Machines will make criminal of every driver
-The Sun

This is an awful idea...Talk about big brother....

Colby Proclaims Woman Suffrage

The 19th amendment to the constitution was announced on this day in 1920.

ON THIS DAY | 26 | 1962 Abortion mother returns home

Interesting case...

Old ID Card Gives New Status to Mexicans in U.S.

Several American cities have started accepting Mexican ID cards as valid identity cards in the US. I dont think that that's such a good idea. If you want illegal immigrants to contribute to the local economy (by opening bank accounts, etc.), then you should issue them US ID cards instead of accepting easily forgeable Mexican cards.

An Unpatriotic Act

To quote part of the article, " One member of Congress, Representative John Conyers Jr., a Michigan Democrat, has charged that Mr. Ashcroft's lobbying campaign, in which United States attorneys have been asked to participate, may violate the law prohibiting members of the executive branch from engaging in grass-roots lobbying for or against Congressional legislation."

Given the nature of the Patriot Act itself, do you really think Ashcroft is concerned with violating laws? :-/

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Bush appoints anti-Muslim to peace role

Quote:
"The largely honorary appointment of Daniel Pipes, a gift of President George Bush, has outraged Democratic senators, American Muslims and Arabs, liberal Jews and a large portion of the academic community, who say his opinions are not conducive to peace. "

Absolutely, I am outraged.

BBC NEWS | Americas | Crowds remember King's dream


I have a dream...

Hentoff: ACLU files challenge to Patriot Act

A well-written column by the well-known authority on the First Amendment, Nat Hentoff.

CNN.com - Judge suspended over Ten Commandments - Aug. 22, 2003

Finally, Judge Moore has been suspended (pending enquiry) and Alabama state officials have "made" plans to remove the monument from the state judicial building.

This calls for celebration. Anyone up for it?

The Moore saga continues...

Alabama Judge Defiant on Commandments' Display

News

Pauline Hanson has been found guilty of electoral fraud - the same person whose election manifesto includes stopping immigration and welfare payments to aborigines.

Preserving Life & Liberty

This site was created by the US Department of Justice to support the USA PATRIOT Act as more and more American citizens, politicians, and organizations have gotten their heads out of their asses and seen the Act for what it really is. The Life and Liberty website makes the case that the USA PATRIOT Act is in fact a beautiful and wonderful piece of legislation that gets the bad guys without trampling the rights of everyone else.

Simply put, this site is at best misleading, if not absolute, baldfaced lying. Let's look at the claims on the main page.

It starts by writing out the title of the USA Patriot Act in full: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism."

Then it says that Congress enacted the Patriot Act with overwhelming bipartisan margins... Yes, that is true, however, Congress never had the chance to actually read the bill, as I wrote in my last post. Further, it no longer enjoys such support from Congress.

Section 1 says that "The Patriot Act allows investigators to use teh tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking." PARTLY TRUE. While the USA PATRIOT Act does grant counter-terrorism efforts some powers that already existed, the difference is that under the USA PATRIOT Act, in many cases, the government either doesn't need to get a warrant or does not allow judges to reject warrant applications. Warrants aren't worth anything if they must automatically be approved upon request, as provisions of the Patriot Act demand. One example of this is in a subsection of section 1: "Allows federal agents to ask a court for an order to obtain business records in national security terrorism cases." The government site says that the government can ask a federal court to order records be turned over to the government so long as they are sought for an authorized investigation. HALF TRUE. The half they aren't telling anyone here is that so long as a government agent says that the record is sought for an authorized investigation, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (whose workings are secret, hearings are secret, names of judges are secret, locations are secret, and only have the government's lawyers appear before them) are REQUIRED to issue the order. There is no judicial discretion, the court cannot even evaluate the claim that the record is sought for an authorized investigation. While the propaganda site of lifeandliberty.gov may claim that the information is not sought solely on the basis of First Amendment activities, there is zero oversight to ensure that this is the case, because as soon as the words "this is sought for an ongoing investigation" are uttered by an agent to the FISA court, the court MUST issue the order requested by the government.

Section 2 says "The Patriot Act facilitated information sharing and cooperation among governmental agencies so that they can better 'connect the dots.' The Act removed the major legal barriers that prevented the law enforcement, intelligence, and national defense communities from talking and coordinating their work to protect the American people and our national security." MAJOR PIECE OF INFORMATION MISSING. The barriers that prevented law enforcment, intelligence, and national defense communities were put in place after the Church Committee (Congressional Committee) found that the domestic spying capabilities were being grossly abused. The FBI CONTEL program, the spying (and FBI attempt to discredit) Dr. Martin Luther King and other civil rights activists, and other such abuses led to Congress stripping away some of the intelligence/national defense communities' powers. Now, John Ashcroft rides into the picture on a white horse, saying that it is absurd to not let the government agencies have these powers so they can "connect the dots" and promises that the powers will not be abused. Well, Mr. Ashcroft, the government agencies LOST the powers because they WERE abused.

