Ontario Health Minister Backs Free Crack Pipe Distribution Program

Ontario Health Minister Backs Free Crack Pipe Distribution Program

Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman supports a program that will distribute free crack pipes to citizens, ensuring that the program will stay alive despite strong opposition from Ottawa city officials.

The program, designed to fight the possible spread of hepatitis C and HIV from sharing crack pipes, lost $7,500 from the city last year, putting the future of the free crack pipe program in jeopardy. City officials said there is no evidence that the program has actually halted the spread of communicable diseases, and that crack addicts need help, not supplies.

After the nonsense of giving free needles to drug users, I suppose free crack pipes were only a matter of time.

It’s a simple matter of economics: if you want to get more of something, subsidize it. Need more doctors? Pay people to go to med school. Want more cars? Give money to General Motors. Want more drug users? Give people tools to do drugs with.

In the long run, this will likely cause more disease to be spread. After all, it takes rational thought to think to get a clean needle and if there’s one group of people not exactly known for rational thought, it’s drug users.

Ontario Health Minister Backs Free Crack Pipe Distribution Program

Ontario Health Minister Backs Free Crack Pipe Distribution Program

Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman supports a program that will distribute free crack pipes to citizens, ensuring that the program will stay alive despite strong opposition from Ottawa city officials.

The program, designed to fight the possible spread of hepatitis C and HIV from sharing crack pipes, lost $7,500 from the city last year, putting the future of the free crack pipe program in jeopardy. City officials said there is no evidence that the program has actually halted the spread of communicable diseases, and that crack addicts need help, not supplies.

After the nonsense of giving free needles to drug users, I suppose free crack pipes were only a matter of time.

It’s a simple matter of economics: if you want to get more of something, subsidize it. Need more doctors? Pay people to go to med school. Want more cars? Give money to General Motors. Want more drug users? Give people tools to do drugs with.

In the long run, this will likely cause more disease to be spread. After all, it takes rational thought to think to get a clean needle and if there’s one group of people not exactly known for rational thought, it’s drug users.

Spanish leaders want bishops’ apology for pro-family rally

Catholic World News : Spanish leaders want bishops’ apology for pro-family rally

Spanish government leaders have asked the country’s Catholic bishops to apologize for the massive pro-family rally held in Madrid on December 30, Vatican Radio reports.

Leaders of the Socialist governing party have charged that the Church intervened in partisan political affairs with the rally, which drew nearly 2 million participants. (The government is reporting that only 160,000 took part in the demonstration.) The government has asked the bishops’ conference for an apology.

Although 40 bishops took part in the pro-family event, and the hierarchy gave clear support to the event, the rally was organized primarily by lay Catholic activists. The organizers have consistently argued that the rally was not intended as a partisan political event, but as a public expression of support for the traditional family founded on Christian marriage.

Here’s my suggested apology:

I’m sorry you’re subscribed to an economic philosophy that has worked solely to impoverish millions around the world. I’m sorry you reject the traditional meaning of marriage and all the joy and security it brings to people and to nations. I’m sorry your social policies kill so many people and so many souls. I’m sorry you’ve chosen to reject God and the love He has for you. But, there’s still time to come back to Him and truly find the peace and happiness you wrongly think your failed policies can instill.

Hat Tip: The Cafeteria Is Closed

Spanish leaders want bishops’ apology for pro-family rally

Catholic World News : Spanish leaders want bishops’ apology for pro-family rally

Spanish government leaders have asked the country’s Catholic bishops to apologize for the massive pro-family rally held in Madrid on December 30, Vatican Radio reports.

Leaders of the Socialist governing party have charged that the Church intervened in partisan political affairs with the rally, which drew nearly 2 million participants. (The government is reporting that only 160,000 took part in the demonstration.) The government has asked the bishops’ conference for an apology.

Although 40 bishops took part in the pro-family event, and the hierarchy gave clear support to the event, the rally was organized primarily by lay Catholic activists. The organizers have consistently argued that the rally was not intended as a partisan political event, but as a public expression of support for the traditional family founded on Christian marriage.

