Adoption

Russia Expands Adoption Ban

|

Russia will no longer permit adoptions of Russian children by single people (straight or gay) who live in countries that allow same-sex marriage. The ban will not affect American citizens since Russia banned all adoptions by Americans in 2012.

In October, 2011, Reason TV took a critical look at international adoption in a program called "Abandoned in Guatemala: The Failure of International Adoption Policies."

Here's the original writeup.

"If we shut down international adoptions, that's 5,000 kids a year whose lives we are ruining, whose lives could have been wonderful, and we're dooming them by shutting them into these institutions. So, to me, that's fundamental evil."

–Harvard law professor Elizabeth Bartholet

In 2007, Guatemala's privately run system of adoption attorneys, orphanages and foster care providers helped nearly 5,000 abandoned children find homes with loving families around the world. But then the Guatemalan government shut down international adoptions, created a centrally controlled adoption agency and nationalized the orphanage system. The plan was to promote in-country adoptions, but that plan hasn't worked. Last year, only 35 children were adopted by Guatemalan families.

Why did the Guatemalan government put an end to a system that was giving thousands of abandoned children a chance at a better life? And what did UNICEF have to do with it? Reason.tv producers Paul Feine and Alex Manning went to Guatemala to find out.

"Abandoned in Guatemala: The Failure of International Adoption Policies" is a film about the promise of international adoption and the sad reality that international adoptions around the world are decreasing, largely due to the influence of UNICEF. It's also a film about a privately run system that worked and a state-run system that is failing. Most of all, "Abandoned in Guatemala" is a film intended to raise awareness about international adoption in the hope that in the near future more abandoned children will be placed with loving families, wherever they happen to live.

Approximately 20 minutes.

Produced by Paul Feine and Alex Manning. Additional camera: Anthony Fisher. Graphics: Sharif Matar. Voice-over translations: Rin Palmer. Special thanks to Lissa Hanckel, Ana Isabel Maria-Gadala Centeno and Madre Ines. Music by Jason Shaw (audionautix.com) and Vate (www.vate.com.mx).

NEXT: Damon Root: Supreme Court To Rule on Cell Phone Privacy

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. Snowden, while under the patronage of the one true dictator of mother Russia, needs to stand up and fight this.

    From afar Reason can only make words, but Snowden while in Russia can fight!

    1. Eddie Snowden — patron saint of Russian orphans!

      1. Oh look! Both of us in the same place at the same time…
        We must be Mary. I mean Tulpa! I mean…I mean…

        1. Don’t worry, there’s still hope.

        2. Why don’t both of you go look for your ring, precious.

          1. So “Lyle” was retained, but not “Brezhnev”.

            1. Lyle is just an idiot. Brezhnev was Mary.

              1. But you’re the same old dick.

    2. He should valiantly succor these unfortunates for his morality to remain cogent.

      1. If he moved to Russia for moral reasons and not self-preservation, there might be a bit of cognitive dissonance there. Just a tad.

      2. Somehow “Please don’t hand me over to Eric Holder” is a bad prelude to “Your adopion policies suck.”

  2. If only abortions had been readily available, there wouldn’t be this many unwanted childernz in the first place.

    *lobs grenade, slinks away*

    1. Paging EvH. EvH please come to the anti-abortion phone, please.

      1. As a matter of fact, I shall. Given that it’s a serious topic.

        The domestic U.S. adoption system is dysfunctional. Will I get any argument on that?

        There’s a long waiting list of people wanting to adopt children, and a lot of the so-called “unwanted” children who get aborted could have gotten adopted if the system operated more efficiently.

        Since all sides purport to be in favor of reducing the number of abortions, what is the controversy? I doubt the choicers would object (not openly) if more women chose adoption for their “unwanted” children.

        1. You give them too much credit. The majority of choicers already state that they think abortion is the cat’s meow because they think we have too many people consuming Goddess Gaia’s precious natural resources.

          Though they tend to do that in the context of poor Africans, Asians, and other assorted Brown people while never explaining why they and their kin have more of a right to consume those resources. Funny, that.

          1. “because they think we have too many people consuming Goddess Gaia’s precious natural resources”

            A friend of mine witnessed a pregnant woman getting berated by a stranger at the grocery store for contributing to overpopulation.

            But conservatives are the ones pushing their morality on others.

            1. A friend of mine witnessed a pregnant woman getting berated by a stranger at the grocery store for contributing to overpopulation.

              The fuck? I’m entering into Berserker rage just reading that!

              1. Ditto – the reply to that idiot should they be encountered again is this: why haven’t you killed yourself?

          2. The majority of choicers already state that they think abortion is the cat’s meow because they think we have too many people consuming Goddess Gaia’s precious natural resources.

            Cite? I think abortion’s the cat’s meow in large part because of all the would-be criminals it eliminates.

            1. I think abortion’s the cat’s meow in large part because of all the would-be criminals it eliminates.

              That was an unintended consequence.

              Or feel free to prove me wrong… cite pro-abortion organizations using this “we’re removing society of criminals” as reasoning prior to Freakanomics.

              Though even if you find it – is the argument here “it’s cool to kill so long as we know they had a higher chance of criminal activity than others”?

              Make it if you want – seems to be though this is the same elitist argument that the world is over-populated so we need more abortions…. as they and you seem to be saying all’s well so long as bad people are being snuffed out.

              Congrats on allying yourself with all the worst tyrants throughout human history.

              1. Congrats on allying yourself with all the worst tyrants throughout human history.

                You really expect too much of us.

        2. Yeah, not openly…but it is strange how rarely they mention the adoption choice.

        3. I doubt the choicers would object (not openly) if more women chose adoption for their “unwanted” children.

          I wouldn’t be too sure about that one…

          And don’t float “adoption” as an answer. Adoption? Fuck you, seriously. I am not turning my body over for nine months of gaining weight and puking and being tired and suffering and not being able to sleep on my side and going to the hospital for a bout of misery and pain so that some couple I don’t know and probably don’t even like can have a baby. I don’t owe that couple a free couch to sleep on while they come to my city to check out the local orphans, so I sure as shit don’t own them my body.

          1. I googled that passage, and surprise, surprise, guess who I found?

            http://www.rawstory.com/rs/201…..-of-women/

            Is she like the id of the movement?

            1. Id, id, id! Monsters from the id!

              1. Amanduh’s attitude is almost certainly all the birth control she needs.

    2. Deep dish pizza makes a lot of sense in Russia because the crust traps air bubbles and acts as an excellent insulator.

    3. According to the UN, Russia has the greatest number of abortions per woman of child-bearing age in the world.

      If anything the correlation in this case would appear to be between high abortion rates and high rates of child neglect.

      1. It’s weird because the Orthodox Church is uber-powerful and respected in Russia. It is connected to the government and everyone is okay with that.

        If anything the correlation in this case would appear to be between high abortion rates and high rates of child neglect.

        One data point =/= correlation

        1. One data point =/= correlation

          One data point in a set of points showing a correlation can be used as an example of said correlation — and yes, such a correlation does exist. I don’t think it proves a causal relationship between the two factors, but the correlation does exist.

          1. RE: Orthodoxy, its rise is a relatively recent phenomena (the church’s purported members has nearly doubled since the end of the Cold War) and, contrary to most of the Western world and Rabbinical Judaism, there is a strong tradition of caesaropapism in Orthodox-majority countries (meaning that the government head gets to boss the church around and that the church more often than not finds itself as either an enforcement arm of government or a cultural force arguing for submission to government), rather than a tradition of the church operating as an independent pole upholding morality outside of the government. (Russia does have groups which can be categorized that way, Old Believers for example but they are small in number and hardly institutionalized.)

          2. set of points showing a correlation

            I’d love to see this data!

  3. So the US has totally exhausted its supply of unwanted children?

    Time to automate the monocle polishing factory!

    1. Is there an orphan gap vis a vis the Russians and if so, what is Congress and the President proposes to do about it?

    2. Is it just an issue of taking in a foreign child comes with fewer strings and roadblocks than adopting within the US?

      Maybe parents feel that adopting a kid from a shitty country is more of a kindness than adopting from the US?

      All the folks I know who have adopted kids have done so from within the US, or from their country of origin…

      1. Foreign adoption virtually eliminates the possibility that the birth mother or biological father will show up agitating about their rights.

        And American adoption is either private direct adoption which is expensive, provides you no rights if the pregnant girl changes her mind (and no refunds), and relatively rare given the demand, so market forces mean you face heavy competition for the fabled white newborn.

        If you go the route of public adoption, you are not getting a white infant. They seem to have a buy-one-get-one-free attitude where you have to prove your commitment to the process by taking an older child, multiple siblings, a child with mental or physical handicaps, or a different race child first, then you might have a shot at a healthy infant somewhere down the line maybe.

        And, frankly, not too many older children are given up for adoption. They were taken from abusive situations, abused themselves or abused by the welfare state, and so on top of a disturbed child you might have criminal and/or junkie parents who will come looking for their favorite punchbag at some point (or get cleaned up and you are in some 12 step nightmare or in court.)

        Adoption is very, very fucked up in America. My sister-in-law is just in the early stages of it and she already has a bouquet of horror stories.

