Judge Blocks Maine Ebola Quarantine, Feds Announce Lots of Climate Change Plans, Google Fined Over Boobs: P.M. Links

|

  • I don't think we're going to have a hard time keeping track of where that nurse is.
    CNN

    A judge has ruled that Maine health officials cannot quarantine nurse Kaci Hickox over fears she may have Ebola because she has no symptoms. He ruled that the state can continue to monitor her, and she must coordinate any travel with state officials.

  • Eric Frein, the man accused of ambushing Pennsylvania state troopers (killing one) and fleeing into the wilderness for 48 days before getting caught last night, has formally been charged with murder.
  • Friday's news dump from the Obama administration includes thousands of pages describing what various federal agencies will be doing to combat climate change. No doubt these potentially costly proposals will get lots of attention and analysis the weekend before midterm elections and amid all this Ebola-mania. (Yes, that was sarcasm.)
  • A judge in Virginia ruled that criminal defendants can be forced to cooperate with police if they use fingerprint locking for their smart phones and open them up, because fingerprints are more like keys than like passcodes.
  • The family of a man who died in Rikers Island prison, nearly cooked to death after being left in an extremely overheated prison cell, have been awarded $2.25 million from New York City in a settlement.
  • Google has been fined $2,250 for a street view image in Canada that showed a woman's cleavage.

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

NEXT: DOJ, Albuquerque Agree to Police Reforms

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. A judge has ruled that Maine health officials cannot quarantine nurse Kaci Hickox over fears she may have Ebola …

    Time to wall off Maine, I guess.

    1. And get rid of sarcasmic?

      1. He can be the guy Plissken has to go in and extract.

    2. The judge seems to have landed on a tolerable middle ground.

      Ya gotta balance risks with rights when you are talking about infectious disease. I know a number of hard-core libertarians don’t agree, and think that no mandatory quarantine is ever appropriate because the “patient” hasn’t committed any crimes.

      The concept of reckless endangerment might apply here, but even that has its problems, as it penalizes people for potential harm (which causes me a great deal of heartburn).

      Its a tough one.

      1. There are definitely cases where quarantine is justified. I think the passengers on the Novovirus Cruises (TM) should be held in temporary CDC facility for a short period of time. Ebola is simply not a threat that justifies quarantine at this time, and there is almost no chance it ever will be.

        1. Ebola is simply not a threat that justifies quarantine at this time,

          In all seriousness, because this is a hard question:

          What kind of infectious disease threat would justify putting someone in a mandatory quarantine?

          1. Hmmm… What is the deadliest naturally occurring disease in the world???

            Uh, Ebola?

            1. Nope. Influenza is still the king.

            2. While ebola is extremly virulent, it’s not that infectious.

              1. I read that as white Ebola. I don’t know what that says about me.

                1. Ebola with a dash of privilege.

                  1. +1 Viral hegemony

              2. It may be the deadliest (which is what Drake said), but that’s not really what you need to look at here. As you say, you need to consider both infectiousness and virulence. And fortunately Ebola seems to be not too virulent, at least before the bleeding out of every orifice stage.

                1. Ebola is highly virulent, I think it’s highly infectious, but it is not very transmissible.

              3. The description I saw the other day is: Ebola is highly infectious; but Ebola is not highly contagious.

          2. Rabies, because they might go crazy and bite someone?

            Seriously.

            1. Yeah, rabies may well be more horrifying than Ebola. You are pretty well fucked once any symptoms start. I think that one person ever has recovered from rabies.

              1. People infected with rabies don’t usually go all 28 Days Later with the disease. They have other weird behaviours. If you’re vaccinated-which I am-then you’re fine. If you get bit, the virus can take a long time before it gets to the terminal, symptomatic stage. As long as two years depending on where you’re bitten and how much virus was transmitted.

                The one or two people who survived are a fascinating case. The Milwaukee Protocol was used on them. Shuts down their brains while the immune system clears the virus. The machines kept them breathing and pumping blood.

          3. What kind of infectious disease threat would justify putting someone in a mandatory quarantine?

            SARS, MERS, Y. pestis, H5N1?

            1. There’s no hope in containing H5N1. Waste of effort. Y. pestis on the other hand is easy and a good idea.

          4. Quaratnine has to not only be justified, it also has to have a chance of working. Ebola simply can’t spread in America like it can in Africa. Influenza can’t be contained. So those two are out. A disease that can be limited by quarantine is TB because only a small fraction of cases are symptomatic, active TB and only those are contagious (it’s a good thing because 1/3 the world has it). Another case is the Norovirus-tastic ships I mentioned before. Normally Norovirus isn’t something that government should care about outside its hospitals, but I think such a heavy biological load as those passengers is possibly different.

