Teacher Compares Student’s Romney Shirt to KKK Robe‏

A Philadelphia high school teacher is under investigation after she reportedly ordered a student to take off a t-shirt supporting Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and compared the shirt to a Ku Klux Klan sheet.

The incident occurred at Charles Carroll High School in Port Richmond. When the student refused the order, she tried to throw the girl out of class.

The teacher reportedly told the 16-year-old student that the high school was a “Democratic school” and then threatened to use a marker to cross out Romney’s name.

Philadelphia School District spokesman Fernando Gallard confirmed to Philly.com that, “a teacher made some comments to a student wearing a Romney t-shirt in their classroom.”  “The comments were of a political nature, and also of a personal nature,” he told the newspaper. “We are looking into the comments, and the conduct of the teacher.”

Gallard said the student was well within her rights to wear the t-shirt and was not in violation of any school dress codes.

In the meantime, the teacher was switched out of the class “to allow the student to feel comfortable to come to the class.”
Gallard said the student was within her rights.

The incident became public when the child’s father called radio station IQ 106.9 FM.  “My daughter refused to leave the classroom or acknowledge this bullying,” he said.

Source

Must not mention British student misbehaviour

A police worker who posted details of her battles with drunk students on her Twitter account has been ordered off the social media site after an official complaint.

Police Community Support Officer Sarah Giles was accused of ‘stereotyping’ by tweeting about the drunken antics of university freshers.

PCSO Giles, tweeting as @TopshamPolice, put up messages about student 'mayhem' in her beat area of Exeter, Devon.

She often tweeted about the drinking habits of first years at Exeter University - until a complaint was made by its Students' Guild.

In one tweet two weeks ago, PCSO Giles wrote: 'Lots of strong coffee needed tonight :-/ follow up calls to student who threw up in taxi and victims of wing mirror bashing #exeterfreshers’.

Another tweet on September 19, said: 'Off to work in an hour - more student mayhem :-)'

And the day before she tweeted: 'Large group of students already spotted heading into town to tour the city’s watering holes'

Another said: ‘2 students details taken for uni disciplinary process after trying to wheel road signs away from site in stolen trolleys'

Source

I have no doubt that the comments mirrored reality but truth is no defense these days, particularly in Britain.

Intolerance in a Chicago Synagogue

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) swung by a Chicago-area synagogue for a worship service on the eve of Yom Kippur last week, upsetting congregants and provoking one man to mount a campaign for her Democratic challenger before the end of the night, the Chicago Tribune reports.

According to the Tribune, Rabbi Michael Siegel of Anshe Emet Synagogue observed protocol by offering a customary greeting to Bachmann during the services. While elected officials are traditionally acknowledged during such events at the temple, the presence of the conservative Minnesota firebrand prompted particular displeasure.

Some reportedly walked out of the ceremony, while Gary Sircus, a 25-year member of Anshe Emet Synagogue, voiced more active opposition to Bachmann's attendance.

"Our congregation values and embodies tolerance, compassion, respect for individual rights, intelligence, science -- all of the things that I think Michele Bachmann stands against," said Sircus, according to the Tribune

Bachmann has been a vocal supporter of Israel and an unabashed opponent of gay rights, an awkward policy duo on that particular night

Source

Leftists just can't stand any views but their own.  They are just angry people.

Bachmann is an evangelical Christian so her visit to a shul is a little surprising but it may have been to honor Yom Kippur

It's ironical that Bachmann's view of homosexuality is closer to what the Torah instructs (Leviticus 18:22) than were the views of the liberal Jews who criticized her presence.  So the intolerant Jews on the occasion were actually being intolerant of their own religious laws.

You can hear some of the music of Yom Kippur (Kol Nidre) here.  It is rather good musically.  Quite operatic.  Surprisingly, the words are not in Hebrew but in Aramaic  -- the language of Jesus. 

And the words of the Kol Nidre are rather disturbing.  It says that all vows made by the participants are null and void.  This has been widely interpreted as saying that Jews can break their promises with a clear conscience.  You are not supposed to interpret it in that plain straightforward way these days, however.  The Kol Nidre originated in the Middle Ages so I suspect that it originally had something to do with business relationships between Jews and Gentiles.  Christians at that time often  saw Jews as fair game and broke their promises to Jews so there may have been a need to return the compliment.