        YMMV

        1. And, frankly, not too many older children are given up for adoption. They were taken from abusive situations, abused themselves or abused by the welfare state, and so on top of a disturbed child you might have criminal and/or junkie parents who will come looking for their favorite punchbag at some point (or get cleaned up and you are in some 12 step nightmare or in court.)

          Excellent point. My wife and I hope to adopt an older child, and we are choosing to adopt internationally for the exact reasons you name.

        2. A friend tried to adopt his junkie sister’s child and the biological father found out that his kid would be raised by fags and stepped in to stop it even though he wanted nothing to do with the kid. They’d put a ton of time, energy and money into the adoption and making sure the prenatal stuff went well and everything fell through.

          1. That’s terrible, jesse.

            I honestly believe were should move to a “mother is the sole guardian to the child” model as a default absent an agreement made prior to conception. (Marriage being one sort of those agreements.) Random sperm donors have neither rights nor responsibilities. Maybe compensate them the average payment for sperm donation in the state of conception.

            1. The kid ended up being taken into foster care shortly after birth. The state was open to adopting the child to my friend, but at that point the kid had lived with the foster parents for most of its life and the foster parents were eager to adopt, so my friend figured that would be better for the child and didn’t press it.

          2. Fuck, that sucks.

          3. From everything I have ever heard on the subject (which would be from adoptees, adopters, and some relatives of adopters), the spate of “birth mother/father wants the kid back after 5 years and gets it” court cases that occurred in the late 80s/90s (I think that was when it was) scared the ever-living fuck out of prospective adoptive parents. Not only was the system nightmarish–but they were willing to deal with that–but the fact that they now knew they could have the kid taken from them at any time even after years of bonding was too much. So they turned to foreign adoptions which basically had no risk of that.

            Most domestic adoptions I have seen (for example, a friend of my mother’s was a big adopter/foster parent) have been generally older kids to a “vetted”, “by-the-numbers” family that would often adopt different-race kids, and often multiple ones. The kids always knew they were adopted and had usually been in and out of the system for a while.

        3. Very true. Had a friend tried to adopt (public). It was a nightmare. The way I understood it was the agency didn’t approve of his political beliefs (very conservative, religious, homeschooled first kid…) and denied his request. Dad was a Lt Col, AF pilot, former commander who had a security clearance up the ying yang and had been screened to work around nukes. The wife was a former AF officer/pilot as well.

          They had to go the overseas route.

          Orphans are a good deal…if you can get em.

    3. Totally exhausted? No. There are adoptables out there. But demand for adoptable infants and toddlers without expensive chronic diseases totally outstrips supply.

      Most of the adoptables in the US are kids who have been in the foster system for years before parental rights were finally terminated, and thus have all the baggage of being raised by unfit parents, all the baggage of years of habituation to the foster system, and tend to be closer in age to being teenagers than to being infants. And then, these kids are disproportionately minority, while the National Association of Black Social Workers does its best to prevent cross-race adoptions.


    4. SIV|3.15.14 @ 3:27PM|#

      So the US has totally exhausted its supply of unwanted children?

      I PROMISE YOU, I AM WORKING AS FAST AS I CAN TO CREATE MORE

  4. So the US has totally exhausted its supply of unwanted children?

    No, we still have Tony and PB.

  5. Fuck the orphans. If their alcoholic commie parents didn’t want them they should have aborted them. It’s an orphan-eat-orphan world.

    1. http://www.abilify.com/bipolar/symptoms.aspx

      In a manic episode, some people with bipolar I disorder may experience an elevated (extremely happy) mood. Others may feel very agitated and act uncooperatively and aggressively.

      A diagnosis for a manic episode includes an elevated or an irritable mood lasting at least a week, plus 3 or more of the following symptoms:

      An inflated feeling of power, greatness, or importance
      Talking more than usual
      Racing thoughts
      Being easily distracted (attention shifts between many topics in just a few minutes)
      Intense focus on goal-directed activity or restlessness

      1. Cool! Now all we have to do is figure out whose sock puppet you are. Let’s see…

        1. http://www.abilify.com/bipolar…..tment.aspx

          Medication

          Medication is usually required for people with bipolar I disorder. It can play an important role in helping manage symptoms, including extreme mood swings. The primary types of medication include mood stabilizers such as lithium and valproate, and atypical antipsychotics such as
          ABILIFY (aripiprazole).

          Talk Therapy

          In addition to medication, adding talk therapy
          may also be an important part of your treatment plan. It can provide much needed support, education, and guidance as you deal with your symptoms. Talk therapy can be done individually or in groups. And the psychologist, therapist, or other healthcare professional providing therapy often works with your doctor to help track your progress.

          1. Oh look! He’s got a whole file, ready to paste in!
            HAHAHAHAHAHA!
            More, more!

            1. http://www.abilify.com/bipolar/understanding.aspx

              How Bipolar I Disorder Is Diagnosed

              There are no lab tests or medical procedures for diagnosing bipolar I disorder. Instead, a healthcare provider must take a very thorough history of both the patient and, if possible, the patient’s family. Bipolar I disorder tends to run in families, although having a family history of the condition doesn’t necessarily mean a person will develop bipolar I disorder. By being open and detailed about their symptoms, people can help their doctor arrive at a correct diagnosis. Earlier diagnosis and treatment can help.

              Causes

              While the causes of bipolar I disorder are still unknown, the symptoms are thought to be triggered by an imbalance of some key chemicals in the brain. Learn more about what scientists believe may be behind bipolar I disorder by

              1. You’re not obsessed…AT ALL!
                HAHAHAHAHAHA!

                1. http://www.webmd.com/bipolar-d…..1-disorder

                  People in manic episodes may spend money far beyond their means, have sex with people they wouldn’t otherwise, or pursue grandiose, unrealistic plans. In severe manic episodes, a person loses touch with reality. They may become delusional and behave bizarrely.

        2. The Tired One?
          That’s my guess.

  6. The worst part about the ban is that in 18 years there won’t be as many beautiful, nubile Russian born girls walking around our college campuses and towns.

    Damn you, Putin!

    1. Meh, we can still get Romanians, no? Campuses could be filled with nubile Romanian girls They’re less prone to that Russian scoop nose that Putin has such a fine example of anyway.

  7. All kidding aside, it’s important to keep our collective eyes on the ball and never forget that, somehow, it’s all America’s fault.

  8. Hmm.
    Has anyone heard from Sloopy? tOSU just lost.

    1. I heard he was having brunch with Groovus.
      Oops.

  9. My wife has done considerably more research on adoption than me, but I recall that absolute revulsion to the way that Russia treats its orphans.
    It is truly like a prison little to no touching. No room for attachment. The caretakers are forced to cycle through the children they care for. The physical and emotional scars of being in a Russian orphanage are appalling.
    Countries in Africa that are poorer do a better job

    1. Let the market sort out the orphans!

    2. Russia does not treat children very well in general. Probably not surprising, given the alcoholism rates and general lack of attention the Russkies pay to their own health. I was appalled listening to some of the stories of child abuse coming out of Russia; as you said, worse than even some of the stuff coming out of Africa.

  10. How did the Religious Right get such a stranglehold on the Russian Gubmint?

    1. What’s crazy is that some of the fringier elements of the American religious right claim that they’re at least partly responsible for the way Russia is going.

      Painting the entire religious right with the Scott Lively or Bryan Fischer brush would be cruel though. Every movement has its nutters and those two are prime examples.

      1. I’m “Facebook Friends” with Bryan, and he’s going on right now about how the GOP of the mid-19th century didn’t back down over slavery, so the modern GOP should back down over “same-sex marriage”. He’s complaining about Rand Paul basically saying that the issue should be decided by individual states.

        I pointed out that 1. Slavery was a Constitutionally protected institution; 2. The GOP, and Lincoln, were content to allow slavery to exist in the South–they just wanted to limit its expansion 3. Individual states passed anti-slavery laws that only applied within their own borders.

        Sounds more like Rand Paul’s strategy than Fischer’s.

        1. That first sentence should read “so the modern GOP should NOT back down over ‘same-sex marriage’.”

    2. I lived for a while in Slovakia. People there are not religious at all, yet they are incredibly traditional.

      Slovaks are not very open to gay marriage (even the younger generation).
      There is not much out of wedlock birth, but women marry very young, many are not interested in college, and many Slovak women see themselves staying at home as the future they aspire to.

      I think Russians might be similar.

      1. Somewhat, but there is definitely a high incidence of out of wedlock births and general family dysfunctionality which is much higher than what I have heard of the Slovaks.

        The Soviets messed up Russia but good.

  11. OT:

    The first unfortunate truth is Mt. Gox’s admission that it is a fractional-reserve bank. Seeing this problem for what it is, the company is now looking to enter into agreements with its partners to “erase a significant portion of [its] debt.”

    You know, on an urelated note, I have some furniture and other personal effects locked up at a ministorage facility. I pay a monthly fee, and they seem to do pretty well relying on the rent alone; they don’t run a “rent-a-center” on the side, using the items I’ve stored.

    1. On its current balance sheet the company lists its assets as consisting of 2,000 bitcoins (plus $32 mn. in fiat), and offsetting liabilities of 750,000 bitcoins (and another $55 mn of fiat claims against it). There is a clearly a big hole to fill. More troubling is that Mt. Gox notes that this theft of its bitcoins took place over a five-year period. Furthermore the company now confirms that the loss is due to the “transaction malleability” issue with the bitcoin protocol (which I discussed here as a reason Mt. Gox held only fractional reserves).

