No, You Asked For It:

So, a young lady has been suspended for a pseudo-lesbian highschool kiss:

Inspired by a high school assignment, Stephanie Haaser leaped onto a cafeteria table, shouted "End homophobia now!" and kissed classmate Katherine Pecore.

Not actually a lesbian, the girl in question was suspended for two days. The principal offers what is, at first glance, a reasonable explanation:

"It's highly inappropriate to stand on a table in the cafeteria and make out, whether the kiss was heterosexual or homosexual," said River Hill High School principal Scott Pfeifer. "I don't think there's a school in the country where parents would consider that appropriate behavior."

Right. No problem. Except...

Haaser, a junior, said she chose to make the statement as part of an English class assignment, which required that she engage in a nonconformist act in the tradition of Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Ah! I see! So, the school officially tasked teenagers with engaging in an act of rebellion. What brilliance! What an astonishing grasp of the teenage mind!

Sorry, bucko. You asked for this, and now you can reap the whirlwind. You're lucky this is the worst you got.

For Sovay:

I thought you'd like to see this other entry into the Last Words of Uday & Qusay contest. It's in the style of Dr. Seuss.

My favorite Seussian poem, though, will always be "Norse, Of Course."

Happy National Ammo Day!

Today's the day. Go out and pick up some ammo.

Any Stick:

Today, Mark Steyn defends America:

The fanatical Muslims despise America because it's all lapdancing and gay porn; the secular Europeans despise America because it's all born-again Christians hung up on abortion; the anti-Semites despise America because it's controlled by Jews. Too Jewish, too Christian, too Godless, America is also too isolationist, except when it's too imperialist.

This echoes G. K. Chesterton, defending Christianity in the masterful sixth chapter of Orthodoxy:

One accusation against Christianity was that it prevented men, by morbid tears and terrors, from seeking joy and liberty in the bosom of Nature. But another accusation was that it comforted men with a fictitious providence, and put them in a pink-and-white nursery. One great agnostic asked why Nature was not beautiful enough, and why it was hard to be free. Another great agnostic objected that Christian optimism, "the garment of make-believe woven by pious hands," hid from us the fact that Nature was ugly, and that it was impossible to be free. One rationalist had hardly done calling Christianity a nightmare before another began to call it a fool's paradise. . . .

I felt that a strong case against Christianity lay in the charge that there is something timid, monkish, and unmanly about all that is called "Christian," especially in its attitude towards resistance and fighting. . . . The Gospel paradox about the other cheek, the fact that priests never fought, a hundred things made plausible the accusation that Christianity was an attempt to make a man too like a sheep. I read it and believed it, and if I had read nothing different, I should have gone on believing it. But I read something very different. I turned the next page in my agnostic manual, and my brain turned up-side down. Now I found that I was to hate Christianity not for fighting too little, but for fighting too much. Christianity, it seemed, was the mother of wars. Christianity had deluged the world with blood. I had got thoroughly angry with the Christian, because he never was angry. And now I was told to be angry with him because his anger had been the most huge and horrible thing in human history; because his anger had soaked the earth and smoked to the sun. The very people who reproached Christianity with the meekness and non-resistance of the monasteries were the very people who reproached it also with the violence and valour of the Crusades. It was the fault of poor old Christianity (somehow or other) both that Edward the Confessor did not fight and that Richard Coeur de Leon did.

It is well to love those, and defend them, who are beaten with every stick. At the least this practice exhibits the virtue of mercy; and, as no one is so bad that any stick is good enough to beat them, it is apt to exhibit the virtue of justice as well.

NBS:

I'll vote with the Alliance this week.

Uday & Qusay Speak:

The last words of Saddam's sons:

Uday: "Good news! I just got off the phone with the Information minister! He says all the Americans have been routed from Iraq by a popular uprising! Mobs are roaming the street, chanting our names!"

Qusay: "Great! That must be them at the door, even now."

Credit for this really belongs to Sovay McKnight, who is much better at parodies than I am.

Who is John Derbyshire?

Why, a friend of mine, and a correspondant, bless him for the time he wastes on it. Certain persons who hate him have set up a page about the fellow. You may find a link to his own web page listed to the right, under "Admired Voices," on Grim's Hall.

UPDATE: It has come to my attention that John has given an account of the reasons why the author of the above page hates his guts.

Gay Marriage! Today!

Well, 180 days from yesterday. You've probably heard that the Mass. State Supreme Court has construed a Constitutional right to gay marriage. I am astonished, as always I am when the court finds a constitutional right to something that has been illegal since long before the Founding--a capital crime, in this case, since long ago.

I have argued before that, as marriage as an institution predates the Federal Constitution and the various state constitutions, the power to alter its basic nature is one of the powers reserved to the people by the 9th and 10th amendments.

