CB's fireplace

I Am Thrilled!

My husband's agenda catches on. Those logs in that fireplace burn like hell, as if to get exercize for that next stake: Patr...,oops, Inquisition II. We already had WW II, now the second term for the son of my husband's father, a Bush II. People seem to be so infatuated with that Roman letter II, with anything Roman for that matter.

Now this weblog's team can boast about a II too. Like that other team, it has members who hear voices and take guidance from the Bible. All the girls of my coffee klatsch would agree that this is always better than the Constitution, as those atheists or deists who made it were not inspired from as or so many flights up as our present theists.

Landing II is a good start for many more Roman letters people will have more and more trouble to decipher.

Burn the blo...,sorry, logs! It's still winter.

Laura Bush on 02.18.05 @ 05:26 PM GMT+1 [link]

Save the Zygotes!

Okay, since libertarianism is so focused on the non-aggression principle, let's see how it applies in response to Brad's pro-choice post below.

Now, ordinarily, I would say abortion is wrong because it's an act of aggression against the unborn (who, you may notice, can't speak for themselves). Brad, you point out, though, that since zygotes die in the reproductive process, sex can be construed as an act of aggression all its own. A fair point, I'll grant you. And a neat catch-22. Hadn't thought of that before.

However, if you are arguing on biblical grounds (and I think you are, since you used words like "zealous," "cultic," and "God"), then let me refer you to Genesis 1:28. That's the biblical verse in which God states: "Be fruitful and increase in number." He doesn't say: "Be fruitful, unless it kills zygotes." He does say, "Thou shalt not kill," of course. And you're right: He didn't create us to be murderers. But that commandment speaks of disrupting the natural order. Not having sex would disrupt it all the same.

If we bring about our own extinction on purpose, wouldn't that count as genocide? Because that's an act of aggression, too.


Jonathan David Morris on 02.18.05 @ 03:50 PM GMT+1 [link]

Abortion: Why I am pro-choice

The anti-choice, so-called "pro-life" position on abortion is that one becomes a person at the moment of conception. A great many zealous, undoubtedly well-intentioned people consider abortion nothing less than the murder of babies.

I don't share that position, and here's why...

Most conceptions do not result in pregnancy. Zygotes usually fail to be accepted by the uterine lining and are flushed out with the next menses or absorbed back into the female body. Only a few "take hold", so to speak. Most die.

It's that simple. That's how a normal, natural, healthy, appropriately functioning human reproductive system operates. It is simply human nature, or (if you prefer) how God made us.

Yet, if every zygote is a person...

then the very act of attempting to reproduce...

even within traditional matrimony...

with all of the appropriate cultic sanctifications...

would nearly always be an act of murder, with the sole exception being the comparative handful of times that it actually results in pregnancy.

Why? Well, is it not murder to abandon a baby to die and not support its life?

One could not set out to even attempt to conceive a child, if every conceived zygote is a person. It would be an act of gross criminal negligence, as most such attempts would not successfully result in viable pregnancies. You'd inevitably slaughter zygotes.

And, since one would have no way of knowing beforehand if any conception would actually result in a zygote that the womb will allow to thrive -- one could not in good conscience even take the risk of trying.

If all of those zygotes are babies, and the only way to make them is to accept the fact that you'll kill far more zygotes than the number of third trimester offspring you eventually whelp, then there is only one way to avoid murder -- total and complete abstention from reproductive sex for the course of the entire human reproductive lifespan.

If there were no murders of that sort occurring, no human child could ever be born again. Imagine it. No attempts at reproduction, ever again, by anyone, anywhere. It would be turning the old religious dogma on its head -- that the only acceptable sex is, supposedly, that which is intended to result in pregnancy. For attempting to conceive a child would, almost inevitably, kill some zygotes.

Any morality that would, if universally adhered to, result in extinction of the human species is a deeply flawed morality. I don't believe God made us to be murderers.

Brad Spangler on 02.17.05 @ 04:59 PM GMT+1 [link]

The paranoia of the incompetent

It seems that "the usual suspects" have their collective panties in a bunch over Bill Arkin's recently published compendium of code names for various "Top Secret" US military operations.