Section 3, "allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurs" claims that the "provision does not change the standards governing the availability of a search warrant..." TRUE. However, it does allow the government to forum shop, looking for a friendly judge anywhere in the United States, so if Judge X in California is generally more willing to grant warrants that Judge Y in Massachusetts, the FBI can get a warrant for California's Judge X for a search in Boston. Drug investigations and mafia investigations also span a number of districts and thus multiple warrants in multiple jurisdictions are required. This remains unchanged and nobody talks about changing it. If Mr. Ashcroft wants to compare drug and mafia investigations with terrorism investigations, it shouldn't be done only when it is convenient such as in section 1.

Section 4 is the only piece of this website that I have no problem with--it discusses the increased penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes. That is reasonable, that is fair, and moreover, this section tells the whole truth (and is the only section of this website to do so).

NOW, let's move onto a subpage of this website--"Dispelling the Myths." The site says that there is a myth that the Patriot Act could subject political organizations to surveillance, wiretapping, harassment, and criminal action for political advocacy and that peaceful groups that dissent from government policy could be treated as domestic terrorists. It claims the reality is that Peaceful groups that dissent from government policy without breaking laws cannot be targeted and that the Patriot Act limits domestic terrorism to conduct that breaks laws and endangers human life.

This "reality" is actually a myth. Peaceful groups CAN be targeted. The protests at Puerto Rico's Vieques Island is an example of peaceful protest that could be found to be domestic terrorism under the Patriot Act's definition. It breaks the law, and since Vieques Island has live fire exercises and armed sentries, any protests that tresspass onto Federal property could be argued (and has been argued!) to endanger human life.

The next "myth" is that the government can monitor people's library habits. The "reality" according to the Government site, is that "The Patriot Act specifically protects Americans' First Amendment rights, and terrorism investigators have no interest in the library habits of ordinary Americans...The Patriot Act ensures that business records--whether from a library or any other business--can be obtained in national security investigations with the permission of a federal judge." BULLSHIT. The reality is that federal judges are REQUIRED to give their "permission" under the USA PATRIOT Act and are NOT allowed to make any determination of facts. Again, if the government claims that the record is needed as part of an ongoing criminal investigation, the record must be turned over, even if the subject of the record is not the target of the investigation, and the judge HAS NO OPTION TO TURN DOWN THE "REQUEST". Let's be honest--it's not a request--it's a demand. Further, the "terrorism investigators have no interest in the library habits of ordinary Americans?" Tell that to the Church Committee.

In short, www.lifeandliberty.gov is full of lies and half truths designed to try to drum up support for what is probably the worst piece of legislation that has been passed and signed in a very long time.

Further, despite repeated claims by Mr. Ashcroft that there is not a Patriot Act II or anything else on the horizon (and once the Patriot Act II was leaked to the media, he claimed that was merely a draft that was being "discussed internally"), today ABC News issued a report on the Vital Interdiction of Criminal Terrorist Organizations Act of 2003 (or VICTORY ACT--who comes up with these names, anyway?!) (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/WorldNewsTonight/victory_act030820.html) that would give law enforcment the authority to ISSUE SUBPEONAS ON THEIR OWN--NO JUDGE--that would REQUIRE a person suspected on money laundering to turn over financial records AND APPEAR IN A PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS--have they ever heard of the 4th and 5th Amendments? Require people to appear in a prosecutor's office to answer questions? I think not!

In summary, the Ashcroft Department of Justice is trying to claim that they are protecting civil liberties while going after terrorists, and that ordinary Americans will not be effected. In truth, there is no judicial oversight under the USA PATRIOT Act, the VICTORY Act manages to be worse in that area (I didn't think was even possible--yay American ingenuity), and right now, there is only one thing that stands between everyone's civil liberties and Orwell's 1984--the "restraint" of investigators. Looking at history, I can't imagine why I'm worried--government restraint has always worked so well in the past. Just look at the roundup of immigrants in the '20s under Attorney General Palmer. Just look at the roundup and internment of Japanese-Americans in the '40s. Just look at the roundup of communists in the '50s. Just look at the illegal surveillance and wiretaps in the '60s that led to the findings of the Church Committee. I feel better already.

