Big news from Canada via the Beeb –

Canada’s Supreme Court has ruled that doctors may help patients who have severe and incurable medical conditions to die, overturning a 1993 ban.

In a unanimous decision, the court said the law impinged on Canadians’ rights.

The case was brought by a civil rights group on behalf of two women, Kay Carter and Gloria Taylor, with degenerative diseases. Both have since died.

Wow. Eric MacDonald has been campaigning on this issue for years.

The government has to write a new law within a year or the law will be struck down.

Assisted suicide is legal in several European countries and a few US states.

In Canada is it illegal to counsel, aid or abet a suicide, and the offence carries up to 14 years in prison.

Which is why Eric got a visit from the police after he accompanied his wife Elizabeth to Zurich. They didn’t prosecute him though…but they could have. The worst is, she died earlier than she needed to because she was determined to do it while she still could.

In the ruling, the justices wrote they “did not agree that the existential formulation of the right to life requires an absolute prohibition on assistance in dying, or that individuals cannot ‘waive’ their right to life”.

The court limited doctor-assisted suicide to patients who are consenting adults, who have a incurable but not necessarily terminal disease that causes “enduring and intolerable suffering”.

Wo – that “not necessarily terminal” makes it an even bigger deal. There’s an issue with stipulating that the disease has to be terminal, given that some non-terminal diseases can be such misery.

The justices also argued the total ban on doctor-assisted suicide “deprives some individuals of life, as it has the effect of forcing some individuals to take their own lives prematurely, for fear that they would be incapable of doing so when they reached the point where suffering was intolerable”.

Bingo. Exactly. That’s why Eric’s wife Elizabeth insisted on going to Zurich prematurely. The reality of the Oregon and Washington laws has been that fewer people than expected get doctor-assisted suicide: once it’s available, the urgency goes away.

This issue may be like abortion in the US: it may be better to have it decided by legislators than by courts. Then again it may be like segregation: it may be better to have the high court firmly strike down the underlying principle.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Muhammed Syed explains about it.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuYaMhRGrtM

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Pope sweety says it’s ok for adults to hit children, provided it’s done with dignity.

Pope Francis has backed parents who smack their children, providing the child’s “dignity” is maintained.

He made the remarks during his weekly general audience at the Vatican, which was devoted to the role of fathers in the family.

How does an adult hit a child while maintaining the child’s dignity? Is it that the adult doesn’t abort the child in the process?

The Pope said: “One time, I heard a father in a meeting with married couples say ‘I sometimes have to smack my children a bit, but never in the face so as to not humiliate them.’

“How beautiful,” he added. “He knows the sense of dignity. He has to punish them but does it justly and moves on.”

Oh that is beautiful. It’s simply gorgeous. He hits them on their gleaming little buttocks, so as not to humiliate them.

Pope sweety is still a pope.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Nina Strochlic at the Daily Beast reports that FGM numbers in the US have skyrocketed despite strong federal and state laws against it.

In 1997, the CDC estimated that 168,000 girls and women were at risk or had undergone FGM—at the time of the last national census in 1990. A few years later, in 2000, the African Women’s Center upped the number at 227,000.

But according to estimates released on Friday, there currently are around 507,000 girls living in the U.S. who are either at risk of being cut or who have already been cut. That’s more than triple the figure from the very first nationwide count.

These are estimates, not counts.

This fresh data comes from a new report issued Friday by the nonprofit Population Reference Bureau, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit. It was culled from the U.S. Census’ 2013 American Community Survey. The PRB then crunched the numbers from immigration communities and compared them with the prevalence of FGM in the countries where those people hail from. Working under the assumption that first- or second-generation Americans either have experienced FGM or will at the same rate as their homeland counterparts, the PRB narrowed the focus to teens from 15 to 19, presumably most at risk, and women up to 49, a percentage of whom already have undergone the procedure. New York City and Washington, D.C. have the highest concentration, with more than 50,000 girls at risk in each city. Minneapolis, with its large Somali population, is third.