      In other words, over a five-year period the bitcoin bank went from a (presumably) 100% reserve ratio to holding less than 3% reserves? and no one noticed!

      1. Looks like Bitcoin needs a “central bitcoin” to require adequate reserves and become lender of last resort.

        1. In other words, it needs the ability to perpetuate the problem, so that when the system collapses, the damage is much, much worse than otherwise would have been.

          1. You say perpetuate the problem and I say eradicate the problem.

            Now in this case Bitcoin is not a national currency so a “central bitcoin” would just verify full reserve held by a Mt. Gox.

            1. No, you misidentify the problem as usual. Bitcoin is an aetheric currency, as such, Mt. Gox was able to disappear in smoke.

              1. SAN FRANCISCO/VANCOUVER (Reuters) – Some savvy bitcoin investors have a solution to cyber-thieves and instability shaking online exchanges: they print out their virtual savings and hide them in the real world.

                The shuttering this week of bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox and fears that hundreds of millions of dollars worth of the virtual currency have been lost or stolen are pushing investors to tighten their security.

                Touted by advocates as a new, digital type of money that could one day replace real-world cash, bitcoins can also be stored like traditional currencies, locked up in a safe, or hidden in a shoe box.

                1. Still aetheric. Bitcoin’s existence depends on the existence of the internet, or at least some sort of electronic funds transfer system. Even if I print out an ersatz Bitcoin banknote, without the internet to convert that banknote into Bitcoin, it’s, by all definition, not work the paper it’s printed on. Though, that’s more to do with the extremely high price of printer ink.

              2. I said “national currency” you dunderhead.

            2. Re: Peter Caca,

              You say perpetuate the problem [central banking] and I say eradicate the problem.

              Central banking exacerbates the problem.

              I already diagnosed your problem a few H&R posts ago, Caca, and that is you don’t understand the concept of money, at all.

            3. Eradicate the problem, like the Federal Reserve did 100 years ago?

              1. The Fed has long ago eradicated the problem of depositors losing everything. But it required the existence of the FDIC too.

                Mt Gox is free banking era – but it was intended as such.

                Too bad depositors – free banking gets you fucked in the ass.

                1. Re: Peter Caca,

                  The Fed has long ago eradicated the problem of depositors losing everything.

                  Depositors insurance does not eradicate the problem. If you think I’m wrong, then you would be ignoring the massive bailout of the banks that happened just a few years ago. It was in all the papers, if memory serves…

                2. Too bad depositors – free banking gets you fucked in the ass.

                  We all know the market could never sell deposit insurance.

                  1. I imagine that those who offer deposit insurance would mandate that a bank’s reserves be fairly high.

                    1. That’s exactly why private deposit insurance is superior to government deposit insurance. Private insurance companies would ensure responsible behavior on the part of banks, instead of serving as a backstop for spendthrifts.

                    2. The problem with private deposit insurance is scale with the TBTFs.

                      Who could insure Morgan’s $2 trillion in deposits? No one can.

                    3. Nobody would have the insane leverage ratios we have now if discipline were enforced by private deposit insurance. Well, somebody might. But if people are fully informed of the risk and still want to take it, then they should be able to. Good luck attracting depositors if nobody will certify you as safe. Thank god JP can lend out to their heart’s content and stick taxpayers with the bill, am I right, Mr. Classical Liberal?

                    4. Who could insure Morgan’s $2 trillion in deposits? No one can.

                      Huh? I bet that a consortium of insurance companies could each take on a bit of the risk, and split the premiums. Also, I imagine there could be provisions in the policy limiting the amount the insurer was liable for based on the bank’s reserve levels, amount of risky loans, etc.

                      It’s a canard that only government can provide regulation.

                    5. Palin’s Buttplug:

                      The problem with private deposit insurance is scale with the TBTFs.

                      Who could insure Morgan’s $2 trillion in deposits? No one can.

                      If I assume you are correct, then this implies that private deposit insurance would eliminate TBTFs, since, who would want to be part of it, without insurance?

                      At this point, I think you’re arguing in favor of private deposit insurance.

                  2. Re: Jordan,

                    We all know the market could never sell deposit insurance.

                    Well, actually, the market would not offer deposit insurance the same way it does not sell gambler’s insurance (last I checked, at least). Putting your money in a bank requires the same kind of effort and analysis one would employ before placing your child in a school or daycare. In this case, all those depositors were taking big chances with their Bitcoin deposits considering there was very little business history from Mt Gox or a track record for one to analyze. Those idiots were gambling with their savings.

                    1. Putting your money in a bank requires the same kind of effort and analysis one would employ before placing your child in a school or daycare.

                      And you can pay somebody else to do the analysis. Like an insurance company. If insurers won’t certify deposits from Bank A, you know it’s too risky.

                3. Too bad depositors – free banking gets you fucked in the ass.

                  If you’re a moron that keeps your BTC online maybe. Otherwise free banking has no problems. America’s bank busts of the 1800s happened because of government regulations. Canada did not these regulations or busts.

                  The Fed has long ago eradicated the problem of depositors losing everything.

                  They’re replaced ‘lose everything’ with ‘everyone loses from inflation’. And with the way they’ve jacked up the US banking system they may just get both.

                4. The Fed has long ago eradicated the problem of depositors losing everything.

                  Much in the same way that shooting the hostages can be said to resolve a standoff, yes, that is true.

            4. You say perpetuate the problem and I say eradicate the problem.

              That’s cause you’re fucking stupid.

      2. Re: cavalier973,

        In other words, over a five-year period the bitcoin bank went from a (presumably) 100% reserve ratio to holding less than 3% reserves? and no one noticed!

        Oh, the market noticed all right. Who didn’t notice were the final fools that didn’t get their money out sooner. If the company was having trouble redeeming its clients’ Bitcoin for dollars, that was a clear indication (to someone who knows how banks work) that the company was playing a Ponzi scheme, unwittingly or not.

    2. So basically what you are saying is that you’re down with an Islamic bank. My university, strangely enough, offers a degree specialty in Islamic banking for Accounting and International Business, if I remember correctly. *shrugs* They may be on to something.

      1. Why aren’t you linking the Wikipedia article?

        Anyway, Islamic Banking forbids “usury”, which prohibition doesn’t make sense. Does Islamic law also forbid renting out your lawnmower? Because it comes down to the same thing. I can charge you rent to use my lawnmower, or I can charge you interest on the money I lend you to purchase your own.

        1. Does Islamic law also forbid renting out your lawnmower?

          Probably. Actually, I’m curious as to how real estate works in sharia countries like Saudi Arabia. Are landlords forbidden? Or do they do the land value tax thing, like Henry George?

          Anyone know?

          1. Well, it seems according to his leasing land is halal.

            So now you know.

            1. If I have to look up what “halal” means, then the terrorists have won.

    3. A nice thing that is starting to happen is that exchanges can offer cryptographic proof that they really have the coins they say they do, so that should help avoid this kind of situation.

  12. OT: Bill Maher Absolutely Trashes the Bible and ‘Psychotic Mass Murderer’ God

    “What kind of tyrant kills everyone just to get back at the few he’s mad at? I mean, besides Chris Christie,” he jabbed.

    “Isn’t life hard enough without making shit up out of thin air to fuck with yourself?” he later asked of religion’s arbitrary rules about food, clothing, and other material goods.

    Watch the full segment below, via HBO:

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bil…..derer-god/ (speaking about Noah and the Great Flood inflicted on mankind)

    Got to love the rationality of Maher!

    1. What kind of tyrant kills everyone just to get back at the few he’s mad at?

      I know, right!

    2. Re: Peter Caca,

      Got to love the rationality of Maher!

      Which is like loving a tombstone.

      “What kind of tyrant kills everyone just to get back at the few he’s mad at?”

      Stalin?
      Mao?
      Pol Pot?
      Obama (with his drones)?

      I mean, what is it with this guy and wedding parties?

      1. Stalin?
        Mao?
        Pol Pot?

        Nice company this Christian God keeps.

        1. You forgot Obama (with his drones).

        2. Re: Peter Caca,

          Nice company this Christian God keeps

          Maybe. What doesn’t seem to pique your curiosity is how come Maher became a Bible literalist all of a sudden.

          1. how come Maher became a Bible literalist all of a sudden

            Because Bible literalism is quite nearly the simplest and most idiotic of the philosophies held to within the Christian world, and Maher understands his limitations. Seriously, even the smart “Bible literalists” understand that literalism in a work which explicitly employs genres not meant to be taken literally is a fairly stupid way to engage in serious textual analysis.

              1. Right, those would be the “smart” Bible literalists. I have never understood what is wrong with using a historical-critical approach (within reason, of course — don’t need to hold the original meaning of the text in some sort of black box, to be disinterred by experts).

                1. Book of Numbers OT(NRSV) 15 Moses said to them, “Have you allowed all the women to live? 16 These women here, on Balaam’s advice, made the Israelites act treacherously against the Lord in the affair of Peor, so that the plague came among the congregation of the Lord. 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him. 18 But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.

                  Context and metaphor out of that.