Ashcroft Blasts Efforts to Weaken Terrorism Law

This is a positively absurd sideshow. Ashcroft came out and blasted last month's vote in the Republican-led house that would repeal the provision of the USA PATRIOT Act that lets the federal government delay notiification that search warrants have been executed, AKA the sneak and peek provision. John Ashcroft had the gall, the sheer unadulterated hypocrisy, to call this a hasty uninformed piece of legislation. EXCUSE ME?! He's calling the amendment hasty? No, I don't think so!!!

The USA PATRIOT Act is the hasty piece of legislation. The USA PATRIOT Act was never read in its entirety by the legislators who voted on it---they read sections of it and relied on Ashcroft's word when he told them what was in it. How do I know this? BECAUSE THE VOTE ON THE USA PATRIOT ACT OCCURED BEFORE THE BILL WAS PRINTED!!! Hasty amendment my @*#(!.

CNN.com - Texas appeals court stops scheduled Wednesday execution - Aug. 19, 2003

Yay! The execution was stayed. (Mark Robertson, the convict, is mentally retarded).

CNN.com - Nude 'David' offends neighbors - Aug. 18, 2003

In response to questions about a replica of Michaelangelo's "David" statue, Vanderbugh County Prosecutor Stan Levco responded, "My preliminary thought is that it does not violate any statute...[b]ut I haven't made a final determination."

This, right here, is a PRIME example of why the 1st Amendment's protections should be near absolute. I agree with current slander laws, and while I'm less enthused with the clear and present danger standard, I do see why it's there. Beyond that? First Amendment all the way. If you can't draft an obscenity law so it catches double penetration porn. but not Michaelangelo's David, you shouldn't draft a law at all. (And that's the conclusion Justice Brennan came to after years of trying to find the right balancing test).

I just paid attention to the ads on the top of this page. All of them (except maybe one) links to conservative rightist websites. These ads are catered for specific websites (a website on literature will have links to dictionaries, book stores, etc.) and the links are provided automatically by the Google search engine.

So, does the name "Dartmouth Civil Liberties Union" sound like a particularly conservative organization?

Media Should Identify Rape Victims

Fox news never stops to amuse me, and their views section is sometimes outright delirious. For example, Burns in this piece of opinionated claptrap argues that media sources should reveal the names of rape victims so as to prevent unscrupulous women from making false allegations (the basic gist of his article).

He claims that the practice of keeping rape victims anonymous is a mere courtesy and goes on to compare rape with mugging and robbery. He talks about rape as a traumatic crime, but that's all. He does not even talk about the possible psychological and physical consequences of revealing the names of victims - death threats, etc. (especially if the allegation is made against someone like Bryant).

Although I agree with him that the media (and the judicial system) should do more to prevent false allegations of sexual assault, I am pretty outraged by his comparison of rape with robbery.

Davis to OK rights for same-sex couples / No position yet from top GOP recall rival


I am not sure if Davis is approving civil unions for homosexual couples in CA because he truly supports the measure, or because he is trying to highlight his day-to-day responsibilities as the state's governor (invaluable advice given to him by Bill Clinton).

An interesting article on racial diversity in California....

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | God's crucible


Okay, so, I posted an article by Pat Buchanan on this blog a few days back but I definitely do not subscribe to his phobia of immigrants (and by implication non-whites) as expressed in this paragraph...

". . . The rightwing American nationalist, Pat Buchanan, has recently out-spenglered Oswald Spengler (author of The Decline of the West) by publishing a book entitled The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil our Country and Civilization. Immigrant invasions! Adducing some of the statistics that I have just mentioned, Buchanan cries: "If Americans wish to preserve their civilization and culture, American women must have more children.". . ."

Economist.com | Censorship in Arkansas

The new law in Arkansas insisting that books that may be “harmful to minors” be moved to an adult room is being challenged by the ACLU of Arkansas. Another law considers something harmful if it has “any description, exhibition, presentation or representation, in whatever form, of nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sado-masochistic abuse.” The two laws combined would move books with half-naked mickey mouse into the adult room.

I appreciate the legislature's concern about protecting children from any sexually explicit material (or pornography) but the sado-masochistic part makes the law too broad. For instance, the Hardy Boys ("sado-masochistic" language) or Nancy Drew series or even Archie comics (bikini clad figures) would have to be considered as adult content. I sometimes feel like disowning these narrow-minded conservatives. Mind you, I am conservative too, but, I am not as petty.

Any thoughts?

ABA opposes U.S. snooping on terrorism defendants, lawyers

Yesterday, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that the American Bar Association yesterday urged the Bush administration to drop plans that would let agents eavesdrop on conversations between terrorism suspects and defense lawyers, as well as to ease other restrictions to ensure military tribunals are fair and open.

Some people really need to understand that church and state are two separate things. America is not a theocracy, for pete's sake.