So basically what the PRB is reporting is an increase in immigration from countries where FGM is prevalent, with a reasonable guess that many girls in those families will have had or are likely to have FGM. Maybe the guess is a little too pessimistic – maybe more immigrants than they think are dropping that particular home custom.

(Speaking of immigration…I was in a bargain grocery store a few days ago, in a suburb of Seattle with a high immigrant population. A girl of about 10, with I assume her father, asked me about a bottle of yellow liquid in her hand – “What’s this?” They looked perhaps Somali. I looked at it and said “It’s for cleaning” at the same time she added, “Is it for cooking?” Alarmed by her question, I gestured at the shelves and said “This whole area is for cleaning stuff, definitely don’t eat it.” She nodded and I bumbled off, then a minute later it dawned on me – yellow liquid – they’re looking for cooking oil. So I tried to find them again to show them where the food items were, but I couldn’t. It haunted me a bit. I’d be pretty at sea trying to find cooking oil in a store where all the labels were in Arabic or Bengali. Then again the daughter is there and there were lots of people around to ask.) (I hope she gets her reward, and is allowed to keep her junk intact.)

If this data seems ambiguous—“may have undergone” or “at risk of undergoing”—that’s because it is. Getting solid numbers on how frequently FGM is actually practiced in the U.S. has been virtually impossible. There is little information on what actually goes on in these insular immigrant communities, and with felony charges facing anyone who admits to orchestrating the cutting, it seems unlikely that many people would answer surveys truthfully.

Which of course is one reason some people oppose criminalization. It’s complicated.

The people most in the know—local teachers and healthcare providers—must be involved to paint an accurate picture of FGM in the United States. They’re also the ones with the best footing to stanch the practice.

Post fliers in those bargain grocery stores – and the nearby check-cashing places and quick loan shark places and the like.

Estimating according to country isn’t very accurate, because rates can vary hugely within countries.

This is why activists are pushing government agencies to create a bottom-up approach to information gathering, so that the federal level can better evaluate on-the-ground needs.

Sharing these numbers with residents of these immigrant communities also could be a first step to quashing the practice. The communities may not even be aware that the practice in many of their home countries actually is on the decline, says Feldman-Jacobs. From Benin to Iraq, from Liberia to the Central African Republic, the rate of FGM has dropped by as much as half among young girls in the past 20 years.

It’s actually a hopeful story, overall.

Part of the impetus behind the federal effort is a 25-year-old activist named Jaha Dukureh, who, along with advocacy group Equality Now, filed a petition last May asking the government to carry out a new study. Her story, as it was told to me at the time, and an examination of the underground FGM crisis in America, can be found here.

Good job, Daily Beast.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Check out Greg Epstein on Twitter.

A couple of days ago, the crowd of anti-feminist atheists on Twitter zoomed in on him because…Anita Sarkeesian is Harvard Humanist of the Year. She will accept the award at an event next Sunday.

Well you know that can’t be allowed. So the shouting began.

Chas Stewart ‏@BirdTerrifier Feb 3
.@gregmepstein baby, darling… Why are you watering down humanism? Surely there were more deserving HotY recipients. How’s she a humanist?

Greg Epstein ‏@gregmepstein
.@BirdTerrifier Your tone is inappropriate & gives me just a tiny hint of the massive disrespect Anita addresses bravely, strongly. Blocked.

Chas Stewart ‏@BirdTerrifier Feb 3
@gregmepstein dude, inappropriate. Can’t nudge someone with a “baby, darling”? Why haven’t you all justified the pick? Whence humanism?

Notung ‏@SIN_Notung Feb 3
@BirdTerrifier if people disagree with the award, that just proves how RIGHT the award is!

Chas Stewart ‏@BirdTerrifier Feb 3
@SIN_Notung I might’ve run afoul of the civility pledge but baby darling said to a man is different than to a woman.