There have been many rabbis who have opposed use of the Kol Nidre and I agree with them, for what it is worth.  It is an anachronism in my view and is dead against what the Torah commands (Deuteronomy 23:23).  It should be abolished but sentimental attachment to it is now strong so I guess it will stay.

Homosexual bigotry OK?

In recent months, there's been a lot of chatter on the interwebs about this thing called "gaycism" on the TV. As defined by Lauren Bans of GQ, gaycism is "the wrongheaded idea that having gay characters gives you carte blanche to cut PC corners elsewhere."

 In her example, Bans cites shows like Modern Family and freshman comedy Partners as emblematic of this trend. Modern Family is an Emmy-juggernaut, a critical darling and a much-lauded champion of LGBT characterization on TV, but that progressivism comes at the expense of Gloria, the lone woman of color. Sofia Vergara is a terrific comedienne and kills in the role, but the brunt of her jokes revolve around her flimsy command of the English language. Gloria's B-story FOR AN ENTIRE EPISODE dealt with her use of malapropisms, like "doggy dog world" and "don't give me an old tomato," because being foreign is her whole purpose on the show. Oh, and having boobs.

King recently upped the gaycist ante with Two Broke Girls, a show the New Yorker referred to as "so racist it is less offensive than baffling." The show reduces black men to sweet ol' jive-talkers, Eastern Europeans to crazed sex hounds and Asian Americans to Long Duk Dong and "Yellow Panic" stereotypes. On the latter, Andrew Ti of "Yo, Is That Racist?" notes, "It's distressingly easy to imagine the writers sitting around and listing off every single ching-chong stereotype, ultimately deciding with some sorrow that a Fu Manchu mustache would be impractical for budget reasons."

Into this controversy steps The New Normal, the new Ryan Murphy show about two gay men who decide to raise a baby together, a show that marries Murphy's trademark tonal inconsistency "with more gay jokes and regular old racism than Gallagher's stand-up act." All of Murphy's shows have huge problems, and Glee has faced heavy criticism for not only being super racist, but also for being super transphobic, which was recently kiiiind of rectified by introducing the character of Unique, a young trans* woman of color. However, as the Cracked article on the show argues, the real problem is that everyone is a "something" on the show, and all the characters conform to broad caricatures, "like the awkward Jew with the afro, the black girl who always sings the big gospel notes, the gay kid with the great fashion sense, the overachieving Asian [and] the fiery, underprivileged Latina."

Source

Must not mention elephants

Even if you are the most outspoken man in Britain



Top Gear host Jeremy Clarkson breached BBC guidelines by comparing a Japanese car to people with growths on their faces.

A report by the the BBC Trust’s editorial standards committee (ESC) found he 'strayed into an offensive stereotypical assumption' with the scripted remarks during an episode of the hit motoring show.

A member of the public complained about the 'offensive' remarks after Clarkson likened the shape of a Prius campervan to someone with 'a growth on their face' and referred to it as the 'elephant car.'

The ESC said the show’s audience enjoyed the presenters’ 'sometimes controversial and forthright views' but ruled this remark 'played on a stereotypically negative reaction to facial disfigurement.'

'The committee concluded that this programme was in breach of the guidelines on harm and offence as the exchanges about facial disfigurement were not editorially justified and did not meet generally accepted standards in the context of their portrayal of a disability.' It upheld the complaint.

Source

Clarkson actually said nothing about the elephant man -- a circus freak of the 19th century.  Some people just put his words together that way.  His description of the car was pretty spot-on.  Only a Greenie could love it

Australia: Freedom of speech defence in troop families abuse case



Making general comments is a lot different from abusing individuals so I don't think this defence will get him far  -- given Australian laws

A SELF-STYLED Muslim cleric accused of sending offensive letters to the families of soldiers who died in Afghanistan will this week tell the High Court charges against him should be dropped on the grounds they infringed his implied constitutional freedom of political communication.

Man Haron Monis is charged with 12 counts of using a postal service in a menacing, harassing or offensive way, a federal crime which carries a maximum two year jail sentence.