        2. “Ebola is simply not a threat that justifies quarantine at this time,”

          Cite(s) missing; quite a few of them.

          1. I’ve already cited in previous threads and you just ignore them. The burden is on you to disprove what all the evidence points to at this time.

            1. That’s simply not true.

              As usual, you’re using an entirely wrong metric.

              The standard here is most definitely not, “Will letting people from ebola hot zones walk around free result in a pandemic in the USA wiping out half the population?”

              The standard is, “Can people from ebola hot zones infect any other people, and can that risk be eliminated if they are briefly quarantined?”

              That’s GOT to be the standard because the state derives its police powers by delegation from each citizen individually. That means that the quarantine power isn’t there to stop pandemics; it’s there to stop individual infections.

              So please present information that it’s absolutely impossible for a returning health care worker to infect anyone else. And spare me the “Not when they don’t have symptoms” nonsense. There has to be a moment before they’re symptomatic, and a moment after they’re symptomatic. They cannot know in advance what moment that is. Since they don’t possess teleporters, if they aren’t quarantined they could first become symptomatic while they’re in a public place.

              1. It’s not impossible, it’s just highly unlikely. Incredibly unlikely. So what if she can’t teleport herself to quarantine? She can still simply avoid people and call an authority.

                1. She can still simply avoid people and call an authority.

                  One of the primary symptoms is vomiting, which last time I checked was involuntary.

                  No matter how you look at it, you have a situation where she cannot, by definition, know in advance if and when she will become dangerous to others.

                  If I drank a potion that would randomly put me to sleep without warning or the ability to resist it at some unpredictable time in the next 21 days, would it be OK for the state to stop me from driving on public roads?

              2. The standard here is most definitely not,”Will letting people from ebola hot zones walk around free result in a pandemic in the USA wiping out half the population?”

                If he admitted that then he wouldn’t be able to accuse everyone who disagrees with him of being a paranoid freak.

                1. So we should impose quarantines to avoid the extremely unlikely scenario of Ebola spreading. That does not make sense.

                  Re vomit: she would feel ill well before then. I don’t know about you but for me vomiting never comes out of nowhere. There’s always this long awful nausea build up that’s slower and more dragged out than the last Hobbit movie.

      2. Regardless the nurse still acted like a total cunt.

        1. Because so many of us here wouldn’t look up and go “Fuck you, I’m asymptomatic, y’all can take that quarantine and shove it up your ass.” Riiiight.

          I know I would be an even bigger prick.

          1. Again, asymptomatic doesn’t mean she doesn’t have Ebola.

            1. It does mean she is not contagious.

              1. That is true. And thus far, since the likelihood of a national Ebola outbreak in the northern hemisphere is still very small, I agree with the judge.

                But a quarantine for these things isn’t to protect the population when someone becomes symptomatic, it’s to watch them, see if they develop symptoms, and have them in a safe, isolated place when they develop symptoms– or test positive– during a reasonable incubation period.

              2. Do we know that for sure? Anyone else a little concerned about the number of healthcare workers AKA people who should know how the disease spreads, have gotten the virus?

                1. Anyone else a little concerned about the number of healthcare workers AKA people who should know how the disease spreads, have gotten the virus?

                  According to the CDCs website we’re at four people with the disease– in this country.

                  Two healthcare workers who were directly involved with the Dallas “patient zero”, and the returning Doctor who spent three months swimming in Lake Ebola. For some reason the CDCs statistics didn’t count “patient zero”. I don’t know why.

                  Yes, I know that doesn’t answer your specific question.

                2. The fact that healthcare workers have gotten it doesn’t surprise me, knowing how to prevent disease and practicing the extreme vigilance to do it almost 24/7 are two different things. People slip up. What surprises me is the indifference to the public first demonstrated by the doctor in NY and then this nurse.

                  1. knowing how to prevent disease and practicing the extreme vigilance to do it almost 24/7 are two different things

                    +1 Rene Russo

          2. Then a bunch of people who are here are assholes. If I thought there was even a chance I had Ebola I wouldn’t wander around and risk spreading it to others.

            But don’t worry I’m sure the experts are right, it can’t spread before you show symptoms. I’m they know everything about a disease first discovered in the 70s that until now only effected poor Africans in the darkest corner of Africa.

            The nurse is being arrogant.

            1. Well, shit, everyone on earth should just quarantine themselves in perpetuity just in case they’ve contracted a highly virulent, deadly disease that hasn’t been discovered yet. IT COULD HAPPEN! YOU DON’T KNOW THE ODDS!