Astrokid NJ ‏@AstrokidNJ Feb 4
@gregmepstein Dear @BirdTerrifier she’s a humanist just like past great feminists. Didn’t you get the memo from AHA?

http://americanhumanist.org/feminist

That’s just one thread. There were a bunch. Greg Epstein now has some idea what the harassment is like.

Another:

Greg Epstein ‏@gregmepstein
.@BlueBallSkeptic what we’re thinking awarding Anita? Feminism=central to humanism; she=brave/important; & you=blocked if only f/your handle

Jacques Cuze ‏@JacquesCuze Feb 3
@_sinisterBen the real problem is that @twitter is a shit UI with too few controls. @Aneris23 @Shermertron

sinister ‏@_sinisterBen Feb 3
@JacquesCuze @twitter @Aneris23 @Shermertron and a lot of children shouting obscenities then crying for their moms when responded to.

Shermertron ‏@Shermertron Feb 3
@_sinisterBen @JacquesCuze @gregmepstein @Aneris23 @BirdTerrifier Hey, it’s not as though he is a prominent Humanist (TM) with power…

Etc etc etc

It’s revealing, isn’t it.

Greg Epstein @gregmepstein · Feb 3
Heard there’re a lot of sexist atheists online but am privileged not to have to think of y’all much. Guess we’ll see how misguided you are.

This is now a pinned tweet:

Greg Epstein @gregmepstein · Feb 3
Am blocking atheist men behaving badly/like sexists. Don’t mean you’re evil-just what your behavior deserves. I wish you strength to change

With a long long string of retorts – a sample –

DC in Detroit ‏@DC_in_Detroit 18 hours ago
@gregmepstein @D4M10N I wonder how many of those bad-behaving atheist men were actually women.

Black Trident TV ‏@BlackTridentTV 14 hours ago
@uberfeminist @gregmepstein @UniversityWatc1 Sarkeesian is feminist. Doesn’t feminism literally stand in direct opposition to humanism?

A Man in Green #982 ‏@BackToTheBlade 14 hours ago
@UniversityWatc1 @gregmepstein Anita is a humanist for calling hundreds of thousands of people Sexist Misogynists? Harvard Trash. #GamerGate

Andrew BLeh ‏@AndrewBLeh 14 hours ago
@BackToTheBlade @UniversityWatc1 @gregmepstein anita has done more to scare women away from gaming than anyone

University Watch ‏@UniversityWatc1 13 hours ago
@BackToTheBlade @gregmepstein Yep, @femfreq is about CENSORSHIP & DEMONISATION. She doesn’t even play games.

Miranda Celeste Hale ‏@mirandachale 13 hours ago
.@gregmepstein This is ridiculously condescending. The men in question aren’t misogynists. They just disagree with you. See the difference?

Mindgamer ‏@denouc 13 hours ago
@mirandachale Fundamentalists call those who disagree with them “sinners”. Feminists call them “misogynist”. Cult mentality. @gregmepstein

Jake Follain ‏@JFollain 12 hours ago
@mirandachale @gregmepstein He’s apparently convinced that sexism against men doesn’t exist, because of Anita’s made up definition of sexism

dBetty ‏@ddbetty 9 minutes ago
@gregmepstein @gregladen After 9 years old, it takes gut level emotional experience to change. Power wedgie may help them focus.

All of which goes to show, there is no sexism and no misogyny and we made the whole thing up!

Or something.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

The BBC reports on the Verge’s publication of Costolo’s admission that Twitter sucks at preventing harassment. That’s good, because it puts Costolo and Twitter that much more on the spot. Yes, Twitter, you suck at preventing harassment. Yes, Mr Costolo, Twitter sucks at preventing harassment.

Twitter’s chief executive Dick Costolo has admitted that the company “sucks” when it comes to dealing with abuse and trolling on the service.

