Daniel Hauser, the 13 year old Minnesota boy with the dual affliction of Hodgkin lymphoma and idiots for parents, has been told that he can’t refuse effective medical treatments.

In a 58-page ruling Friday, Brown County District Judge John Rodenberg found that Daniel Hauser has been “medically neglected” and is in need of child protection services.

Rodenberg said Daniel will stay in the custody of his parents, but Colleen and Anthony Hauser have until May 19 to get an updated chest X-ray for their son and select an oncologist.

The judge wrote that Daniel has only a “rudimentary understanding at best of the risks and benefits of chemotherapy. … he does not believe he is ill currently. The fact is that he is very ill currently.”

I might feel differently about this if the kid had been well informed and was consciously making a decision to die, but he wants to live and has been lied to by the deluded pseudo-Indian religious kooks he has for parents, and by the quacks who have been giving him medical advice.

Speaking of ridiculous parsing of newspaper articles, here’s something Simon Singh wrote:

The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments.

The US has some deep problems with an overly credulous culture, but at least we don’t labor under the libel laws of the UK, which are destructive of the basic principles of free speech. Truth ought to be protection against accusations of libel, but a judge didn’t think so in this case — Singh was found guilty of accurately describing chiropractic claims as “bogus”.

Well, maybe I shouldn’t rush to excuse the US from this sort of thing. We do have the recent case of a California judge finding a teacher in violation of the separation of church and state for calling creationism “superstitious nonsense”. Since creationism is religious, it is now going to be protected from criticism because you aren’t allowed to say that any religious belief is wrong in an American classroom.

We are so screwed.

Terry Eagleton and Stanley Fish get another drubbing, this time at the hands of Matt Taibbi. I’d almost feel sorry for them, except that I’m still feeling the trauma of being trapped on a plane with Eagleton’s book, so I say…sic ’em.

This latest salvo is fired by author/professor Stanley Fish, a prominent religion-peddler of the pointy-headed, turtlenecked genus, who made his case in his blog at the New York Times. Fish was mostly riffing on a recent book written by the windily pompous University of Manchester professor Terry Eagleton, a pudgily superior type, physically resembling a giant runny nose, who seems to have been raised by indulgent aunts who gave him sweets every time he corrected the grammar of other children. The esteemed professor’s new book is called Reason, Faith and Revolution, and it’s sort of an answer to the popular atheist literature of people like Richard Dawkins and Chris Hitchens. If you ever want to give yourself a really good, throbbing headache, go online and check out Eagleton’s lectures at Yale, upon which the book was based, in which one may listen to this soft-soaping old toady do his verbose best to stick his tongue as far as he can up the anus of the next generation of the American upper class.

Money is essential to science, and at the same time it can be a dangerous corrupter. There’s a common argument, for instance, that a lot of biomedical research is untrustworthy because it is done at the behest of Big Pharma dollars — it’s more persuasive to people than it should be, because there is a grain of truth to it, and it would be easy to get sucked into the lucrative world of the industry shill. However, we also have a counterbalance: scientists don’t go into research because they want to be rich, and we are also educated with a set of principles that puts the integrity of our observations above all. But we also have to be honest: there is temptation, and there are tradeoffs, and there are scientists who lose sight of their principles when the stakes get higher.

[Read more…]

That Pat Robertson video in the last post was just too ghastly. Right now, the sun is shining and I just finished my very last lecture of the semester, so here’s something to celebrate with: two of the coolest people in the world, David Bowie and Annie Lennox. It’ll cheer you right up!

Right now, I think I need to take a walk in the sunshine.

The US military has gathered up a collection of soldier’s bibles…and destroyed them. No word yet on whether Satan’s imps were observed dancing in the flames; I’m sure the wingnut news services will soon be melting down with hysterical tales.

A Pew poll finds that church attendance is correlated with willingness to torture.

More than half of people who attend services at least once a week — 54 percent — said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is “often” or “sometimes” justified. Only 42 percent of people who “seldom or never” go to services agreed, according to the analysis released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

I can’t be too smug about it, though: that difference isn’t exactly huge, and 42% is a depressingly large number of non-church-goers favoring barbarous behavior. I wouldn’t be happy with anything larger than 0%.

The province of Alberta has decided to make education optional. If there’s something in the real world that you don’t like, such as that you evolved from other apes, or that gay people exist, or perhaps that understanding the motion of bodies requires some of that difficult math stuff, students will be allowed to close their eyes and plug their ears and pretend those uncomfortable complexities don’t exist. How sweet! And then they can graduate without ever learning anything new, and go on to be ignorant voters who will no doubt continue the trend of dumbing down everything.

This is a very stupid move by stupid people that will produce more stupid people.

It neglects a fundamental property of education: that in order to learn, you have to be exposed to many new and sometimes difficult ideas. We teach about subjects that no one thinks are good, because you need to know about them to have an informed opinion. The Holocaust was horrible and painful — shall we allow children to avoid exposure to it? Fundamentalist parents may gnash their teeth in fury at the very idea of evolution — but how can they disagree with it rationally, if they don’t even know what it is?

Somehow we’ve acquired this bizarre notion that learning is about being eased along, never stressing ourselves, never facing a challenge. We’ve mistaken education for an exercise in affirmation. And now Alberta wants to enshrine that idea in their educational system.

Well, at least if the future creates a lot of demand for jobs that require smugly oblivious, incompetent people, industry will know precisely where to go for them.

It looks like trouble, and some ministers are defending the proposed blasphemy law — you people aren’t going to let this violation of civil rights pass, are you?

We have some more details on the law, too: it authorizes fines up to €100,000, and gives the police the right to seize blasphemous materials from your home. If you’re reading Pharyngula right now on your home computer, you may have broken that law, and they can come take your computer away…and then they’ll notice all those books by Hitchens and Harris and Dawkins and so forth on your bookshelves, and next thing you know, you’re locked up in the Catholic Prison, stamping out communion wafers for 20 years.

And then there are the other implications. The Scientologists must be rubbing their hands with glee: their outrage will be sufficient to arrest people who protest their cult. If you draw a doodle that looks vaguely like Mohammed, and some nearby Moslem is outraged, you are guilty, guilty, guilty.

I know that Turkey is one of those countries I’d be wise to avoid unless I want to risk arrest…do you really want Ireland to share that distinction, too?

I need details of this law against blasphemy. If “Begorrah!” and “Saints preserve us!” are outlawed, then Irish stereotypes will be utterly demolished. On the other hand, one Irish fellow I knew used the peculiar expression “fewkin'” as every other word…I presume charming references to sexual acts will not be regarded as blasphemous? Otherwise, the charm of the Irish vernacular will be lost to us forever.

Here is the only definition I’ve seen so far.

“Blasphemous matter” is defined as matter “that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion; and he or she intends, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.”

Wait, they’re going to make this work in Ireland? So the government plans on censoring every mention of “Catholic” and “Protestant” because they’ll spark outrage in some subset of the population? I think that, in general, prohibiting things because some fraction of the population will feel outraged at the concept would effectively mean that everything should be outlawed. I know I could stand outside any church or cathedral, stamp my foot, and fulminate at length — if only I were Irish, I could stroll the land, casting the priestly snakes off the island.