        2. Really, there are two things on this nurse’s side.

          1. She very likely doesn’t have Ebola.
          2. The governor took a political stand, got rebuked and then felt he couldn’t back down.

          However, this nurse isn’t entirely sympathetic. Her insistence that she WILL NOT voluntarily go into a quarantine and that she WILL continue her work in the blood transfusion and needle-stick industry is pretty cunty.

          1. How many people defending her would walk into an office for bloodwork or a wound treatment, see her, and walk right the hell back out?

            I wouldn’t let her touch me.

            1. Would you make her bake you a cake?

            2. I wouldn’t, because I actually have a decent understanding of Ebola.

              1. I wouldn’t, because I actually have a decent understanding of Ebola.

                Then you’re a fool, because you’re admitting that you would 100% with-your-life trust a nurse to tell you the moment she feels nausea, headache, or fatigue.

                What if her standard for what feels like a “real” symptom is higher than yours? What if she thinks she’s “just overheated in this room, and not feverish”? What if she simply stubbornly wants to defy she’s symptomatic, because she is bound and determined to prove she’s right? What if she thinks she’s personally indestructible?

                Most of those personality issues are fairly common in the public at large, and incredibly common among health care workers. Particularly health care workers with messiah complexes.

                1. I wouldn’t, because I actually have a decent understanding of Ebola.

                  Cyto probably knows a lot more about Ebola. But a very large majority of people would walk out, including me. I just don’t trust the CDC or many of the med professionals who tell us they know it all and would definitely self-report … accidents will happen.

                  I don’t see where it’s a problem for this nurse to be out as long as she steers clear of potential direct contact with others who do not know she was exposed. That would be recklessly endangering people who want to take a higher degree of precaution.

                2. She’s a nurse she volunteered to fight this thing. I think she has the know-how and judgement to do the right thing. Further, even during the symptomatic stages the disease is not very transmissible.

                  1. I think she has the know-how and judgement to do the right thing.

                    See, I think her refusal to limit her contact with the public at all is a sign that her judgment is not to be trusted. Her messiah complex is out of control, probably due to exposure to TV cameras.

                    And the CDC is still flopping around and issuing and retracting new guidance on a weekly to daily basis on transmissibility and precautions.

                    In looking at quarantine policy, that steers me to the worst-case scenarios. We just don’t know, so why would we risk people’s lives assuming the best case scenario?

                    We learned recently, for example, that Ebola apparently can live and reproduce on your skin, at least for awhile. That ramps up transmissibility considerably. There is a raging debate now (at best) over whether it is transmissible via airborne droplets (which in technical parlance is not the same thing as being an airborne disease).

                    Our ignorance is vast. Our policy should take that into account by, I believe, being risk averse until we know more.

                  2. She’s a nurse she volunteered to fight this thing. I think she has the know-how and judgement to do the right thing. Further, even during the symptomatic stages the disease is not very transmissible.

                    Maybe so. Other nurses have not shown good judgment, however. And shouldn’t she let others make their own judgments as to what level of precaution they want to take? This is a bit like forcing people to bake cakes for SSM weddings – if they choose to avoid SSM weddings, isn’t that their right? If someone wants to steer clear of this nurse, or Warty for that matter, isn’t that their right?

            3. Again, if “people I wouldn’t let touch me” was a basis for detention, 75% of the people on this site would be under house arrest. Although unlike the “is a cunt” criteria, I at least would not be one of them.

              1. I don’t understand. Are you saying you’re not a cunt?

        3. If that was basis for detention, 75% of the people on this site would be under house arrest.

          1. And it would change the lifestyle of 2% of the people on this site.

        4. She’s basically a CDC mouthpiece. They are her employer, she has a CDC email address, she’s a 2012 graduate “intelligence officer” of their EIS (Epidemic Intelligence Service) program, she was a speaker at one of their conferences, and her lawyer is a White House visitor. It’s a set-up, folks.

          1. My Alex Jones nutbar detector just went off. Oh hi Papaya.

            1. Here you go. Yes, it’s hosted on Natural News, but this appears to me to be a genuine CDC conference program. Her name and picture are on page 138 (class of 2012) and she’s listed as a presenter on page 141.

              1. That’s nice. Calling her a CDC mouthpiece on this basis is still the typical level of nut bar I would expect from you. Now tell us how hordes of Ebola-infected furriers are coming for us.