In a memo to staff, leaked to tech news website the Verge, he said that bullying behaviour on the network was driving users away.

He promised tougher action to deal with abusers.

A series of high-profile users have quit Twitter in recent months, citing online abuse.

And you know what else? Low-profile users have also quit Twitter because of abuse. So have medium-profile users and people at all points in between. It almost seems as if the only people who don’t quit Twitter are the ones who are there to abuse people.

Unfortunately the BBC article then goes on to answer the question “What can be done to stop trolling?” and two of its four answers reveal that it doesn’t know what it’s talking about.

• Users could ignore the post – the troll’s goal is to get a reaction and some say by responding you are “feeding the troll”
• Some have suggested a new system that allows those who are being trolled to choose not to be shown accounts that are less than 30 days old, as a lot of trolling is done from a new account

Getting a reaction is not the troll’s only goal – and there’s more to all this than mere trolling. Many of the abusers on Twitter are intent on damaging and silencing the people they target – destroying their reputations, getting people to believe lies about them, degrading and shaming them. It’s systematic and sustained, and merely concealing it from the target does nothing whatsoever about that.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Jamila has an autobiographical or miniature memoir-type post which is a must-read.

My mother was a Baptist who converted to Catholicism about the time it came to enroll me in school and to get a parish discount.  I do believe her devotion, but the timing leads me to think that her god’s got wonderful timing.  Except for a 6-8th grade reprieve, ALL of my education up until my final semester in college was at the hands of Catholic schoolteachers. And true to form, they taught me how to question and dissect everything.

I actually did consider myself to be an adherent Catholic… though it never did make sense to me.  I put forth a good face.

The face started to crack in high school when my questioning Catholic doctrine and dogma and my growing understanding of my rights as a citizen were in eternal conflict.

She stuck a pro-choice slogan on her backpack, to the helpless rage of the vice-principal.

I spent more time in detention than in nearly every other activity except for forensics.  I loved parliamentary debate just as much as I loved being in front of a room.

What an ideal combination, am I right?

Read on!

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Twitter CEO to employees: “We suck at dealing with abuse.”

Why yes, yes you do. What was your first clue?

Twitter CEO Dick Costolo is taking personal responsibility for his platform’s chronic problems with harassment and abuse, telling employees that he is embarrassed for the company’s failures and would soon be taking stronger action to eliminate trolls. He said problems with trolls are driving away the company’s users. “We suck at dealing with abuse and trolls on the platform and we’ve sucked at it for years,” Costolo wrote in an internal memo obtained by The Verge. “It’s no secret and the rest of the world talks about it every day. We lose core user after core user by not addressing simple trolling issues that they face every day.”

And you know what else? You don’t lose core trolls. Core users leave, and trolls stay. There’s a downside to that.

Costolo’s comments came in response to a question on an internal forum about a recent story by Lindy West, a frequent target of harassment on Twitter. Among other things, West’s tormentors created a Twitter account for her then recently-deceased father and made cruel comments about her on the service; West recently shared her story on This American Life and the Guardian.

Ahhhhhh, that was your first clue. I was wondering. Thanks for the clarification.

You could have paid attention a lot sooner, and avoided this embarrassment, but…

An employee on the internal forum pointed out that Twitter is “within its rights to let its platform be used as a vehicle for sexist and racist harassment” but could choose not to. It could choose to be better.

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Dick Costolo wrote:

We suck at dealing with abuse and trolls on the platform and we’ve sucked at it for years. It’s no secret and the rest of the world talks about it every day. We lose core user after core user by not addressing simple trolling issues that they face every day.

I’m frankly ashamed of how poorly we’ve dealt with this issue during my tenure as CEO. It’s absurd. There’s no excuse for it. I take full responsibility for not being more aggressive on this front. It’s nobody else’s fault but mine, and it’s embarrassing.

We’re going to start kicking these people off right and left and making sure that when they issue their ridiculous attacks, nobody hears them.

