rate of nominalism in Catholics. 31% of Australians said they lacked a belief in any god, making Australia the fourth least religious nation out of 21 in the study. General interest in religion and religious issues also recorded significantly low. Unsurprisingly, youth were found to be the least religious of all. 9

In such an unsuitable environment for an event promoting religion to the masses, the clandestine introduction of special police powers for World Youth Day has proved to be widely unpopular. Using a cleverly arranged legal loop-hole that bypassed parliamentary scrutiny, the deputy Premier gazetted new regulations on June 25, that allowed for a AU$5,500 fine to anyone who “causes annoyance or inconvenience to participants in a World Youth Day event”.10 The word “annoyance” was vague enough to endanger people’s right to demonstrate and campaign during the event. Members of Broken Rites, a support group for church sex abuse victims, reported being approached by police to have their banners and placards pre-approved for their intended demonstration. The NoToPope coalition expressed concern that they would not be allowed to hand out condoms and protest papal doctrines on sexuality. The consequence of this law that was most widely publicised was that merely wearing a shirt with an anti-catholic or anti-WYD slogan could result in fine or arrest.11 In response to this, the NoToPope coalition staged a “fashion show” in front of State Parliament, displaying a range of potentially offensive shirts.12

The government attempted to justify these laws as nothing out of the ordinary, comparing them to the sort of controls used at sporting events, but as Stephen Blanks of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties has pointed out, normally such laws would apply to all sports spectators, not just those supporting the visiting team. It seems that the state government is eager to avoid a repeat of last year’s embarrassment during APEC, where a comedy team made it through two police checkpoints in a fake motorcade, carrying one of their members dressed as Osama bin Laden. They were let off on all charges due to the role that police complacency played in the incident.13

Finally, on Tuesday this week, a court ruling deemed the term “annoyance” to be invalid, due to its propensity to outlaw almost behaviour as trivial as tying a shoelace. However, it did not remove the term “inconvenience” from the law, which the Premier claimed was good enough to embue police with the power to suppress undesirable behaviour. 14

With growing mass dissent and a lack of religious zealotry, it is puzzling to many why Sydney was made to bear this burden at all. Premier Iemma’s main incentive to the public is a promised boost of AU$200 million to the local economy.15 Retailers don’t seem convinced, however, including the CEO of Myer who predicts losses around $20 million dollars due to their business.16 NSW Trainers Association says that the AU$41 million compensation deal that had to be struck in order to re-locate 700 horses from Randwick Racecourse will not cover all costs, nor will it justify the risk of a new outbreak of equine influenza which saw last year’s Spring Carnival cancelled.17 There have been reports that the sex industry can expect a surge in business thanks to non-catholic visitors accompanying World Youth Day, but even that prospect seems to be unsupported speculation.18

Another proposed justification is as a sort of reciprocation for the contribution the Catholic Church makes to the community through hospitals and schools. State-funded hospitals contracted to the Catholic church often do not refer rape victims to rape counseling (because such services offer emergency contraception to victims), will not perform procedures such as vasectomies and abortions, and will often refuse to host IVF facilities. 19 Like these hospitals, Catholic schools also receive significant amounts of public money- the government gives Catholic school students 73% as much funding as public schools20 – and really only provide education opportunities to children whose parents are willing to subject them to doctrines of the Catholic church from as young as 5 years old. Considering how few people in NSW subscribe strongly to the particulars of Catholic morality and superstition, it is more plausible to say that these services are being co-opted by the Catholic church for its own agenda, than to say the church has invested its own funding into meeting the interests of the broader community.

However, there is a positive side to all this controversy. Threats of strike action during WYD08 forced the government to settle a long running pay dispute with the transport union.21 The gazetting of anti-free speech “annoyance” laws has revived the debate over whether Australia needs a Bill of Rights, and the succesful challenge of these laws has been a blow for the government’s attempts to subvert democratic processes. The inconveniences and injustices of World Youth Day have united businesses, unions and the general public in a way that is rarely seen in politically moderate Australia. As much as the church expects to boost its numbers from this event, many activist groups can expect an increase in support flowing on from the publicity they’ve received. Most of all, many previously complacent citizens have been forced to recognise the importance of vigilance over the powers entrusted to political leaders.

It is clear that rational activists and civil libertarians will not let this mass mobilisation of youth in the name of superstitious dogma go unanswered.

