What’s interesting in the news today?
There’s all kinds of stuff to choose from today.
____________________________________________________
The Muslim Brotherhood is now cracking down on women’s rights.
From Reuters
“The Islamist movement that backs President Mohamed Mursi gave 10 reasons why Muslim countries should “reject and condemn” the declaration, which the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women is racing to negotiate a consensus deal on by Friday.”
“Egypt has joined Iran, Russia and the Vatican – dubbed an “unholy alliance” by some diplomats – in threatening to derail the women’s rights declaration by objecting to language on sexual, reproductive and gay rights.
The Muslim Brotherhood said the declaration would give “wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger.”
Liberals are finally starting to wake up to what it is they backed under the guise of Democracy. Buyer’s remorse.
From TheNYTimes
““A woman needs to be confined within a framework that is controlled by the man of the house,” Osama Yehia Abu Salama, a Brotherhood family expert, said of the group’s general approach, speaking in a recent seminar for women training to become marriage counselors. Even if a wife were beaten by her husband, he advised, “Show her how she had a role in what happened to her.”
“If he is to blame,” Mr. Abu Salama added, “she shares 30 percent or 40 percent of the fault.”
Now, with a leader of the Brotherhood’s political arm in Egypt’s presidential palace and its members dominating Parliament, some deeply patriarchal views the organization has long taught its members are spilling into public view. The Brotherhood’s strident statements are reinforcing fears among many Egyptian liberals about the potential consequences of the group’s rise to power and creating new awkwardness for President Mohamed Morsi as he presents himself as a new kind of moderate, Western-friendly Islamist.”
____________________________________________________
Meanwhile in Libya, Coptic Christians are being tortured into converting to Islam.
From AsiaNews.it
“Libyan Salafis are responsible for torture, attempts to forcibly convert and desecration of Christian imagery. This is according to 44 of the 48 Egyptian Coptic vendors on their return home. “They forced us to pronounce the al-shahaadatayn – said one of them – the proclamation of the Islamic faith and spit on images of Pope Shenouda III.” So far, the Egyptian government has not reacted to the episode that involved its citizens nor charges of religious discrimination. However, the relatives of the victims are demanding justice and accuse the Islamist government of protecting the Libyan Salafists.
Arrested in mid-February in the Benghazi market, accused of publicizing religious images and illegal immigration, the Coptic Orthodox were held for several days in a jail guarded by Salafi armed guards. They were released after several days of negotiations between the Egyptian and the Libyan governments accused on several occasions of failing to protect foreign nationals in its territory. Currently four Christians are still detained in Libya for further investigation.
The case has also sparked outrage among the population of Benghazi, which in October revolted against the Salafi militias accused of having organized the attack on the U.S. consulate in which the US Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed.”
And the govt. we’re propping up ignores it. Just like those responsible for the Ambassador’s murder.
____________________________________________________
Here’s an interesting read on the new Pope, and the liberal disappointment over the choice. Mild Content Warning! Liberals can be quite crass.
From NationalReview
“I may be a Reformed Protestant, but I still care a great deal about the new pope. He is, after all, only the world’s most prominent advocate for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Christians everywhere should be grateful that the new pope is by all credible accounts a humble, devout man with a heart for the “least of these.” In fact, for millions of our more secular citizens, the Catholic Church is essentially a stand-in for all (orthodox) Christendom, and critiques of Catholics are often critiques of all Christianity.
I was reminded of this fact when I read Frances Kissling’s recent piece in The Nation – highlighted again today in response to the selection of the new pope. Kissling, some may recall, is the past president of a group called “Catholics for Choice.” Kissling contends that the new pope (no matter who he is) will change nothing, and nothing will ever change until, well, Catholics stop being Christian. Feast your eyes on this critique:
“As long as Catholics are expected to accept rigid, sexist and blatantly illogical doctrine, there can be no real change in the church. From the Vatican down to the local parish priest, the early narratives—stories, really—that sought to explain who we are, why we are here, and the meaning of life are still taught, despite the fact that they are even less credible explanations of who we are than they ever were.”
And it goes downhill from there.
____________________________________________________
Another piece on the intended, but unmentioned, costs in ObamaCare.
From TheWallStJournal
“Big government likes big providers. That’s why ObamaCare is gradually making the local doctor-owned medical practice a relic. In the not too distant future, most physicians will be hourly wage earners, likely employed by a hospital chain.