                1. So the fact that she’s a CDC employee and graduate of their “intelligence officer” program, repeating the CDC line, and has a lawyer with connections to the White House, all that doesn’t justify calling her a CDC “mouthpiece”? What do you want, a copy of her ID card that states “CDC Mouthpiece”?

                  I’m the one with the facts on this, you’re dismissing them, and I’m the nutbar? Yeah, right.

                  1. Proof motherfucker do you have it?!?!

                    1. That pretty much is proof, fella. Open your eyes. I’m not exactly in Grassy Knoll territory here. Unless you think it’s all some sort of odd coincidence that a previously unknown CDC employee somehow gets a White House lawyer and puts herself into the news to argue for what just happens to be the official CDC position on Ebola quarantines.

                      Oh, and right after she got into the news, she deleted or hid her LinkedIn profile, which connected her with the CDC.

                2. “Now tell us how hordes of Ebola-infected furriers are coming for us.”

                  Ebola-infected furriers with small pox infested pelts, no doubt.

              1. And so, as is common, Cyto demands proof of something, and then when it’s presented, he ignores or dismisses it.

                My predictions: the official administration/CDC line on Ebola will change after the election, and they’ll be taking it more seriously. And sooner or later, the connection between all the illegal immigrant children last summer and the wave of EV-D68/measles/etc. will be established and hit the national news. But again, not until after the election.

                1. Maybe you should go to some CDC officials and ask them some HardQuestions and post their answers on youtube.

                2. Hey hey immigration makes us stronger, and anything that goes against that narrative has to be ignored. Can’t have people start questioning open borders now.

                  1. the connection between all the illegal immigrant children last summer and the wave of EV-D68/measles/etc. will be established and hit the national news.

                    Oh you mean the connection you surmised from a single paper that didn’t demonstrate any such link?

                    Here’s the problem: you don’t understand what ‘proof’ is. That’s why you’re not a scientist or at least I hope not. You’re a nutter who thinks his half-assed ‘scepticism’ lets him see things that others don’t. You’re just delusional and you are pretty much an Alex Jones-level nut bar.

                    Hey hey immigration makes us stronger, and anything that goes against that narrative has to be ignored.

                    Exactly.

                    1. The “single paper” said that EV-D68 is common in the countries the recent surge of illegals came from. EV-D68 was previously very uncommon in the US. Tens of thousands of illegals, from countries where EV-D68 is common, were just spread all over the country. Now EV-D68 is all over the country, and has killed at least eight people and is paralyzing others. Follow along with me here, using your powers of logic and deduction: 2 + 2 = ____?

                      And there was also a CDC paper I referenced that traced the recent surge in measles to people bringing it in from other countries. But I guess that’s just the CDC being xenophobic, right?

                3. Don’t you love Cyto’s schtick, lecturing us about how he’s the smartest guy here in the virtual room? I think he figures that if he tells us a few hundred more times we’ll all actually start to believe it.

                  The million dollar question that Mr I Know Everything can’t answer though is why the administration has just mandated that every military service member serving in the affected region be quarantined for 21 days when they leave.

                  1. I’ll be the rationale for the quarantine order for the military over there before they come here is to prevent public panic like they had in Taiwan when they went overboard on their quarantine.

                    Do you think the soldiers mind a 3 week vaca in Italy? How tightly are they being restricted?

                  2. I don’t why the US military is being quarantined. Seems silly to me. Maybe BigT is right it’s all just theatrics. Of course the USG should never have sent them over there anyway.

      3. Again, I really recommend pursuing this case study on quarantine during SARS, not only is it fascinating, but it shows how venal and incompetent the Obama administration really is. From the CDC’s 2003 report:

        4. Quarantine and isolation
        Lessons Learned
        Although public health laws were on the books in all of the jurisdictions we
        studied before the outbreak of SARS, the legal authority to order quarantine was limited to specific diseases. Hence, the SARS epidemic required amending the existing legal
        authority. China adopted the most extensive quarantine; it is not clear that such measures would be acceptable in the U.S. Taiwan illustrates the delicate balance between public
        health and political considerations in quarantine. Officials in Taiwan now believe that its aggressive use of quarantine contributed to public panic and thus proved counterproductive.
        In virtually all jurisdictions there were some incidents of violation of
        quarantine. In Toronto, the two groups most likely to violate quarantine were teenagers and health care workers.

