A.M. Links: Unions Said To Get Special Obamacare Treatment, Officials Say CIA Turned Some Guantanamo Prisoners Into Double Agents, Judge Orders Sandy Hook Shooting 911 Calls Released

|

Credit: Peter Weis/wikimedia
  • The Obama administration is accused of giving unions special treatment under Obamacare.
  • German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union and the Social Democratic Party have agreed to the terms of a coalition agreement.
  • Current and former U.S. officials claim that the CIA turned some prisoners at Guantanamo Bay into double agents.
  • A Connecticut judge has ruled that the 911 calls relating to the Sandy Hook shooting be made public by December 4.
  • The Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem has rejected an appeal by a woman fined $140 a day for not having her son circumcised. The court levied the fine after the woman's estranged husband demanded the procedure.
  • Canada is to appeal the World Trade Organization's ruling that the European Union's ban on seal products is justified.

Get Reason.com and Reason 24/7 content widgets for your websites.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

Advertisement

NEXT: Unions Said To Get Special Exemptions From Obamacare

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem has rejected an appeal by a woman fined $140 a day for not having her son circumcised.

    This case is not so cut and dried.

    1. The Heinz people will be following you soon.

    2. It does seem to be shrouded in mystery.

    3. The Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem has rejected an appeal by a woman fined $140 a day for not having her son circumcised.

      The woman’s son is paying her $150 per day to stand firm against the court.

      /JayLeno joke

      1. Are you implying Jay Leno isn’t funny?!

    4. You laugh, but how people can claim Israel is not a theocracy in light of evidence like this is ludicrous. Sure, they may be a democracy, of sorts, but so is Iran.

      1. how people can claim Israel is not a theocracy

        Being Israeli…culture, religion, genetics?

        1. Is that supposed to be some sort of rebuttal? It fails.

          1. Is that supposed to be some sort of rebuttal?
            No.

      2. No idea how the Israeli justice system works, but one strange incident does not a theocracy make.

  2. Canada is to appeal the World Trade Organization’s ruling that the European Union’s ban on seal products is justified.

    They know that when it snows their eyes become large and the light that you shine can be seen and it would be a shame to lose that, eh.

    1. Fuck the cunts in the EU who fake-care for the seals and all their specious, sissy, humanitarianism.

      1. Citation needed for their caring being fake.

        1. Here’s my citation: Me.

    2. This subthread is never gonna survive unless you get a little crazy.

      1. Goddammit!

        1. [rubs palms together with look of evil glee upon face]

      2. +1 Adamski

      3. Even puns that good are still of the devil.

    3. But we’re never gonna survive unless we get a little crazy, eh.

  3. When are AM/PM Links going to start carrying stories on artisanal mayonnaise and deep dish “pizza”?

    1. Artisanal Mayo and Deep Dish Pizza: it’s like peanut butter and chocolate!

    2. You mean pus and tomato pie?

  4. Not since the Trailer Park Boys has the world paid attention to the Maritimes:

    http://justpassingthrough.ca/

    Iranians claim they didn’t agree to what Obama is telling the world.

    http://freebeacon.com/

    1. Iranians claim they didn’t agree to what Obama is telling the world.

      The playa getting played? Consider this my ‘O’ face :-O

      1. Looks like the Senate is going to be able to push those extra sanctions earlier than expected!

      2. Iranian foreign ministry official on Tuesday rejected the White House’s version of the deal as “invalid” and accused Washington of releasing a factually inaccurate primer that misleads the American public.

        So *that’s* where Baghdad Bob ended up! πŸ˜‰

        1. Factually inaccuracies in my White House?
          Say it aint so, Barry.

          1. I won’t hold my breath waiting for the Atlantic to retract their 13 stories on how John Kerry is the greatest Secretary of State of all time

        2. Wait- is he in Iran or going by the name Jay Carney?

    2. Has the new TPB season started yet?

  5. Current and former U.S. officials claim that the CIA turned some prisoners at Guantanamo Bay into double agents

    It’s like Homeland, in reverse.

    1. They knew all along Nina was the mole.

    2. A disinformation campaign – to get them whacked back in jihadistan?

      1. I like the way you think. There’s a script consulting role for you out there. πŸ™‚

      2. Yeah. Or maybe it’s a ploy to get the remaining prisoners to slow down their release efforts. “Sure you want to make that habeas claim now?”

  6. The Obama administration is accused of giving unions special treatment under Obamacare.

    I’m pretty sure this was a foregone conclusion to the union healh plans saga. Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if the unions were initially screwed like the rest of us just so Obama could fix it for the mid-terms.

    1. I thought the unions had been getting waivers for quite some time.

      1. And the 40% excise tax on Cadillac plans does not kick in until 2018, plenty of time for BO to get out of office.

        1. I think there is a decent chance a repeal movement gets going more earnestly after the next congressional recess.

          1. Yeah, both parties have voters that love the plans and do not want them taxed, so I agree that tax will never be enforced.

            1. Our elected officials don’t like to retire taxes already on the books. I bet it gets reduced to some not ludicrous amount (say 5%) but not eliminated entirely.

        2. Does anyone understand this fucking law? This year and next millions are going to lose their insurance because it isn’t “good” enough by Obama standards.

          Then they will start taxing the shit out of policies that are too good? What the Fuck?

          1. This is a market based reform which promotes competition. Competition of exactly identical levels of coverage.

          2. It was sold to women as inter-gender theft. Y’know, we’ll get guys to pay for maternity care and well-baby ‘cuz being a gal is not a pre-existing condition.

            But in actuality, the law was inter-generational theft, and young women, working 29 hrs a week as a barista to pay off $60k in student loans, are just about the hardest hit.

            Also, insurance company execs are partying like hedge funders, ‘cuz the required loss thingie encourages them to swell expenses.

            I assume it’s all by design.

      2. Me too – although I have to admit I’m kind of cloudy on what exactly a waiver gets you. No fines for dumping employer provided insurance?

    2. I’m not sure O is smart enough for that. It’s likely to have been more of the nobody read it, so they didn’t realize these provisions would affect unions, and then scrambling to fix it once they realized it.

  7. ‘There she blows!’ Horrifying footage shows washed-up sperm whale EXPLODING as biologist tries to cut up its carcass

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..rcass.html

    1. Is this a repeat from Oregon in 1970?

      1. No explosives were used in this instance.

    2. Nasty.

      The Faroe Islands are also home to one of my favorite metal bands, Tyr.

      1. I can only imagine the smell. I don’t think I could get within a mile of that scene without puking my guts out.

      2. How far to Asgaard

  8. Caring for Aging Parents: Should There Be a Law?

    a new law that went into effect this month requires children to provide for the emotional and physical needs of their parents, which includes visiting them often or facing fines and potential jail time.

    And you thought *Democratcare* was bad!

    1. Don’t they already have this in either Japan or China?

      1. In China, as the story he linked to says πŸ˜‰

        1. Those Chinese are *almost* as inscrutable as Democratcare.

    2. Wow, that’s only four months old. Even worse than Charles Oliver’s Brickbats!

      1. But it’s funnier than Chip Bok’s Friday Funnies!

        *** takes ball and runs home ***

        1. That’s not saying very much.

    3. “Hey, maybe we should have given ‘my kids an asshole’ waivers to the one child policy.”

  9. The court levied the fine after the woman’s estranged husband demanded the procedure.

    “If losing a natural part of my cock was good enough for me, it’s good enough for my son.”

    Debate!

    1. I wonder if the ladies have a preference when performing fellatio?

      1. Don’t care as long as it’s clean and the pubes aren’t long enough to be braided.

        1. This is why there are no …

      2. I have known women who had strong preferences in each direction, unfortuantely not biblically in all cases

    2. I’ll just try to head this off (pun intended) by informing any intactivists that they share a platform with Andrew Sullivan.