Since the judiciary has decided to take it upon itself to do so, I see nothing untoward about putting the question to the people. The amendment process it the proper one for assigning new powers to the state that have hitherto not belonged to it; or, if the state is arrogating powers it does not deserve, to clarify the limits.

I personally feel that, whether we decide to legalize or to ban gay marriage�I will abide the democratic process with only an idle eye, having no interest in gays either way�the constitutional amendment is the only legitimate way to do it. The power to alter marriage as an institution was never granted the state; and if it is to become a function of the state, it must be sought, and granted or denied, by the people.

Human Decency, II:

I send thanks to everyone who joined in contributing to the Lester Campbell self-defense fund. The pictures through that link show the old fellow getting his money order, which hopefully will help him out in days to come. It is not the state but the citizenry who have righted this wrong, just as it was the citizen--Mr. Campbell--and not the state who fought against the mugger.

This story has a mostly happy ending, but the neighborhood in which Mr. Campbell lives is not secure. The state will not, and apparently can not, fix that larger problem. It is imperative, then, for the good of the people, that men like Mr. Campbell be allowed to exercise their right to self defense. Those of you who have a voice in the elections of that legislature ought to join the effort to make that right unencumbered by burdensome regulation.

Human Decency Rights A Wrong:

Last week, we learned that an 89-year-old woman had her farm sold out from under her by the county to pay about $600 in back-taxes. The county sold her property, worth more than a million dollars, to a land developer for $15,000. Mrs. Shue was to be evicted at the age of almost ninety, and also robbed of about $984,000.

Today, we learn that the deal is off: the county will reimburse the land developer, and the widow gets to keep her farm. Whose work was this?

The developer's own, who gave back the land even before he learned that the county would repay him. I don't recall having ever said a kind thing about a land developer before, but this was an act of fine, human decency.

Conclusive Proof of EU's Evil:

It's too late to be forgiven. Nothing but the complete destruction of the EU bureaucracy will do.

"Oh my God! It's got Ralph! Shoot! Shoot!"

The ad copy says, "This is the perfect gift for rendezvous black-powder re-enactment enthusiasts."

Allow me to suggest: Maybe not.

The Memo:

You will by now have seen this story on a memo offering evidence of a Qaeda-Iraq link. It is worth noting that the Department of Defense has issued a statement about it. The statement is charmingly verbose. The short form of it is this: "The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence asked us a question: 'What sources and reports tend to suggest a link between al Qaeda and Saddam's Iraq?' This memo was our reply. It was not a conclusion that such links existed, just a compilation of reports that suggested it, most of which were raw data. As the question was 'what suggests a link?', data which suggested otherwise was not included."

I haven't seen most of this stuff before, and I don't know what conclusions were drawn about any particular report. Still, it's worth noting that this memo only opens new questions, it doesn't close the case.

Intelligence Agility:

An excellent article by Bruce Berkowitz focuses on the 9/11 intelligence failure. In explaining it, he concludes that the kind of threat posed by terrorist groups can't be met by the CIA as it is currently structured, and proposes a new model for intelligence, based on agility:

For an intelligence organization, agility can be defined as having four features. First, the organization needs to be able to move people and other resources quickly and efficiently as requirements change. Second, it needs to be able to draw on expertise and information sources from around the world. Third, it needs to be able to move information easily so that all of the people required to produce an intelligence product can work together effectively. And, fourth, it needs to be able to deliver products to consumers when needed and in the form they require to do their job. Taken together, these features provide a benchmark for measuring proposals to make U.S. intelligence more agile.

His further recommendations are worth reading. They provide a model for what we should ask our representatives to demand of the executive branch.

Hail a Hero:

Capt. Harry Hornbuckle, bred of the state of Georgia, raised to arms at Fort Stewart, GA. Hero of the Iraq war, and still in service, training heroes yet to come.

...But I Remember My Oath:

It was long ago, and dissolved by law, but I remember and maintain my oath:

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. That I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Forn Sidr:

One of my least favorite bloggers, The Raving Atheist, has this to say about the recognition of Forn Sidr in the Dane-Mark:

Denmark yesterday recognized the worship of Viking gods such as Odin and Thor as a religion. Although the request -- by a group called Forn Sidr -- was originally turned down in 1999, worshippers of the Norse deities will now be allowed to celebrate legal marriages, receive donations and get tax breaks.

American public schools still teach that the Norse, Greek and Roman gods are �myths.� They are the one form of theology that can safely be declared false. Hindu, Wiccan and Christian mythology do not receive the same deserved disrespect. There�d be bloodshed in the classroom if they did.

