I was recently having a discussion with a Christian on the issue of Canada's Anti-Spanking law which was inspired by a Christian Biblical Literalist family who believed that whipping and caning their six children daily was required by their religion.

My position is essentially that the Anti-Spanking law recognizes the Rights of the Child which was established by:

1. The Universal Declaration of Rights, 1948.

Article 25. "2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection."

2. The Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Child, 1959 and to which most Western countries are signatories.

Principle 9. "The child shall be protected against all forms of neglect, cruelty and exploitation."

3. The International Convention on the Rights of the Child (a binding treaty to all signatories), 1989 and to which 129 (mostly) Western countries are signatories.

Article 14. Item 3. "3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others."

Article 19. Item 1. "States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child."

The Christian's position is nicely summarized in the following paragraph which is a direct quote.

"Need I remind you? - I'm not the one advocating that my personal morality should be forced upon others. Your friends are. But of course, it's okay now - because it's *your* views being forced - as opposed to the fundamentalists on the either side of the spectrum."

My response to the above statement:

"I've been giving this some thought and while I still don't think continuing the discussion would be productive, here are my thoughts anyway.

While (name removed)  isn't right, he isn't completely wrong either.

The concept of the "Rights of Man" (Thomas Paine) is a view which is being imposed by Secular society.

However, it's being imposed through International and Civil Law.

Unlike, religious dogma, the Secular State doesn't impose through violence or authoritarianism. It does so through the Rule of Law while recognizing the rights of all in the context of what is being imposed, including religious rights.

So, this is one critical difference which (name removed)  doesn't appear to recognize.

Another critical difference is in the content of the views and the value judgment that we place on those views as a culture.

The view that we are imposing through Law is one that recognizes the rights of all and establishes the position that each and every human being has Natural Rights (Thomas Paine) that those rights are inviolable by any belief, social system, culture, etc.

This view is diametrically opposed to any dogmatic belief system like religion, communism, fascism, etc.  because it raises the Rights of the Individual above the Rights of the Belief, Organization, State, et al.

So, while Freedom of Religion is recognized under this concept, that freedom cannot and will not be allowed to trump the Natural Rights held by individual human beings including children.

This is the second critical difference that (name removed)  doesn't appear to recognize.

That is, this concept enshrines the rights of all individuals whereas if religion were to impose its values on the non-religious, it's concepts only recognize it's religious rights and not the rights of all individuals, particularly where the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic religions are concerned.

This is the core of the fight going on right now between the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic extremists and the Secular Western State.

The reasons why religious dogma would consider this an imposition and object to it are rather obvious.

To tie this in to the other topic we were discussing, this is also precisely why Interculturalism is a much better concept and why Multiculturalism is racist and divisive. The concepts are the same.

Interculturalism is founded on the concept of Inclusion and places civil law over and above all cultural and social beliefs, thereby removing cultural relativism as an option.

However, it does this within the context of recognizing the right of all to follow their culture as long as those cultural beliefs do not contravene existing law and/or violate anyone else's civil rights..

Multiculturalism is founded on the concept of Diversity and imposes cultural relativism.

The exception to this occurs in situations where certain (not all) criminal laws are violated. Other laws can be violated on the grounds of accommodationism.

However, this is inconsistently applied since by definition, not accommodating these beliefs (religious or cultural) is in contradiction to the fundamental concept of Multiculturalism.

These critical differences are based on the fundamental concepts advocated by each belief system.

Secularism and Interculturalism is Inclusive and speaks to the rights of all, religious and non-religious.


Multiculturalism and Religious accommodation are, by definition, culturally and religiously relativistic.

My contribution to Draw Mohammed Day follows.

Okay ... I know I'm not an artist and it's just a cut and paste compilation but we all have to start somewhere :-).

The Pansies are the traditional symbol of FreeThought which is why I added them to the bottom of the picture.

The image of Mohammed is a cut and paste of another image located in one my previous posts.

In case, it's difficult to read, the caption says: Religious freedom? or FreeThought? Free Speech protects us all.

Yes it's tame compared to the usual stuff I post but apparently it's still "evil". I decided to go for a tame image in order to make precisely that point.

The following is a powerful 2 hour film depicting ex-Reverend of the United Church of Canada, Kevin Annett's struggle to get justice for the thousands of Canadian Aboriginal children murdered by both the United and Catholic Churches in Canada as well as the hundreds of thousands who were kidnapped from their families and subjected to brutal psychological, physical and sexual abuse at the hands of the priests and the nuns. 

