Is Peeing A Sacrament?

Erick Erickson has an article with the sensational headline, “State of Iowa Says Churches Must Let Men Use the Women’s Bathroom” (retweeted by the lachrymose Glenn Beck). ZOMG! The big bad government is sending legions of men in dresses to diddle your children in your very churches! And they’re not Catholic priests, even! Be afraid!

The government FAQ linked to says,

DOES THIS LAW APPLY TO CHURCHES?

Sometimes. Iowa law provides that these protections do not apply to religious institutions with respect to any religion-based qualifications when such qualifications are related to a bona fide religious purpose. Where qualifications are not related to a bona fide religious purpose, churches are still subject to the law’s provisions. (e.g. a child care facility operated at a church or a church service open to the public).

This, of course, raises the question of what consitutes a “bona fide religious purpose”. Erickson spends some time talking about cases about who is and isn’t a minister, then admitting that no church has actually been, you know, oppressed, before reminding you to stay scared of creeping liberalism and impending tyranny.

But I still want an answer to the question: what’s a bona fide religious purpose for a bathroom, even in a church? Is peeing a sacrament? I know that the Bible includes the phrase “he that pisseth against the wall”, but it just seems to mean “man and boy”. There’s 2 Kings 18:27 (note to Donald Trump: that’s pronounced “second Kings”, not “two kings”):

But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

But not only doesn’t this sound like an exhortation for good Christians to emulate, they’re not even using a bathroom.

Obviously, maybe some church has a religious ritual for peeing, one that’s not found in the Bible. But in that case, I want to see the church in question explain itself.

Teabagger Rally Photos

a.gallery {
float: left;
clear: left;
margin-top: 1em;
margin-bottom: 1em;
margin-right: 1em;
margin-left: 0em;
}

Some photos of the Glenn Beck teabagger rally on the Mall today.

Read More

Journalistic Balance in a Biased World

CNN has a piece up called Is the lunatic fringe hijacking America?, about how extremists have a disproportionate effect on politics. Okay, fair enough.

But in an effort to be fair and balanced (if not Fair and Balanced™), CNN’s guest gave four examples of extremists, two from the left and two from the right; two from politics, and two from media.

On the right: Michele Bachmann and Glenn Beck. Two well-known unhinged nutjobs, but I’m sure we can all think of others: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, Pat Robertson, etc.

And to balance them out on the left, Alan Grayson and Keith Olbermann.

When I heard that, my first thought was “Alan who?”. I mean, he could at least have gone with someone people have heard of, like Dennis Kucinich or Wonkette.

Now, as it turns out, Alan Grayson is an actual, honest-to-Cthulhu freshman representative from Florida’s 8th. According to Daily Kos, his long and sordid history of espousing far-left causes includes

  1. Oct. 2, 2009: Characterized the GOP’s health care plan as “Don’t get sick. If you do get sick, die quickly.”
  2. Feb. 3, 2010: Several Republican candidates for Grayson’s seat drop out of the race.

It might also be instructive to see what PolitiFact has to say about their record of truthfulness:

  Michele Bachmann Alan Grayson Glenn Beck Keith Olbermann
True 0 0 0 0
Mostly True 0 0 0 2
Half True 0 0 2 2
Barely True 0 1 4 0
False 3 0 5 1
Pants on Fire 4 0 2 0

Which, I think, confirms Stephen Colbert’s observation that “reality has a well-known liberal bias.”

I’m all for journalistic balance, and not favoring one ideology over another, but this is ridiculous. The purpose of news outlets is to tell the public what’s going on. Their commitment should be to the truth, not to any party. But what’s going on here is an abdication of that commitment. The truth does not always lie at the midway point between opposite sides. It’s entirely possible for one side to be full of shit, and in that case, it’s a journalist’s job to say so. It’s sad that Jon Stewart could teach these people a few lessons

As for which extremists have the most sway, where’s the army of marching leftist morons to balance out the Teabaggers? Which networks and politicians have promoted their meetings? Where are the calls from the left to dismantle the constitution?

In fact, the most common accusation I hear leveled against Democrats, aside from the background noise that they’re baby-killing communo-fascist terrorist sympathizers, is that they’re wimps who can’t get anything done; that they need to grow a spine and a pair of cojones and start acting like they have a majority.

So CNN can suck my balls. One on the left, and one on the right. For balance.