Judge Roy Moore's Lawless Battle: "Judge Roy Moore's Lawless Battle

hief Justice Roy Moore of Alabama has built his career on demagoguing about the Ten Commandments. As an obscure state court judge, he posted the commandments on a wall behind his bench, and used the controversy over the display to get himself elected to Alabama's highest judicial post. Once in office he installed a two-and-a-half-ton Ten Commandments monument in the rotunda of the main judicial building in Montgomery. When two federal courts ordered him to remove it, he resisted, claiming that he is an independent constitutional officer. Now that he is facing a court deadline of Aug. 20, he is milking the drama for all it's worth. He says he will announce tomorrow whether he will comply.
There is a very serious principle at risk in Justice Moore's grandstanding. The federal Constitution applies to the states, and the federal courts are its ultimate interpreter. Justice Moore's desire to ignore the Constitution's mandates on the separation of church and state has an uncomfortable resemblance to the arguments Gov. George Wallace made when he mounted his stand in the 'schoolhouse door' to block blacks from enrolling at the University of Alabama.
Justice Moore's disturbing crusade recently spread to Congress, where the House of Representatives attached an amendment to an appropriations bill that would ban the use of federal funds to enforce the order to remove the Ten Commandments monument. The Senate must make sure that this lawless provision does not find its way into the final bill, and members of both houses of Congress should make clear that this sort of attack on federal judicial power is unacceptable.
Attorney General John Ashcroft, the nation's highest law enforcement officer, has a special duty to stand up, as his predecessors did in the civil rights era, for the authority of the federal courts. But Justice Moore can spare the nation a divisive constitutional showdown, and himself further embarrassment, by announcing that he will obey the law.

Law Suit filed


Two observations: First, I was shocked to see that all the counties where the obsolete voting machines are used have significant minority populations. Conspiracy theorists would say: its all a conspiracy to disenfranchise the minorities.

Second, this lawsuit may give Gov. Gray some desperately needed respite from the recall business. Will he be able to delay the recall till March '04 when he's sure to win in the shadow of the Democratic Presidential primary?

DCLU crossed the 100 member threshold yesterday. 2.4% of Dartmouth students are DCLU members!

We are big!

ABA Loosens Attorney-Client Secrecy Rules


I am not sure how to react to this. On one hand, I feel that lawyers have the moral obligation to report frauds, financial crimes, potential national security problems, etc, but at the same time, I feel that client privacy forms the basis of the legal profession. Why would a client come to a lawyer with a case and and give the lawyer all the important information, things that could potentially get him arrested, if the client cannot trust the lawyer to keep the matter secret??

Who's watching the class? Webcams in schools raise privacy issue

Good grief---this is not a good idea. :(

Signs Grow of Innocent People Being Executed, Judge Says

An interesting article which poses the key questions: Does the death penalty comport with contemporary standards of decency, and more importantly, perhaps, does the possibility/probability of executing innocents comport with contemporary standards of decency.

Future Term Events


Check this page out to see what DCLU has in store for you in the upcoming terms!

The DCLU BBQ today was a major hit. We had music, food, drinks and a ton of ice cream! Best BBQ this summer!


Events

TIME.com: Beware the Straight Backlash -- Aug. 11, 2003

This is a well writen op-ed piece, by Andrew Sullivan, about same-sex marriages. The author is a gay, conservative Catholic, who frames the issue the issue very well. This is not about the "sanctity of marriage" or whatever buzzwords Bush, the Vatican, and other opponents of same-sex marriages throw out there-it is about treating homosexuals like human beings.

Barring same-sex marriages does not comport with human dignity and certainly violates equal-protection rights (and the 1st Amendment's separation of church and state as well).

Would the sky fall down if homosexuals were permitted to marry? What can the objection to same-sex marriage be if not a more subtle objection to homosexuals themselves?! Sullivan paraphrases the Vatican, writing, "[According to the Vatican, g]ranting legal recognition to gay spouses will destroy the family and society." Gee--I can't imagine how giving legal recognition to gay spouses harms the family any more than all those heterosexuals who cheat on their spouses, especially the high-profile celebrities and politicians. Let's be honest-the objection isn't that legal recognition of gay spouses will destroy the family and society-the true objection is that it treats homosexuals as the equals of heterosexuals, and we very well can't have that, can we?

It wasn't too long ago that interracial couples were a no-no. Black man and a white woman or vice versa? Hell no. Better take out the rope, Bubba, and your best clean white sheets. It is disturbing to see that in the 21st century, we haven't learned our lesson. The same discrimination, the same ugliness against others, and the same seeing others as less than human--only the target of our derision and hatred has changed.

Now, this is disturbing. Funny this was not even mentioned in any American newspaper. What the heck is happening to American media??



