Another AIDS denialist bites the dust - AIDS related death

Schadenfreude is that uniquely German expression describing the pleasure someone derives from watching/enjoying someone else's misery. Of course, we should not really enjoy someone else's misery, even less so someone else's premature, preventable death. Sometimes though, especially when the harm is self-inflicted and very predictable, one can't help but feel somewhat schadenfreudig.

Well, on this occasion, another HIV denialist bit the dust. Christine Maggiore died of an AIDS related illness (a typical AIDS indicator disease, pneumonia) late December. Maggiore's main claim to fame (other than founding the Italian design company Allessi) was that she was HIV positive but refused to take any anti-HIV medication. She belonged to a small band of HIV denialists who continue to insist that HIV has nothing to do with AIDS.

Worse than her harming herself, however, being pregnant twice, she also refused to take HIV mother-to-child-prevention medication during pregnancy, with the result that one of her kids became HIV infected, and eventually died on AIDS. All of this she did in the face of overwhelming empirical evidence of the life-preserving capacities of standard HIV medicines. The coroner in the US, at the time, declared the child's death to be AIDS related. A HIV denialist retained by Maggiore (a veterinary toxicologist of all things) declared that her daughter died as a result of an allergic reaction to amoxicillin. Maggiore lived a 'healthy life', ie a life without any drugs. According to the denialist community she should have been able to live forever, sadly at the age of 52 she died a premature death caused by AIDS.

Well, what can one say other than that stubbornness in the face of overwhelming evidence is a pretty silly thing. One got to give her credit tho for sacrificing her life in order to be able to stick credibly to her obviously false beliefs on HIV.

'God is very disappointed' in homophobic clergy

I love these religious people. Always up for a good laugh. Here's bits and pieces from an article in yesterday's GUARDIAN, written by the inimitable Mr Riazat Butt.

Everyone with an IQ above 60 knows that the bible (old, new, whatever testament) is strictly against homosexuality. It really is that simple. Anyway, as long back as I can think, gay folks have tried to make it look as if that isn't what the Bible says, or that the thing was written in different times and that we shouldn't take the unequivocal condemnation of homosexuality literal, and so on and so forth. Bit like sheep trying hard to become full card carrying members of the local butcher's association.

Traditionally, particularly Catholic monasteries have been preferred hiding grounds for homosexual men. Hence probably that odd Christian churches' male clergy predeliction for wearing colourful dresses in public. Anyway, in recent years more and more homosexual clergy have come out and so made homosexuality an issue in debates on church policies.

This has been so most aggressively in the Anglican church. They have their own gay bishop. I mean, he is't a gay bishop, but a bishop who happens to be openly gay. As always when organised Christianity is given a chance to have a go at some minority or other, they do it with gusto. So, a fellow senior management staffer in that church, Mr Peter Akinola declared that homosexuality is worse than bestiality (bummer), and that in fact it's a kind of slavery. One would expect an African bishop to have a reasonable understanding of the basic difference between sexual activities among consenting adults (even of the same sex) and slavery, but then, hey, may be history lessons have not yet reached Nigerian clergy men.

I digress, it's kinda too easy and too tempting to make mince meat out of these so obviously idiotic homophobic views pronounced usually by men going in drag ...

What I really wanted to focus on is actually the claim by Gene Robinson, the gay bishop bloke from the USA. He informs us (on the eve of - YAWN - the launch of his most recent book...) that God would be very disappointed in homophobic clergy like fellow drag wearing bishop Akinola. - Well... how does Robinson know? The Bible is clearly a homophobic document, and while there is no evidence that the Bible pronounces God's views on anything, and while there is no evidence that God exists in the first place; surely IF someone is a Christian, the Bible is as good a document of God's views, as it gets in terms of God and homosexuality. It's a bit surprising then that Robinson isn't prepared to concede that God isn't his and his husband's friend. On what grounds does Robinson claim that 'God is very disappointed' in homophobic clergy?

Puzzled as ever when it comes to the machinations of organized Christianity.

ONLY in the US of A = Master's of Flat Earth degree program approved

Like in any other country, universities or other tertiary education institutions wanting to confer degrees to their students need to have them approved by one or another external review body. So, in the USA's (where else?) state of Texas (where else?) did the Institute for Creation Research (what else?) manage to get approval to administer a Master level science program. So, soon there will be an MFE available (Master of Flat Earth) from the Institute. How hilarious can it possibly get? Here's the institute's scientific agenda, in its own words: 'The Institute for Creation Research equips believers with evidences of the Bible’s accuracy and authority through scientific research, educational programs, and media presentations, all conducted within a thoroughly biblical framework.' There's also standardly Christian insights such as these: 'the harmful consequences of evolutionary thinking on families and society (abortion, promiscuity, drug abuse, homosexuality and many others) are evident all around us.' The New York Times reports that 'the Texas Education Agency’s director of science, Christine Castillo Comer, lost her job after superiors accused her of displaying bias against creationism and failing to be “neutral” over the teaching of evolution.' So, now that folks are more 'neutral' there with re to the creationism/evolution issue the creationists can offer their own academic degrees :).

The Empire of the Flat Earth Strikes Again

The Observer newspaper in the UK reports today that flat earthers are highly incensed about a pilot scheme tested in some of the country's schools. Kids ages 4-11 receive booklets featuring a prince who's turning down a couple of princesses before finally falling in love with his prince. Goes without saying that this isn't about sex but about love. Educationalists have pointed out that the power of children's books in terms of shaping future social values is very substantial. Omitting gay people from such literature likely contributes to homophobic societal values. I have no idea whether these factual claims are correct, but they do not sound utterly implausible.
Of course, the empire of the flat earth is pretty horrified. Says the education spokesman (of course a spokesman) of the Muslim Council of Britain, 'This is not consistent with Islamic teachings and from our point of view many parents would be concerned.' Other flat earthers have suggested that these books 'promote' homosexuality. Leaving aside the question of whether or not that would be a bad thing (if it was possible to promote some sexual orientation to such an extent that people change their's), the same could probably be said for the prince-meets-princess type children's literature. So, unless one thinks there's something inherently wrong about homosexuality one would probably have to worry about any kind of sexual orientation bias in children's books. Quite arguably children's booklets showing the diversity of relationships we have in modern societies (of course, the Vatican, Iran and similar oddities are not, strictly speaking modern, civilised societies :) are desireable.