Kevin Annett continues to be harassed and persecuted for his exposure of both the church and government but despite this continues his fight for justice on behalf of the Aboriginal people of Canada. 

While he remains a Christian (follower of Christ) he has harsh criticism for religion and the Church and it's hypocrisy. 

Unrepentant

A. British Columbia

1.   Port Alberni: Presbyterian-United Church school (1895-1973), now occupied by the Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council (NTC) office, Kitskuksis Road . Grave site is a series of sinkhole rows in hills 100 metres due west of the NTC building, in thick foliage, past an unused water pipeline. Children also interred at Tseshaht reserve cemetery, and in wooded gully east of Catholic cemetery on River Road .

2.   Alert Bay : St. Michael’s Anglican school (1878-1975), situated on Cormorant Island offshore from Port McNeill. Presently building is used by Namgis First Nation. Site is an overgrown field adjacent to the building, and also under the foundations of the present new building, constructed during the 1960’s. Skeletons seen “between the walls”.

3.   Kuper Island: Catholic school (1890-1975), offshore from Chemainus. Land occupied by Penelakut Band. Former building is destroyed except for a staircase. Two grave sites: one immediately south of the former building, in a field containing a conventional cemetery; another at the west shoreline in a lagoon near the main dock.

4.   Nanaimo Indian Hospital: Indian Affairs and United Church experimental facility (1942-1970) on Department of National Defense land. Buildings now destroyed. Grave sites are immediately east of former buildings on Fifth avenue , adjacent to and south of Malaspina College .

5.   Mission: St. Mary’s Catholic school (1861-1984), adjacent to and north of Lougheed Highway and Fraser River Heritage Park . Original school buildings are destroyed, but many foundations are visible on the grounds of the Park.

In this area there are two grave sites: a) immediately adjacent to former girls’ dormitory and present cemetery for priests, and a larger mass grave in an artificial earthen mound, north of the cemetery among overgrown foliage and blackberry bushes, and b) east of the old school grounds, on the hilly slopes next to the field leading to the newer school building which is presently used by the Sto:lo First Nation. Hill site is 150 metres west of building.

6.   North Vancouver: Squamish (1898-1959) and Sechelt (1912-1975) Catholic schools, buildings destroyed. Graves of children who died in these schools interred in the Squamish Band Cemetery , North Vancouver .

7.   Sardis: Coqualeetza Methodist-United Church school (1889-1940), then experimental hospital run by federal government (1940-1969). Native burial site next to Sto:lo reserve and Little Mountain school, also possibly adjacent to former school-hospital building.

8. Cranbrook: St. Eugene Catholic school (1898-1970), recently converted into a tourist “resort” with federal funding, resulting in the covering-over of a mass burial site by a golf course in front of the building. Numerous grave sites are around and under this golf course.

9. Williams Lake : Catholic school (1890-1981), buildings destroyed but foundations intact, five miles south of city. Grave sites reported north of school grounds and under foundations of tunnel-like structure.

10. Meares Island (Tofino): Kakawis-Christie Catholic school (1898-1974). Buildings incorporated into Kakawis Healing Centre. Body storage room reported in basement, adjacent to burial grounds south of school.

11. Kamloops : Catholic school (1890-1978). Buildings intact. Mass grave south of school, adjacent to and amidst orchard. Numerous burials witnessed there.

12. Lytton: St. George’s Anglican school (1901-1979). Graves of students flogged to death, and others, reported under floorboards and next to playground.

13. Fraser Lake : Lejac Catholic school (1910-1976), buildings destroyed. Graves reported under old foundations and between the walls.

Alberta:

1. Edmonton : United Church school (1919-1960), presently site of the Poundmaker Lodge in St. Albert . Graves of children reported south of former school site, under thick hedge that runs north-south, adjacent to memorial marker.

2. Edmonton : Charles Camsell Hospital (1945-1967), building intact, experimental hospital run by Indian Affairs and United Church . Mass graves of children from hospital reported south of building, near staff garden.

3. Saddle Lake : Bluequills Catholic school (1898-1970), building intact, skeletons and skulls observed in basement furnace. Mass grave reported adjacent to school.

4. Hobbema: Ermineskin Catholic school (1916-1973), five intact skeletons observed in school furnace. Graves under former building foundations.

Manitoba:

1. Brandon : Methodist-United Church school (1895-1972). Building intact. Burials reported west of school building.

2. Portage La Prairie: Presbyterian-United Church school (1895-1950). Children buried at nearby Hillside Cemetery .

3. Norway House: Methodist-United Church school (1900-1974). “Very old” grave site next to former school building, demolished by United Church in 2004.