Here’s my suggested apology:

I’m sorry you’re subscribed to an economic philosophy that has worked solely to impoverish millions around the world. I’m sorry you reject the traditional meaning of marriage and all the joy and security it brings to people and to nations. I’m sorry your social policies kill so many people and so many souls. I’m sorry you’ve chosen to reject God and the love He has for you. But, there’s still time to come back to Him and truly find the peace and happiness you wrongly think your failed policies can instill.

Hat Tip: The Cafeteria Is Closed

Spanish leaders want bishops’ apology for pro-family rally

Catholic World News : Spanish leaders want bishops’ apology for pro-family rally

Spanish government leaders have asked the country’s Catholic bishops to apologize for the massive pro-family rally held in Madrid on December 30, Vatican Radio reports.

Leaders of the Socialist governing party have charged that the Church intervened in partisan political affairs with the rally, which drew nearly 2 million participants. (The government is reporting that only 160,000 took part in the demonstration.) The government has asked the bishops’ conference for an apology.

Although 40 bishops took part in the pro-family event, and the hierarchy gave clear support to the event, the rally was organized primarily by lay Catholic activists. The organizers have consistently argued that the rally was not intended as a partisan political event, but as a public expression of support for the traditional family founded on Christian marriage.

Here’s my suggested apology:

I’m sorry you’re subscribed to an economic philosophy that has worked solely to impoverish millions around the world. I’m sorry you reject the traditional meaning of marriage and all the joy and security it brings to people and to nations. I’m sorry your social policies kill so many people and so many souls. I’m sorry you’ve chosen to reject God and the love He has for you. But, there’s still time to come back to Him and truly find the peace and happiness you wrongly think your failed policies can instill.

Hat Tip: The Cafeteria Is Closed

2010 Reapportionment and Presidential Elections

States that could gain, lose House seats – Yahoo! News

Being a math nerd, I looked at the article and wondered how switching of seats would impact the Presidential Election. Had the suggested apportionment of seats been in effect in 2000, Bush would have gained a net nine Electoral votes, while in 2004 he would gained a net 16 electoral votes over his 2000 performance. (Keep in mind the 2000 election was held before the last reapportionment, so it’s showing a double effect.) Similarly, in 1996, Bob Dole would have gained 7 electoral votes and Bush the Elder would have gained 10 electoral votes in 1992.

This shows that, as a general rule, population trends are favoring the GOP in the Electoral College. This doesn’t mean the Electoral College is a lock, though. Bill Clinton showed in 1992 and 1996 that the so-called “Solid South” can be broken up if the Democrats run a candidate those voters find appealing. In addition, the GOP may have lost Ohio for the foreseeable future given the Ohio GOP’s record of corruption and incompetence. This loss alone would more than offset the GOP’s growth in strength due to reapportionment. So while the national trend is good for Republicans, local trends do not bode as well.

Dopey News Journal Letter to the Editor

Stealing one of Hube’s frequent tropes:

In a free country, how can religion dictate morality

I was sitting at home alone the other day when my telephone rang, and some sort of automated voice-activated survey was asking residents of Cecil County whether they believed abortion should be legal in this country. Despite pressing the button, as instructed for pro-choice, the robotic voice thanked me for being pro-life.

Maybe you hit the wrong button….

Not only do I believe abortion should always be legal in the United States, but actually encouraged as a great way to reduce the surplus population.

Ever notice that everyone who wants to reduce the population by killing humans is already born and doesn’t volunteer themselves for execution? I’ll take these guys as something other than misanthropes when they start nominating themselves for the sacrifices they are so eager to have others make.

Religious fanatics and right-wing lunatics are pushing these backward-thinking programs because of George Bush, and his fundamentalist Jesus freaks.

There’s more than just women’s rights at stake here, and it’s high time free thinkers tell these anti-abortion idiots, the lunatics from the religious right and Bush, to stick it.

In two sentences, I count six insults directed at those who disagree with him. No wonder he opens the letter by telling us he was home alone. Maybe he really does just hate everyone else.

Book Review: Can a Catholic Be a Democrat? by David Carlin

David Carlin is a former Democrat member of the Rhode Island House of Representatives and is currently a professor at the Community College of Rhode Island as well as a faithful Catholic. A life-long member of the Catholic Church, he grew increasingly disturbed by what he saw as an increasing pro-secular and anti-Christian perspective starting to dominate the Democrat party.