        1. Lessons Learned
          Law enforcement was very important in controlling SARS. For example, in
          Toronto law enforcement personnel were used to enforce the isolation of patients with SARS at hospitals, to serve quarantine orders, to conduct spot checks on people in quarantine, and to track down people who broke quarantine. Traditional law enforcement
          functions also were affected by SARS. In Singapore, the police were directed not to arrest individuals with SARS engaged in certain illegal acts lest infected individuals be “driven underground.” While voluntary compliance with quarantine was high in the countries we studied, it is not clear that a largely voluntary approach would work in the U.S. with its cultural notions of individuality, due process, and skepticism of government.
          Securing large numbers of quarantine orders, however, would severely strain the resources of public health agencies, prosecutors, and the courts.

          Again, the CDC predicted this 11 years ago.

          1. There seems to be general public support for quarantine if it is applied fairly and reasonably. A complicating factor, however, is that it is often impossible to tell when the
            need for quarantine will end. Thus, in Toronto, the second wave of quarantine was the most difficult for a variety of psychological and social reasons.

            A lack of alternatives made the use of quarantine and isolation an important
            element of controlling SARS in Canada, China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan,and Vietnam. These jurisdictions had a high rate of compliance with quarantine and
            isolation. It is not clear whether the United States would have the same compliance rate in a comparable epidemic. Many of the Asian countries are well known for their communitarian culture, and Canada is also known for its commitment to social solidarity
            as evidenced by its health care system. By contrast, the United States is a heterogeneous society with a strong tradition of individualism and skepticism about government.

            The CDC wistfully sighing about the fact that we’re not like those communitarian Asians or Canadians is chilling, eh?

          2. This is dangerously reasonable information, HM. Careful, Cyto will call you names for this.

            1. Officials in Taiwan now believe that its aggressive use of quarantine contributed to public panic and thus proved counterproductive.

              That would be (and seems to be right now) the effect in the US. A softer approach is needed – largely self-quarantine/isolation with 24/7 remote monitoring would be the best.

            2. While voluntary compliance with quarantine was high in the countries we studied, it is not clear that a largely voluntary approach would work in the U.S. with its cultural notions of individuality, due process, and skepticism of government.
              Securing large numbers of quarantine orders, however, would severely strain the resources of public health agencies, prosecutors, and the courts.

              This is sociology, not science.

    3. Can’t we just freeze the St. Lawrence seaway and cut the bridges, like Bane did to Gotham?

    1. I saw that episode a couple nights ago. The whole episode has moments like that.

  2. Friday’s news dump from the Obama administration includes thousands of pages describing what various federal agencies will be doing to combat climate change.

    They’re going to replace the federal fleet of cars with Priuses?

    1. Spread Ebola thus reducing the population?

    2. In the 70’s my dad had to trade his state provided Plymouth Fury in for a Chevette.

      Even to this day he gets pissed if you even bring that up around him.

      1. In the 70’s my dad had to trade his state provided Plymouth Fury in for a Chevette.

        If only there was a way he could’ve avoided that problem…

    3. Dissolve the Agencies and fire all the employees because everything they do is unnecessary?

      1. Uh, this is Obo’s news dump, not fantasyland.

        1. To be fair, they were talking about the global warming fantasy first.

  3. Effectiveness of the Electronic Cigarette

    Remarkable (50 pc) eight-month reductions in, or complete abstinence from tobacco smoking was achieved with the e-cig in almost half (44%) of the participants.

    1. But kids might try them.

      1. And if they try them, they might never try cigarettes! We must ban something that people might use a substitute for something we want to ban!

        Christ, what a bunch of clowns.

        1. Well then, you should be excited for the upcoming season.

          1. Its a target-rich environment, no doubt.

        2. And then there’s the moral panic of “OH NOES!!!111!!! Kids might drink the e-cig liquid!!!” Yeah, they might get into the Clorox, too.

          1. It’s more a stupid panic than a moral one, I think, in that specific instance. Nicotine is quite toxic and drinking a small amount of the liquid could kill a child. But as you point out, so could a lot of other common things lying around the house.

        3. Clowns are getting banned too, in France.

    2. This week I got an email flyer in my from the kids’ school, about some meeting/lecture discussing the dangers of e-cigs and hookahs. I’d go just to start trouble, if I didn’t have actual worthwhile things to do instead.

      1. Oh, go. You could bring up the potential dangers of e-hookahs.

        1. The main danger from e-hookah-ing seems to be if you can’t do math and don’t realize you can’t make thousands of dollars working a few hours a month for less than $50 an hour.

          1. Well, you can eventually make thousands of dollars.

      2. discussing the dangers of e-cigs

        Thus prompting half the student body to start smoking e-cigs.

        TOP. MEN.

    3. That’s wildly impressive. I know they worked for me; haven’t touch a cig in, well shit, I think like 2.5 years

  4. No doubt these potentially costly proposals will get lots of attention and analysis the weekend before midterm elections and amid all this Ebola-mania.