Mr Monis, also known as Sheikh Haron, has been fighting to have the indictment quashed since 2010 but has lost in the District Court and Court of Criminal Appeal. In June, he was granted special leave to appeal to the High Court, where he will argue the legislation is invalid because it substantially curtails the ability of citizens to participate in the political process.

Mr Monis allegedly sent a series of letters to the families of Private Luke Worsley and Lance Corporal Jason Marks, who were killed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008.

He is also charged over a letter he sent in 2009 to the family of the Austrade official Craig Senger, who was killed in the bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta in 2007.

A key issue to be argued is the correct meaning of the word "offensive". In written submissions, Guy Reynolds, SC, for Mr Monis, said the law could catch general media material delivered by post, such as newspapers and magazines, which discuss political and government matters.

The Full Court will hear the matter in Canberra.

SOURCE

Censorship of immigration debate in Canada

Very Canadian.  Censorship as a means of expressing disapproval is childish -- like sticking your fingers in your ears.  One would have hoped that the Canadian parliament was more mature than that

The right for MPs to say and discuss almost anything they want is one of the central privileges of Parliament, but a couple of divisive debates over the past week tested the thresholds of dialogue in the House of Commons.

In one case, two spokespeople from the Canadian Immigration Forum were barred from speaking at the Commons immigration committee Wednesday because content on their website was deemed offensive -- including an interview with Canadian white supremacist Paul Fromm.

Madi Lussier, one of the two witnesses from the Canadian Immigration Forum not permitted to speak to the Commons committee, wiped away tears as she expressed her frustrations. The group's website is mostly an aggregator of articles on different issues touching on immigration, but divided into provocative sections with names such as "Chinafication" and "Arabization."

She has advocated a moratorium on immigration for 50 years, and warned that "European" values might be at risk of disappearing in Canada.

NDP MP Jinny Sims was the first to argue against the group appearing. She said there are certain lines that cannot be crossed when allowing groups to testify at committee hearings.

"Well, I think (the website) definitely reflects the views of a white supremacist," Sims said.

But Arthur Schafer, director of the Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba, says it's disappointing that the committee did not allow the Canadian Immigration Forum to appear.

"Every point of view -- however ugly and obnoxious most Canadians might find it -- should be allowed to be aired in hearings before our parliamentarians," said Schafer.

SOURCE

Washington state Board of Education pushes schools to replace their Native American mascots‏

Universities and colleges have been harassed over this for some years and now it seems to be the turn of the High Schools

The state Board of Education is making another attempt at encouraging Washington schools to replace their Native American mascots.

In the past decade, about 10 schools have given up their Indian mascots. But another 50, including tribal schools, are holding fast to their nicknames as warriors, braves, redskins and red devils.

The state board passed a resolution on Wednesday urging districts to stop using Native American mascots, but as board spokesman Aaron Wyatt acknowledges, it does not have the authority to mandate this change.  There are no consequences for schools that do not voluntarily choose a new mascot, Wyatt said Friday.

Oregon's state Board of Education voted in May to ban Native American mascots, nicknames and logos. Schools in that state have five years to comply. Eight Oregon high schools are affected.

Washington's resolution, which is similar to resolution passed by the board in 1993, was inspired by research by the American Psychological Association citing the adverse effects of Native American mascots on students.

The resolution also mentions the widening achievement gap between Native American and other students and the call by a number of national organizations and tribes for this change.

Ten schools have changed their names in the past decade, including Eatonville Middle School, which went from the Warriors to the Eagles; Eisenhower Middle School in Everett, which went from the Warriors to the Patriots and Issaquah High School, which changed from the Indians to the Eagles.

About 10 tribal schools or those on Washington reservations also have Native American mascots, but the majority of schools in the state with Indian mascots are part of their community's long-standing history.

Source

Obama versus  speech

PRESIDENT OBAMA addresses the U.N. General Assembly.  It sounds sort of reasonable until you think about it

"The future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt – it must be claimed by those in Tahrir Square who chanted “Muslims, Christians, we are one.”

The future must not belong to those who bully women – it must be shaped by girls who go to school, and those who stand for a world where our daughters can live their dreams just like our sons.