Everybody on the leadership team knows this is vital.

@dickc

Ok, well, now we get to hold him to it.

Twitter had made a couple of worthless passes at attempting to pretend to prepare to almost do something about it, but…

But every day, Twitter users still face threats of physical violence, sexual abuse, and stalking — all forms of harassment that disproportionately affect women online, according to data from The Pew Center.

Just last week, feminist critic Anita Sarkeesiandocumented the harassment she received on Twitter from January 20th to the 26th. You’ll have to scroll for awhile before you hit the end of tweets containing gendered insults, victim blaming, incitement to suicide, sexual violence, rape and death threats.

And lies. Don’t forget lies. There are always lies – masses of them.

We’ll see.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

At Mother Jones, a doctor writes an open letter to the parent of the unvaccinated child who exposed the doctor’s family to measles.

I assume you love your child just like I love mine. I assume that you are trying to make good choices regarding their care. Please realize that your child does not live in a bubble. When your child gets sick, other children are exposed. My children. Why would you knowingly expose anyone to your sick, unvaccinated child after recently visiting Disneyland? That was a boneheaded move.

Many anti-vaxxers think measles is no big deal – just an ordinary “childhood disease” that causes a little rash and then gets better.

My son, Eli, is 10 months old. He is too young to received the MMR vaccine and thus has no protection. Whether by refusal or because they are too young, exposed unvaccinated children have a 90 percent chance of getting measles.

Fourth, there are children like my Maggie. These are children who can’t be vaccinated. Children who have cancer. Children who are immunocompromised. Children who are truly allergic to a vaccine or part of a vaccine (i.e., anaphylaxis to egg). These children remain at risk. They cannot be protected, except by vaccinating people around them.

Maggie was diagnosed last August with ALL—acute lymphoblastic leukemia (blood cancer). She has had multiple rounds of chemotherapy, lumbar punctures, and surgery to implant her port. She has been admitted six times since diagnosis and spent over three weeks at Phoenix Children’s Hospital (including Halloween and New Years). She had been immunized fully, but we are unable to immunize her further until after treatments end.  Her treatment will prayerfully end shortly after her 5th birthday, in January 2017.

Here is how the measles outbreak has further complicated our situation.

It was a Wednesday. Maggie had just been discharged from Phoenix Children’s Hospital after finishing her latest round of chemotherapy. That afternoon she went to the PCH East Valley Specialty Clinic for a lab draw. Everything went fine, and we were feeling good…until Sunday evening when we got the call. On Wednesday afternoon, Anna, Maggie, and Eli had been exposed to measles by another patient. Our two kids lacked the immunity to defend against measles. The only protection available was multiple shots of rubeola immune globulin (measles antibodies). There were three shots for Maggie and two shots for Eli. They screamed, but they now have some temporary protection against measles. We pray it is enough.

Go to Mother Jones to see the photo of Eli getting his shots. Bring a kleenex.

Eli and Maggie were exposed to measles on January 21. Despite the treatment noted, they could start showing signs of measles any time from now through February 11 (21 days post exposure). After a new blood test, both my wife and I were found to be immune to measles, but the children will remain in isolation until February 11.

Unvaccinating parent, thanks for screwing up our three-week “vacation” from chemotherapy. Instead of a break, we get to watch for measles symptoms and pray for no fevers (or back to the hospital we go). Thanks for making us cancel our trip to the snow this year. Maggie really wanted to see snow, but we will not risk exposing anyone else. On that note, thanks for exposing 195 children to an illness considered ‘eliminated’ from the US. Your poor choices don’t just effect your child. They affect my family and many more like us.

Please forgive my sarcasm. I am upset and just a little bit scared.

Don’t be that parent.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Guest post by Bruce Everett

It’s been a couple of weeks since the posting of a clarification of my reasons for leaving the Humanist Society of South Australia (HSSA). This, in response to public speculation by HSSA member Mark Senior, was a labour that could have been more easily avoided if only the HSSA had kept its members properly informed of policies passed by committee.