    Sarcasm, that’s real helpful.

    1. Like you would know.

  5. A judge in Virginia ruled that criminal defendants can be forced to cooperate with police if they use fingerprint locking for their smart phones and open them up…

    Yeah, I opted against doing that on my S5, but I figured they would have their drug sniffing dog bite my finger off and use it that way.

    1. May as well drop it as an option on phones, I’ll never use it now.

    2. Problem Solved!

      Think knowing what body part does the unlocking makes it more like a passcode than a key?

      1. They will just order you to try each digit in succession. Or were you thinking about using number 21?

        1. Yet again rationalizing why I went for the Plus

        2. Thats weird. None of my fingers seem to do the trick!

    3. I wonder about pattern locks, would they be more in line with passcode and protected?

  6. Trinity Western law school future in doubt after B.C. Law Society rejection

    More than 8,000 of the society’s 13,530 members voted earlier this month in a special referendum to overturn the board’s decision earlier this year to accredit the faith-based law school.

    “The policies of this university are inconsistent with core values of legal profession in so far that this university continues to dispel or expel students for their private sexual activities,” said [Victoria lawyer Michael] Mulligan.

    Uh… the students are there voluntarily, signing-on to this ethics pledge (or whatever it is) voluntarily. Lawyer doesn’t understand contracts… now that’s news!

    1. This is why we need single-payer law.

    2. I like the use of dispel, there, Mr. Fascist:

      “The University hereby drives off in various directions and causes to dissipate this student, on account of his fondness for buttsex.”

      What a moron.

    3. “Critics oppose the new law school’s accreditation because Trinity Western students must sign a Christian covenant that states sexual relations are to be confined within the bounds of a marriage between a man and a woman.”

      Remind me of the old SSM taunt, “how does my marriage threaten you?”

      1. “I will not have sexual relations with that woman.”

      2. “The beauty of gay marriage is that it grants something to one group that doesn’t come at the expense of anyone else. Heterosexual rights are undisturbed.”

        https://reason.com/archives/201…..to-freedom

        I wish I could have some of the same weed the Reason staffers smoke.

        1. One problem, N.G.K.C. Who are the Reason commenters (Choney and Shriek excepted) who support the B.C. Law Society’s position?

          1. Well, if you support SSM at all for any reason, then you must therefore agree with everyone else who supports it for any reason.

          2. My link was to a reassuring Reason article that said – well, said what the quote said.

        2. I was unaware of a recognized human right to have your law school accredited by the B.C. Law Society.

          1. The B.C. Law Society is pretty clearly acting as an agent of the state. It seems pretty silly to suggest that there’s a human right to have your sex life recognized by the state, but to be denied your opportunity for livelihood because of the state’s stand on a private contractual matter.

            1. I support the school’s right to do what it’s doing. Interesting that it’s only now a problem, because the way that reads, I bet they had anti-fornication on the books before the whole gay marriage business became so chic.

              1. The school seems only to have been accredited earlier this year, so I don’t think that has much to do with it.
                People have been making the same complaints about BYU and Bob Jones and other religious colleges for ages.

                1. Don’t attend the schools, I guess.

                  1. That would be my advice to people who don’t like schools with policies against pre- or extra-marital sex.

                    1. My school required it for graduation.

                    2. My school required it for graduation.

                      What is the antecedent here – premarital sex, extramarital sex, SSM, or buttsex? You left yourself open.

                    3. We all know what IT is…

                      wink, wink

                      nudge, nudge

                      knowwattamean…

                      Say no more…

            2. But the state could take that stance regardless of the legal status of gay marriage, could it not? Thus the link that GKC draws between this matter and state recognition of gay marriage is, as usual, a canard.

              1. Well, yes it is. But that doesn’t make yours any more legitimate. If the state has the legitimate authority to interfere in one, it has the legitimate authority to interfere in the other.

          2. It’s the governing body for the legal profession in the province. So it’s either an arm of the state or a quango.

            1. More mission creep. The board should be there to determine if the school produces competent lawyers, not to impose their vision of social justice.

        3. Your tears are yummy.

          1. Holy shit you are full fascist.

        4. How does state recognition of gay marriage harm the rights of anyone else?

      3. Wait, what about marriage between fornicators of different genders?

      4. And gay marriage has what to do with this? This was a controversial issue around religious schools before legal gay marriage was even a twinkle in some Massachusetts judge’s eye. And the complaint is that they are expelling straight fornicators. You’re really reaching here. Just stick to making jokes not having to do with abortion or gay marriage. You’re pretty good at that sometimes.