The future must not belong to those corrupt few who steal a country’s resources – it must be won by the students and entrepreneurs; workers and business owners who seek a broader prosperity for all people. Those are the men and women that America stands with; theirs is the vision we will support.

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied."

Source

So everybody should just shut up?

Christian speech riles atheists

Again.  But answering speech with speech is fine‏

The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), an atheist activist non-profit, is advertising a new billboard that uses gay themes to argue against faith in the public sphere. The ad, which reads, “Ban Marriage Between Church and State,” was erected in Smithville, Missouri, in response to a separate, Christian sign reaffirming that marriage is between one man and one woman.

The new 14 by 48 foot atheist ad uses a rainbow, a symbol familiar to the gay community, to make its case. The “Ban Marriage Between Church and State” billboard was recently placed near an ad put up by Catholic Radio that reads, “1 Man, 1 Woman, Forever.”

Smillville resident Matt Gaines employed the FFRF to post the message after he saw the Catholic Radio ad and contended that it is overtly offensive to homosexuals.

Source

A very emotional philosopher

You would think that a philosopher would think first and emote later.  Philosophers are supposed to be good at thinking. But Leftists are so preoccupied with their own emotions that even a Leftist philosopher can't mount a logical argument, it would seem. NYT philospher ANDREW F. MARCH below

Most of us think that it is wrong for white people to use the “n-word.” (Use it? I can’t even bring myself to mention it.) Personally, I would feel a shiver of guilt and shame if that word crossed my mind as a thought about another person. And it’s not hard to account for that feeling. It is a word that is intimately associated with a chain of some of humanity’s greatest historical evils — the trans-Atlantic slave trade, the practice of chattel slavery and countless legal, social and psychological practices aiming at the effective dehumanization of persons of black African origin. To perpetuate it publicly is to harm other persons  [How?   Any examples?   "Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me"], and this matters objectively even if I don’t personally, subjectively care about the persons in question. But my feelings about this word are even deeper than this: I don’t even want to participate in the history that produced it and its meanings by letting it grow roots in my own mind.

Source

Victoria's Secret Geisha Lingerie Sparks Controversy‏

Women must not look Japanese?

It takes hundreds of employees, thousands of hours and millions of dollars to launch a mass market lingerie line. And one blogger to take it all down.

"I never thought they would pull the Geisha outfit off the market," Nina Jacinto tells Shine. "I imagine there were a number of factors that went into that decision."

Two weeks ago, Jacinto, a 26-year-old Bay Area blogger and non-profit development manager, most likely became one of those factors.

 "I saw a link to [Victoria's Secret's Go East] line on the blog, Angry Asian Man," she says.  "Hooray for exotic orientalist bull----," wrote the blogger who included a link to the "Asian-inspired" lingerie line's centerpiece: "The Sexy Little Geisha," a mesh teddy that comes with an obi belt, chopsticks and a fan.

Immediately Jacinto sat down to write an insightful post on why she found the outfit, and the line in general, offensive. "It's the kind of overt racism masked behind claims of inspired fashion and exploring sexual fantasy that makes my skin crawl," she wrote

[It doesn't take much to make her skin crawl.  Maybe she has some disease]

Source

Must not report the Gypsy tradition?

The Canadian  writer below seems to have poor reality contact.  He calls Ezra Levant a "so-called" broadcaster.  I have news for him:  Levant is an ACTUAL broadcaster.

It has been common for many years in many countries for Gypsies to support themselves by petty crime.  They are (for instance) notorious pickpockets and a real nuisance in cities such as Paris.  I cannot remember seeing a single report of one supporting himself/herself by a 9 to 5 job, though there may be some.  So as generalizations go, what Levant said appears to have been reasonable. 

Mr. Emotional  below seems to think that a generalization has to apply to ALL members of a group before you can use it.  But that is not how people actually talk.  Let me give an example "Dogs bark".  Is that a good generaliztuion?  I think most people would say so.  But some dogs do not bark  -- Australian dingoes, for example.  Let's have another example:  "cats are furry".  But there are some breeds of cats that have no fur.