Groups slam US database against terrorism -DAWN - Top Stories; 11 August, 2003: "Groups slam US database against terrorism


By Our Correspondent

WASHINGTON, Aug 10: Some civil liberties and Muslim advocacy groups on Sunday said that a new counter-terrorism database being introduced in Florida could hurt minorities.

They said that it could lower the threshold for government snooping because it allowed fast and unhindered access to personal information.

The Florida police, however, say the database is designed to give law enforcement agencies a powerful new tool to analyse billions of records about criminals. Civil liberties groups point out that the database also allows police access to data about ordinary Americans.

The system, called Matrix, enables investigators to find patterns and links among people and events faster than ever before. It combs police records with commercially available collections of personal information about most American adults.

The state-level programme, aided by federal funding, is poised to expand across the United States. But civil rights activists hope that Congressmen will also question the 'unsavoury aspects,' as one of them said, of the database when the federal government tries to adopt it.

Congress has been very critical of similar information gathering systems on the federal level, such as a Pentagon-supported plan for global surveillance and an air-passenger-screening system.

The Department of Homeland Security announced earlier this week plans to launch a pilot law enforcement data-sharing network that will include Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New York. "

Boston.com / News / Nation / Terms for federal crimes 'too severe,' justice says

I agree that it is time to revist the terms for Federal crimes. Furthermore, I strongly oppose Ashcroft's directive for the DOJ to monitor judicial sentencing. His claim that "The Department of Justice has a solemn obligation to ensure that laws concerning criminal sentencing are faithfully, fairly, and consistently enforced" is absolutely false and bullshit, quite frankly--it violates separation of powers as well as the independence of the judiciary.

Pat Buchanan: Yes, Virginia, there is a religious war


Although I detest Buchanan's condeming tone in the article, it is worth a read because it offers a slightly different perspective on things from what we get to read in most national dailies.

I have to say that a state has no right to determine what major one of its aid beneficiaries can or cannot chose. This is like the restriction on international students that they cannot major in chemistry, biology, nuclear physics or similar subjects because the government feels that they should not. Outright discrimination!

If the state can provide aid to undergraduates at a Roman Catholic College [note the stress on the kind of college], then how can it prevent students from majoring in theology? Next, if they decide that students cannot major in philosophy or biology, or any other subject for that matter, who's to stop them? I disagree with Aaron Caplan from ACLU-WA that the states should be free to decide what kinds of study to support. What's to prevent discrimination then?


_________________________________
August 10, 2003
Courts Weighing Rights of States to Curb Aid for Religion Majors
By ADAM LIPTAK


RAVERSE CITY, Mich., Aug. 5 — Teresa Becker made a costly decision when she chose after her sophomore year to major in theology.

She had received $1,200 in state scholarship money for her freshman year at Ave Maria College in Ypsilanti, Mich., in 2000. The next year she received $2,750 in state aid. Last June, she was promised that amount for her junior year, too.

A month later, when word of her choice of a major reached state officials, they wrote her a new letter.

"Students enrolled in a course of study leading to a degree in theology, divinity or religious education are not eligible to receive an award," it said, paraphrasing a state law. "Your award has changed from $2,750.00 to $0.00."

Ms. Becker sued. On July 21, Judge George Caram Steeh of Federal District Court in Detroit issued a preliminary ruling in her favor, saying the state had probably engaged in religious discrimination. Judge Steeh ordered the state to put her scholarship money in escrow until there is a final court ruling.

A case much like Ms. Becker's from Washington State will be decided by the United States Supreme Court in its next term. A trial in Ms. Becker's case has not been scheduled and may never be needed; the Supreme Court case will probably effectively decide hers as well.

Eleven states prohibit aid for the study of theology. In addition to Michigan and Washington, they are New York, New Jersey, Alabama, Louisiana, Missouri, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wisconsin, according to a supporting brief filed in the Supreme Court by five state attorneys general.

The Washington case is in some ways the narrower one. The State Supreme Court interpreted theology to mean "instruction that resembles worship and manifests a devotion to religion and religious principles in thought, feeling, belief and conduct."

In Washington, then, teaching about religion as an academic subject, as opposed to religious teaching meant to inspire devotion, is fine.

The Michigan law is seemingly broader, and its original purpose is not well understood. In an e-mail message to an Ave Maria College official in January, the director of the state's scholarship office, Diana Todd Sprague, wrote: "I am not clear on why this was part of the statute since it was established in the 60's. It has been described to me as having to do with the separation of church and state, but I am not certain."

Jason Allen, a Republican state senator from here, called the history of the law murky. Senator Allen has introduced legislation to allow state aid for students studying theology.