What's the fuss about? After all:

...Arkin says he deliberately did not reveal any intelligence sources or methods, technical weapons data or detailed war plans.

"I don't have one bit of concern that our enemies are going to gain from the publication of this book," he says.

Arkin is a military affairs analyst for NBC News whose own period of military service was back in the 1970's, if I recall correctly. I don't picture this guy rappeling down ventilation shafts, like Tom Cruise in Mission Imposssible, to get this information.

In fact:

...Arkin says he found most of the code names in budget documents, obscure military journals and other materials already available to the public — which means the government isn't doing a very good job of keeping its own secrets.

So he used publicly available sources and, we may suppose, perhaps chatted up a few clueless Public Affairs weenies at the Pentagon.

Yet critics insist on using harsh terms and "making a mountain out of a mole hill" as the old saying goes.

"Mr. Arkin has gone a long way toward endangering national security," argues retired CIA officer Bill McNair, who until recently helped decide which documents should be kept secret.

"We risk a real danger if everybody in the world feels they have the right to begin releasing this bit of classified information," says McNair.

Mr. McNair, you must be a farm boy at heart -- because you're spreading the crap around like someone whose fields desperately need fertilizer.

If Arkin can put this book together with not much more effort than, perhaps, a few library visists and working his Rolodex a bit -- what is government secrecy really protecting?

I mean, surely they aren't actually trying to keep this information out of the hands of other governments. After all, it appears their information security strategy heavily relies on assumptions of laziness and stupidity. Clearly, then, their primary concern is the public and press, rather than trained, professional and dedicated spies.

So, Arkin is a threat because he's not as lazy and stupid as he's supposed to be?

Arkin has committed three grievous sins, in the eyes of those who worship at the altar of the State.

• He has exposed State incompetence.


• Also, he has partially illustrated the true role of State secrecy -- to protect the State from public oversight.


• Lastly, he has endangered not public security, but the security of State symbolism.

The Emperor does not like being told he has no clothes -- the nude fool.

Brad Spangler on 02.11.05 @ 07:27 PM GMT+1 [link]

A call for information and an announcement

I would like to know more about a few subjects from a libertarian point of view. Many of these areas I am quite friendly to and knowledgeable about:
(1) paganism, wicca and druidism
(2) psychedelics and hemp
(3) alliances with Greens and anarchists or friendly contacts
(4) successful projects of libertarians
(5) market art: pictures of marketplaces, exchanges of people buying and selling that are good art. I will have an essay on this shortly.

Donald Meinshausen on 02.09.05 @ 12:56 AM GMT+1 [link]

Is This a Conspiracy?

Is this a conspiracy against Christian or what?
Ilana, where is your answer or post, Tom, where is your post, where are all the others? Since days I have only spam in my mail and the weblog is stuck. If my husband, sorry, gardner was so lazy with my rose buds, I would fire him or throw him into this fireplace of Chris.
Get yourself together. Democracy has not yet won.

Laura Bush on 02.08.05 @ 08:29 AM GMT+1 [link]

Iraq-cracy: 1-2-3

So Iraqis have finally held their first big boy election. Congratulations. Seriously, I mean that. Now that they've entered the strange, new world of democracy, though, it's time they learn what this new world is full of (largely, that would be crap). Let's take a look at the fundamentals.

Free Speech. Free Speech is one of the most basic tenets of a functioning democracy. This is because the power to vote is sort of like the right to speak your mind (unless, of course, you're a woman in pre-Prohibition America -- in which case, shhh). As long as you say the things people want to hear, you're free to say whatever you want. That's the beauty of democracy. It's quite refreshing. And I wasn't even paid to say that.

A Free Press. A free press is essential in a democracy… or so the networks would have us believe. Soon Iraq will have its very own Elite Media, as well as a rebellious brand of Shiite-Wing Radio. These institutions will track sandstorms, give reality TV updates, and protect the very establishment Iraqi voters just established. A free press means freedom from thought -- it really takes a load off! Iraqis can also look forward to "cable systems," which are systems of cables that run underground -- where the weapons are buried -- and serve to transport fresh new ideas and moving pictures of naked ladies on late night Cinemax. Unfortunately, some cable systems don't carry Aljazeera or the YES Network. These cable systems are tyrannies. In this case, get satellite. Now there's a free press worth paying a price in blood for.