Apparently it needs pointing out that I’m not obliged to use private channels with the HSSA when making corrective statements, when HSSA members publicly speculate on my reasons for leaving. As you’d expect, people will complain of improper treatment all the same…

“My current opinion of Bruce has diminished greatly. He acts more like a rightwing witch-hunter than a progressive thinker and spends an inordinate amount of his time looking for fault in others in the progressive movements.

When we were at the Global Atheist Conference and we met PZ Meyers [sic] he came away saying leadingly “DID YOU SEE HIS EYES?”…”WHAT?”, I responded. He said, “HE WAS LOOKING AT ALL THE TEENAGE GIRLS!”. I didn’t see that at all. Maybe I wasn’t hunting for it like Bruce was. He came away suggesting PZ was an old pervert, I came away thinking it was nice to have met him. Name any public figure in the atheist or Progressive side of politics and he will have a similar attack vector.

This tendency removes him from almost any social environment as people start to fear the inevitable moment when he will turn on them (something I have heard from quite a few members).

If you look at this post you’ll see that it is without basis. “weird body language”, “secrets” that were announced at public meetings and discussed and ACCEPTED after he ceased attending. Accusations of racism to allusions to cultural practices & ideas (a formal logical fallacy), “rape apologetics” for a case where both woman involved have overtly said no rape occurred (we also don’t pre-convict people), liking one self-effacing page out of 1000’s that I have hit like on (keep hunting Bruce, I’m sure you’ll find something else to assist in the assassination) and “whiffs” of problems.

This tall poppy syndrome, combined with his willingness to not voice any of this TO OUR FACES (while taking lifts to meetings, etc) and giving every appearance of being a friend is not a good look.

I will go through his public backstab in detail on the site… which will no doubt be longer than his actual post… a waste of my time in dealing with one big load of innuendo.”
(Justin Millikan, HSSA President, 2015)

Let me home in on one point, before I address a few of the others.

As raised in my initial post, former Australian Humanist of The Year (AHoY) Leslie Cannold presumes the innocence of Julian Assange while not dismissing the allegations against him. Last year’s AHoY, Geoffrey Robertson, while obviously presuming the innocence of Julian Assange, states that the accusations are serious and need to be “faced down”.

The HSSA President dismisses the accusations on the basis of claims that have been considered by pretty much everyone even vaguely familiar with the case. Perhaps he’d like to enlighten everyone concerned as to why the point he raises obligates that the accusations against Assange be dismissed. Perhaps the President can explain why failing to dismiss the allegations against Assange constitutes “pre-convicting”.

Perhaps the HSSA President could offer Geoffrey Robertson a free consultation.

And perhaps, until both the President and Secretary have reached alignment with Leslie Cannold’s views on this matter – a matter that could have had her leaving the Wikileaks party earlier than she did – they could reconsider their habit of histrionically dropping her name on account of an AHoY award she won in 2011, before the current HSSA even existed.

***

I started this post as I started the last – pointing out that the President and Secretary had kept members in the dark about the passing of the anti-harassment policy earlier in 2014. In his response to my initial post, The President has claimed that I was wrong, and that the policy had been announced at a public meeting that I had not attended.

The falsity of this assertion was quickly pointed out by HSSA member Scott Sharrad, who attended all of last year’s meetings. The anti-harassment policy was not announced publicly. I’ve told the truth on this matter; the President has not.

Perhaps HSSA members would like to take this opportunity to demand of committee, an explanation as to why the rules of the HSSA have also been kept from the membership. It’s not for no reason that members of other Humanist bodies are often given copies of the organisation’s constitution. I know I got mine when I defected to an interstate Humanist organisation.

***

Apparently my penchant for a certain “attack vector” removes me from almost any social environment because of the fear “quite a few” people have of my turning on them – so members tell Justin. Apparently, I also give “every appearance of being a friend” – so says Justin.