Editorial note: Bishop Anthony Fisher, a World Youth Day coordinator, has lately been criticized for his remarks regarding Catholic victims of sex abuse. “Happily, I think most of Australia was enjoying [and] delighting in the beauty and goodness of these young people and the hope for us doing these sorts of things better in the future, as we saw last night, rather than dwelling crankily – as a few people are doing – on old wounds.”22

World Youth Day

  1. “WYD08″. World Youth Day 2008. Accessed 8th June, 2008 http://www.wyd2008.org [<]
  2. Kuczynski, Marcus. “500,000 set to converge on Sydney Harbour to see Pope”. June 17, 2008. The Courier Mail: http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24030868-953,00.html [<]
  3. Powell, Sian. “World Youth Day to cost taxpayers $160m”. April 22, 2008. The Australian: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23578255-5013404,00.html [<]
  4. “WYD08″. World Youth Day 2008. Accessed 8th June, 2008 http://www.wyd2008.org [<]
  5. “Road Closures for World Youth Day 2008″, Roads and Traffic Authority NSW. Accessed 8th June 2008 http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/newsevents/2008_03_wyd.html [<]
  6. Hildebrand, Joe. “World Youth Day staff crisis to force free travel”. 3rd June 2008. The Daily Telegraph: http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23960027-5013605,00.html [<]
  7. “Traffic Warnings ahead of Youth Day”. June 14, 2008. AAP: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24015484-5016937,00.html [<]
  8. “2006 Census QuickStats: Sydney {Urban Centre/Locality}”, Australian Bureau of Statistics. Accessed 8th June 2008 http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ [<]
  9. “High level of religious identity paired with low level of belief”, Bertelsmann foundation. Accessed 8th June 2008 http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/ [<]
  10. “World Youth Day Amendment Regulation 2008 – Clause 7″, NSW Bar Association, Accessed 8th June 2008 http://www.nswbar.asn.au/circulars/july/wyd_reg2.pdf [<]
  11. Joel Gibson, Jano Gibson and Linda Morris, “Protests need our blessing, say police”. 2nd June 2008 http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/protests-need-our-blessing-say-police/2008/07/01/1214678038215.html [<]
  12. “‘Annoying’ proteters hold spoof fashion show”. Australian Broadcasting Corporation News. 9th June 2008 http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/09/2298949.htm [<]
  13. Daniel Emerson and Arjun Ramachandran, “Chaser’s APEC stunt charges dropped”. 28th April 2008 http://www.smh.com.au/news/tv–radio/chasers-apec-stunt-charges-dropped/2008/04/28/1209234710155.html [<]
  14. “RACHEL EVANS and AMBER PIKE v STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES”. Australasian Legal Information Institute. 17th June 2008, http://www.austlii.edu.au/ [<]
  15. “WYD ‘will have its benefits’”. SBS World News Australia. 24th June 2008 http://news.sbs.com.au/worldnewsaustralia/wyd_39will_have_its_benefits39_550098 [<]
  16. “Myer boss says World Youth Day will be ‘catastrophic’ for sales”. smartcompany.com.au 7th July 2008 http://www.smartcompany.com.au/Free-Articles/The-Briefing/20080707-Myer-boss-says-World-Youth-Day-will-be-catastrophic-for-sales.html [<]
  17. Morris, Linda. “Taxpayers’ $95m bill for World Youth Day”. Sydney Morning Herald. 16th November 2007 http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/taxpayers-95m-bill-for-world-youth-day/2007/11/15/1194766868787.html [<]
  18. Plambeck, Sean. “World Youth Day ‘will be a boost for sex industry’. news.com.au 3rd June 2008 http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23804107-5016937,00.html [<]
  19. Franklin, Matthew. “Doctors want Catholic beliefs out of state hospitals”. The Australian. 12th January 2007 http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21045678-421,00.html [<]
  20. “Catholic systemic school funding”. Catholic Education Office Sydney. Accessed 8th June 2008 http://www.ceosyd.catholic.edu.au/cms/Jahia/pid/3330 [<]
  21. “World Youth Day strike called off”. TVNZ News. 9th July 2008 http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/1896758 [<]
  22. “Catholic Bishop says abuse victims are ‘dwelling on old wounds’”. July 18, 2008. http://www.livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/07/16/Stop_dwelling_on_the_old_wounds_Bishop_Fisher_tells_sex_abuse_victims [<]