He begins by chronicling the history of the secularist takeover of the Democrat party, beginning with the destruction of the local party machines which helped keep the party from being too ideological as they would have to appeal to a wide variety of voter across the country. With the destruction of these machines, they lost the ability to keep people easily in the Democrat fold come Election Day and so the ability to raise money grew in importance. As money grew in importance, the Party had to rely more and more on the very wealthy for support. With their money came their influence and their ideology, which pushed the Democrats to oppose traditional values driving out many Catholics and Southern Protestants who had formerly been a significant portion of their coalition. (I spoke a little about this effect and how Mike Huckabee is emblematic of it here.) He also feels the commitment of the new elites of the party to supposed “civil rights” movements like gay rights is merely a “penance” for their seeking to steer the Democrat party towards more of an oligarchic position, to promote their own wealth, which he feels has steered the Democrats away from their traditional support for the poor. This was an interesting history to read.

The next section of the book deals with the incompatibility of Catholic belief and Democratic policies. First he explains why Catholicism is incompatible with the secularist agenda now pushed by the Democrats. Then he demolishes the many excuses used by Catholics to attempt to justify their continued support for Democrats. My favorite was his tearing down of the “personally opposed, but…” line taken by so many Democrats, including our own Senator Biden, by showing how their argument can be used in defense of white supremacy:

I have a duty to represent all my constituents, not just Negroes. I’m duty-bound to represent my racist constituents too, and they favor a regime of white supremacy. Personally, I’m opposed to racism, but…

I’ve taken a solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. In Plessy v. Ferguson the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that racial segregation is a constitutionally protected practice. Therefore, it’s my duty to support and defend the institution of racial segregation.

He also does an effective job defusing the arguments of Catholics who support pro-abortion candidates using the “seamless garment” metaphor of the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin. He shows not only that most of those fail to actually account for abortion in the seamless garment but also that they misinterpret what the Cardinal was actually urging.

Surprisingly, in his summary, Carlin acknowledges he is still a registered Democrat and actively advises and supports many Democrats. He makes a valid point that, living in Rhode Island, there isn’t much difference between the two parties, so there’s no real point in switching. He also admits that it might be just an inbred bias against the Republican Party given that his family is Democrat for generations back or that he’s just too old to change.

One criticism of the book I’d have is that he seems to accept as fact that the GOP is dominated by the rich and looks out for business interests. (Although he is generous and honest enough to admit that those who argue that a strong economy is better for the poor than government welfare programs have a strong case.) Besides the fact the Republican Party is on the correct side of the moral debate, one of the reasons I am a Republican is because their economic policies will help the poor more than those of the Democrats. As the trope goes, “the best welfare program is a job,” so we need to support policies that will create jobs. Unfortunately, the Democrats propose policies such as increased governmental regulation, higher taxes, higher minimum wage, protectionism, etc that will destroy jobs.

Carlin closes his section on the future of this secularist-Christian divide that serves as a warning for Democrats that also works as a good closing for this review:

Once upon a time it was the most natural thing in the world for a Catholic to be a Democrat. In the foreseeable future, unless the Democrats drastically change their present anti-Catholic course, it will be the most natural thing in the world for a Catholic to be a Republican.

Obama Misses an opportunity?

Obama Misses An Opportunity? [Jonah Goldberg]

I can see it both ways. But it must have been be very tempting for Obama to come back at Hillary’s statement that the first woman president would be a big change by saying “well, the first black president would be a big deal too.”

Bonus rightwing points: If he followed up with “not counting your husband, of course.”

It’s to Obama’s credit that he didn’t make this followup. While it might score some debate points, I think it’s best for the country if the first black President were elected in a campaign free of racial pleas from all sides. Let him be elected for who he is, rather than on the color of his skin. Saying “Vote for me because I have dark skin” (or “Because I have a vagina”) is identity politics, plan and simple, which will just divide the country. If we can’t elect because of your policies, we shouldn’t elect you for any other reason. Campaign on the issues, not random personal traits.

Although I would forgive him for it if he had followed up with Goldberg’s suggested comment about Bill Clinton. That’s funny enough to be worth it.