      1. So what? Mussolini made the trains run on time*. That doesn’t make that a bad thing, a wrong thing or an inherently fascist thing.

        (*)Not really, but it was a lie agreed upon.

        1. By Italian standards.

    3. We cut the umbilical cord, don’t we?

      1. Yeah, but not til the age of 26. Amirite?

      2. Bah. You’re going to make me engage this. I was hoping someone else would. Slackers. The umbilical cord will dry and fall away naturally on its own. My hood wouldn’t have.

    4. “If losing a natural part of my cock was good enough for me, it’s good enough for my son.”

      A clear example of cognitive dissonance. The same mechanism that makes one proud of having survived frat initiations, military basic training, etc.

      The question is: do children have a right to bodily integrity, and can that right be enforced against parents?

      1. do children have a right to bodily integrity, and can that right be enforced against parents?

        *** stops cutting kid’s nails ***

      2. I didn’t realize what a debate this was until we decided not to snip my son.

        My mom and grandma went nuts (ha!) when they found out.

        Ultimately, if he likes his foreskin, he can keep it (or cut it off later).

        1. That’s basically the route we took too. At the time, the AMA’s position was that there was no medical benefit or detriment either way, so we figured we’d just leave it alone.

        2. Same route my parents took and we stuck with when we had a son. Snip it, pierce it, whatever when you are an adult.

        3. Here in Czechia we would’ve been weird if we had him snipped. It never even came up.

      3. The question is: do children have a right to bodily integrity, and can that right be enforced against parents?

        The first question might be whether the right is absolute.

        1. So no pierced ears before the minor gains majority, right? If its absolute.

          1. If its absolute.
            right. Which is why it may be hard to characterize something like this as an absolute right…which then implies that case law will be required to determine which bodily parts can and cannot be mutilated. So the answer to the question asked “Can that right be enforced against the parents” is, ahem, it depends. πŸ˜‰

          2. I say, yeah, no pierced ears unless the kid wants it. Too young to ask for it? Don’t do it. But really ear piercing and circumcision are two very different things.

      4. My son can make that decision when he’s 18, now that several doctors I’ve talked to agree that it has no statistical health benefit. Others are free to feel differently. It is within the remit of guardians to preserve and protect a ward’s spiritual and physical well-being as best they understand it. Even people who strongly agree with that statement strongly disagree with what prescription such a feeling should lead to. I don’t think they’re being monsters to disagree.

      5. The same mechanism that makes one proud of having survived frat initiations, military basic training

        One of these things is not like the other…

    5. Seriously, you look forward to circumcision debates? I’ve had enough for three lifetimes.

      1. Yes, it’s a complicated issue with no easy answers.

        1. It’s really not that complicated.

      2. You want to cut them off? I say, let them develop naturally,

  10. Movember sexist, racist, and transphobic apparently

    Just a peek at the derp.

    Haddad claims Movember is also racist because black males are “twice as likely to develop” prostate cancer than white males yet most people celebrating Movember are white. Somehow, this is apparently racist.

    Uh, duh. White males are doing it. It’s obviously and blatantly racist.

    The comments are mostly awesome, though.

    1. Stuff like this makes me want to suggest that the pink ribbon bullies are actively evil.

      1. If anything, all that pink shit makes me less sympathetic to the cause of finding a cure for breast cancer. And I find the name of the organization very irritating as well.

    2. Huh. I just think it’s fucking stupid. How is growing a mustache going to do anything about prostate cancer? And “Movember”?

    3. Yes, it’s racist for white men to raise money to fight a disease that affects black men twice as much. Or something.

      1. They just want their slaves to live longer?

    4. The English and cultural studies major argues

      Stop right there.

  11. Lara Logan suspended by 60 Minutes for piling on fake Benghazi “scandal”.

    Lara Logan has been ordered to take an indefinite leave of absence from the CBS newsmagazine “60 Minutes” after an internal review found deep flaws in her reporting about the attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya.

    Logan had earlier apologized for the report, which was sharply criticized after it was broadcast. But in the review made public Tuesday, CBS said Logan’s Oct. 27 segment on the 2012 Benghazi raid was “deficient” and did not adequately vet the supposed eyewitness story of “Morgan Jones,” a security consultant whose real name is Dylan Davies.

    http://www.latimes.com/enterta…..z2lr3hutp5

    A shame too. She had a sterling reputation before the fools gold of Benghazi.

    1. WE GOTS TO FIND US A SCANDAL!

      1. Veal Parmigiana

        Ingredients
        1 1/2 cups dry, unseasoned bread crumbs
        1 cup, plus 4 tablespoons grated Parmesan cheese
        1 tablespoon each minced fresh parsley and basil
        1 teaspoon salt
        1/2 teaspoon ground black pepper
        2 large eggs
        1 teaspoon water
        1/2 cup all-purpose flour
        8 veal scallops
        1/3 cup olive oil
        1 1/2 cups tomato sauce
        8 slices mozzarella cheese

      2. Directions
        Position a rack in the center of the oven. Preheat the oven to 350 degrees. Combine the bread crumbs, 1/2 cup of the Parmesan cheese, fresh herbs, salt and pepper in a pie plate. Set aside. In a shallow bowl, whisk the eggs and water. Set aside. On a plate, spread the all-purpose flour. Coat the veal scallops with the flour and shake off the excess. Dip in the egg mixture and then coat with the bread crumb mixture, patting with your fingers to make the crumbs adhere.

        Heat olive oil in a large skillet over medium-high heat. Add the veal and saute until lightly browned, 2 to 3 minutes. Using tongs, turn the cutlets and cook, 2 to 3 minutes more, adding a little more oil if the pan looks dry. Remove veal scallops to a plate and blot with paper towels.

        Lightly oil a baking pan or shallow baking dish. Spoon into the pan 1/2 cup of the tomato sauce. Arrange the veal scallops over the sauce, slightly overlapping them. Sprinkle with 4 tablespoons of the Parmesan cheese. Cover with the remaining tomato sauce. Top with the mozzarella slices and the remaining Parmesan cheese. Cover the pan with aluminum foil and bake until heated through, 20 to 30 minutes. If you wish to brown the top, remove the foil and run the dish briefly under a broiler.

    2. Yeah, because we can absolutely trust the government to not be changing the story after the fact, have planted false information at the beginning so that it could be discredited later, etc. I’m not saying any of these things is true, but it’s important to keep this in perspective.

    3. Wait isn’t this the same organization that didn’t fire Dan Rather for the forged Bush military papers fake scandal reporting?

      1. It was accurate, what more do you want wingtard?

        1. Your funny – explain if accurate, why Rather took, willingly without discord, a demotion and loss of his public position on 60 mins after it happened? Oh, and why his producer was fired?

    4. So did Dan Rather at one point.

  12. Current and former U.S. officials claim that the CIA turned some prisoners at Guantanamo Bay into double agents.

    Double agents to spy in Palau?

  13. Sandy Hook 911 tapes WILL be released as judge says they will ‘vindicate’ the first responders

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..r-4th.html

    1. They should be released even if they don’t vindicate the non-zeroth-responders.

  14. Israeli mother ordered to pay fine of $140 a day for refusing to circumcise her son

    Woman refused to allow Jewish ritual saying it would ‘mutilate’ her baby
    But she is reportedly being forced to carry out ceremony by her husband
    She is being fined $140 for every day her son remains uncircumcised

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..e-son.html

    1. Is this the new Cleveland Browns meme around here or something? I think this is the 5th time I’ve seen this, including in today’s list of morning links.