Free Stuff. That's right. It's one of democracy's best kept secrets. By pulling the right democratic levers, citizens can vote for free stuff from the public treasury. "How much free stuff?" you ask. The rewards are practically limitless. Pothole need a-fixin'? No problem. Don't feel like paying for art supplies? Again, no problem! Here. Take the shirt off my back. I don't need it. I have other shirts at home.

Choice. Democracy's a lot like the menu at Wendy's. Or it's a lot like the menu at Burger King. You see, it's a matter of preference. Coke or Pepsi? Classic rock or grunge? Whatever you want, it's up to you. You can choose from a number of predetermined options. The choice is all yours. This also applies in politics: Democracy means you can choose your own leaders. So now, instead of just one crusty, old, out-of-touch bastard with sagging eyes and control issues, Iraqis can choose between several crusty, old, out-of-touch bastards with sagging eyes and control issues -- each ready, willing, and able to screw things up on the electorate's behalf.

Brand Name Get-Out-The-Vote Campaigns. "Choose or Lose." "Vote or Die." Soon Iraq will have its very own pro-voting crusades. These movements will feature celebrity figureheads, hip t-shirts, and manufactured hostility, and will serve to remind Iraqis to vote for their favorite crusty, old, out-of-touch bastard. Brand name get-out-the-vote campaigns will, of course, annoy the hell out of any Iraqi with two brain cells to rub together. But if nothing else, it's a change of pace. Now people will die if they don't vote. Neat.

Human Dignity. In a democracy, humans have something called human dignity. This is slightly different than actual dignity. Actual dignity would prohibit others from raiding your home or making you take your shoes off at the airport. Human dignity, on the other hand, means you're treated like a human as long as it's convenient for other humans. Another name for human dignity is "no dignity," which is not to be confused with the hit song, "No Diggity," by Blackstreet. No doubt.

Deliciously Democratic Scandals. In a democracy, elected officials routinely accept sexual favors from young girls. This keeps voters preoccupied while the nation falls back into tyranny. It also makes for great Late Show fun.

A Living Constitution. Democracies often hinge on a couple of rules written down on a piece of paper. This is called a constitution. Even though paper is made from dead trees, constitutions are thought to be alive and ever-changing. This ensures that future Iraqis will be able to distort the wants and needs of current Iraqis once current Iraqis are dead. It sounds quaint, I know, but it's really quite romantic.

And finally:

Invincibility. Democracy puts power in the hands of the people. This is especially helpful when you have a lot of people. A lot of people equals a lot of power. Democracy means never having to say you're sorry. Kill 'em all. Let God sort 'em out.

Well, there you have it: Democracy in a great, big, tax-funded nutshell. Always remember that the seeds of freedom will not grow without being nurtured. Never get democracy wet. Don't expose it to bright lights. And whatever you do, never feed democracy after midnight.



Jonathan David Morris on 02.04.05 @ 03:31 PM GMT+1 [link]

Iran first or Mexico first? :-)

I am very pleased to make my first post on Chris' new blog and I extend my best wishes for his recovery to full health. At Chris' request, I am not merely cross-posting from my personal blog but, instead, adding commentary. As I believe this blog attracts far more European interest than mine -- which is located in Canada (if location means much these days) -- the additional commentary will be by way of providing background on the North American situations I discuss.

Wendy McElroy on 02.04.05 @ 12:30 PM GMT+1 [more..]

Neighborhood Brothel Now Hiring

A friend just sent me this story from the Telegraph:

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.

...Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit.

This story would seem to give new meaning to P.J. O'Rourke's idea of a "Parliament of Whores." It would also seem to shed some light on why our own C.B. decided to settle in Germa...nevermind. It doesn't really do that second thing at all. The first one, though. And how.


Jonathan David Morris on 02.01.05 @ 07:10 PM GMT+1 [link]