                  1. The Midianite parents would have been legally/ethically responsible for this situation falling upon their children?NOT the Israelites;
                    This situation was forced upon the Israelites by the unprovoked treachery of the Midianites;
                    No ANE land-based and/or blood-succession-based civilization had means for assimilating foreign males into them, except as severely constrained/debilitated slaves (e.g., “prisoners were often blinded en masse. When brought to their captors’ land, they could still perform certain tasks, such as carrying water from a well or canal with a bucket and a rope” [OT:DLAM:237]);
                    All ANE civilizations recognized the military threat/risk that male slaves (even children) of foreign stock represented. Even the case in which David ‘served’ the Philistines, the Philistine leaders were sensitive to the issue?that David might ‘turn on his Philistine masters’ in the heat of battle (1 Sam 29);
                    There were no ‘social relief’ institutions in this world [only the largest of empires could afford to take in destitute women and children as temple ‘personnel’?see OT:CANE:445], and the land in which this event occurred was depopulated .(“Those who were able to flee from their conquerors often died of exposure, starvation, or thirst” [OT:DLAM:237])

                    1. There would be no practical way to transport these boys to their ‘next of kin’ down south, and there was no guarantee that they would take them in anyway. Even the Kenites, generally loyal to Israel, were divided in policy, as Heber the Kenite’s alliance with Syria in Judges indicates. “The propensity of pastoral nomads for raids, or razzias, both against one another and against sedentists is well attested in the near eastern historical record.” [OT:CANE:251]
                      As in the case of the Amalekites, Israel was forced–by the Midianite atrocity–into the difficult situation of selecting the ‘most humane way’ of dealing with the boys, which, in most situations in the ancient world, was killing them very quickly (similar to ‘euthanasia’, perhaps, which was also considered the ‘most humane’ way of doing this, according to ANE testimony?see the discussion/documentation in the case of the Amalekites, at rbutcher1.html)

                      http://christianthinktank.com/midian.html

                    2. Secondly, the accusation that these girls were for “sex slave” purposes contradicts what we know about the culture and about the event. [But at least one of the writers above–to their credit–added the word ‘presumably’, realizing that the text doesn’t actually say anything about it?]

                      1. Most girls were married soon/immediately after they began menstruating in the ANE (circa 12 years of age), and since infant and child mortality was so high, the average age of the girls spared would have been around 5 years of age or slightly lower (life expectancy wasn’t a straight line, with childhood risks so high). Of all the horrible things ascribed to Israel in the OT, pedophilia is the one conspicuous omission. That these little kids would have been even considered as ‘sex slaves’ seems quite incongruent with their ages.

                    3. Cavalier, all of that material is fucking stupid and worthless, and you should be embarrassed.

                      If the Old Testament is true, God was directly giving this order. That means he was directly concerned in the outcome.

                      And THAT means that the outcome could have been literally whatever he wanted. He could have transported those children to a new Earth if he wanted. He could have lifted a new continent out of the sea. He could have CHANGED THE BASIS of all of “ANE” civilization. (Iron Age civilizations, like the Romans, routinely assimilated conquered populations into their own citizen structure.)

                      The Midianite parents would have been legally/ethically responsible for this situation falling upon their children?NOT the Israelites

                      Actually, when you slaughter a population and come into possession of a large number of infant prisoners, you are absolutely and without question 100% responsible for what happens to those infant prisoners once they are in your power. And I don’t give a flying fuck WHAT you think your fucking logistical problems are. Especially when you (supposedly) have access to a supernatural power that, you know, fed a population of tens of thousands for 40 years in the desert, that can conquer whatever land it wants, that can make new land if it wants, etc.

                    4. “The Midianite parents would have been legally/ethically responsible for this situation falling upon their children?NOT the Israelites;
                      This situation was forced upon the Israelites by the unprovoked treachery of the Midianites;”

                      Wait, they were forced to murder all those people?

                      You’re a fucking idiot if you believe that.

                    5. Wait, they were forced to murder all those people?

                      You’re a fucking idiot if you believe that.

                      Maybe so; maybe so.

                      On an unrelated note, what are your views of Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki?

                    6. Cav, thanks for the information. Although most of my response has already been made by others, I wanted to offer a couple points they missed.

                      History, is written by the victors. Had the Nazis prevailed, today’s German students would be hearing about the awful things the Polish people did to make poor Hitler attack them. So, whether it was spiritual or political is irrelevant. They believed that the land was theirs because god told them so.

                      As for the virgin girls? Okay, translations from Hebrew to Latin and then on to the NRSV may leave some ambiguity about who was getting what and why. Considering that women were viewed as breeders and possessions I can’t think of very many alternatives and none of them are good. And that’s ignoring the admonitions against mixing with other tribes.

                      The bigger point I want to make is that if it’s all just context and metaphor then there can’t be any truth to anything that people think is behind it. At the very least, it’s not sincere worship if someone just picks and chooses what they think is “real” and ignores anything that doesn’t square with their own attitudes.

                    7. I just present the truth. If you reject it, that’s on you.

                    8. Using the NRSV; well, there’s your problem right there. Use the KJV, just like Paul and Silas did, and you can’t go wrong.

      2. I mean, what is it with this guy and wedding parties?

        Extremely early term abortions, or very late term abortions. I’m not sure which it is.

    3. “What kind of tyrant kills everyone just to get back at the few he’s mad at? I mean, besides Chris Christie,”

      How is this joke even funny? I don’t like Christie, but he’s never killed anyone. Fuck, Maher’s audience really will laugh at anything.

      1. Oh, come on, IT. Christie is a Republican, and so by his very existence causes death and misery. On purpose.

      2. Reminds me of this:

        Hitchens flips off Maher’s audience and specifically states something like “your audience, who will apparently laugh at anything”

  13. So Brezhnev got disappeared, eh? Karma.

    1. And look who coincidentally appeared. What a coincidence.

      1. ??

  14. OT: I wish I could claim credit for this story, but someone else wrote it. It is a tasteful combination of P. G. Wodehouse and H. P. Lovecraft.

    ‘Yes, Jeeves?’

    ‘There is a cosmic horror to see you, sir.’

    ‘Can’t it wait until after breakfast?’

    ‘I’m afraid not, sir.’

    ‘I thought those cosmic thingummies were able to wait like the dickens, Jeeves. How did that Arab chap put it? Something about lying dead.’

    ‘”That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die,” is, I believe the quote you are looking for, sir.’

    ‘Yes, Jeeves, on the spot. So why is this scaly creature in such hurry?’

    ‘It is dripping a nameless ichor on the carpet, sir.’

    ‘Is it. The cheek of these infernal creatures. Why, it’s worse than my Aunt Agatha.’

    ‘Indeed, sir.’

    For the whole thing, see

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/c…..ess-ichor/

    1. There’s also a book with the same conceit, in case you’re looking for just the right gift for the wife:

      http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ…..B007BVAO2U

      1. (I have not received any compensation for pimping these works)

    2. That’s pretty cool. Are the hard copies collector’s items? Some of those prices are ridiculous.

      1. I’m glad to say I’m not affiliated with these guys, I just noticed their amusing idea.

  15. Large numbers of Muscovites, possibly in the tens of thousands, rally against Putin and his aggression in Ukraine.

    http://news.nationalpost.com/2…..crackdown/

    1. A protest led by a campaign manager for a Communist Party candidate, against a Tsarist-wannabe with a picture of Peter the Great adorning his office. I wasn’t expecting the reincarnation of Peter Stolypin to be leading the protest, but is there any way for both of them to lose?

      1. It’s Russia. Even when they win they lose.

  16. Short term lurker, first time poster here. If this is where everyone’s dumping their random links today, here’s mine:

    A new study sponsored by Nasa’s Goddard Space Flight Center has highlighted the prospect that global industrial civilisation could collapse in coming decades due to unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution.

    According to them:
    “Currently, high levels of economic stratification are linked directly to overconsumption of resources, with “Elites” based largely in industrialised countries responsible for both:

    “… accumulated surplus is not evenly distributed throughout society, but rather has been controlled by an elite. The mass of the population, while producing the wealth, is only allocated a small portion of it by elites, usually at or just above subsistence levels.””

    It’s seriously funny seeing completely politicized scientists try to explain history. They try to claim that economic stratification is what caused the Western Roman Empire to collapse.

    1. What does this have to do with space exploration, again? Or for that matter, with the US — where the “mass of the population” is wildly above “subsistence levels”.

    2. Re: Jensen,

      It’s seriously funny seeing completely politicized scientists try to explain history.

      You can find studies and predictions of looming economic collapse because of (take your pick) overindustrialization, overpopulation, resource depletion since the end of the 19th Century, normally written by academists with NO training in sound economics or economic history.

      They try to claim that economic stratification is what caused the Western Roman Empire to collapse.

      I wonder what would they say was the cause of the collapse of the Soviet Empire, but I am sure they will not come up with “economic stratification,” a completely meaningless term for the science of economics. There’s no such thing as “stratification” when it comes to the actions of millions or billions of individual actors with individual minds.

      1. OldMexican, due to very poor judgement I have a degree in history. Trust me, I’ve seen plenty of Malthusian arguments by shitty academics. I just noticed people here seem to like posting insane nonsense. And time travel pornography.

        They don’t seem to address the Soviet Union at all, probably doesn’t fit in their ‘model’.

