Links With Your Coffee - Saturday
- the quackometer blog: Skeptics' Circle #72: You Very Naughty Girls and Boys.
- A word from the future » Listics
- Rice Tells Turkey To Find Own Country To Occupy
Today Condoleezza Rice discouraged Turkey from sending troops into Iraq and told Turks to "find their own country to occupy."
"We were here first," said Rice, explaining that Turkey would have to deal with incursions by Kurdish terrorists in some other way, saying that "Iraq is already taken." - MathTrek: Mathematical Fortune-Telling
Predicting the future is not very hard, according to Bruce Bueno de Mesquita: a little mathematics is all you need. Figuring out how to manipulate a situation to achieve specific aims is a bit less straightforward, but Bueno de Mesquita says his mathematical tools can usually do that, too.
- Taser death at Vancouver Airport - Boing Boing
- The Five Scariest Politicians Caught on Tape - Esquire (tip to Marc ?)
- HeadlinedNews.com - SCHOOL BANS HARRY POTTER COSTUMES OVER "GAY" CHARACTER - October 23, 2007
Chicago, IL (HLN) -- An Illinois-based school district has banned Halloween costumes depicting the characters in the Harry Potter novels after the book’s author revealed that one of its characters is a homosexual.
(tip to Josh) Oh my, only in Chicago or perhaps Utah is Harry Potter banned after all you don't have to want to worry that a Dumbledore will grab Harry's wand and steal his candy.
Comments
That MathTrek article was great. I'm curious about these future-telling equations now.
Being gay is extremely sexually explicit. Banning Harry Potter costumes is prudent. Little known fact -- gay people incite raw, unintelligible passions in anyone around them.
While we're at it, lets ban jock straps too. Jockstraps are suggestive of underage drinking and unprotected sex.
Question: If someone shows up in Black-face, would they be sent home because black-face is racist or would they be sent home because black people are better lovers?
I find the Harry Potty piece appalling (but, of course, not unsurprising), in a way that makes it worth spelling out the confused "reasoning."
' "We don’t want students promoting any sexual agenda, gay or straight" said school principal Tom Mannino, "so we’re preempting any issues parents or students might have and banning all Harry Potter costumes outright."'
By that logic, just about every costume depicting any purported heterosexual would have to be banned as well for "imposing" a so-called lifestyle: including, say, Frankenstein, who had a "bride," and Dracula, who typically has a harem of women. If one has to be informed about a character's sexual-orientation, it could hardly be because of a supposed "lifestyle"--for such was not evident if the character's author had to reveal it--only a label.
Or, even more insidious: '..."This ban is ridiculous," says one mother. "Just because one character in the book is gay, doesn’t mean they all are." '
The insinuation being, 'You're right it's bad to be gay; but what about those wonderful characters whose sexual orientation we can't YET demonize?'
"An Illinois-based school district has banned Halloween costumes depicting the characters in the Harry Potter novels after the book’s author revealed that one of its characters is a homosexual."
OAK BROOK is a SUBURB of Chicago. Chicago has one of the largest gay populations in the country. Comparing Chicago to Utah reveals either your bias or your ignorance of the city of Chicago.
What your comment shows is that you have an impaired sense of humor.
Someone better go call Santorum, or that filthy dirty Dumbledore pervert is gonna marry a dog next!
You'd probably get some good santorum from a Jack Russel Terrier, mind you...
Post a comment