So it would be interesting to see what would happen if the Forn Sidrites made their presence known in this country. Faced with a First Amendment challenge, the schools would have three choices: (1) stop teaching mythology (2) include Christianity, Judaism, etc. in the mythology curriculum, or (3) create a comparative religion curriculum which included the Norse �theology.� I think the first alternative would be the most likely. The second would probably be ruled unconstitutional because the government isn�t supposed to take a position on the truth of any religion. The third would simply be unpalatable -- no good Christian would tolerate having their faith compared, even indirectly, to a religion which �everyone knows� is really just a myth.

This being the case, I can see a day when the schools are also compelled to ban any children�s fiction containing a supernatural element. Cults may one day form around Harry Potter and The Wizard of Oz and declare themselves to be religions. And they�ll have the same constitutional right against disparagement as every other disparagable belief.

As usual with the Atheist, there is more wrong here than can easily be addressed. (For example: the only religion which can actually be proven false is not Forn Sidr, but Atheism.) Besides, I recall the few classes I had that mentioned the Bible always approached it as "literature," so I'm not sure the problem hasn't been addressed in advance.

I'll just ask this: where, exactly, is that Constitutional right not to be disparaged? Maybe what the schools will be compelled to do is stop being pushed around by whiners, and assert their obligation to teach what students need to know, whatever it may be.

An Important Warning:

The Scotsman reports that the Qaeda agents who carried out the bombing in Riyadh were dressed as policemen. There is no reason they could not use a similar tactic in the United States. Keep your eyes open always.

Happy Birthday, USMC

I raise a glass to the 228th year of the United States Marines. I now yield the floor to the Commandant:

This year we celebrate the 228th anniversary of the founding of our Corps. As always, it is an occasion for remembrance, proud traditions, and joyful camaraderie. The events of the past year have called for great sacrifices from many Marines and their families. While the Global War on Terrorism will continue to demand the best from each of us, it is important that we join with our fellow Marines, families and friends to celebrate our Corps' special culture and unique warrior ethos.

This past year, Marines demonstrated once again that they are the most important entity on any battlefield. Lethal weapons and advanced technologies provide us unique advantages, but educated warriors ultimately determine victory in combat not machines. During Operations IRAQI FREEDOM and ENDURING FREEDOM, our small unit leaders' skills, adaptability and flexibility produced victory on uncertain and at times chaotic battlefields. We proved once again the power of integrated ground-air-logistics teams as well as the importance of every Marine being first and foremost a rifleman.

Our special spirit is evident not only in battle; it is evident in the faithful performance of demanding duties by countless Marines at home and abroad. Every Marine makes a vital contribution to the ability of our Corps to project and sustain credible combat power. Moreover, the willingness and readiness of all Marines to accept and accomplish any mission is central to our success and a hallmark of our warrior ethos.

The culture that defines the Marine Corps is nurtured by our traditions. In celebrating our heritage, we strengthen the linkages to a glorious history and recommit ourselves to upholding the standards and values given to us by past generations.

In commemorating our 228th anniversary, remain true to the spirit of the occasion. Reflect on our fallen with deep respect, observe our traditions with justifiable pride, take care of one another, and of course, celebrate those special bonds that exist among United States Marines.

Happy Birthday Marines, Semper Fidelis, and keep attacking!

M. W. Hagee
General, U.S. Marine Corps

Ooh-rah!

Here find links to the Marine Corps Hymn and the Marine Corps Prayer. If you feel inclined to have some cake, go right ahead.

Update: General Lejune's birthday wishes are preserved online:

On November 10, 1775, a Corps of Marines was created by a resolution of the Continental Congress. Since that date, many thousand men have borne the name Marine. In memory of them, it is fitting that we who are Marines should commemorate the Birthday of our Corps by calling to mind the glories of its long and illustrious history.

The record of our Corps is one which will bear comparison with that of the most famous military organizations in the world's history. During 90 of the 146 years of it's existence the Marine Corps has been in action against the nations foes. From the battle of Trenton to the Argonne. Marines have won foremost honors in war, and in the long eras of tranquility at home. Generation after generation of Marines have grown gray in war in both hemispheres and in every corner of the seven seas that our country and its citizens might enjoy peace and security.

In every battle and skirmish since the birth of our Corps Marines have acquitted themselves with the greatest distinction, winning new honors on each occasion until the term Marine has come to signify all that is highest in military efficiency and soldierly virtue.

This high name of distinction and soldierly repute we who are Marines today have received from those who preceded us in the Corps. With it we also received from them the eternal spirit which has animated our Corps from generation to generation and has been the distinguishing mark of the Marines in every age. So long as that spirit continues to flourish Marines will be found equal to every emergency in the future as they have been in the past, and the men of our nation will regard us as worthy successors to the long line of illustrious men who have served as "Soldiers of the Sea" since the founding of the Corps.

NBS:

For the new blog showcase, I'll vote for Patriot Paradox - I Pray Daily. Am I an Extremist? as the political entry. For non-political, the neurotech entry. I can't say I'm as excited about the non-political entries this week, but what the heck.