Why? Because when doctors practice in small offices, it is hard for Washington to regulate what they do. There are too many of them, and the government is too remote. It is far easier for federal agencies to regulate physicians if they work for big hospitals. So ObamaCare shifts money to favor the delivery of outpatient care through hospital-owned networks.
The irony is that in the name of lowering costs, ObamaCare will almost certainly make the practice of medicine more expensive. It turns out that when doctors become salaried hospital employees, their overall productivity falls.”
____________________________________________________
Debt? What debt? Oh that. Sure it’s a big number, but it’s not a problem.
No really. Stop laughing, he’s serious. 😯
From CNSNews
“Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, said on Thursday that the nation’s current debt of $16.7 trillion is “not endangering” the country, adding that “some debt is not a bad idea” and that he and other congressional Democrats “don’t think there’s a problem.”
Conyers and other liberal Democrats spoke at a Capitol Hill press conference about their initiative to compel Congress to cancel the across-the-board budget cuts (sequester) of $1.2 trillion over 10 years, which actually are reductions in the rate of increase in federal spending and amount to $44 billion for this year.”
“Conyers said, “Let me let you understand, first of all, that the debt is not endangering us a bit — not at all. Our economists say we’re in debt but it’s not endangering everything. As a matter of fact, there are economists that say some debt is not a bad idea at all.”
“So all those ideas about the ceiling falling, the walls caving in because of that, you can sleep more comfortably in your bed at night when you realize that we don’t think there’s a problem,” he said.”
I don’t know about you, but I feel better already. 🙄
____________________________________________________
But don’t worry, it’s not all bad today. 🙂
From DetroitCBSLocal
” A federal judge has blocked the Obama administration from requiring Domino’s Pizza founder Tom Monaghan to provide mandatory contraception coverage to his employees under the federal health care law.”
“On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Lawrence Zatkoff granted a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the law against Monaghan and Domino’s Farms.”
____________________________________________________
Wandering Views 
If the Vatican, Russia and Egypt are on one side and the US and the UN are on the other, I’ll be against the US. The Vatican opposes parts of the declaration that promote promiscuity and perversion. I generally trust the Vatican on such matters. The US is relentlessly pro-perversion.
American Christians should remember that on moral issues the US (both the government and the popular culture) is a worldwide menace.
LikeLike
Interesting that read in a.certain context (and not the one he intended,apparently) Kissling’s comments are totally accurate.
LikeLike
The UN likes to throw our noble sounding things with names like U.N. Commission on the Status of Women that often has a hidden leftist agenda, but the name makes those who oppose them look mean. The democrats in congress often do the same thing. I’d like to know why the Vatican is opposed to this.
LikeLike
How about this Portman guy flip flopping on gay marriage because his son is gay? Got the approval of his pastor, too.
LikeLike
UN declarations are barely worth the paper they are written on. I believe the Vatican’s opposition is for the usual: abortion and birth control. Islamic countries and the Vatican have been allied on this issue for some time. Putin needs to maintain Orthodox institutional support.
The Islamic turn to the Arab Spring is not surprising. They were far more organized and have a longer history than their liberal counterparts. Benghazi is beset with separatists and Islamist that are not representative of the population but again are better organized.
The Portman flip is an example of politics of the personal, i.e. we only act on issues that affect us. The congress is highly unrepresentative of the US in terms of wealth and income — the percentage of millionaires is far higher in Congress than outside. Thus, if they succumb to the very human tendency of focusing on what they know and affects them, the concerns and needs to the poor and shrinking middle class will receive scant attention.
LikeLike
In terms of the budget and deficit I take my cue from Krugman
The move of doctors from small independent practises to large HMOs and insurers could have been prevented with single payer. With single payer, the doctor bills the state directly and runs his/her office similar to a small business. Most doctors in my town operate an office with two or three doctors as partners in order to provide on-call care. As a small business, they have one main payer — the government but they also bill insurances companies, worker’s compensation board, and private persons (for services not covered — ie sick notes, elective surgery, etc). No large private corporate intermediary between me and my doctor.
LikeLike
KBells,
The Vaticans beef with it is would you would expect. It’s not the women’s rights part.
“objecting to language on sexual, reproductive and gay rights.”
It’s because the UN keeps trying to force abortion and “gay right” along with it. Of course supporters, are throwing a hissy fit. Like this totally unbiased Yahoo reporter. Yahoo fits, that’s for sure.