      1. We just need to link them all together, something like:

        “Cleveland deep dish pizza owner, saddened that Bea Arthur was fined $140/day for not circumcising him, covers himself in artisanal mayo and asks the Browns to let him down one last time. STEVE SMITH approves request.”

        Does that cover everything?

    2. Oh good. Someday her son will know the exact monetary value it took for his mother to agree to “mutilate” him.

      1. And, yes, it is mutilation.

        1. Well, I think the important thing in this boy’s future therapy sessions will be that his mother certainly thought it was.

        2. All seriousness, are you the victim of a “botched job”? Because I’m circumcised, and I (and my wife) love it. In no way would I categorize it as mutilation.

          1. The fact that botched jobs exist means that if we have a son, he’s not getting snipped. No reason to risk it.

          2. I hear it looks like a lobster tail, but without its shell.

            1. +1 Linus

              And,(what the hell)+2 Charlie Browns

          3. With all due respect to your wife, her preferences don’t override the rights of others. Nor do yours.

            And I put it to you that if you were circumcised as an infant that you have no standard of comparison. And even if you did, that still doesn’t address the rights issue.

            My thing with this is that it’s irreversible, plus the medical risk as outlined by Spoons.

            1. plus the medical risk as outlined by Spoons.

              You mean very little to none?

              Some people just want to argue over nothing.

              Here’s you: I feel strongly about a non-issue that few people care about so I’m going to yell loudly and harass and insult anyone who doesn’t fall in lockstep with me!

          4. In no way would I categorize it as mutilation.

            Well, maybe you need to open a fucking dictionary.

            1. I think people who have had it done, are perfectly capable of defining it as or not as mutilation for themselves.

              Just as many humans likely find many new piercings as mutilation doesn’t mean it is.

              Nor does the fact that those getting the piercings don’t believe it’s mutilation become instantly resolvable by eloquent arguments such as open a fucking dictionary.

              Not to mention you should really read the definition yourself as it seems plainly obvious, that much like other descriptive words such as beauty, the definition defines the descriptive purposes of the word – it does not consist of examples of the word.

              Since you’ve opened a fucking dictionary though – I’m sure you were already well aware of that.

    3. Did you hear the story about the Cleveland Browns?

      1. Factory of Sadness?

        1. If you mean Jordan beat me to the story, yes I’m sad πŸ™

  15. I can’t resist a good Fed bashing:

    The policy of quantitative easing has run its course. It undermines planning, as every economic decision must be made in the context of what the Federal Reserve may or may not do next. It starves risk-averse savers, the elderly, and the disabled from interest income. It lowers the bar for speculative, unproductive, low-covenant lending (as it did during the housing bubble). It relaxes a constraint that is not binding ? as there are already trillions of dollars in idle reserves at U.S. banks, on which the Federal Reserve pays interest both to keep them idle and to avoid disruptions in short-term money markets. It undermines price signals and misallocates scarce savings to speculative pursuits. It further skews the distribution of wealth, and while the extent of this skew has a scarce chance of persisting, the benefits of any spending from transiently elevated stock market wealth will accrue to primarily to higher-income individuals who are not as constrained as the millions of lower-income, low-asset families hoping for some “trickle-down” effect. We have seen numerous variants of this movie before, and we should have learned the ending by now.

    There’s a lot more there, including evidence of the current bubble and why the S&P will likely be lower in 10 years than it is now.

    1. This is Shreeking Retard bait, engage at your own peril.

      1. You know, it *is* possible just to ignore it.

        1. I have been trying to ignore our resident Retard more, though I will admit to a perverted pleasure in engaging it now and then, but only when it’s idiocy is particularly egregious.

          It’s like picking a scab. You know you shouldn’t, you try hard not to, you are usually good about it, but sometimes…

          1. That is what reasonable/incif are for. You dont see the scab to pick at it.

        2. Look above. It is being attention starved on it’s post so it is talking to itself now.

          It might be cute if it weren’t so pathetic.

          1. I saw that. Beautiful. It’s the little things that make everyday life so enjoyable.

            1. It really is like a little kid at a restaurant. All the adults are talking about things it doesn’t comprehend, so to get the attention on it, it starts screaming and kicking.

      2. Monetarist clowns gonna clown.

        1. Monetarist clowns gonna clownprint.

          Fixed!

        2. Jordan, what is your idea about monetarists? I’ve read Friedman, and his basic notion was that the money supply should be increased in line with GDP growth, so that the money supply doesn’t effect pricing (or does so as little as possible).

          Monetarism today is mainly associated with the work of Milton Friedman, who was among the generation of economists to accept Keynesian economics and then criticize Keynes’ theory of gluts using fiscal policy (government spending). Friedman and Anna Schwartz wrote an influential book, A Monetary History of the United States, 1867?1960, and argued “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.” Though he opposed the existence of the Federal Reserve,[2] Friedman advocated, given its existence, a central bank policy aimed at keeping the supply and demand for money at equilibrium, as measured by growth in productivity and demand.

          That may be impossible (and a bad idea to try), but it’s very different than what’s going on now.

    2. Fuck “savers”. Really, fuck them.

      Growth is about building things such as companies, homes, office towers, etc. — and you do that with a low cost of capital.

      That writer fails Capitalism 101 – opening day.

      1. The Monetarist clown mindset on full display. Perfect.

      2. I’m now 100% convinced that you’re a Reason regular trolling. I can’t tell who you are, but you’re definitely a troll. This reply can’t possibly be serious.

        1. Well, he did admit to having a Coke habit last week.

        2. For like the one millionth time, he’s that lowlife piece of shit David Weigel.

          1. I hope not. I had a certain amount of begrudging respect for Weigel. (Standard disclaimer blah blah)

          2. I doubt Weigel would waste time on this board when he’s paid by the word.

            Writing well-formed, gramatically correct and un-typeoed text is surprisingly time consuming.

            Shriek is just some nutjob who is cognitively disabled at Mary Stack of Forth Worth, Texas levels.

      3. Fuck “slavers”. Really, fuck them.

        What a true classical liberal would have said.

      4. And trains! Don’t forget about the trains!

      5. So, I have a question for you guys. What’s the difference between taco soup and chili? When I moved down to TX, their taco soup is more like what I would expect a chili to be, and their chili is just like a stew. This is all differentiated, of course, from hot-dog chili, which is pretty much just ground beef with a sauce.

    3. Uncertainty is the worst thing you can do to an economy. This is why third world countries that lack the rule of law and iron clad property rights are so poor. If you don’t know what the law is, you can’t plan which means you can’t invest which means everyone is stuck at a subsistence level.

      Our top men Keynsians can’t get that through their thick skulls. They think they can fuck with the currency and stop the business cycle never realizing that by fucking with the currency they are making it harder for the economy to grow in the first place. We saw this movie in the 1970s, it is called stagflation.

  16. Juror Form Lists ‘Slave’ as Occupation

    Pretty sure it was a typo and was meant to be ‘Slaver’.

    1. I tried to list my occupation as “Fluffer for Lesbian Porn,” but there wasn’t a checkbox for that.

    2. If there are slavers, there are slaves.

      1. Unless they really, really suck at their job.

        1. Or they are self employed!

    3. Nah, as Tax Freedom Day gets later and later every year, they’re just being honest.

    4. Did you post that from yesterday’s PM Links? Or did you mean to post the “Israeli woman fined for not circumcising son” link instead? πŸ˜‰

      1. Sorry, Ted, I didn’t sleep well last night.

  17. Jeffrey Rosen in the New Republic sounds the alarm: Supreme Court might use the HHS mandate case to protect the rights of Teh Corprashuns, thanks to Citizens United.