Ronald Muller, the president of Ave Maria College, a Roman Catholic college, said its theology major is part of its liberal arts curriculum.

Theology "is an academic discipline like philosophy, English literature or the classics," he said.

Barry Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which opposes state financing for most religious education, said the Michigan statute might be too sweeping.

"The statute should probably read that persons preparing for the ministry or religious education are excluded," Mr. Lynn said.

The plaintiff in the Washington case, Joshua Davey, acknowledged that he is preparing for a career as a Christian minister. Ms. Becker, on the other hand, says she does not know what career she will choose.

"I am not seriously considering any sort of religious life," she said in an interview at her parents' home here. But she said that her interest in theology is not only academic.

"I selected theology as my undergraduate major," she wrote in court papers, "based on my sincere religious conviction that this course of study will help me pursue my vocation in life, to know, love and serve God and my fellow men."

Ms. Becker, 21, is spending the summer in this resort town where she grew up, on the shore of Lake Michigan. She is direct and serious, and she talked about the central role her Catholic faith plays in her life.

"I was raised in it," she said. "I love it. It influences how I act around others, how I treat others. It's my salvation. In a sense, it's everything."

She is working at a doctor's office to make up for the loss of state aid, and she volunteers with the local anti-abortion advocacy group. In the fall, she will start her senior year. She said she has heard nothing from the state about a fourth year of aid.

Ms. Becker said the scholarship law might have discouraged some of her fellow students at Ave Maria from choosing theology as their majors. That did not stop them, she said, from taking theology classes.

In a brief to the Supreme Court, Mr. Davey's lawyers said that having scholarship decisions turn on what major a student declares is a little odd.

A student "could take numerous theology courses, paid for by state grants, so long as his major was something else (like psychology or math)," the lawyers wrote. But a student who declares a theology major would get no state money for an entire year "even if the student takes nothing but language, literature, philosophy and science," they said.

Ms. Becker's lawyers at the Thomas More Law Center, a conservative public interest law firm in Ann Arbor, Mich., emphasized what they called the unfairness of the distinction the Michigan law draws.

"An atheist committed to scientific materialism may study the Big Bang, the laws governing the subsequent organization of matter and, ultimately, the amphibian from which man is said to have evolved — all without forfeiting his scholarship," they wrote in court papers. "But Teresa must forfeit her scholarship if she wishes to discuss the Uncaused Cause that created the stuff of the Big Bang, and the notion that the laws that govern creation are not merely statistically improbable but so irreducibly complex that the heavens proclaim the glory of the Lord."

Aaron Caplan, a staff lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington State, said that states should be free to decide what kinds of study to support. They can, for instance, offer scholarships for medical school but not law school. And while court decisions hold that states are free to offer scholarships for religious study, Mr. Caplan said, it does not follow that states should be required to do so.

The Washington case and Ms. Becker's boil down to one proposition, he said: "A state may legally choose not to fund people's religious education."

Ms. Becker saw it differently. "The state is violating people's rights to religious freedom," she said. Her fellow students have expressed support. "They're praying for me and rooting for me," she said.

...in Pakistan. Despite claims that kite flying has been banned to reduce the chances of electrical short-circuits, it is pretty apparent that the ban is meant to restrict civil liberties.

Guardian Unlimited | World dispatch | Strings attached

My favorite quote from this hilarious article: "And how do I know you're not saying "halve?" "Did Iraq halve weapons of mass destruction?" How should I know? What difference does it make? That's a stupid question. "


It All Depends on What You Mean by 'Have': "It All Depends on What You Mean by 'Have'
By STEVE MARTIN


o if you're asking me did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction, I'm saying, well, it all depends on what you mean by "have."

See, I can "have" something without actually having it. I can "have" a cold, but I don't own the cold, nor do I harbor it. Really, when you think about it, the cold has me, or even more precisely, the cold has passed through me. Plus, the word "have" has the complicated letter "v" in it. It seems that so many words with the letter "v" are words that are difficult to use and spell. Like "verisimilitude." And "envelope."

Therefore, when you ask me, "Did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction," I frankly don't know what you're talking about. Do you mean currently? Then why did you say "did?" Think about "did." What the heck does that mean? Say it a few times out loud. Sounds silly. I'm beginning to think it's just the media's effort to use a fancy palindrome, rather than ask a pertinent question.

And how do I know you're not saying "halve?" "Did Iraq halve weapons of mass destruction?" How should I know? What difference does it make? That's a stupid question.

Let me try and clear it up for you. I think what you were trying to say was, "At any time, did anyone in Iraq think about, wish for, dream of, or search the Internet for weapons of mass destruction?"