        1. Shall we include the WRE in our study, an empire for whom we have little concrete and reliable economic data and for which there exist far more compelling orthodox theories for its demise?

          Of course!

          Shall we include the Soviet Union, a much more recent empire with much more reliable and verifiable economic data, especially regarding “economic stratification”?

          Of course not!

      2. They try to claim that economic stratification is what caused the Western Roman Empire to collapse.

        I blame Bushus Maximus the II.

    3. Sadly, it seems like so many scientists are completely politicized now. I’m sure the preponderance of government grants for research had no part in that, no sir.

      1. Yes, Episiarch. Wingnuttery has infiltrated the realm of science too.

        Of course Darwin got his pushback from right-wing assholes and now modern science is getting the same.

        1. Yeah, all those anti-GMO people are right-wing fuckwits.

    4. NOTHING LEFT TO CUT

    5. Well, they’re rocket scientists, so we know they know what they’re talking about.

    6. Currently, high levels of economic stratification are linked directly to overconsumption of resources

      So…my position on the economic strata (stratum?) is a result of how much I consume?

    7. I am actually for MORE economic stratification so we can cull the deadweight off this planet starting with the entire Middle East, India, China, and the useless Red State fundie white trash in North America via poverty and birthrate collapse.

      1. Back to your “people on welfare vote Republican” talking point, I see?

        1. “people on SNAP vote GOP” to be a tad bit more accurate.

          But yes! You read my rants I see.

          AS long as the things I like survive – freethought/secularism, science, liberalism, diversity, and capitalism.

          Fuck everyone else.

          1. “people on SNAP vote GOP”

            Gotta admit that’s surprising, since I read in the New York Times that “Some of [Obama’s] firmest support came from low-income groups” in 2012.

            AS long as the things I like survive – freethought/secularism, science, liberalism, diversity, and capitalism.

            You want entire countries wiped out…..yet you support “diversity.” OK.

            1. I don’t want countries to be wiped out. I want the best fit to survive instead – without Confederate Cornbread (SNAP).

              1. Southern Cornbread is the bomb. You should crumble it up in your homemade vegetable beef stew, and add cayenne pepper sauce.

                Son!

          2. This: “the things I like…diversity,…”

            And this: “Fuck everyone else.”

            are opposites.

            1. Diversity happens by market choice.

              1. And when everyone chooses to be a Young Earth Creationist Rapture Bunny, how will you cope?

      2. Yes! We need more living space for the master race!

        In all your other derp I sometimes forget that you are a racist pile of shit on top of everything else.

        1. I am not racist – I am religionist. I despise superstition and ignorance.

          I read The Golden Bough as a sophomore in college. It may be the most important book(s) ever written.

          1. I despise superstition and ignorance.

            Thanks, Ass Cork, I needed a good laugh.

          2. Palin’s Buttplug|3.15.14 @ 6:28PM|#
            “I am not racist – I am religionist. I despise superstition and ignorance.”

            I’ll believe that when you blow the mirror away.

      3. Ah, so you’re a fan of keeping the undesirables mired in poverty. Now your progressivism and love of central bankers makes perfect sense.

    8. Interesting interception, Jensen.

    9. NASA has no reason to even exist. Kill it.

      You have no idea how much it pains me to say that. But at least the SpaceX et al guys are keeping the dream alive.

  17. … accumulated surplus is not evenly distributed throughout society, but rather has been controlled by an elite. The mass of the population, while producing the wealth, is only allocated a small portion of it by elites, usually at or just above subsistence levels.”

    I wish they wouldn’t write stuff like this. It’s possible that the elite guy in charge of allocating my portion of The Wealth will read it, and have a sad, and then he’ll cut my rations.

    1. It’s something I find very common in progressive dialogue. This weird anthropomorphic view where ‘Society’ has control of resource allocation and is distributing it unfairly. Therefore, they can gain control of it and distribute it however they want. They never really get to the point where it’s more a complex system of interrelations, not some hierarchy that can be controlled in any effective way.

      1. Entire countries have wrecked their economies crashing head-first into the economic calculation problem, but that doesn’t stop a new generation of academic retards from advocating the exact same kind of system for bureaucracies clog markets and ignore price signals.

        It’s all about the pretension of knowledge and fatal conceit that Hayek explained.

  18. My 80’s music playlist, now with more Phil Collins!

    Walking Through an Eighties Mall

  19. Venice on brink of seceding from Italy.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..Italy.html

    1. It’s not like they didn’t do a pretty decent job for the 1,000 years they lasted on their own until Napoleon conquered them.

      1. I find it interesting how Venice handled its navy. They had triremes, but the rowers were free citizens instead of slaves. Each rower had a small space beneath his seat where he could stow his own trade goods to sell when they arrived at the destination, which augmented his income.

        There was quite a bit of government intervention through its years of independence, and it engaged in neo-con-like foreign policy on occasion (such as diverting the Crusaders to Byzantine in order to eliminate a rival), but on the whole it appeared to be a better place to live than many other places in Medieval/Renaissance Europe.

        http://www.amazon.com/Venice-P…..0307473791

        1. The Renaissance was birthed by Italian city states, and that in turn led to The Enlightenment. If not for the city states, western civilization might not be a thing.

          The Italian City states were absolutely the place to be in Europe during the Dark Ages. They simply didn’t go through The Dark Ages as I understand. The only place that comes close is The Hanseatic League, which was a confederation of trader city-states.

          That Venitian referendum I linked to? Central government won’t recognize it but many are going to start paying taxes to the local government instead anyway. Did I mention the referendum takes place tomorrow alongside the Crimean referendum? Double-Trouble Sunday!

          1. Cytotoxic|3.15.14 @ 7:09PM|#
            “The Renaissance was birthed by Italian city states, and that in turn led to The Enlightenment. If not for the city states, western civilization might not be a thing.”

            When you get the chance, hie yourself to Florence.
            My only disappointment was a lack of memorials to the original banks!

    2. Pretty sure quite a few northern districts would like to do so. Mezzogiorno gets all the tax money that the northerners pay. And most of the government jobs.

      1. To be fair, Southern Italy didn’t want to be conquered by the North in the 19 century, but wasn’t really given an option. Now the tables are turned, and the north is bitching.

        1. If the south didn’t want it, why wasn’t there a mass guerrilla campaign against Garibaldi to stop it?

      2. And of them, my old home (Abruzzo) probably would want to separate from the rest of the Mezzogiorno.

        1. And then after that, the Marsicans probably would want to separate from L’Aquila at the first opportunity.

          Italy really was cobbled together. The Italians kept importing ideas from abroad in the 19th century that didn’t work with their culture and situation, but they implemented them anyway.

          I, for one, support the return of the city-state.

      1. Yeah, but that was just the WWII winners arguing about who got it.

    3. Venice secede? Why do they want to revive slavery?

      1. Bring back the galleys!

    4. Pretty weird to see cosmotarians supporting secession. I mean, what is the point? If national boundaries shouldn’t exist why support temporarily redrawing them?

      1. To kill the nation-state through 1,000 cuts.

        1. Yes, but what if the citizens of those independent states get above themselves and decide they don’t want to let a bajillion Muslims and Blacks immigrate, sorta like the Swiss did recently? That’s the problem with small states, it’s easier for the general population to influence the government.

          1. Well, if it’s really a “bajilion” Black Muslims, then you have a Golden Horde situation and a small state isn’t going to be able to repel them anyway.

            1. a small state isn’t going to be able to repel them anyway.

              Why not? Put troops on the border posts and tell them they won’t get court martialed if they shoot. Most potential immigrants would go for other countries, easier targets.

              1. Depends on proximity. Your scenario is basically what the Thai government told it’s border cops to do from the 70’s to pretty much about now, and I know this because my father-in-law was one of those border cops with orders to shoot to kill. Yet, thousands, if not tens-of-thousands, of Laotians, Cambodians, and, especially, Burmese attempted to cross the border.

                Read up on the Thahan Phran and what still goes on in Mae Hong Son Province.

              2. I would say that attrition through enforcement, even more than border security measures, is the answer. An illegal immigrant living the interior of America has a less than 1% chance of getting deported:

                washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/12/

                deportations-come-mostly-

                from-border-dhs-chief-say/

                This could easily be raised. I I decided to commit a crime and then flee the police, what are the chances the government would find me?

                1. I decided to commit a crime and then flee the police, what are the chances the government would find me?

                  Depends on the crime. A lot of illegal immigrants, that aren’t caught, became illegal due to visa overstays. Unless they do something that attracts the authorities’ attention, they can be under the radar for the rest of their lives. Especially since they’re not in the system anyway. E-Verify ain’t going to work either as the Chinese restaurants they’re working at pay them under the table anyway (and you’d be surprised at the amount of Latinos working in the back of these Chinese buffet restaurants for the same reasons).

                  1. This could easily be raised.

                    Yes we could easily live under a police state.

                    1. Yes we could easily live under a police state.

                      False dichotomy: Raising enforcement of immigration laws from 1% to something higher != living in a police state

                    2. Raising enforcement of immigration laws from 1% to something higher != living in a police state

                      As I alluded to up-thread, attempting to catch a greater number of illegal immigrants already living in the United States will require things like internal checkpoints, national id, household registration, etc. Maybe you wouldn’t mind those things as you believe they won’t effect you, but slopes get slippery, no?