    Without mentioning RFRA’s case-by-case balancing test, Rosen trots out a parade of horribles:

    “For example, Judge [Illana] Rovner [dissenting in the Seventh Circuit] noted, an employer who is a Methodist and objects to stem cell research might refuse to cover an employee’s participation in a clinical trial of stem cell research for Lou Gehrig’s disease; an employer who is a Christian scientist might insist that the ACA’s mandate of coverage for traditional medical care is a violation of his religious beliefs; and an employer who is a Southern Baptist and objects to gay marriage and surrogacy might refuse family leave to gay employees that would otherwise be required under federal law.”

    Regarding the underlying religious-freedom issue, “Judge Harry Edward on the D.C. Circuit had the most convincing take. “First, the Mandate does not require the Gilardis to use or purchase contraception themselves. Second, the Mandate does not require the Gilardis to encourage Freshway’s employees to use contraceptives any more directly than they do by authorizing Freshway to pay wages. Finally, the Gilardis remain free to express publicly their disapproval of contraceptive products.””

    http://www.newrepublic.com/art…..ged-suprem

    1. If only there was some common medium of exchange that employers could use to compensate employees – who in turn to use that medium in any way they chose.

    2. My God, people will be able to run their businesses the way they choose by whatever values they have. That is just chaos.

      It is so funny to listen to the “parade of horribles”. None of those situations strike me as horrible.

      an employer who is a Methodist and objects to stem cell research might refuse to cover an employee’s participation in a clinical trial of stem cell research for Lou Gehrig’s disease

      How would this even work? You buy health insurance not medical care. To my knowledge there is not a single health insurance policy in existence that lets the purchaser rather than the doctor and the insurance company decide what treatment is covered. Sure, the policy will exclude coverage for some kind of conditions, like maternity coverage, but never treatments for those conditions. It would be like having an insurance policy that covered you for cancer treatments but only paid for chemo not radiation. Such policies do not exist.

      Christian scientist might insist that the ACA’s mandate of coverage for traditional medical care is a violation of his religious beliefs;

      That is also called, not providing health insurance to your employees, which last I looked happens all of the time.

      1. Crap insurance!!!!11!

        1. If some nut wants to provide health insurance that only covers faith healing or homeopathic cures, I wouldn’t want to work for him all things being equal. But if some do, good for them.

      2. Like with school debates, this one has an easy answer: separate health insurance from employment.

        When people are buying their own insurance, they can buy what they want.

        No employer tells anyone what kind of home insurance coverage they can have. “You cant cover for hail damage, as that is a biblical plague and Gods will!”

        1. Insurance is just another form of compensation. If you have a better offer, don’t work there.

          1. I agree, Im just saying that the “problem” comes from FDR fucking up the system.

            If Insurance is just another form of compensation, it should be taxed like any other form of compensation.

            Start taxing it like regular income and people will opt to take care of it themselves in most cases.

            1. But if you don’t get insurance through your employer and buy it on your own, how do you get insurance when you are old and a bad risk?

              Think about how life insurance works. You can get life insurance cheap when you are young and a good risk. But eventually as you get sick or get old, you can’t buy it anymore. The same would be true of health insurance. If you go to a true individual market for health insurance, I don’t see how old people would be able to buy it. In such a system, health insurance would be very cheap right up until you were old enough to really need it.

              1. Use the young/cheap years to save up money to self-insure in old age?

                And how does employment-based insurance help you get insurance after you are retired? Answer: it doesnt.

                Same thing exists now.

                Thats 2 answers.

                Answer #3, medicare. As much as I would end it if I could, my post above about ending employment-based insurance doesnt say a damn thing about it.

                Answer #4: you can still buy insurance when old, it will just be expensive.

                Answer #5: charities.

                You get the point, there are probably 100 answers.

                1. Use the young/cheap years to save up money to self-insure in old age?

                  Couldn’t ever save enough. And worse still, since I have no idea what my costs will be, I don’t have any idea how much to save and thus can’t plan. Maybe I will one of those guys running marathons in my 80s and it won’t be expensive for me even then or maybe I will develop some chronic disease and have a fortune in costs. I have no way of knowing and thus can’t know how much to save.

                  Answer #3, medicare. As much as I would end it if I could, my post above about ending employment-based insurance doesnt say a damn thing about it.

                  Yes, paying for old people’s insurance is an option. But it doesn’t seem like a very good one or really any better than what we have now.

                  1. Couldn’t ever save enough

                    Bullshit.

                    Health insurance premiums will come out to about $500,000 over the course of a 45 year career.

                  2. Man-up and die, people. Man-up and die.

                    1. +1 Logan’s Run

                  3. “Couldn’t ever save enough. And worse still, since I have no idea what my costs will be, I don’t have any idea how much to save and thus can’t plan. “

                    Bullshit.

                    Here you go…

                    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm…..MC1361028/

                    It’s already been calculated for you.

                    Now that’s the average, look around how healthy/unhealthy are your relatives? Based on that info and your own sensitivity to risk you can determine how far above the average you need to be to be comfortable.

                    That said, since we’re looking at only around $200,000 (2013 dollars) in total lifetime medical expenses (including a nursing home) past the age of 65 it is not even all that hard to save for. In fact simply saving the 3% of your income the government currently takes for Medicaid will just about cover the bill for most people.

                    Does that leave you at the risk that you will be one of those people who get unlucky enough to rack up several million in medical expenses? Sure but even there you could pretty cheaply buy insurance against that risk because those individuals are very rare

              2. Since when do you have a right to health insurance?

                If you want health insurance you pay for it. Overweight? You pay more. Smoke? You pay more. Can’t pass a rudimentary fitness test? You pay more.

                Yes, you get old and you get sick. It sucks. Maybe the thing to do is establish a pre-tax savings account that you can access when you get certain age-related illnesses.

                In the end you are going to die anyway.

                1. That is better than my answer.

                  Also, there is no requirement than every problem have a solution. “Fuck it, just deal” is a legitimate result.

                  1. I think the problem is that this market has been tinkered with so much that we don’t even know what would happen if we deregulated it a bit. Perhaps prices would become significantly more reasonable, perhaps the elderly would have new options. We’re almost a century away from having a free health market.

                2. Yes, you get old and you get sick. It sucks. Maybe the thing to do is establish a pre-tax savings account that you can access when you get certain age-related illnesses.

                  Except that I have no idea what my costs will be and thus have no way to plan how much to save. Other than that it is a great idea. Because of the uncertainty of the costs, “just save more” is not in any way an adequate answer to the question of what to do with the old and the sick who are bad risks.

                  And yes “its sucks to be old too fucking bad” is one answer. But it is not an answer anyone outside of the most fanatical libertarians is going to accept. If your position is that we are going to have a free market health care system whereby when you get old or when you get sick you likely won’t be able to buy insurance and will be left the whims of charity or the value of your savings (which if it does cover it will likely mean you leave nothing to your kids and die broke), then you might as well get ready for single payer because people are not going to accept that level of risk. You can tell me how they should and how overall your system would be better all you want. But that doesn’t change the reality that the vast majority of the country would find such a system intolerable.

                  So while your idea may be great, it is a fantasy since the country would never allow such a situation to develop. If that is the only market alternative, the country will go full on socialized medicine.

                  1. Except that I have no idea what my costs will be and thus have no way to plan how much to save.

                    Thats BS.

                    Barring super-hyper-expensive disease, it should be easy to save more than enough. Put away $500 per month for 40 years with reasonable investment and you will easily cover any typical medical expenses.

                    There aint no such thing as a free lunch. Someone is going to pay for your treatment, and it should be you.

                    1. . Put away $500 per month for 40 years with reasonable investment and you will easily cover any typical medical expenses.

                      And if I get sick before the 40 years and have built up the savings? What if the market crashes and I lose everything? That does happen you know. What if my kid gets sick and I have to spend it on him?