Ontario:

1. Thunder Bay : Lakehead Psychiatric Hospital , still in operation. Experimental centre. Women and children reported buried adjacent to hospital grounds.

2. Sioux Lookout: Pelican Lake Catholic school (1911-1973). Burials of children in mound near to school.

3. Kenora: Cecilia Jeffrey school, Presbyterian-United Church (1900-1966). Large burial mound east of former school.

4. Fort Albany : St. Anne’s Catholic school (1936-1964). Children killed in electric chair buried next to school.

5. Spanish: Catholic school (1883-1965). Numerous graves.

6. Brantford : Mohawk Institute, Anglican church (1850-1969), building intact. Series of graves in orchard behind school building, under rows of trees.

7. Sault Ste. Marie: Shingwauk Anglican school (1873-1969), some intact buildings. Several graves of children reported on grounds of old school.

Quebec:

1. Montreal : Allan Memorial Institute, McGill University , still in operation since opening in 1940. MKULTRA experimental centre. Mass grave of children killed there north of building, on southern slopes of Mount Royal behind stone wall.

Sources:

- Eyewitness accounts from survivors of these institutions, catalogued in Hidden from History: The Canadian Holocaust (2nd ed., 2005) by Kevin Annett. Other accounts are from local residents.

Source: Hidden From History dot Org - Breaking News

Hidden From History dot Org - Main site

Trying to define the term Feminism is challenging because it means many different things to many different people.

My definition is quite simple.

Feminism is the movement for equal rights for women whatever that might entail during any given period in history.

Given my definition I don't accept the concept of "protofeminism" nor do I believe that there were only three "waves" of feminism.

That said, for now and in the interests of clarity, I will make my comments within the context of accepted historical standards.

Historically speaking there have been three "waves" of feminism defined.

The first wave began in the 18th century along with the development of the FreeThought movement and Rationalism and was supported by many FreeThinkers from it's inception.

It's neither an accident nor a coincidence that the suffragette leaders were FreeThinkers for the most part.

The reason for this is that it was the FreeThinkers who were questioning the standards and the existing beliefs, holding them up to the light of reason, discarding that which didn't meet rational standards and upholding that which did.

That's not to say that Christian women didn't play a role in fighting for the right to vote. They did. It was, in fact, the one unifying issue between Christian feminists and FreeThinking feminists.

However, there was a divergence of interest on other issues where the Christian feminists focused on Temperance (prohibition of alcohol) whereas the FreeThinking feminists focused on Abolition (banning slavery) amongst other issues.

While the stated focus of this First Wave was womens suffrage, the right to vote, it's real focus was much more than that.

It was about the right of women to recognized as persons under the law.

After all, that's precisely why women didn't have suffrage. We were legally considered chattel, the property of the men who were in charge of us whether they were our fathers, husbands, uncles, brothers, caretakers, etc.

Note that according to Amendment XIV of the US Constitution, citizens were persons and on those grounds granted the privileges defined by the Constitution including the right to vote. Since women were not given the right to vote they were not considered persons under the law or citizens as defined by the XIVth Amendment.

Amendment XIV

(The proposed amendment was sent to the states June 16, 1866, by the Thirty-ninth Congress. It was ratified July 9, 1868.)
Section 1

[Citizenship defined; privileges of citizens.]

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0749825.html

While the women of the day who posed arguments to support their right to equality did so within the context of the times and in relation to the existing social theories which kept them enslaved, the real issue was glaringly obvious and while unstated, was reflected clearly in Marion Kirkland Reid's, A Plea For Women (1843), where she elucidated three issues which stood in the way of women's rights. These three issues formed the foundation for both the First and Second Wave Feminist movements.

They were:
1. Lack of civil rights
2. Unjust laws against women
3. Inability to obtain an education

If women were considered human beings, people under the law, the above would have resulted in violations of the existing Constitutions in various western countries.

In addition, it was implicit in the existing social theories of the day which Reid also addressed:

1. women and domesticity
2. women and Christianity.

Reid spoke to these in the context of "women's appropriate role in society".

Source: http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/whm2003/reid.html

So Reid's major contribution was to objectify through these issues the real problem which was that women were not considered to be persons under the law, by the society of the day.

Reid's document, combined with the shunning of women from around the world, who attended the first World Anti-Slavery Convention in 1840 led to the Seneca Falls Convention in the US, on women's rights. The Declaration of Rights and Sentiments was authored here by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and became the foundation for American feminism.