This kind of overt self-contradiction is what you’ll find when people make things up as they go along.

The first of these two contradictory claims is absurd just on its own merits given that I was not “removed” from the HSSA. I resigned of my own cognisance.

I don’t apologise for being friendly in the first instance, and I certainly don’t apologise for ending friendships after encountering certain kinds of interaction. Sometimes the contempt familiarity brings is well earned.

As for my not voicing any of the complaints I made to people’s faces; this is flatly untrue.  No, I didn’t raise each and every point to the President or Secretary’s face, nor did I put any of it to the floor at meetings.

However, when in person, I raised the issue of a racist joke about a Thai restaurant with the President, the response I got was a dismissive “HA HA! THAT’S NOT RACIST!” When I raised this issue again in my formal resignation from committee, I got evasion and excuses.

There’s only a limited extent to which I’m willing to be direct or formal with certain people, when such approaches fail to ablate even the tiniest fraction of the tin-foil lining bonded to their skulls.

If the President genuinely believes that I have never been direct with him about any of this, in person, then either he’s entirely gormless, incredibly forgetful, or both. Of course, there’s also the possibility that he doesn’t genuinely believe this.

***

My objection to the President’s classism has been taken by certain members as nit-picking, and signifying nothing. Yet the President’s own response demonstrates this dismissive attitude isn’t a feasible position. First of all, he volunteers the opinion that the page is just “self-effacing”.

(Northern Suburbs Survival Tips just being “Self-Effacing”, 2014.)

This particular meme, featured on the Northern Suburbs Survival Tips page, refers to the $7 Medicare Co-payment that the Abbott Government had planned in 2014. This policy would have hit pensioners and the unemployed, and particularly those with chronic illnesses, quite hard. According to the HSSA President though, this is just a self-effacing joke. (You can follow the link to see more examples of just how “self-effacing” the page really is).

Inviting poor folk to ‘like’ this page is one thing, but volunteering the opinion that the page is innocuous is an entirely different prospect.

Far more tellingly though, is the President’s complaint of being the victim of “tall poppy syndrome”. Aside from the vain absurdity of the President positioning himself as a “tall poppy”, this rhetorical trope is used regularly – as it is here – to vilify, and to dismiss the objections and concerns of poor people out of hand. It’s a concept that’s intrinsically classist.

Rather than rebutting my original objection, the President has gormlessly affirmed its truth.

***

“Assassination”, “witch-hunter”, “PZ Meyers [sic]” – veterans in dealing with the kind of rubbish the HSSA President is peddling will recognise the red flags immediately.

Let me lay a few facts on you about my time at the 2012 Global Atheist Convention (GAC).

I didn’t meet PZ Myers with the HSSA President. I didn’t meet PZ Myers at the GAC at all. I’ve never met him. I didn’t meet anyone at the GAC with the HSSA President or Secretary.

Between my covering the GAC for Butterflies and Wheels, my desire to meet people I met on Facebook, and my utter not-giving-a-shit-about-celebrity, the only direct celebrity interactions I had involved someone I’d rather forget, a mutual nod with Dan Dennett, and Richard Dawkins possibly staring in the direction of my table. I don’t count being in the same hall as PZ as meeting him, and at any rate, I’ve never seen him around teenagers, nor do I recall teenagers being at the GAC in the first place.

The HSSA President’s account of my time at the GAC is about as credible as any of his other tall tales.

***

The President says he’s going to respond at length; good; good for me; good for HSSA members who genuinely want to know what they’re dealing with; good for CAHS; not so good for the President, nor the Secretary, nor for the cultish types who’ve lined up to brown nose in the wake of all of this.

Continuing my dispute with this ultracrepidarian bumbler would be unproductive. I’ve had more than enough of this issue, and of the HSSA, and I trust in the President’s capacity to continue inadvertently verifying my account, while undermining his own.

~ Bruce

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)