                      Again, “just save you fucking dead beat” is not a level of risk that people are going to accept. You are going to have to do better than that or we will be stuck with single payer.

                      Libertarians hate the employer based insurance system. But they fail understand that given people’s aversion to risk it is the best system that we are likely to ever get. And if it ever goes away and you realize your dream of an individualized market, we will quickly end up with socialized medicine as people demand the government do something about the old and the sick.

                    2. Because only your employer can buy health insurance??? You can’t buy your own? You buy your own auto, home, life insurance without their assistance.

                      Last I checked, the old were covered by Medicare.

                    3. I think because only your employer can buy in bulk, allowing someone with a pre-existing condition to get affordable insurance – or for some, it allows them to get insurance at all as they may be uninsurable without being in a group policy of some sort.

                  2. All of this is under the assumption that health care will be/must be so expensive/unpredictable as to require insurance as the primary means of payment.

                    What if the about 1000 regulations and the costs they impose were done away with and health care could be paid for like most other things we buy?

                  3. I don’t know what to tell you, John.

                    No one has a right to health insurance or health care. It is a service provided by people. You may as well just demand that other people who provide service and expertise in exchange for compensation be required to do so for free – lawyers, mechanics, chefs, etc.

                    The employer “provided” system is bullshit in many respects, but mostly because the end-user is not the customer but the fodder. The current insurance market is bullshit because for some unfathomable reason you can’t buy insurance across state lines.

                    I understand that people beleive they have a right to this. That doesn’t mean they will get it. What happens when they don’t get what they think they are owed? Don’t you think it’s about time politicians started talking straight to everyone that thinks they deserve soemthing for nothing?

                  4. Also, just so you know, everyone – and I do mean everyone – dies eventually. No amount of insurance, provider care, or transfer of wealth is going to change that.

                  5. John do you have any idea what the average elderly person spends on Medical care?

                    Got news for you, it ain’t millions. It’s barely even hundreds of thousands.

                    We could take what is currently confiscated from every American’s paycheck for Social Security and Medicare instead of putting all the funds into the government allocate 75% to a mandatory IRA account and around 80% of the population would be able to pay cash for all of their post age 65 medical bills including however many years they are in a nursing home and still leave money to their kids with no other savings at all

              3. What if you got it through a mutual aid society, which contained enough members to statistically balance it? The insurance companies actually don’t care how the pool is formed, so long is it large and varied enough for their actuarial statistics to work. This is one of a host of ideas that would work. Same thing with small businesses forming groups that gave them a statistical averageness. Once the benefit is decoupled from a one-to-one relation between myself and my employer, all sorts of actuarially sound risk pools can be formed.

                1. Put another way, if being a member of the Lions or Knights of Columbus or Atheist Anarchists for Communitarian Action Without Monetary Recompense (not, to my knowledge a real group) provided the same benefit (even if that benefit was no benefit) as being employed by someone, we’d actually be solving John’s problem AND easing the free movement of labor AND improving the strength of non-State intra-state (because of current insurance regulation by state) societies.

                  1. Large churches, labor unions, etc. All are big enough to create a pool.

                    I could see my church having some staff doctors at their clinic for basic care. And then insurance for advanced stuff. Same way some companies do it.

                2. That is possible Brett. But the problem is why would any young person ever join such? And even if they did, how is having to join some dumb ass organization to get my health insurance any better than getting it through my job? I would rather get my insurance at work and be able to skip the lodge meetings. But I am not much of a joiner.

                  1. All of this is under the assumption that health care will be/must be so expensive/unpredictable as to require insurance as the primary means of payment.

                    What if the about 1000 regulations and the costs they impose were done away with and health care could be paid for like most other things we buy?

                  2. But the problem is why would any young person ever join such?

                    Because its a benefit of membership?

                    Im already a member of my church, why wouldnt I take advantage of the health care offer that comes with the membership?

                    Would I join an org just for this purpose? No, I wouldnt. But Ive never taken a job for health insurance reasons either.

                  3. Who said you had to be a member to purchase their insurance plan?

                3. Or your church, or the Lions club or the town you live in, or any other group that wants to form a group plan.

                  1. Including your employer, who could use the ability to be in their pool or a pool they belong to as a differentiator within the field. Like 401k policies.

    3. Is it just me, or is that parade of horribles not particularly horrible, especially given that there is (or was, at least before O-care) a thriving individual insurance market?

      1. Joe, on Morning Joe this morning was saying that he wants Obamacare repealed, but the Republicans need to come up with a plan of their own. He said that a single mother with a sick kid at midnight shouldn’t have to take the kid to the ER to get treatment. And I thought to myself — Well what the fuck else is open at midnight?

        1. Depends how sick the kid is. If the kid has bacterial meningitis, sure, take them to the ER. If the kid has an ear infection, take them to the doctor the next morning.

          Is it really that hard?

          1. No it isn’t. All this hand-wringing and pearl-clutching is just fucking pathetic and emabarrassing.

        2. And again, in a more free market, some healthcare systems would offer 24 hour medical clinic access for non-life threatening issues. The current system encourages doctors to keep bankers hours and dump people in the ER.

    4. and an employer who is a Southern Baptist and objects to gay marriage and surrogacy might refuse family leave to gay employees that would otherwise be required under federal law

      So, what’s the libertarian position on maternity leave and adoption leave?

      1. It shouldnt be mandated by the government.

        Did you need to ask that?

        1. So, it would be perfectly OK for this hypothetical Southern Baptist Employer to offer adoption leave for heterosexual employees, but not for gay ones?

          1. Doesn’t that fall into 1st amendment freedom of association? We seem to have this conversation once or twice a week. It seems that the most prominent libertarian view is that anti-discrimination laws that apply to people or corporations are unconstitutional.

          2. Yes.

          3. No. He’d be a bastard for doing so. But that’s a different question from whether he should be put in jail for doing so.

            You know this.

            1. This is Tonio’s specific area of trolling.

              He thinks he is proving some sort of point, but he isnt. Or, at least, I cant figure out what it is.

              1. It’s not trolling, it’s just a hobby horse. “I’m a libertarian, except for with gay issues. In that case, the state should hold a gun to the head of conscientious objectors and force them to accept me!”

                1. When in the area of your hobby horse, you ask questions you know the answer to in order to “gotcha” people, you are trolling.

                  1. Either way, it doesn’t really hurt to make the answer plainly known, again.

                  2. fair enough. I just have a more restrictive definition of trolling.

  18. Germ-killing nanosurface opens up new front in hygiene

    Pretty cool. That is, until ARMOR-PLATED SUPERBUGS evolve!!

    1. Mother Nature is a cruel bitch.

    2. Wow, that is really cool. I wonder if it would be physically possible to make an antiviral surface.

      1. Patent that and you’d be rich.

        Then, on to Prions.

      2. http://www.nrl.navy.mil/techtr…..s_id=MAT25

        http://www.newscientist.com/ar…..pYi98SsOm4

        These are spray coatings that you put on things to make the surface antiviral.

    3. Bacteria-size pigeon spikes. Why didn’t I think of that.

    4. We really do need to stop killing germs until absolutely necessary… we’re headed for troubles

  19. Libertarian Florida woman pays $11,000 in taxes with $1 bills in protest of local government

    ‘Save your own money’: Julann Roe says she doesn’t like tax increases or paying for other people’s retirement
    The Dade City insurance company owner was paying taxes on her $700,000 41-acre estate
    ‘I do not feel obligated to pay for your retirement’: Roe’s act of protest came after Pasco County voted for 3 percent employee pay increase

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..nment.html
    Obviously a false story. Everyone knows there are no libertarian women.

