Israeli police teach schoolchildren how to shoot Palestinians Israeli police planned to teach children how to shoot at Palestinians as part of a training exercise in a school. The incident in the Menashe Regional Council, near Haifa in northern present-day Israel, was brought to light in recent days when Palestinian citizens of Israel took photos of what was happening.
April 26th, Social conservatives are right to oppose proposed legislation that would ban therapy to help those experiencing unwanted same-sex attraction or gender identity confusion. Social conservatives last week elevated a skirmish in the culture war with misdirected heavy-artillery fire.
It was an understandable error by people of good will, who have well-grounded concerns about the current condition of the common good. But it was an error all the same. The cause of the conflict was a California bill that would expose counselors and other professionals who try to help people experiencing unwanted same-sex attraction or gender confusion to serious legal penalties, such as enhanced damages awards.
The bill is cruising through the California legislature without meaningful opposition. It appears to be one more instance among a growing number of attacks on ordered liberty in the name of sexual-identity privileges.
Naturally, people of conscience are growing concerned that the ambitions of sexual-identity activists are totalizingand that their political triumphs will leave no place in which to faithfully live out the convictions that human beings are male and female and that men and women are complementary.
This bill heightens those concerns, with good reason. But critics of the bill unloaded a volley of fire that both missed the mark and besmirched their own credibility.
Conservative Criticism of the Bill Friends of ordered liberty pointed out a troubling implication of the California bill: It could burden speech on matters of civic importance and personal well-being.
But some conservative critics of the bill went furtherasserting that it would ban books that express traditional views about human identity and sexuality, such as the Bible and scholarly works about marriage and gender dysphoria.
Tyranny and fundamentalism are bad for the mind, and they are bad for business. A bookstore in China or Saudi Arabia is impoverished both intellectually and economically insofar as the government threatens coercive force against the proprietors for offering books that communicate forbidden truths and opinions.
We Americans are not immune from the temptation to use coercion to inflict bouts of deliberate ignorance and impoverishment on our fellow citizens. After all, our Congress passed the Sedition Acts of and forbidding criticism of government. And some American communities have, on occasion, demonstrated an enthusiasm for censorship.
But in the long view of American history those episodes appear as aberrations, exceptions proving the rule that freedom to propose and inquire is sacrosanct.
Indeed, a charge that someone is trying to ban books has particular purchase in American political discourse, as few allegations of wrongdoing still do.
Those who still hope for a rational conversation about matters of sexual identity find it increasingly difficult to locate ground on which to reason together.
And it is generally advisable to appeal to those moral and political principles on which Americans still broadly agree. We generally agree that book banning is bad.
So, it is tempting to approach discourse about the California bill and others like it by reference to the most egregious acts of censorship for which they might be used.
That is a mistake. What the Proposed California Law Would Really Do To step back from the controversy over sexual identity and to view AB as a proposed change in the law, rather than a skirmish in the culture wars, is to see that it would depart quite dramatically from the American legal tradition.
It would attack both freedom of expression and the autonomy of the patient-counselor relationship quite directly. But it would not ban books. But the proposed legislative changes do not apply to chattels and other goods. The new bill does not alter or add to those provisions.THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
This book was first thought of, so far as the central idea goes, in , but was not written down until about the end of As a follow-up to Tuesday’s post about the majority-minority public schools in Oslo, the following brief account reports the latest statistics on the cultural enrichment of schools in Austria.
Vienna is the most fully enriched location, and seems to be in roughly the same situation as Oslo. Many thanks to Hermes for the translation from timberdesignmag.com This is a world where money seems to have such control over journalistic integrity.
Is there no place for the reader to turn for unbiased news? The short answer is an emphatic yes. There’s still hope. When it comes to “censorship”, news can be censored either by the over-reach of government.
bloc voting, once (so we were told) the sign of a totalatarian pseudo-democracy, like Soviet Russia or Communist China, is now standard practice in the English . Press Laws On paper, the Russian press and media enjoyed some of the strongest legal protections in the world. Section 5 of Article 29 of the new Russian Constitution of l explicitly provides: "The freedom of the mass media shall be guaranteed.
The Fever of 1 IDOL OF THE MOB For a few hours on a sunny, crisp morning in October , royal governor Samuel Shute’s administration looked quite promising, at least from the outside.