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-russia-vatican-threaten-derail-u-n-womens-221956137.html
“An “unholy alliance” of Iran, Russia, the Vatican and others is threatening to derail a U.N. declaration urging an end to violence against women and girls by objecting to language on sexual, reproductive and gay rights, some U.N. diplomats said Wednesday.”
“”There’s this sort of unholy alliance … coming together to oppose language on sexual health, reproductive rights and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) rights,” one senior U.N. diplomat said. “It’s tough going, but progress is being made.”
“Diplomats say key sticking points in this year’s draft text again revolve around sexual and reproductive rights, the inclusion of gay rights and an amendment proposed by Egypt that would allow countries to avoid implementing recommendations if they clashed with national laws, religious or cultural values.”
LikeLike
“In terms of the budget and deficit I take my cue from Krugman”
🙄
That would be your first error on most issues he’s opined on. So you like being wrong? 🙂
LikeLike
Portman is a good example of why it is dangerous for the South to stay unequally yoked to a perverted North. In the North, even the good guys can be pro-perversion.
LikeLike
On Portman’s rather weak argument of the issue:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/03/portmanteaus-for-portman.php
From the post:
“He confines his argument to the fulfillment of the two individuals involved. That’s an argument that justifies a lot more than gay marriage, but Senator Portman doesn’t seem to have much interest in testing its limits. Reading a bit further into the column, one gets the impression that Senator Portman is rushing to catch a train that is leaving the station, as it very well may be.”
LikeLike
I honestly would not care if gay people wanted to call themselves married and they can make their own decisions as long as they stop trying to force business owners, doctor and others to not only agree with their decision but participate or lose your livelihood.
LikeLike
Well, that’s exactly where state recognition of gay marriage does become an issue that impacts the entire culture, like it or not. A legal marriage carries with it recognition by society as a whole — and it therefore does open up the whole issue of potential discrimination issues.
Should be interesting as we watch the battle between individual “rights” — with what many consider the right religious freedom.
But I have a feeling I already know *which* rights will win out in the present cultural climate. 😉
LikeLike
And I couldn’t help myself.
I spotted a tweet this morning — actually a re-tweet one of our opinion writers posted from a well-known liberal commentator — saying how the pope seems to be liberal on social justice issues but is “sadly” traditional on matters of sex and contraception.
My public “reply” tweet to them both: So you’re saying that the pope is … Catholic??
LikeLike
aj — krugman’s been right on austerity, inflation and just about anything else.
donna — Exactly.
It would be appropriate to criticize Francis for his lack of leadership during the “dirty” war but his current positions are what you should expect from a pope. And quite frankly, he appears more willing to walk the talk than Benedict.
LikeLike
hwesseli, I posted a couple of links on the Pope Francis issue on the 3-14 political thread. But you all could save the smear campaign. This is not a Republican presidential candidate you can paint as a racist for driving by the wrong rock or as a homophobe for something that may or many not have happened when he was 17. This is the Pope. He has been elected for life and there is not a thing you can do about it.
LikeLike
Donna, religious freedom is in the constitution. The right to a wedding cake is not.
LikeLike
To Catholics, marriage is a holy sacrament. No way they’re going to mess with that.
LikeLike
kbells — The Argentine junta was opposed by some churchman but not by Francis. At the least he sat on the fence. At the worst he deliberately dismissed two Jesuit priests so that they would be arrested a week later and then killed. In comparison we have JPII facing the Polish communists and military and archbishop Romero who was killed for opposing the El Salvador regime. He wasn’t 17, he was a middle age man in charge of the Jesuit mission in Argentina. Its not a smear — I can respect a man for holding to his beliefs even if I disagree but given the standard set by JPII and other Catholic priests, Francis is open to legitimate criticism.
LikeLike
Did you read the articles?
LikeLike
The NYT link works, the other does not.
The NYT article outlines the Vatican’s response to the accusations. In the most prominent story of the two Jesuit priests, it appears only one has “reconciled” with Francis. He was unavailable to the press but issued a statement. See the following link for the full statement, he’s hedging i.e. saying a lot but not saying much at all;
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/15/full-statement-from-jesuit-kidnapped-by-argentine-junta-on-new-pope/?smid=tw-thelede&seid=auto
Orlando Yorio, the other priest in this controversy, died from natural causes in 2000 believing to the end that Francis had abandoned him. His testimony formed part of the book, The Silence.