  20. E J Dionne explains it.

    What happened on Nuclear Thursday has more to do with the rise of an activist conservative judiciary than with the norms of the Senate. From the moment that five conservative justices issued their ruling in Bush v. Gore, liberals and Democrats realized they were up against forces willing to achieve their purposes by using power at every level of government.

    ——–

    Bush v. Gore set in motion what liberals see as a pernicious feedback loop. By giving the presidency to a conservative, the five right-of-center justices guaranteed that for at least four years (and what turned out to be eight), the judiciary would be tilted even further in a conservative direction.

    It’s almost as if elections have, you know, consequences.

    Obama packing the courts with our guys is good. Rethuglitards packing the courts with their guys is bad.

    Social Justice!

    1. As I’ve said many, many times before but they don’t seem to care, the important ruling in Bush v. Gore was a 7-2 vote, not 5-4.

      1. Can you elaborate? I recall reading Bush v. Gore in law school but can’t remember the distinction between the 5-4 and 7-2 vote. I’m sure my hyper liberal professor didn’t do a good job of noting the distinction, but I suppose I should remember it anyway.

  21. The policy of quantitative easing has run its course. It undermines planning, as every economic decision must be made in the context of what the Federal Reserve may or may not do next. It starves risk-averse savers, the elderly, and the disabled from interest income. It lowers the bar for speculative, unproductive, low-covenant lending (as it did during the housing bubble).

    The best way to grow the economy from On High is to mask and muddle the price signal for money. This will ensure efficient investment.

  22. Reykjav?k Mayor (jokingly?) wants foreign citizenship…

    So he can spell his daughter’s name with a C:

    The reason: J?n’s real name is J?n Gunnar Kristinsson but he is known as J?n Gnarr, as he has been known since he was a child. However, according to the National Registry ‘Gnarr’ does not fulfill Icelandic naming laws.

    […]

    J?n said he would seek citizenship of another country so that he could leave Iceland, have his name legally recognized abroad and then return as a foreigner in order to be able to keep his chosen name.

    The mayor also said that he had named his daughter Camilla after her grandmother but that the National Registry had changed it to Kamilla because the letter ‘c’ had since been dropped from the Icelandic alphabet and was now banned.

    1. If you like your name, you can keep it.

    2. You know who else banned letters of the alphabet?

      1. Big Bird?

        1. Attaturk didn’t merely ban letters, but entire alphabets!

          1. And an entire language (Ottoman)!

        2. Yes, folks, we have a winnah!

          The Atat?rk regime replaced Arabic script with a modified Latin alphabet without letters Q, W and X. Those letters were not needed for Turkish, but were needed for Kurdish. So this was all about keeping the Kurds down.

    3. He’s the comedian who ran on the Best Party platform isn’t he?

  23. Welch’s article last night already linked to Matt Y’s crotch rubbing of the pope’s take on capitalism.

    But we haven’t discussed the comments!

    A great travesty of modern times is the American trend of aligning libertarian economic philosophies with Christian ethics. It happens only in this country, it seems to me, and it’s outrageous. It will spell the end of American Christianity as conservatives envision it, because people will (and I believe, already) perceive the inherent absurdity of laying claim to the teachings of Jesus and attempting to characterize those teachings as being somehow in line with an economics based entirely in avaricious self-interest. I call it a travesty because its consequences have been and continue to be profoundly damaging to this country and the rest of the world.

    1. It happens only in this country, it seems to me

      Well-researched as always.

    2. Thomas Woods, Catholic publicist, defends Austrian economics:

      http://tomwoods.com/blog/is-th…..dissenter/

    3. it seems to me

      Safe to ignore everything that follows!

    4. Not a surprise, but he seems to not get the difference between government policy and private policy.

      Is it “avaricious self-interest” for churches to run hospitals instead of the ACA?

      Is it “avaricious self-interest” for churches to run soup kitchens instead of food stamps?

      Etc, etc.

      1. What these morons don’t get (Pope included) is that avarice is a personal failing, not an effect of the system. Not shockingly, when you let people free to do their own bidding, you discover that some have personal failings.

        The implicit solution changes when you recognize avarice and all sin as personal failings rather than institutional failings. Instead of trying to implement top down doctrine to prohibit or disincentivize avarice, you work on a personal level to get people to overcome their avarice.

    5. American trend of aligning libertarian economic philosophies with Christian ethics.

      I would argue that there really isn’t an “libertarian economic philosophy”. There is a libertarian governance philosophy that values the sanctity of the individual over the collective that by implication results in a free market economy. Libertarians in my view should not support the free market because the market produces wonderful results and gets us all rich, though it generally does even if individual results are not perfect. Libertarians support the free market because it is the only economic system consistent with the dignity of the individual and freedom.

      Last I looked both of those things, dignity of the individual and freedom of will, are pretty base Christian concepts. The great contribution of Christianity to civilization is the concept that all men from the lowest to the highest are equal before God. I would love to hear how this half wit squares that with desire to use the gun to put the individual below the human collective.

      1. ^^^This^^^

        Well said John.

        1. I have been told on several occasions I missed my calling and should have been a minister. No kidding. Considering that I have never been a member of any church and find churches generally infuriating, I have always found such observations quite amusing.

          1. How do you think new churches get started?

          2. Protestants don’t have to join a particular denomination before starting a ministry. They can start their own denomination if they wish!

            1. Not just protestants. Catholics can too! They just wont be Catholic anymore.

              1. +1 Martin Luther

      2. I would love to hear how this half wit squares that with desire to use the gun to put the individual below the human collective.

        The problem is that when govt thieves your money out of your paycheck before you even see it, and when they build it into the economy through inflation, it’s easy for some to dismiss the “gun to the head” argument. That’s one of the most devious parts of the income tax.

        1. That is very true. I had a professor in law school who used to at the start of his Law and Economics class give the example of a home owners association. One day the association shows up at your door and says you own them a thousand dollars for your share of community beautification. You say you never wanted that. They say “we voted and some expressed your view but your side lost, now pay up”. You say no. So they leave and come back and start towing your car. When you try to stop them, they shoot you and take your car.

          The whole class sits shocked at this example. The prof then says “this is exactly what the government does every day.” And would then go on to say that his point was not that we didn’t need government or taxes but that every dollar of tax is exactly this process working with all of its injustice and therefore it perhaps ought to be done as rarely as possible.

          1. I would have loved to have a professor who put it that straight forward and out in the open for all the students to hear.

          2. Someone stuck a little comic on the door into my office. It is in the nuclear engineering department at my school so it is a nuclear joke. It opens with the question: How do we stop too much wealth from accumulating in one place?

            The first person titled “Optimist” says: Give to the poor!
            The second person titled “Pessimist” says: Take from the rich!
            The third person titled “Physicist” says: Make all the money out of uranium.

            After seeing this joke for weeks every morning when I got to work, I finally had to add something to it. I wrote beside the pessimist title, (thief). I was sick of it not being pointed out exactly what that person is. I can’t stand that that is a valid point of view to some people and that it is not mocked and shamed immediately.

            1. You should have written:

              Libertarian – let people voluntarily exchange money for other stuff that they want.

              1. If there was space I would have. Actually I may still try.

                I try to avoid political discussions at work but I couldn’t stand the comic anymore and had to point out exactly what the “Pessimist” was advocating.

            2. So this cartoon is stealing an idea from Larry Niven?

              He “suggested” putting money on the Roentgen standard.

              http://www.larryniven.net/stories/roentgen.shtml

          3. That is a great story. I am going to memorize it and use it, if you do not mind.

      3. “The great contribution of Christianity to civilization is the concept that all men from the lowest to the highest are equal before God.”

        Tell that to the pope.
        That’s some real cherry picking there, John.

        1. There is nothing cherry picking about it at all. That is the central message of Christianity. All men are equal before God. Every man rich, poor, powerful or weak is judged by the same standard and has salvation available to them.