So you may disagree with what Levant says about Gypsies but facts and figures would be more impressive than abuse and spurious logic.  See here for the sort of news report Levant was referring to.  An excerpt from what Levant said here.  As the name might suggest, Levant is Jewish.  He has a phenomenal record of putting a bomb under complacent Canadian liberalism  -- JR

Which brings us to the recent case of so-called broadcaster Ezra Levant of Sun TV and his hateful and vicious smear of the entire Roma people -- all 8 to 12 million of them (and all of their ancestors!) 

Was that rant merely legitimate free speech, not the business of meddlesome human "bureaucrats"?    Or was it hate speech, as Paul Storseth describes that criminal act. Was Levant's rant, in fact, an effort, as the Conservative MP put it, to "perpetuate violence or hurt somebody else"?

Sun TV must think there is something wrong with what Levant did. Exceptionally, it took the offending rant off its web site only a few days after it was posted. Normally Levant's stuff is up there for months.

As well, after a few days, the Sun folks removed all of the supportive, hateful comments in response to Levant some viewers had posted (a few suggesting using guns against the Roma). It is also reliably reported that a few days ago someone from Sun went on the air to apologize for what Levant said.

Source

"Anti-Extremist" Commentator Proves She Is Every Bit The Islamist Bin Laden Was

An Egyptian-born U.S. columnist was arrested Tuesday for spray-painting an advertisement equating Muslim radicals with savages at a New York City subway station.

Mona Eltahawy, 45, of New York, was arrested on charges including criminal mischief and making graffiti, police said. Her arrest was captured on video by a New York Post camera crew and posted online.

Eltahawy is a women's rights defender and lecturer on the role of social media in the Arab world. She calls herself a liberal Muslim who has spoken publicly against violent Islamic groups. She's seen in the video spraying pink paint on the ad while another woman tries to block her.

Non-violent? Sort of -- if you ignore the part where she threatened to assault someone who objected to her covering up the message she disliked. And silencing messages you don't like is unAmerican.

By the way, here's the ad that Eltahawy found so offensive that she had to prevent its message from getting out.



Frankly, not only do I not find the ad offensive, I believe it to be common sense.

Source

It would seem that even "moderate" Muslims are still Fascistic.

Blinkered liberal Jew

Rachel Kahn-Troster (below) claims to be a rabbi, which shows how little regard she has for her own sacred scriptures.  Leviticus 6:14 says the priesthood shall consist of Aaron and his SONS.  But what's in that silly old Bible thingy doesn't matter to her, obviously.

So it is no wonder that she calls it "hate" when anybody draws attention to the constant violence and aggression in the Muslim world.  Closed eyes are clearly her specialty.  She says not a word about America's recently slaughtered Ambassador in Libya, for instance.  She has no integrity at all.

My daily trek to work is the last place I would expect to encounter a hateful message. But anti-Islam blogger Pamela Geller is determined to make that happen to me and my fellow commuters.
This week, at 10 subway stations around New York, commuters will encounter ads from the virulently anti-Islam group headed by Geller, the American Freedom Defense Initiative. Geller has been cited both by the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center for her anti-Muslim activity.  [It's A badge of honor to be cited by such far-Left outfits]

The subway ads say, "In Any War Between the Civilized Man and the Savage, Support the Civilized Man." Below that are the words: "Support Israel. Defeat Jihad," with a Star of David on either side of the phrases. The coded message makes clear who the savages are: those who support jihad, which in Geller's mind includes all Muslims. She has called Islam "an extreme ideology, the most radical and extreme ideology on the face of the Earth."

At first, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority rejected the ads, but a district judge ruled the ads were protected under the First Amendment. The ads follow similar ads in San Francisco as well as posters at New York's Metro North train stations

The Metro North ads denied their bigotry by stating, "It's not Islamophobia. It's Islamorealism," claiming the actions of a few represented the "reality" of Islam. But when did it become acceptable to spread bigotry against any American religious, racial or ethnic group in the name of "realism"?

Source

I gather that Rachel Can't Trust Her has some small theological background so at the risk of re-plowing an already very furrowed field I will mention an objection that she and her ilk might have to the modern-day applicability of Leviticus Chapter 6.  It is a chapter primarily concerned with burnt offerings and such things.  And NOBODY does burnt offerings these days, though some barbecue cooks might be suspected of it.