                    3. Three years in prison for paying employees under the table is a good place to start.

                    4. Three years in prison for paying employees under the table is a good place to start.

                      In getting to a police state. No one is interested in your Club America shit. We’re going to keep hiring illegals; deal with it.

            2. a “bajilion” Black Muslims

              You could get a copy of Muhammad Speaks on any street corner.

              1. You could get a copy of Muhammad Speaks on any street corner.

                And bean pies for every meal!

          2. Europe is beset with racism and bigotry already. Functional free markets are the best bet to defeating xenophobia and achieving free borders. Singapore has very open immigration.

            1. Good point about Singapore and Europe. Europe does have a problem with people who think that *gasp* European governments should act in the interest of European people. Singapore is a dictatorship. If competition from immigrant workers reduces the native people’s wages and they complain, it doesn’t matter. Capitalism is good for the erosion of nationalism because it allows the development of super-rich elite classes that don’;t identify with the general population. In contrast in a country that is less stratified the elites are more likely to identify with the general population. Of course the flip side is that stratification leads to less support for capitalism among the ‘losers.’

              1. Singapore is a dictatorship.

                No, it isn’t.

              2. the interest of European people.

                There is no such thing as ‘the interests of a people’. STFU and go home Merican.

    5. Have you read “City of Fallen Angels”? It wasn’t quite as compelling as “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil”, but it was informative in a dry sort of way about how Venetians think about themselves.

      The main plot weaving through the story concerns the mystery of how and why the Venetian Opera House burned down.

  20. BTW, it looks like Mary is REALLY off. Over in the Adoption thread, she’s using “Lyle” and “so very tired” tags and forgetting to switch when she replies to her own posts.
    It might be amusing if it weren’t so pathetic.

    1. I thought that this was the adoption thread?

      1. Ooops!
        Over on the “Snowden” thread.
        Thanks, c973!

      2. I’m so confused. First all the non-sequiturs and gaps and now this. Where am I?

          1. You are here.

            On Russia Today. I’m your host, Svetlana.
            This morning we pose the question: Just how evil IS American imperialism? Joining us is Reason Magazine editor Matt Welch. Nice tie, Matt!

    2. “BTW, it looks like Mary is REALLY off. Over in the Adoption thread, she’s using “Lyle” and “so very tired” tags”

      Um, no you stupid fuck, since you’re to god damned dumb to notice, I didn’t get nuked when she did.

      Even YOU aren’t too fucking retarded to figure out what that means fuckwit, yes, you got it, your moron ass was wrong, I’m not Mary.

      Fuck off and die now.

  21. I support Russia on this one. It’s their children, their business. If gays want children, they should have them themselves, oh wait, they can’t. “Normal” my ass.

    1. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 8:06PM|#
      “I support Russia on this one. It’s their children, their business.”
      No, it’s not “their” children; does the state own your kids?

      “If gays want children, they should have them themselves, oh wait, they can’t. “Normal” my ass.”
      OK, fucking bigot. Go away.

      1. No, it’s not “their” children; does the state own your kids?

        I haven’t given my kids up for adoption.

        bigot

        This isn’t Slate Magazine, that word is not an argument.

        1. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 8:21PM|#
          “I haven’t given my kids up for adoption.”

          Which is a clever way for a brain-dead ignoramus to avoid answering the question, right.
          Let’s be clear, asshole: Does the state own your children? Yes or no.

          “bigot
          This isn’t Slate Magazine, that word is not an argument.”

          No, it’s not an argument. It’s a statement of fact, asshole.

          1. Does the state own your children?

            No. But who owns the Russian children. You? Me?

            It’s a statement of fact, asshole.

            If you define “bigot” as anyone who doesn’t think buggery is totally normal and comparable to the act of procreation, then yes, I’m a “bigot.” I’m not sue how that relates to my argument.

            1. Um…

              What argument was that, bigot?

            2. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 8:40PM|#
              “No. But who owns the Russian children.”

              The parents may deal with them as they please.
              ———————-
              “If you define “bigot” as anyone who doesn’t think buggery is totally normal and comparable to the act of procreation, then yes, I’m a “bigot.” I’m not sue how that relates to my argument.”

              OK, got it. Tell us how blacks are not ‘totally normal’, bigot.

              1. The parents may deal with them as they please.

                In many cases the parents aren’t there to deal with them, this is Russia we’re talking about. But if that were to happen how many Russian people would be like “yay American homosexuals are going to adopt my kid!” No. They would rather give to one of the many, many heterosexual i.e. normal parents.(Contrary to popular imagination the demand for white children to be adopted far exceeds the supply)

                Tell us how blacks are not ‘totally normal’

                How would Blacks not be ‘normal’? They are a different race, there is nothing objectively ‘abnormal’ about their race.

                1. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 8:54PM|#
                  “In many cases the parents aren’t there to deal with them,…”

                  Which leaves other family members.
                  You’re just dying to turn the kids over to the state, aren’t you, bigot?
                  ——————–
                  “How would Blacks not be ‘normal’? They are a different race, there is nothing objectively ‘abnormal’ about their race.”

                  Yeah, they were born that way, right, bigot?

                  1. Which leaves other family members.
                    You’re just dying to turn the kids over to the state, aren’t you, bigot?

                    The Russian families evidently don’t see anything wrong with turning the process to the State. I suppose for America I would prefer a “privatized” solution, but it’s still their country.

                    Yeah, they were born that way, right, bigot?

                    Just like Down Syndrome people were born that way. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t abnormal.

                    1. Just like Down Syndrome people were born that way. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t abnormal.

                      So you don’t have any issues with gays? You think gays should be able to marry and enjoy the benefits of liberty just like everyone else? Your only problem is referring to homosexuality as normal?

                    2. As a libertarian I would say that they have the “right” to their sexual activities, but I’m not going to pretend not to be disgusted by it. As for the marriage issues, I, unlike practically everyone involved in this “debate,” know that the purpose of a legal marriage isn’t to get Goodies from the Gummit, it’s to force the partners(usually the man) to take care of each other by making them hold their assets in common. Why should this be extended to gay people? Why would they want it in the first place, and why should we want it to be extended to them? Some say it’s “none of our business” but since it’s a government function and it’s our government, it is our business. I think that the traditional family does require some method of protection as it has had throughout civilized society. Imagine what would happen if husbands were allowed to remain ‘married’ to their wives while the wives had no guarantee for government power to be used to prevent the husbands from refusing to share their money? But why should that protection be extended to sanctify buggery? Why do Buggered couples require it. I have never heard good answers to these questions.

                    3. Imagine what would happen if husbands were allowed to remain ‘married’ to their wives while the wives had no guarantee for government power to be used to prevent the husbands from refusing to share their money?

                      You mean how marriage was in the United Kingdom until 1870? Sounds pretty ‘traditional’ to me, dude.

                    4. So when you’re playing this character, what age do you pretend to be? And where do you pretend you are from? Americans lack a fondness for bugger and its variants (which is a shame).

                      I just don’t expect upper middle class octogenarian Brits to be obsessing about libertarian thought on gay marriage.

                      I, unlike practically everyone involved in this “debate,” know that the purpose of a legal marriage

                      Are you working some kind of Allegory of the Cave thing here? You have seen the special knowledge and are coming back to us trapped in the cave where we martyr you and you feel warm and superior that you’re being attacked for bringing us hard truths?

                    5. 40 dollars to read the article? Grindr and Scruff are free to use!

                    6. It’s a good racket, I agree.

                    7. Americans lack a fondness for bugger and its variants (which is a shame).

                      You really think Americans aren’t that kinky? 😉

                      Oh, you mean that Americans lack a fondness for the word “bugger”.

                      I was wondering if “Spectator” is “American”.

                    8. “I was wondering if “Spectator” is “American”.”

                      Never saw Murkin’s handle linked to a web site, and I’m nut sure Murkin ever claimed to be other than a So Con racist.

                    9. Psht, I think Americans love them some buggery and like to bugger. I figured by using the root in a gramatically incorrect context I wouldn’t need quotes or to preface it with “the word.”

                    10. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 9:42PM|#
                      “As a libertarian I would say that they have the “right” to their sexual activities,”

                      Bigot, you were busted in the other thread.
                      You’re a ‘libertarian’ about as much as that slimy turd shreek is; so long as everyone does what you like, you’ll be happy to leave them alone.
                      Fuck you. You have no idea what you’re posting about.

                    11. Here are your answers bigot.

                      I, unlike practically everyone involved in this “debate,” know that the purpose of a legal marriage isn’t to get Goodies from the Gummit, it’s to force the partners(usually the man) to take care of each other by making them hold their assets in common.

                      It is none of the governments concern and is not a function of government to have anything to do with how two consenting adults decide to interact.

                      but since it’s a government function and it’s our government, it is our business.

                      It is NOT a government function. Your premises are incorrect.

                      Imagine what would happen if husbands were allowed to remain ‘married’ to their wives while the wives had no guarantee for government power to be used to prevent the husbands from refusing to share their money?

                      Yes, a woman could never contract with a man without it being blessed by the government.

                      Why do Buggered couples require it.

                      Because they wish it. No other reason is required. And you are a vile pig.

                      As a libertarian I would say that they have the “right” to their sexual activities, but I’m not going to pretend not to be disgusted by it.