          And I don’t have to tell the Pope anything. I am not Catholic. As far as I am concerned he is in for a rude awakening if he thinks the fact that he was Pope is going to mean anything before God.

          1. All men are equal before God*

            Except Pagans, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Atheists, etc.

            Cherry picked value is cherry picked.

            The amount of God-sanctioned oppression, enslavement, and genocide in the bible would make the most ambitious serial killer blush. All against non-christians, of course.

            1. Ummm…once Christians exist in the bible, all the oppression/enslavement/etc is against them.

              Have you actually read the bible or just talking out of your ass?

              1. Cover to cover. Multiple times.

                The old testament is still crucial to the belief system. That’s still their god.

                If the bible were a historically accurate document, your argument might have some validity. However, actual history paints a much different picture.

                Yes, Christians were oppressed and enslaved. At least until they gained enough popularity to have real power. Then they committed some of the worst atrocities in human history. All in the name of Jesus Christ.

                1. And the atrocities committed by Christians were in post-biblical times.

                  But honestly, there’s enough blame to go around for everyone. And everyone was a barbarian up until about five minutes ago so it’s not useful to revisit the past in most circumstances.

            2. No, itsnotmeitsyou, is indeed correct. But it should be noted that all the war and oppression and enslavement happened in the old-testament before there were any Christians. So, absolutely correct, but not useful.

              What would be more useful would be to say that these things were sanctioned when done by God’s Chosen People(tm) against others.

            3. Those people are totally equal. God loves them just as much. They just haven’t accepted salvation.

              1. Ah, yes, God loves them so much that he ordered his followers to murder them and send them all to hell.

                And the mere existence of Hell tells me that your god does not love everyone the same. Here’s a place where you go if you don’t accept salvation. You only have a brief window of time to find the Truth (if it’s even available to be heard in your area), repent, and worship the proper god. If you don’t do so in this infinitesimally small speck of time that you have a physical body, he’ll torture you FOR ETERNITY with no hope of reprieve.

                Yes, I totally see how that god loves me just as much as a believer. Totally.

                1. God loves them so much that he ordered his followers to murder them and send them all to hell.

                  I wasn’t aware God has ordered anyone to do anything since he told Abraham to kill Issac.

                  1. Ah, apologetics. “Yeah, well, those crusaders weren’t ACTUALLY told by God to do that, they just said they were. I know, though, cuz MY god wouldn’t do that.”

                    Riiiiight. So are you saying that not a single person who claims to have been spoken to directly by god and given a mission has actually been in contact with god? Or is it only the people who have done good things in the name of god who are actually really for real hearing god’s will?

                    1. Crusades were in the Bible? What version are you reading?

                    2. Crusaders??? I don’t see anywhere in Scripture where Jerusalem, or the Holy Land, in general, is central to Christian theology.

                      Sure, it’s talked about as far as prophecy and the like, and it may have been very important in Judaism (even still so). However, nowhere from the point of Advent on does God make any demand of people claiming to follow Him to “take back” any physical territory.

                      Plus, you wouldn’t be trying to conflate the Crusades with all Christian activity, now, would you?

                    3. I never conflated the crusades with ALL Christian activity and I don’t see what them not being in the bible has to do with this discussion. Try to follow along.

                      This started because Sevo accused John of cherry picking. John claimed that his god loves everyone equally, so I refuted that point, pointing out that the bible contains many atrocities against non-believers. This was to point out that the core of Christian beliefs contains evidence that god does not, in fact, love everyone equally.

                      John reiterated his claim, sans any sort of argument or evidence. So I provided more evidence of this “loving god”. The fact that it didn’t happen in the bible has no bearing on it’s relevancy. People were still told by god to murder, rape, and pillage.

                      John tried to (somehow) claim that NOBODY has been given directives by god since Abraham. (which is also patently false if you believe the bible). Again, without argument or evidence. So in the absence of an actual debate, I went to a snarky comment about Christian Apologetics since that’s what he appeared to be doing.

                      I have no clue as to how the both of you managed to turn “god has, throught history, ordered his followers to murder non-believers. Thereby refuting the concept that ‘god loves everyone equally'” into “the crusades happened in the bible”

                2. Man, you have absolutely no understanding of judgment or Hell.

                  Let you in on a little secret-If you, or anyone else, ends up there, it’s because you did the rejecting.

                  And, I can’t even begin to imagine where you get the idea of God doing any “torture” of anyone.

                  Talk about reading, but not understanding…

                  1. However, nowhere from the point of Advent on does God make any demand of people claiming to follow Him to “take back” any physical territory.

                    And you said that in the same post where you were talking about the Crusades. YEAAAAAH, reading comprehension fail.

                    Let you in on a little secret-If you, or anyone else, ends up there, it’s because you did the rejecting.

                    If I end up there, yeah, it’s my fault for rejecting things that logic and science tell me are impossible. If I get to the pearly gates, I’ll be sure to ask God why he made the world counter to what his holy word says.

                    That said, how does your Christian ethos handle people before mass transportation? communication? people that are still isolated or live in an area that has never heard of christ? Are those people damned to hell, too? That sure sounds like a loving and caring god to me…

                    And, I can’t even begin to imagine where you get the idea of God doing any “torture” of anyone.

                    Semantics, god himself may not be holding the fire poker, but he created a place where beings he doesn’t like go to get tortured. This is an all powerful being we’re talking about. He could just poof them out of existence, but no, he has to send them to a place of eternal torment so they can be in anguish for all of eternity. Again, sound so loving and caring.

                  2. Let you in on a little secret-If you, or anyone else, ends up there, it’s because you did the rejecting.

                    Man, I see this dumb argument all the time. Well, it’s more of a dumb doctrine than a dumb argument. If your god doesn’t want me to reject him or his collection of books, then give me something worth not rejecting. Or don’t give me free will and critical thinking skills to see through the bullshit, then punish me for it.

          2. “he is in for a rude awakening if he thinks the fact that he was Pope is going to mean anything before God”

            It means that God will be more exacting in His demands of a Pope than of a humbler person. To whom much is given, much is expected. Or according to the Book of Stan Lee, “with great power comes great responsibility.”

            So an omission which God might let slide with a humble person will be judged more harshly in the case of a Pope. I believe Francis realizes this.

      4. Libertarians in my view should not support the free market because the market produces wonderful results and gets us all rich

        Bah, I’m libertarian because it works for humans. If communism worked I’d be a communist, if fascism worked I’d be a fascist, if socialism worked I’d be a socialist, If National Socialism worked. Well say what you want about the tenents of National Socialism at least it’s and ethos.

        1. No thanks. If communism worked but at the price of trampling the individual, I will take poverty and freedom.

    6. Reagan and Dumbya practiced “libertarian” economics?

      No, fool, we got the warmongering “Christian soldier” horde mixed with Big Gov “compassionate conservatism” to make up today’s GOP – a toxic mix of ideologies bordering on fascism.

      1. Yes, Bush.

        1. I just blocked the fucker. Feels good.

    7. The real problem is Jesus’s teachings are antithetical to self ownership and self rule. The Bible makes it quite clear in a variety of places and a variety of ways that it’s God set your government above you for a reason and even slaves should provide good service to their masters and not resent their slavery

      1. The real problem is Jesus’s teachings are antithetical to self ownership and self rule.

        Yes and no. Jesus was all about working within the system, and not overthrowing the human government. Why? I think for the exact reason that the American Colonies started to become inhabited. I think Jesus wanted to leave all the corruption and politics and crap to secular leaders, and work his revolution on a personal level. Turns out that Christians are just as vulnerable to corruption, despotism, and evil as non-Christians, and nothing sullies your cause more than a tyrannical church/government.