Excerpt:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of those who suffer from it to refuse allegiance to it, and to insist upon the institution of a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

***

"Closing Remarks
Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one-half the people of this country, their social and religious degradation—in view of the unjust laws above mentioned, and because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed, and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of these United States."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Sentiments

Once suffrage, the right to vote, was won, a major hurdle was overcome. This right, through the XIXth Amendment of the US Constitution legally established that women were persons under the law.

Amendment XIX

(The proposed amendment was sent to the states June 4, 1919, by the Sixty-sixth Congress. It was ratified Aug. 18, 1920.)

[The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied because of sex.]

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

[Congress given power to enforce this article.]

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0749825.html

This allowed women to move things to the next level, to establish legal and social equality in other areas.

Women now began the process of establishing an identity through media and culture,  legal rights, employment inclusion and equity, reproductive rights, exploration of gender issues and female sexuality, fighting for social reform on many fronts including Family and Property Law.

None of these issues was won easily and at times resulted in the imprisonment of advocates.

In addition, many rights were removed after WWII since women were no longer needed in the work force.

This environment led to the Second Wave of Feminism.

Simone de Beauvoir, mother of modern feminism, existentialist philosopher, feminist, polyamorist, bisexual, lover of and inspiration to Jean Paul Sartre wrote the ground-breaking book, The Second Sex in 1949 which laid the foundation for this Second Wave of Feminism.

Beauvoir's critique of First Wave Feminism corrected errors in and advanced the philosophical approaches originally adopted by First Wave Feminism.

She established the concept that women's goal wasn't to be like men but to be equal to men, that equality was established by the freedom to choose, and was responsible for coining the term, Women's Liberation.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_feminism

The BoobQuake event which started as a joke by skeptic atheist feminist blogger, Blah Hag, has taken hold with nearly 130,000 Facebook participants and thousands of tweets on Twitter, as of this moment. (Yes Skeptic Feminists *do* have a sense of humor!).

"In the name of science, I offer my boobs" says she :-) who is also a Biology/Evolution major.

Blag Hag has proposed that women around the world dress immodestly (show cleavage, etc.) on Monday April 26, 2010 to determine if Iranian cleric Sedighi's claims that feminine immodesty causes earthquakes (yes he actually said that!).

"Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes," Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi was quoted as saying by Iranian media. Sedighi is Tehran's acting Friday prayer leader."

One tweet on Twitter commented that this was a win-win event for women because if there wasn't an earthquake we have dispelled a very silly superstition and if there was an earthquake we will have established boobs as Lethal Weapons of the WMD (weapons of mass distraction) variety :-).

It works for me either way.

The media has become quite entranced with the event being reported everywhere from the US, Canada, Australia, India, et al.

Vancouver has decided to have a rally on April 26 called BoobQuake in front of the Art Gallery. Immodestly (but legally) dressed women will parade their immodesty from 4PM to 8PM.

The organizer of the Vancouver rally will have a computer with a geiger counter to test for any shaking in the area.

Blag Hag was quoted by CNN as saying:

“It’s not supposed to be serious activism that is going to revolutionize women’s rights, but just a bit of fun juvenile humor,” she wrote. “I’m a firm believer that when someone says something so stupid and hateful, serious discourse isn't going to accomplish anything - sometimes light-hearted mockery is worthwhile.”

And I couldn't agree more.

Participate and Enjoy!

From Pharyngula:

"Maloney is a naturopath in the state of Maine, where quacks like him get to call themselves "doctors". These so-called "doctors" get to make recommendations like this, in which he disparages standard flu vaccines and suggests these useless prescriptions:

There's another way you can tell he's a quack. When a student, Michael Hawkins, dared to criticize him, pointing out that "Naturopathic medicine is pure bull" and stating that naturopaths are underqualified and do not deserve the title of "doctor," Maloney took action to silence him. After all, we can't have people questioning quacks — that just makes them look even more ridiculous, which could lead to a loss of business.

So Maloney complained to Wordpress, where Hawkins blog was located, and got them to shut it down. This does not speak well of craven Wordpress; if you're using Wordpress hosting, you might want to reconsider it and move elsewhere. You know, to someplace that respects reality.

Now not only is Maloney a quack, but he's a stupid quack. Shutting down blogs that criticize him? That never, ever works. In fact, it tends to backfire rather severely — because now a much bigger blog is going to spread the word that Christopher Maloney is a quack. I'm also going to ask all of you out there who reads this to echo the message: Christopher Maloney is a quack. Won't that be fun? Poke the net, and the net pushes back.

Share the message. Let the whole world know that Christopher Maloney is a cowardly quack.

He's also tasteless. This is possibly the ugliest youtube video ever."