ebonlock | (no subject)

First, if you missed 60 Minutes story on Plan B last night, you can read about it here, their coverage of the FDA's decision not to allow it to be sold over the counter was absolutely fascinating. Infuriating too, of course, as they trace the decision back to a particular Bush appointed fundie "scientist":

Dr. Hager voted “no.” But his colleagues on the committee rejected his arguments, voting 23 to four in favor of offering the drug over the counter.

Such a lop-sided vote should have meant the application would sail through. But then the saga of Plan B took a strange turn.

Dr. Hager says someone at the FDA — he won’t say who — asked him to write a “minority report” in which he asked for more studies and more data on the use of Plan B by young girls.

A few months later something totally unexpected happened: The FDA ignored the committee’s overwhelming vote and rejected the proposal to sell Plan B over the counter, citing the very concerns in Hager’s report.

But the best part? When he flat out denies it was because he's a psycho pro-life fundie and they then play him making a speech at a church in which he outright claims that it is the reason he made this decision:

Some people believe Hager raised these objections because of his religious beliefs, but that’s something he denies. “The religious aspect did not enter into that decision for me,” he says.

But in to a speech he gave to a Christian college, he seemed to admit his role was all about religion. “God has used me to stand in the breach for the cause of the kingdom,” Hager said at the time.

He was talking about Plan B.

I just have to ask folks who still support Bush and his administration (surely one or two must have stumbled across this blog), how can you possibly justify this? Do you honestly feel comfortable living in a theocracy? Would you feel comfortable if condoms were no longer sold over the counter because of "moral concerns"? Because that's where this is heading, boys and girls, they won't be content with just stopping the ladies from having the sex, no, they'll want to stop the boys as well.

While I'm on the subject of men feeling that they should have some say over womens' bodies, you just have to check out the Feministe taking on "Dominionist Libertarian" Vox Day's latest screed on rape. But be prepared for some dry heaves because you quite literally won't believe the shit he and his commentors have posted. Let me give you just a little taste:

I have to confess that I don’t understand this ceaseless quest for victimhood. Being raped doesn’t confer some mystical moral superiority on a woman, it just makes her a victim. And unfortunately, in all too many cases, it just makes her a stupid one.
[...]
Actual rape is another area in which the feminists shot themselves in the foot. Back in the day, women had the protection of their fathers, husbands and brothers. Their fathers, husbands and brothers usually had guns. So what have the feminists been trying to do? Get rid of the men AND the guns!
[...]
Yes, in a profound and awesome way, rape is actually the possibility for life, whereas the other crimes - stealing, lying, murdering - are all about destruction.
[...]
He said she said is worthless. In the middle east a woman needs a Man as a witness to charge another man with rape. Women are not smart enough to realize what they are doing to innocent men.
[...]
“The silence of women in the church” also means women are to be silent in politics as well. What goes for the metaphysical sphere goes for the physical sphere. No females are to be in politics nor vote.

Those who reject the Scriptures, reject the way of life. Sadly, it is the Churches that lead their followers onto the way of Death—and that is exactly what Western Society is doing—following the Way of Death.
[...]
Any ideas on actual good sites for mail order brides? Seriously. There are many out there, but it is very hard to tell the difference between a legitimate bride store and a scam. There is travel, but that is more dangerous (if fun) and isn’t always possible. Just curious:) (oh, I would have emailed, but that doesn’t seem to show up anymore or am I missing something?) I would love a nice China girl for Christmas… keep the two front teeth, ha.
[..]

There's more, oh so much more, but I'm beginning to feel nauseated and must stop. If anyone can point out the difference between these assholes and the Taliban (and no, the fact that one set is Christian and the other Islamic doesn't count) I'd love to hear it.

And speaking of theocracies, looks like somebody is way off script these days:

Human rights abuses in Iraq are now as bad as they were under Saddam Hussein and are even in danger of eclipsing his record, according to the country's first Prime Minister after the fall of Saddam's regime.

'People are doing the same as [in] Saddam's time and worse,' Ayad Allawi told The Observer. 'It is an appropriate comparison. People are remembering the days of Saddam. These were the precise reasons that we fought Saddam and now we are seeing the same things.'

In a damning and wide-ranging indictment of Iraq's escalating human rights catastrophe, Allawi accused fellow Shias in the government of being responsible for death squads and secret torture centres. The brutality of elements in the new security forces rivals that of Saddam's secret police, he said.

...Allawi's bleak assessment is likely to undermine any attempt to suggest that conditions in Iraq are markedly improving.

'We are hearing about secret police, secret bunkers where people are being interrogated,' he added. 'A lot of Iraqis are being tortured or killed in the course of interrogations. We are even witnessing Sharia courts based on Islamic law that are trying people and executing them.'
via Pandagon

Well there goes the "Hey at least we're better than Saddam" argument.