Of course they did have. Come on, Iraq is just one big salt flat and no dictator can look out on his vast desert and not imagine an A-test going on. And let's face it, it really doesn't matter if they had them or not, because they hate us like a lassoed shorthorn heifer hates bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

Finally, all this fuss over 16 lousy words. Shoot, "Honey, I'm home," already has three, with an extra one implied, and practically nothing has been said. It would take way more than 16 words to say something that could be considered a gaffe. I don't really take anything people say seriously until they've used at least 20, sometimes 25, words.

When I was criticized for my comment, I was reluctant to point out it was only 16 words, and I was glad when someone else took the trouble to count them and point out that I wasn't even in paragraph territory. When people heard it was only 16 words, I'm sure most people threw their head back and laughed. And I never heard one negative comment from any of our coalition forces, and they all speak English, too.



Steve Martin is author of "Shopgirl" and the forthcoming "The Pleasure of My Company."

BBC NEWS | South Asia | India court bans officials' strikes

News from far away...the Supreme Court of India bans expression of grievances by government employees "because of the disruption it causes to other citizens and the economy." Interestingly, the Indian constitution clearly allows its citizens to form unions and to protest anything that they find unacceptable.

I suppose America is not the only country where the constitution is being openly flouted ;-)

The D News: Harvard's daily sues school, HUPD over crime records

Yay for The Crimson! Way to go!

And BOO for not contacting the DCLU for its comments. After all, we are the only ACLU chapter in the state.

Legal Affairs: May | June 2003

Well, now, isn't this disturbing. :-/

An overview of Civil Liberties legislation since 1900 - magnacartaplus


Although this site provides a list and explanation of civil liberties legislation in the UK, many parts of it are relevant to civil liberties everywhere.

American Civil Liberties Union : MCA, et al. v. Ashcroft and Mueller

I strongly dislike section 215 of the USA Patriot act. It clearly violates the 4th Amendment--I can't imagine how the government is going to argue to the contrary on this one. The new report on section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act is interesting, and a recommended read.

American Civil Liberties Union : Government Settles ACLU%u2019s Racial Profiling Lawsuit Against TSA, Agrees to Alter Agency Procedures Nationwide

This was an awful example of government abuse. I'm glad to see that it was appropriately dealt with.

New York Pursues Old Cases of Rape Based Just on DNA

Interesting.... It does seem to be strongly unconstitutional, however. I don't see how it is OK to indict a John Doe based on a DNA profile and it not being OK to indict a John Doe based on a shoeprint found at the scene. The fact that DNA evidence is a lot more accurate than a shoeprint shouldn't be a factor-either you know who it is or you don't.

The argument made by proponents of pursuing cases based on DNA is that we now have physical evidence that links a defendant to the crime, and that we are no longer dependent on people's memories. My problem is that if a guy has a one night stand with a girl who then claims rape afterwards, and the guy is picked up 15 years later, is he going to remember where he was? Is he going to have witnesses who saw the two go off voluntarily? DNA is great evidence, but it does not necessarily tell the whole story.

If DNA from a murder case is tested and it does not match the guy on death row, that's sufficient to me, to get him off the hook. I'm convinced that there is enough of a chance that he did not do it. I am NOT, however, willing to do the contrary. If the DNA does match, that alone, is not sufficient evidence to convict somebody. I want to see some sort of evidence, testimony, or what not that explains how the DNA got there.

ON THIS DAY | 4 | 1964 Three civil rights activists found dead

It may very well be, but I don't think you can prevent anyone from using it - freedom of speech, and all.

Read here about the News & Record and Doonesbury story.

This is old news, but, I haven't had time to go over A&L Daily recently. . .

Anyway, I dont think that highlighting the ability of African Americans to be better at sports (football, etc.) or their innate tolerance of heat can be called racism. It is, I would say, appreciating their uniqueness. Edwards' brouhaha is totally unneccessary. . .

Of course black athletes are more tolerant of heat

LEISURE & ARTS

Dusty Baker Has
Nature on His Side
Of course black athletes are more tolerant of heat.

BY JON ENTINE
Tuesday, July 15, 2003 12:01 a.m. EDT

Is the ghost of Jimmy "the Greek" Snyder out for revenge? One might think so given the brouhaha over Chicago Cubs manager Dusty Baker's recent observation that "blacks and Latins take the heat better than most whites."

In 1998, Snyder, a bookie turned football commentator, was asked why blacks had risen to such prominence in sports. Snyder opined that blacks could naturally "jump higher and run faster" because of their "high thighs and big size." All hell broke loose. The NAACP called for Snyder's scalp. A few days later CBS handed it over.

Is Mr. Baker--was Snyder--off base?