                      You are NOT a libertarian, as you’ve proven above. Please stop calling yourself that. We’ve got no room for vile bigots among our ranks.

                    12. The self-rightousness of your comment, combined with how evidently worked up you have gotten point and sputtering at someone who isn’t RESPECTING THE LIBRETTY, is typically liberal! Add that all the logic in your comment is based on twisting my words. First you say that government should not force!!! people to do anything, but then you support a woman contracting with a man, aren’t you aware that the entire purpose of a contract is so that the government can force!!! the parties’ to abide by it? Reminds me of what they say about an oral contract, it isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. And homosexual marriage would be a contract, based on force!!!, so your premise is not logically consistent.

                    13. My position is completely libertarian.

                      1. A person may do as he chooses, PROVIDED in doing so does not infringe upon the rights of others.

                      2. The ONLY legitimate function of government is to protect the rights of the individual.

                      The government dictating what “marriage” is, is NOT protecting individual rights and it is excluding rights from other individuals that claim it.

                      Their ONLY purpose is to enforce the contract that was voluntarily agreed to by the signatories. They have no authority to tell you what the contract must be.

                      Now go away bigot. We are done.

                    14. Their ONLY purpose is to enforce the contract that was voluntarily agreed to by the signatories. They have no authority to tell you what the contract must be.

                      Except that marriage as a government institution has it’s own set of conditions and enforces those on people not related to the contract at all.

                    15. The enforcement of a contract doesn’t require physical force, and it doesn’t require a government to threaten such force. For example, look at tribal societies in the middle of nowhere. They still engage in contractual agreements. Say, a man and woman marry, one of the agreements is that she doesn’t fuck anyone else. You might say with no government, how can that contract be enforced? We’ll say the groom catches his bride in the next tent getting railed. The tribe can use social censure and shame as a punishment for her breaking that agreement. Think of shunning or banishment. Fear of the consequences of breaking such agreement would be enough for most cases.

                    16. The enforcement of a contract doesn’t require physical force, and it doesn’t require a government to threaten such force.

                      Rigghhhhhhtttt.

                    17. Just going to point out that tribes generally lack a level of civilization that most of us would find acceptable. Perhaps a better example could be found?

                    18. but since it’s a government function and it’s our government,

                      No it isn’t/shouldn’t be and even if it were it doesn’t matter.

                      Some say it’s “none of our business” but since it’s a government function and it’s our government, it is our business.

                      FUCK YOU.

                    19. “The Russian families evidently don’t see anything wrong with turning the process to the State”

                      How convenient! Got a cite?

                2. There is no evidence at all that children raised by gay couples are worse off than children raised by ‘normal’ parents you stupid bigoted piece of shit.

                  1. Sevo, here:

                    http://www.pewresearch.org/fac…..sexuality/

                    Cyto is right re adoption studies, but that isn’t the question. The question is, what’s wrong with the Russian government refusing to give it’s children to homosexual foreigners if that is what the people want?

                    1. The People have spoken, I shall do what They want.

                    2. The People have spoken, I shall do what They want.

                      The People allow for mimosa brunches where you live…I feel like that’s an implicit endorsement of living a buggered lifestyle if I ever heard of one.

                    3. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 9:52PM|#
                      “Sevo, here:
                      http://www.pewresearch.org/fac…..sexuality/”

                      Spectator, fail!
                      Didn’t see a single thing about how people wanted to turn their kids over to the government.
                      I did see a sleazy attempt at misdirection, didn’t I?

                    4. Do you have any evidence that the Russian people are greatly opposed to the practice? Not everyone in the world is a libertarian. To them I’m sure it just feels natural that the government should handle adoption. Evidently they agree with it’s refusal to give their children to homosexuals.

                    5. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 10:03PM|#
                      “Do you have any evidence that the Russian people are greatly opposed to the practice”

                      So when an asshole like you cannot support your claim, you ask if *I* have evidence of a claim I never made?
                      Who are you? The Mandalay road guy? Shreek? Tony?

                    6. The question is, what’s wrong with the Russian government refusing to give it’s children to homosexual foreigners if that is what the people want?

                      Well, for one thing, it entangles every employee of the Russian state in a conspiracy to subject child wards of that state to inhumane conditions in Russian orphanages.

                      That means (for example) that any survivor of those orphanages is morally entitled to murder any employee of the Russian state, from Putin right on down to the janitors.

                      It’s a very awkward business, morally, to work for a state. Work for the wrong one, and you become jointly and severally liable for all of that state’s wrongdoing. And “But it was what The People wanted!” means nothing.

                    7. The demand for white children to be adopted far exceeds the supply.

                      And “But it was what The People wanted!” means nothing.

                      Why the hell not? Whose rights are being violated by acting in the wishes of the people in this instance?

                    8. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 10:35PM|#
                      “The demand for white children to be adopted far exceeds the supply.”

                      Asshole, you are Fred Astair when it comes to dodging the questions.
                      What a fucking idjit!

                    9. What question did I dodge?

                    10. Spectator|3.15.14 @ 11:01PM|#
                      “What question did I dodge?”

                      Well, to pick one of the many obvious ones:
                      By what authority does the Russian government choose adoptive parents?

                    11. Whose rights are being violated by acting in the wishes of the people in this instance?

                      I bet you didn’t even get 94% on the Libertarian Purity Test.

                    12. “I bet you didn’t even get 94% on the Libertarian Purity Test.”

                      Uh, I’m guessing, oh, 40%.

                    13. http://www.bcaplan.com/cgi-bin/purity.cgi

                      Funny, some of the questions of that test, such as “Is all government essentially exploitation of the productive members of society for the benefit of a parasitic ruling elite?” My score on the test was a 34, which supposedly means:

                      “Your libertarian credentials are obvious. Doubtlessly you will become more extreme as time goes on.”

                      Yeah, no, people on this website tell me I am a horrible racist collectivist. It’s almost like the test was designed to inflate people’s scores!

                    14. It means Caplan sees some good in you.

      2. Remember Laud Humphries’ identification of the “Breastplate of Righteousness”.

        I’ll bet you 20 bucks that our friend here has ingested more semen than Lisa Ann in a 4-hour bukkake marathon.

        1. Lisa Ann used to be hot. Now she is just a fake-breasted crusty old whore.

          1. She still aged a hell of a lot more gracefully than Jenna Jameson.

            1. YeGads! I can’t believe we agree again. Poor Jenna Jameson looks like an old catcher’s mitt.

              1. Palin’s Buttplug|3.15.14 @ 9:32PM|#
                “YeGads! I can’t believe we agree again.”

                Keep throwing things at the wall and sometimes something will stick.
                And assholes like you will claim to have invented glue!

                1. Your nose is always up my ass, Sevo.

                  You must enjoy the aroma.

                  1. You know who else’s nose is up Shrike’s ass?

                  2. Palin’s Buttplug|3.15.14 @ 9:40PM|#
                    “Your nose is always up my ass, Sevo.”

                    Not on your life. If I had a chance, that would be may rusty garden shovel, you slimy turd.

    2. I support Russia on this one. It’s their children, their business. If gays want children, they should have them themselves, oh wait, they can’t. “Normal” my ass.

      We’ll certainly keep trying, random troll commenter. Thanks for your input.

  22. I am actually for MORE economic stratification so we can cull the deadweight off this planet starting with the entire Middle East, India, China, and the useless Red State fundie white trash in North America via poverty and birthrate collapse.

    What about Africa?

    1. PB is one of the few SWPLs that is aware of what he wants. In addition to hating non-elite Whites, he also hates the Asiatic people’s as well, for daring to have civilizations different from him. In his future their will have two groups, the Stuff White People Like and the ghetto-bound Black and Inigene mass. The Jews will have melted away into the SWPL group. Wonder what he wants done to the Hasidim?

      1. Who are you, dipshit?

        I will tell you which civilization I like most – the freest one!

        1. Palin’s Buttplug|3.15.14 @ 9:10PM|#
          “I will tell you which civilization I like most – the freest one!”

          Yeah, like the one that requires people to buy med insurance, right, you slimy turd?

        2. But what about Africa? You have no problem bashing the Arabs, Indians, and Chinese for perceived flaws that are objectively much more pronounced in Africa. Politically correct bigotry is what it is, no match for real bigots like me.

        3. “Who are you, dipshit?”

          Who are you? I’ve been here since the board started, so why should I care what some fucking noob who’s stuck in the past thinks?

          Seriously, Sarah Palin? Are you some kind of stupid reverse birther or something, gimp?

          Go read up on current events you fucking nobody, then come back when your intellectual balls drop.

          God, fucking niobs like you…

  23. Reminded me of the fact that the The National Association of Black Social Workers has called transracial adoption “a form of genocide.” But they are allowed to say things like that.

    1. You do realize that the soi-disant National Association of Black Social Workers isn’t a professional organization but a collection of Moorish Science Church/Nuwabian-like lunatics who believe Black people came to Earth from UFOs that landed in Egypt and built the pyramids and shit, right?

      1. Associated with the guy who claims Egyptians are “black”, and who told Pythagoras about geometry?
        (I’d rather not go digging)

        1. Directly associated? No, but within the same loony-sphere.

          1. OK, did a quick search: Melanin Theory!
            Skeptical Inquiry did an issue on it years ago when the proponent was getting press.