According to “The Silence,” a book written by journalist Horacio Verbitsky, Bergoglio withdrew his order’s protection of the two men after they refused to quit visiting the slums, which ultimately paved the way for their capture.
Verbitsky’s book is based on statements by Orlando Yorio, one of the kidnapped Jesuits, before he died of natural causes in 2000. Both of the abducted clergymen suffered five months of imprisonment
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/13/us-pope-succession-bergoglio-idUSBRE92C15X20130313
So you have two priests. One says he is reconciled with Francis and the other was bitter enough to give an interview to a journalist blaming Francis for his arrest.
LikeLike
Obama, Bush, drones and our militaristic society:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/blackwhiteandgray/2013/02/obama-bush-and-drones/
LikeLike
Tychicus, Our country reacts to the enemy we are fighting. In World War II, the Germans would surrender and take prisoners while the Japanese generally did not. Our troops took German prisoners, but quickly learned not to give the Japanese a chance to surrender. They killed them all.
On 9/11, those who were not previously paying attention learned a great deal about Al Qaeda. Obama handled the Bin Laden raid perfectly. Bin Laden is dead. The world knows he is dead, and he was buried at sea so he has no grave where his followers could build a monument.
LikeLike
I’m quite critical of American militarism but that was a pretty weak article. The Bin Ladin raid and drones are two separate issues. I have similar issues in terms of how the order was presented and carried out but even if Obama emphasized capture instead of kill, I’m quite sure the soldiers would’ve killed him, especially since there were weapons in the room. Obama’s extensive use of drones is probably the biggest disappointment to the left other than the continuation of the Patriot Act and Gitmo. Drones make war too easy and remove the human element of regret, guilt, second thoughts, etc not to mention it increases “collateral” damage.
As for Obama being the most progressive president — I think the author should consider the two Roosevelts and maybe even Johnson as more progressive. As for Obama being a hawk thats no surprise in the post WWII era only Carter wasn’t a hawk.
LikeLike
HRW, I agree with you about LBJ. Dad and I toured his library and after 90 minutes, we couldn’t decide which part of The Great Society we hated the most. The liberals hated him because of Vietnam, but he truly governed as a flaming liberal.
LikeLike
ricky — Although it was more common in the Pacific theater and the Eastern front to kill prisoners, it did occur in the western front. During the war, the SS was know to have executed allied soldiers and in return some Cdn (and other allies) stopped taking prisoners. I believe it was a Canadian highland regiment who were known by even the Germans not to take prisoners. Here’s an American incident which was a retaliation for an SS incident.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenogne_massacre
In recent years, German (and other) historians have begun to research the death rate of German POWs in Allied camps in 1945-46. The controversy seems to be whether it was deliberate or simple the result a lack of supplies, logistics, camp conditions, and what was a fairly bad winter by continental European standards. There is of course some number crunching with estimates reaching over a million dead in the one year period. Somehow I doubt that …. the more sensible accounts estimate the number at 30,000 and blame the appalling conditions and the indifference of the allied command. I would think the million dead would be more accurate number for Germans who died in the Soviet gulag.
LikeLike
I completely discount the recent reports of German deaths in non-Soviet POW camps. It is however true that some German POWs were kept in Britain and North America for some time after the war. I believe this was done to use them to repair war damage and because there was a shortage of food and shelter in Germany.
As a child I was taught that only 5% of the Germans captured at Stalingrad returned home. Later I learned that the survival rate for Russians in German POW camps was about the same.
LikeLike
The Russians admit to about 400,000. The Germans claim the number is close to 1 million. From 1941-1943, the conditions in Russia were fairly chaotic and the Russians simply couldn’t handle any POWs nor were the Germans prepared for the winter. Watching any film on Stalingrad, the long lines of German POWs were not dressed appropriately for the long march to the gulag. After 1943, the Germans were used as slave laborer and had better survival rates. The last German was released in 1956.
The estimate is 2.5 million Soviets died after being captured. This is in addition to any civilian and soldier simply shot on sight.
I have no doubt that some German POWs died in non-Soviet camps and the number is in the thousands. The rations were fairly low, the conditions poor and overcrowded, and winter was really bad. I highly doubt it was done on purpose — German civilians weren’t faring much better that winter. The German POWs in North America probably wanted to stay for a couple more years.
LikeLike