        It’s really not a taunt to ask that question, it is a legitimate puzzlement.

        1. It has nothing to do with this. The area SoCons are entering the Long Whine phase that SoCons always go into after they’ve lost the struggle over an issue. The butthurt will persist then fade.

          1. At least we haven’t lost the infanticide battle yet.

        2. “And the complaint is that they are expelling straight fornicators.”

          So that makes it OK to deny accreditation – that they school doesn’t allow straights to fornicate?

          Is straight fornication some kind of fundamental right which overrides a colleges standards of student conduct?

    4. To be fair, I have to agree with Mulligan that being people over an ass-raping them is actually a core value of the legal profession.

      1. being people over an ass-raping them

        Are you posting from a phone that does auto-correct?

    5. Too bad Brigham Young University Law School isn’t in Canada, they could really teach those guys the meaning of tolerance!

      http://bleacherreport.com/arti…..or-does-it

  7. A judge in Virginia ruled that criminal defendants can be forced to cooperate with police if they use fingerprint locking for their smart phones and open them up, because fingerprints are more like keys than like passcodes.

    1) How is a raven like a writing-desk?

    2) Just wait for the nippleprint-lock phone app.

  8. Google has been fined $2,250 for a street view image in Canada that showed a woman’s cleavage.

    And the offending pic is . . . where? Not on the other side of that link, I can tell you that.

    1. Did you try searching for “woman’s cleavage, Canada” in Google Maps?

      1. Don’t do it! It is like typing Google into Google. You will break the internet.

        Everyone knows that Canadadian women never take off their heavy wool sweaters. There are no non-photoshopped pics of Canadian Cleavage. Shoot, here in Sunny Minnesoda the gals wear sweaters for 10 months of the year and we are like a nudist colony compared to Friendly Manitoba.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqxLmLUT-qc

        1. Weirdly, if you do type google into google, the second thing that comes up is “Adwords for non-profits.” Are people who work at non-profits really that dumb?

    2. Exactly. How are we supposed to judge the merits of the case for ourselves? How are we supposed to decide if the judgment was too harsh or too lenient?

    3. I think this is it. I am highly disappointed.

      http://tinyurl.com/myxland

      Unfortunately all too SFW.

      1. Hence the $2250.

    4. Here you go:
      http://gigaom2.files.wordpress……png?w=708

      1. Day late and $2,250 short Playa!

        1. No; Playa had the actual URL. You had a tinyurl that could have linked to anything, like crotch shots of Warty.

        2. She got over $1,000 per boob for that?

    5. Was she in a public place?

      In Finland the Goggle Street View cars caught several drunks sleeping on benches and the like.

      1. Happy little boozer!

  9. Google has been fined $2,250 for a street view image in Canada that showed a woman’s cleavage.

    Apparently the woman is living on B. Streisand Alleyway.

    1. If I knew her, I’d make shirts with the picture on it to wear around her sell to all her frenemies and coworkers.

  10. I challenge you to find something less cool than this. I CHALLENGE YOU.

    1. I will never get back that 10 seconds. Never.

    2. What does she do with the turn–no, don’t tell me.

    3. I accept your challenge: this.

      1. He’s not even raising the roof there. Sorry, mine wins.

        1. Do you think she’ll end up in elected office like one of her very unaugust predecessors?

          1. That’s…uh…what were we talking about again?

          2. Ah thanks, that mind bleach helped wipe the video away before the stain was permanent

    4. Vine? Way not to be a stereotype, Obama family!

    1. “Call me Ishmael. Some years ago?never mind how long precisely?having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and WAGE HOLY WAR ON THE INFIDEL.”

    2. Remember when Pakistan was one of the more laid back Muslim countries? The more we try to fight Islamic extremism, the more we seem to spread it around.

      1. Remember when Pakistan was one of the more laid back Muslim countries?

        That was half a century ago.

        The more we try to fight Islamic extremism, the more we seem to spread it around.

        Bullshit.

        1. Name a country where we got significantly involved where the Muslim population was less radical afterwards than they were before?

          1. Were we involved in the anti-communist fight in Malaysia at all?

            1. Malaysia is getting more radical all on its own, thank you.

              1. The one thing about Malaysia is that it has very large Hindu and Chinese minorities that make it hard to go Full Metal Muslim.

                1. The one thing about Malaysia is that it has very large Hindu and Chinese minorities that make it hard to go Full Metal Muslim.

                  Not so fast.