The point is however that the Jerusalem temple later became the  sole locus of such offerings and the destruction of the temple  by the Romans FORCED the abandonment of burnt offerings.  But there is nothing to force the abandonment of a solely male religious leadership.

I suppose I am making an argument about Halakha above  -- which is pretty mad for a non-Jew -- but I think I can read my Bible as well as anyone.  I guess my Protestant background is showing.

Mocking Muhammad is legitimate commentary, not hate speech

By Daniel Pipes

To stop Islamist violence over perceived insults to Muhammad, I argued in a FoxNews.com op-ed Friday, editors and producers daily should display cartoons of Muhammad “until the Islamists get used to the fact that we turn sacred cows into hamburger.”

This appeal prompted a solemn reply from Sheila Musaji of The American Muslim website, who deemed it “irresponsible and beyond the pale.” Why so? Because, as she puts it, “The solution to escalating violence and hate speech is not more hate speech.”

That sounds sensible enough. But does mocking Muhammad, burning a Koran, or calling Islam a cult constitute hate speech? And what about the respectful representations of Muhammad in the buildings of the U.S. Supreme Court or the New York State Supreme Court? Even they caused upset and rioting.

Hate speech, legal authorities agree, involves words directed against a category of persons. Attacking the sanctities of a religion, I submit, is quite unlike targeting the faithful of that religion. The former is protected speech, part of the give and take of the market place of ideas, not all of which are pretty.

Freedom of speech means the freedom to insult and be obnoxious. So long as it does not include incitement or information that urges criminal action, nastiness is an essential part of our heritage.

On a personal note, I have had to learn to live with torrents of vulgar venom, in speech and in pictures alike, from those who disagree with me; you don’t hear me whining about it. More broadly, Catholics, Jews, Mormons, and other faith communities in the West have learned since the Enlightenment to endure vicious lacerations on their symbols and doctrines.

If proof be needed, recall Monty Python’s "Life of Brian," Terrence McNally’s "Corpus Christi," Andres Serrano’s "Piss Christ," and Chris Ofili’s "The Holy Virgin Mary." Or the avalanche of antisemitic cartoons spewing from Muslims.

I asked for the cartoons to be published again and again to establish that Islamists must not chip away at the freedom to mock and insult by hiding behind bogus claims of incitement. Name an instance, Ms Musaji, when biting remarks about Muhammad, the Koran, or Islam have led to riots and murders by non-Muslims against Muslims?   I can think of not a single one.

To make matters worse, Islamists tell us Be Careful with Muhammad! and threaten those with the temerity to discuss, draw, or even pretend to draw the prophet of Islam, even as they freely disparage and insult other religions.

Source

A racist chair

A metal folding chair with an American flag, tied with a rope and hanging from a tree in a Northwest Austin neighborhood has ignited a 24-hour controversy which has spread city-wide.

"I would suppose it's something political, but I don't know what it means," said one passerby.

Actor Clint Eastwood used an empty chair to stage a hypothetical conversation with President Barack Obama at the Republican National Convention in August. Since then, the empty chair has been used by many to refer symbolically to the president.

"To me, it's racist," said Robert Stephenson, an activist living nearby who stopped by to take pictures of the chair.

"It reminds me of when somebody's hanging something from a tree, and it reminds me of a noose hanging with a chair and I think it's very scary," said neighbor Grace Shemain.

She's easily scared  -- JR

Source

Don't act 'too gay' if you want to become a doctor, senior British GP tells trainees... and if you're Asian, try to sound Welsh or Scottish

I knew a doctor once who took over a busy practice but who proclaimed his homosexuality.  His practice soon dwindled to nothing  -- so the advice below is good advice for all its "incorrectness"

A senior GP is under investigation for telling gay junior doctors to avoid acting effeminately around patients.

Dr Una Coales said if they deepened their voices and changed the way they walked they would stand a better chance of impressing their examiners.

In a guidebook written for medics sitting clinical skills tests, she advised doctors from Africa and Asia to try speaking in ‘lyrical’ Scottish or Welsh accents if they wanted jobs in those countries.

And she told women doctors not to wear overly-feminine, flowery dresses – in case patients mistake them for nurses. Bizarrely, she even advised overweight medical students to project an ‘image of Santa Claus’ by interlocking their fingers over their bellies.