Let's review Anthropology 101. Population groups have distinct body types. Elite football players, dependent on speed and jumping ability, are disproportionately of West African descent. Why? Because, as dozens of studies have shown, they have (on average) smaller and more efficient lungs, higher oxidative capacity, more fast-twitch muscle fibers, and a muscled but lean body type.
Note that sprinters of West African ancestry, including African-Americans, hold 494 of the top 500 100-meter times. Their genetically prescribed morphology and physiology is a disaster for endurance events--there are almost no elite endurance runners of West African ancestry--but a goldmine for sprinting and jumping. Allowing for individual variation, Snyder was intuitively right.

Mr. Baker's observations are common sense. Does anyone really think an Eskimo would perform as well in Wrigley Field in July as someone of African ancestry who has spent all but a speck of his evolutionary history along the equator? "The single most important factor in heat toleration is body proportions," says David Brown, a University of Hawaii anthropologist and morphology expert. "If the relative fitness levels are similar, those with more skin surface area to overall body mass--those with relatively longer limbs--are more heat efficient. It's easier to sweat, dissipate heat and keep core body temperature steady." Check that anthropology textbook: Africans have longer limbs and more skin surface area than whites, who have more than Asians. Stout-and-short Eskimos, who are of Asian ancestry, don't perform as efficiently in scorching weather as whites or blacks. Is it racist to acknowledge this?

Now, skin color alone is not the explanation for heat tolerance, as Mr. Baker implied. And Hispanics descended from Europeans are no more heat-tolerant than other whites. But those of African ancestry do have an advantage.

The only unknown is whether small differences translate into athletic advantages. Environmental factors such as nutrition, fitness and hydration are obviously critical to acclimatization. But elite athletes fine-tune these variables so minute genotypic differences can be decisive. As one scientist wrote to me, "Baseball is a game where small differences in ability are telling over a 162-game season. Ceteris paribus, a batter who hits safely six of 20 at-bats is a star while another hitting five of 20 may enjoy insignificant standing."





Perhaps the most disturbing twist to this little tempest has been the hysteria on the political front. Liberals, most notably University of California-Berkeley sociologist Harry Edwards, have rebuked Baker. He called Mr. Baker's comments "unfortunate and not totally informed"--as unfortunate and ill-informed an observation as one could make.
Opportunists on the right reacted no better. Last week, I had the unfortunate experience of appearing on the Fox News right-left slugfest "Hannity and Colmes." Sean Hannity appeared delighted at Mr. Baker's apparent faux pas because it gave him an opportunity to bash liberals for what some conservatives see as a double standard--blacks get free passes for social missteps that often cost whites their jobs.

Of course there is a double standard. Shortly before CBS liquidated Snyder, Dallas Cowboy All-Star Calvin Hill, a Yale University graduate, remarked that "on the plantation, a strong black man was mated with a strong black woman. [Blacks] were simply bred for physical qualities." That remark created no stir--until repeated almost verbatim by Snyder.

Mr. Hannity's obsession to even the score prompted him to bizarrely proclaim that Mr. Baker should apologize for his "silly remarks." But the cure for double standards is not to compound them by sacrificing yet another innocent to ideological correctness.

This controversy transcends sports. The era of the human genome is upon us. Geneticists are studying population-based differences in the hope of devising medicines--for multiple sclerosis that afflicts Northern Europeans, colorectal cancer that hits blacks, alcoholism which impacts Asians because of a mutated gene, or the 27 diseases that disproportionately target Jews--purely as a result of their ancestry. We need a new lexicon that appreciates human differences without playing the race card. In other words, get off Dusty's back.

Mr. Entine is the author of "Taboo: Why Blacks Dominate Sports and Why We're Afraid to Talk About It."

Canada: Hippie Nation?


Canadians are finally becoming famous for something...and its related to civil liberties issues...

Maureen Dowd on Gay marriages and President Bush.

This year can, for many reasons, be called the year of gay controversies - first a Catholic Bishop is not confirmed because of his homosexuality, then an Episcopal Clergyman who is gay is elected as Bishop, the Supreme Court overturns the Texas Sodomy Law, an Ontario appeals court ruling opens the way for Canada to end its ban on marriage between partners of same sex and Chretien proposes Gay Marriage Law, now President Bush wants to outlaw gay marriages. . .

The Harvey Milk High School


A separate school for gay and transgender students. . .a measure similar to racial segregation, I must say, not of accomodating homosexuality.

Affirmative Action Foe's Latest Aim Complicates California Recall Vote

Ward Connerly is upto his tricks again. This time with a ballot initiative banning the collection of racial data in California that had been scheduled for a statewide vote next March.

This is the same guy who was recently asked by a Michigan Congressman, Dingell, to keep his anti-affirmative action trouble making out of Michigan.