              2. Is Malaysia getting more radical?

          2. That assumes these countries weren’t heading in the direction to begin with.

            The Ottoman, British, and French empires pull out of these regions and we act surprised as they gradually become increasingly less Western.

            1. increasingly less Western.

              This seems…awkward.

          3. There is no evidence that Somalia, Afghanistan, or Yemen are any more radical now than before. Pakistan was always insane. Indeed, the Somalia campaign was a great success and the Yemen campaign is also fairly successful.

            Also, correlation =/= causation

          4. Name a country where we got significantly involved where the Muslim population was less radical afterwards than they were before?

            Does Israel count? Not the Pali enclaves, but Israel proper?

      2. Remember when Pakistan was one of the more laid back Muslim countries?

        India doesn’t.

        1. Well maybe a few India-Pakistan wars are considered pretty laid back by Muslim standards.

      3. I’ll just leave this here.

  11. Google has been fined $2,250 for a street view image in Canada that showed a woman’s cleavage.

    And of course everybody clicked immediately on the hyperlink.

    1. And we were all disappointed. Until someone upthread posted a link to the actual picture, which we then clicked immediately. And we were all disappointed.

    1. Holy crap, in my enthusiasm I didn’t notice it’s one of the damn PM links.

      **kicks rocks and walks away**

  12. Apparently Iran is paying Afghans including former Taliban to fight for Assad in Syria. The Afghans think they will fight Americans and cozy up to ISIS. Weird and not well thought out by either party.

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/31/…..n-fighter/

    Watch the video. Did that guy get pulled out of a collapsed sugar factory?

  13. 10 Hours, 100 Catcalls, 1 Unfortunate Implication: Hollaback Walks Back Their Racist “Street Harassment” video, Doubles Down the Stupidity

    Rob Bliss Creative donated time and labor to create this video and support our work. We are grateful for his work and the wide reach that his video has achieved but we feel the need to directly address other responses to the video.

    First, we regret the unintended racial bias in the editing of the video that over represents men of color. Although we appreciate Rob’s support, we are committed to showing the complete picture. It is our hope and intention that this video will be the start of a series to demonstrate that the type of harassment we’re concerned about is directed toward women of all races and ethnicities and conducted by an equally diverse population of men.

    Hollaback! understands that harassment is a broad problem perpetuated by a diversity of individuals regardless of race. There is no one profile for a harasser and harassment comes in many different forms.

    We cannot produce the Director’s Cut footage of this street harassment by cisnormative white patriarchs because it is scant or nonexistent. We regret that you saw through our racist bullshit and hope that you will forget about it soon so that we can get back on our soapbox and continue to harangue you from a position of phony moral superiority.

  14. There is no one profile for a harasser and harassment comes in many different forms.

    !

    1. !

      ?

  15. Daily Show Co-Founder Blames Redistricting For Wendy Davis’ Impending Defeat

    You know, I don’t — I think part of it is that redistricting is redistricting. And Texas, I think, can turn blue. I mean, let’s not forget that 20 years ago Texas had a female governor, who was an admitted alcoholic and a divorcee who was a progressive. So, I don’t think that the dinosaurs were walking the Earth back then. But I do think that with Texas, the media has a lot to do with it. I think that there is just so much going on with the way that reproductive justice has become an issue that is big, but in a state as big as Texas, there are so many other issues, and they just don’t have the information and the media on their side.

    Did someone change the Texas election laws without telling me again? Did the popular vote suddenly become to difficult for even Texans to manage? Or is Lizz Winstead just doing some of that Daily Show comedy that everybody loves?

    1. I think that there is just so much going on with the way that reproductive justice has become an issue that is big, but in a state as big as Texas, there are so many other issues

      Gee, it’s almost like politicians must represent the views of the voters and not attention-whoring activists.

    2. and they just don’t have the information and the media on their side.

      Those poor proles are just too dumb to do what we tell them.

    3. How the hell could redistricting effect the outcome of a statewide race? It’s not like Texas has suddenly annexed part of rural Oklahoma.

  16. let’s not forget that 20 years ago Texas had a female governor, who was an admitted alcoholic and a divorcee who was a progressive.

    *mumbles distractedly while mixing gasoline and laundry detergent*

    1. I like the implication that alcoholism is an inherently Democratic attribute.

      1. I blame Tip O’Neill.

  17. A judge in Virginia ruled that criminal defendants can be forced to cooperate with police if they use fingerprint locking for their smart phones and open them up, because fingerprints are more like keys than like passcodes.

    So if a cop demands you unlock your phone for them, be sure to give them the finger!

    1. You mean this one officer?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.