Dr Coales is a senior member of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ Council and earlier this year narrowly missed out on being elected its president.

She made her comments in a guidebook for junior doctors sitting their ‘Clinical Skills Assessments’, which are exams taken in their final year. In one passage, she wrote: ‘One candidate was facing a third sitting and yet no one had told him that his mannerisms, gait and speech were too overtly gay.

‘So I advised him to lower and deepen his high-pitched voice and neutralise his body movements.

‘He went back to his surgery, practised his speech until his voice went hoarse and modified his body language. Not only did he pass his exam, but he informed me he noticed a huge difference in the way patients interacted with him.’

She also told women not to wear flowery dresses because ‘if you dress like a nurse they [patients] have difficulty believing they are seeing “the doctor”.’

The Royal College of GPs has now launched an inquiry into her comments, which have provoked outrage on the social networking site Twitter. Dr Coales, who trained in America before becoming a GP in South London, could now be ordered to leave the College.

Source

On Bourbon Street you can show everything (but your faith)

On October 26, 2011, the city of New Orleans criminalized religious expression on Bourbon Street.

Subsequently, in May of this year, a preacher from Vieux Carre Assembly of God Church was told by police that he could not continue discussing religion on Bourbon Street, even though he had been preaching there for the past 30 years every Tuesday and Friday evening.

The new rules were quietly put in place when Mayor Mitch Landrieu approved a ban on loitering or congregating “for the purpose of disseminating any social, political, or religious message between the hours of sunset and sunrise.” Individuals convicted of violating this ban can be imprisoned for up to six months.

Six months in prison, for speech?

This is not simply a Mayor suspending constitutional rights but also punishing anyone who tries to live out those rights. In other words, in a city where you can show everything, the new rule is you can show everything but your faith.

Moreover, it’s not up to the government to decide which topics we can and cannot discuss. The First amendment protects an individual’s freedom of speech. Jurisprudence supports this, tradition supports it, and the history of New Orleans supports it.

Just think about these things as you look at the landscape in and around the Big Easy. It’s a city that is literally full of chapels, cathedrals, religious statues and ornaments, and even an NFL team named the Saints.

Moreover, New Orleans and the state of Louisiana are so rich with religious overtones that the city sits in a parish rather than a county. (New Orleans is located in Orleans Parish.)

Yet, since the ban went into effect, several people have been arrested or threatened with arrest for communicating a religious message on Bourbon Street. Fearing arrest, the pastor has stopped going to Bourbon Street to discuss his faith.

When you consider that the ban on sharing a “religious message” covers the hours between sunset and sunrise, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the darkness is being protected. And it really is a shame for the Mayor to go to all this trouble, to pass bans on speech and rabidly enforce them, all to be sure the darkness is dark indeed.

The freedom to show everything on Bourbon Street ought to apply to preachers who want to show light as well.

Source

SCOTUS would knock it on the head but getting before SCOTUS is hugely expensive

Must not say that homosexuals tend to be promiscuous and AIDS-infested

Even though they do tend to be

Paris Hilton has been recorded making derogatory remarks about gay men, most of whom she said "probably have AIDS", during a conversation about all-male networking app Grindr.

The story has prompted an online backlash in the US, with bloggers rushing to condemn the socialite.

According to audio of the conversation, recorded by the cab driver and published by the gossip site, the male friend described how Grindr works.  "Gay guys are the horniest people in the world," Hilton is heard to say.  "They're disgusting. Dude, most of them probably have AIDS."

She goes on to say: "I would be so scared if I were a gay guy. You'll, like, die of AIDS."

A statement from Hilton's representative said the heiress was a "huge supporter of the gay community" and would never purposely make negative remarks about anyone's sexuality.

"Paris Hilton's comments were to express that it is dangerous for anyone to have unprotected sex that could lead to a life-threatening disease," the statement said.

"The conversation became heated, after a close gay friend told her in a cab ride, a story about a gay man who has AIDS and is knowingly having unprotected sex.

"He also discussed a website that encourages random sex by gay men with strangers. As she was being shown the website her comments were in reference to those people promoting themselves on the site.

Source