  24. For some reason, the legacy media seem to have missed this part of the Pope’s Apostolic Exhortation:

    “213. Among the vulnerable for whom the Church wishes to care with particular love and concern are unborn children, the most defenceless and innocent among us….Frequently, as a way of ridiculing the Church’s effort to defend their lives, attempts are made to present her position as ideological, obscurantist and conservative. Yet this defence of unborn life is closely linked to the defence of each and every other human right….

    “214. Precisely because this involves the internal consistency of our message about the value of the human person, the Church cannot be expected to change her position on this question. I want to be completely honest in this regard. This is not something subject to alleged reforms or “modernizations”. It is not “progressive” to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life. On the other hand, it is also true that we have done little to adequately accompany women in very difficult situations, where abortion appears as a quick solution to their profound anguish, especially when the life developing within them is the result of rape or a situation of extreme poverty. Who can remain unmoved before such painful situations?”

    http://www.vatican.va/holy_fat…..um_en.html

    1. Extreme poverty can make you pregnant? I wish someone had told me that.

      1. Well, people in poverty tend to live more in inner cities, where it’s much more likely you’ll be hit by a bus.

        1. I fucking love this meme.

      2. The French version is “en particulier quand la vie qui cro?t en elles est la cons?quence d’une violence, ou dans un contexte d’extr?me pauvret?.”

        So it think the appropriate translation “the consequence of [an act of violence?] or *in the context* of extreme poverty.”

        1. or in a context

        2. EvH…humor impaired much?

          Even in english the context is clear. Well, the “or” in english isnt grammatically clear at times, so you have to have outside knowledge to figure out the context.

          Which creates humorous misinterpretations.

          1. The English translation *is* bad and *does* literally say what you claim. That’s why I double checked, to see if the literal translation was the right one.

            1. I think you are right.

              The english translation left out an “in” after the “or”.

              To be correct it should say

              when the life developing within them is the result of rape or in a situation of extreme poverty

              Poor translation, but Im not so dumb that I didnt get the real meaning from context.

              1. All right, but I did find the translation embarrassing.

                1. But it’s their translation, so it’s official, right? At least for english-speaking areas? Or is only the original latin/italian version official?

                  1. I don’t see a Latin version on the Web page, but like you, I take the most plausible translation.

                    1. I’m guessing that it automatically detects your language and serves you the translation. However, I’m guessing that the “official” version (the one to which the faithful are held) is in Latin. Just as international treaties are produced in multiple languages but one language version is the “official” one.

  25. Welch’s article last night already linked to Matt Y’s crotch rubbing of the pope’s take on capitalism.

    The Pope, of all people, whining about thievery and oppression of the poor?

    Stick it up your ass, you thieving cocksucker.

    1. The Pope, of all people, whining about thievery and oppression of the poor?

      Stick it up your ass, you thieving cocksucker.

      Yeah, this.

      I’ll take the pope seriously about helping the poor when they stop adorning everything in gold and building fantastically expensive buildings to worship a deity who abhors excesses.

      1. God still loves you itsnotmeitsyou. All of your sins will be forgiven, in exchange for a nice sized check to your local church.

        1. I’d have to start using democrat math in order to bribe away pay off absolve me of my sins.

      2. “a deity who abhors excesses.”

        King Solomon building the Temple at Jerusalem:

        http://biblehub.com/nasb/2_chronicles/3.htm

        1. Hypocrisy and contradictory statements in the bible? Color me shocked!

      3. In his defense this particular pope has not only spoken against such practices but actively avoided Papal Regalia (he travels in a Ford Focus, not a limo) and most recently smacked down a German Bishop for playing fast and loose with the church’s money

    2. It’s well-disguised thievery. The Pope lives simply, and Catholic Relief Services has been working on helping the victims of the Philippine typhoon. You may have contributed to one of the special collections they have at your parish.

      1. “It’s well-disguised thievery.”
        Not if you’ve seen the Vatican, it isn’t.

        1. That Vatican? Francis didn’t build that.

          1. True, but it’s within his power to sell off assets. Maybe not the Vatican (who could afford it and what would they do with it), but the church has lots of assets worldwide.

            This pope is less bad than his predecessor, but I’m still waiting to see whether his actions are just strategic PR or an actual sea change.

          2. If you like your sacrament, you can keep it

      2. The Pope lives simply

        Can’t tell if serious, but I am pretty sure you are.

        1. In Argentina, he lived in an apartment and took the bus to work, rather than live in the Archepiscopal palace and use a limousine. Candidly, not all Latin American prelates have taken that option.

          How well he emulates that lifestyle in Rome I don’t have the details, but I know he suspended a luxurious-living German bishop.

          1. not all Latin American prelates have taken that option

            Talk about understatement. And not just the bishops in the Americas, either.

        2. The current pope is said to live more simply than his predecessor in terms of his personal quarters, etc. He has also curbed some of the more egregious and visible excesses of some of the bishops.

          But, yes, he still wears the gold-threaded vestments, etc, on state/religious occasions.

          Credit where due.

      3. You may also want to check with your local parish and diocese to see if they’re doing any charitable work. Of course I’m taking a big risk by suggesting this – what if your research discloses that they’re not doing any charitable work at all? πŸ™‚

  26. SF (which can’t afford its benefit costs) spend $400M to build a station for a train that won’t be built:
    “Bullet train snag could affect Transbay Terminal”
    http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/…..015444.php

    1. That’s a feature, not a bug.

      Next line of argument: “We have to build the train. Otherwise the 400 million we’ve already spent is for naught!”

  27. Canada is to appeal the World Trade Organization’s ruling that the European Union’s ban on seal products is justified.

    Well if I can’t buy my Purina Seal Chow for my seals, then the’ll likely starve to death. Fuck the WTO!!!11!1!

    1. I always like to ask my local grocer is they have “Non-Dolphin Safe” tuna. Dolphins have it too easy.

  28. SF (which can’t afford its benefit costs) spend $400M to build a station for a train that won’t be built:

    They can turn it into a homeless shelter for all the people who have been priced and regulated out of the housing market.

  29. Alright this is my first time posting in AM links. I have been a reader of Reason for 4 years now. And their si one thing I do not see enough of….actualy trolls. I see a few here and there, but not enough. Why do I want them? Because when they do show up you guys do a very good job of knocking them off their high horse and by soing so help me form better arguments when I need to deal with some progressive assclown in my daily life. So please engage the trolls!!! For my sake….for teh childrenz!!!

    1. Welcome to the club. STEVE SMITH will be along to, uh, welcome you any minute now.

      1. someone is also going to have to explain this STEVE SMITH business to me because I have seen it referred to many times.

        1. The real STEVE SMITH is a neighbor of Welch’s, and during one of Warty/Epi/SF’s arguments with him, they referred to him as a hairless sasquatch, and it evolved into the rapesquatch and all caps talking personality as poster “STEVE SMITH”, which got too difficult after registration. Someone not lazy will come along with the post that it happened, as I know someone looked it up within the last 4-6 months and posted a link.

          1. ooooooo, I see what you guys did. Inside Baseball.

            1. http://www.macon.com/2013/11/2…..g-the.html

              I don’t know whether this is STEVE SMITH or just Steve Smith, but I figured it may be relevant.

    2. And I can’t type for shit

    3. There’s room for ONE Rufus J. here, pal.

      You’re lucky you’re cute.

  30. Facing a recall election, CO state senator Evie Hudak will resign instead.

  31. Obama is giving special treatment to unions who skip on alt-text.

  32. Im being thankful.. Google is paying 75$/hour! Just work for few hours & spend more time with friends and family. On sunday I bought themselves a Alfa Romeo from having made $5637 this month. its the best-job Ive ever had.It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it out http://www.Buzz95.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.