        2. Dude, yeah! The white Greek people totally stole all the black Egyptians’ good ideas, and prevented the Egyptians from using the ideas that they thought up, themselves!

          1. The white Greek people totally stole all the black Egyptians’ good ideas

            Actually, according to Greek legend, they bought the Semitic language family-based Phoenician alphabet fair and square.

            1. Suggested:
              “Alpha Beta: How 26 Letters Shaped the Western World”
              http://www.amazon.com/Alpha-Be…..alpha+beta

            2. Which the Phoenicians stole from the Egyptians, duh! Why do you think the Egyptians were reduced to using heiroglyphics?

      2. You got a cite for this?

          1. “National Association of Black Social Workers isn’t a professional organization but a collection of Moorish Science Church/Nuwabian-like lunatics”

            1. Sidd,
              I’m not HM, but what you copied had an embedded link:
              http://nabsw.site-ym.com/
              Showed up on Firefox.

            2. The tell is in their mission statement. They mention the ” Seven Cardinal Virtues of Ma’at” which is a concept from the Afrocentric Egyptian UFO cults like the Nuwabians and such.

              Likewise, according to their membership FAQ, all you need to do to be a member is be a Black person and pay their dues. Every professional organization I’ve belonged to required some sort of proof of licensure or certification.

              1. “Every professional organization I’ve belonged to required some sort of proof of licensure or certification.”

                And I doubt a single one asked that you to belong to a ‘race’.

                1. Only the Lizard People Illuminanti Operatives Association (LPIOA) asked for a scale sample.

                  1. That is actually a pretty fab acronym. Not in use, and not a direct anagram of anything: http://www.morewords.com/word/lpioa/

              2. Well, sure they’re pretty kooky, but the NASW is too. Is there another real black SW’s group? I couldn’t find it. The NABSW has student groups and scholarships and conferences and opinion pieces in the NYT. That all sounds pretty professional organization-y.

                1. http://www.abpsi.org/membership.html#cat

                  Affiliate – Individuals who are not eligible for other membership categories, but are committed to ABPsi’s goals and objectives (no voting privileges).
                  Dues: $225.00

                  1. Well, sure, every group has an affiliate and student membership. Even the Explorer’s Club, if I remember correctly. Who’s going to turn down money. But it’s directly identified as “affiliate”.

                    The NABSW has only individual membership and chapter membership, and within the former, only one level.

                    1. The ASME affiliate option is supposed to be for people who are affiliated professionally but not an engineer. I doubt they’d do any checking though.

                    2. Sure, but they would check for regular membership, right? If one listed they were a member of the ASME, or whatever professional organization, on their CV but didn’t specify that it was affiliate membership, I would consider that lying.

                    3. I was contrasting our affiliate option with the one I quoted which was basically “this is how you give us money if you want.”

                      I don’t think it’d necessarily be lying since the rest of the CV should make it clear that you’re not an engineer.

                    4. I don’t think it’d necessarily be lying since the rest of the CV should make it clear that you’re not an engineer.

                      That’s true. What I meant is that if someone puts that on their CV without a qualifier you assume they mean regular membership. Expecting someone to read between the lines, as it were, might be less than lying, but I would still consider it to be bad form.

                    5. I can see the broader issue, but ASME membership (without doing anything else) is a magazine subscription.

                    6. but ASME membership (without doing anything else) is a magazine subscription.

                      Heh! I think that’s true of all pro. orgs!

                2. Fair point, we are talking about social workers here. I wouldn’t know about another Black social workers group. And sure, from the outside they look like a legit group. Their name is nothing objectionable, but that’s a tactic a lot of fringe groups use. Look at the Truther movement. They have “academic” conferences complete with licensed P.E.s presenting papers about how the Towers must have fallen from a bomb planted within.

                  1. AFAICT the NABSW is lower quality and kookier than other black organizations because the NASW already does everything that the Black Association does for other professions. So it’s just a group of black people in the black club because hey, black club. But they do appear to be a legitimate, if uniquely pathetic, professional organization.

                    1. I would argue what makes a prof. org. “legitimate” is how it is accepted within the industry. If people are listing NABSW on their resumes and clinics are accepting that as a legit credential, then that shows how fucked up the industry standards for social work are. Then again, I’d wager the average social worker admin hiring them hasn’t looked into what the NABSW actually promotes.

                      Or as another theory, NABSWers are only getting hired by other NABSWers to work in the inner city ghetto clinics most social workers don’t want to risk their lives to work in; however if an NABSWer tried to get a job, say in school or hospital, it would raise an eyebrow.

                    2. Put another way, a ‘social worker’ is currently president; ’nuff said.

                    3. Here’s the adviser to the OSA:

                      …Tameka Brown is a graduate of Benedict College and the University of South Carolina where she received her Bachelor and Master of Social Work degrees respectively.

                      Tameka worked for the federal government as a medical social worker for seven years…

                      During her tenure at the VA Medical Center she provided crisis debriefing to medical personnel receiving Hurricane Katrina victims at the Atlanta Naval Base…

                      Tameka is also a licensed Real Estate Agent and received the New Agent Award her first year in real estate(lolwut)…

                      Tameka is currently employed at Benedict College where she has served as an Adjunct Professor, Instructor, and Assistant Director of Service-Learning and Leadership Development. She currently serves as the Director of the Advising Center.

                      Tameka has also served as the Advisor of the student chapter of the Association of Black Social Workers …

                    4. The president also went to Benedict.

                      One thing I’ve notice is that South Carolina is the only Southern state I’ve seen during my (far too extensive, at this point) googling even though there’s a lot of black social workers ’round these parts. Not sure what to make of that.

                    5. It’s getting close to bedtime for me, so help me out here, What does “OSA” stand for in this context?

                    6. office of student affairs

  24. LOS ANGELES (AP) ? A spokesman for the family of comedian David Brenner says the “Tonight Show” favorite has died. He was 78.

    Brenner died Saturday afternoon at his home in New York City, said Jeff Abraham, who was Brenner’s publicist.

    The gangly, toothy Brenner made more than 150 appearances as a guest and substitute host on Johnny Carson’s “Tonight Show,” starting in the 1970s.

  25. 1. Venus Was Not Caused By Global Warming
    Tyson assures us right away that we are to “question everything” so we have to ask why he thinks Venus is the way it is due to the greenhouse effect ? which is another way of saying global warming. Venus is almost 900 degrees Fahrenheit and the clouds are sulfuric acid. Even the most aggressive climate change models and their 20-foot ocean rises don’t predict that for Earth, no matter how many Chevy Volts we don’t buy.

    1. Holy shit! Braga is writing for it? No wonder Cosmos sucks.

    2. MacFarlane says he was inspired to reboot Cosmos for the 21st century because he feels like we are going backwards. Does the evidence bear that out? No, America leads the world in adult science literacy, America leads the world in science output, with 5 percent of the global population producing over 30 percent of global science, and America leads the world in science Nobel prizes. Hardly the trademarks of a backward nation being overrun by superstition.

      1. Only because science is still controlled by elite liberals instead of greasy-haired conservative rednecks.

        1. Science… will die. As will your elite liberal friends. Good, I can feel your anger. I am defenseless. Take your weapon. Strike me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards Creationism will be complete!

        2. Palin’s Buttplug|3.15.14 @ 9:21PM|#
          “Only because science is still controlled by elite liberals instead of greasy-haired conservative rednecks.”

          Better than turds such as yourself.

        3. Re: Peter Caca,

          Only because science is still controlled by elite liberals[…]

          Science has a priesthood?

          I wonder if you even read what you write, Caca.

        4. “…greasy-haired…”

          You got something against Twip??

    3. Instead of being a champion for science and a martyr for freedom of thought, as Cosmos tries to portray him, [Giordano] Bruno undermined science ? religious authorities, including the Pope, who had been interested in a good argument for Copernicus, began to wonder if it was all a cult. Yet they didn’t kill to protect religion from science, no matter how the story of Bruno is framed. Both Copernicus and Galileo, actual scientists who shook the pillars of heaven, died peacefully in their sleep.

      I was also left wondering why would Tyson and Cosmos waste so much time with Bruno IF the purpose of the show was to talk about the history of scientific thought and not create an anti-catholic pamphlet.

      1. If it were anti-Southern Baptist, it would make more sense. The Catholic Church pretty much embraces the Molecules-to-Man Evolutionary Hypothesis, Deep Time, and the other elements of modern scientific thought.

      2. According to the comments below the linked article, Tyson included the story to defend “free thought” rather than “science” per se.

  26. Mary Stack AKA Kizone Kaprow has surfaced in the Raw Story comment thread:

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/201…..od-stamps/

    That is all.

  27. “BTW, it looks like Mary is REALLY off. Over in the Adoption thread, she’s using “Lyle” and “so very tired” tags”

    Um, no you stupid fuck, since you’re too god damned dumb to notice, I didn’t get nuked when she did.

    Even YOU aren’t too fucking retarded to figure out what that means fuckwit, yes, you got it, your moron ass was wrong, I’m not Mary.

    Fuck off and die now.

    1. This thread got a lot more civilized after Mary was vaporized.
      Good work, boys.

  28. The Libertarian Moment, caught on tape!
    http://youtu.be/58zn8v4lc4w

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.