The Journal of Integrity

It seems that we here at the JOI may have a fan at Prospect Magazine. Take a look at the latest cover of their magazine and then take a look at a mock up Shane did back in may. Even look at the filename “the-monster-that-ate-the-economy.jpg”. Now look at their title. What say the internets?

Well, I’ve decided that It’s time to stop lamenting Alosha and move on with the blog. We need to all start blogging a bit more and so to inspire us all I’ve decided to change the theme and I’m also requesting a new banner.

Go go go!

Moar content nao!

And to make him feel loved I’ve changed the site to make him feel more at home.

hymncccp

With Friends like these….

Hillary; before the fall.

It is universally acknowledged by those of us who would have people reject the inherent irrationality of religion, that mere dogmatic atheism would provide an entirely unacceptable alternative. It is a simple point to note that people can and do hold beliefs without having sufficient evidence for those beliefs, and that these beliefs are by no means confined to those which would be rejected upon careful examination and the application of critical thinking. The child who believes, for example, that slavery is wrong for the sole reason that his father tells him so is as justified in his belief as the child who believes the opposite for the same reason. It is only when critical thinking is applied, that we can hope to distinguish between these two judgments.

There are a myriad of circumstances we can imagine under which someone might come to hold an unjustified belief of any sort. It would seem to be a question of luck whether such people happen to acquire beliefs which are (upon examination of the evidence) actually justified.

While those who fall on the other side of the fence are more easily identifiable for obvious reasons, we cannot afford to neglect to encourage critical thinking amongst those we might consider safely ensconced within our own ideological camps. While such people will at the very least be more likely to vote for the better candidate, or endorse the better policies, they will be ill-equipped to engage in persuasive argument with those who oppose them, and, as will be seen from what follows, can go so far as to warrant embarrassment if not outright hostility from their more enlightened peers. If this language strikes you as elitist, consider that the fundamental point of this post is to call for nothing more than honest and open engagement of all issues, without resorting to blind dogmatism and downright wilful ignorance.

I present for your consideration, the denizens of http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/ . A quick glance through the depressingly large volume of topics on the forum will reveal a coterie of sycophantic disciples whose bitterness is exceeded only by their astounding capacity for denial.

“I have made it very clear that I am supporting Senator Obama and we’re working cooperatively on a lot of different matters, but I think that delegates can decide to do this on their own. They don’t need permission. They can decide under the rules of the DNC, and so I think it would be better if we had a plan that actually we put in place and everybody knew what it was and then we executed it because I just think that would go more smoothly,”

Let’s begin with a relatively objective account of the situation. Both Senators Obama and Clinton were campaigning to win the nomination of the same political party. During the primary season under extensive media scrutiny and after more than twenty debates, the consensus was that both candidates shared extremely similar policy positions, with few exceptions. Obama, having wrapped up the Democratic nomination long before his achievement was acknowledged by Clinton (an achievement which still is not acknowledged by a majority on www.hillaryclintonforum.net but more on this later) now faces the Republican Party’s John McCain, a man who unsurprisingly advocates many policies which are anathema to the majority of Democratic voters. These are the facts.

If we gaze through the distorted lens of a small but statistically significant proportion of Hillary Clinton supporters as exemplified by those on the above forum, we arrive at a very different account of reality. A reality where it is acceptable for a woman to vote for Hillary for her sex, but not for a black person to vote for Obama because of his race. A reality where a commentator’s use of the phrase “tit for tat” equates to sexist language (seriously) and where racist anti-Obama graffiti is attributed to Obama supporters attempting to tarnish Clinton’s image, to cite but a few examples. A reality where Hillary’s “suspending her campaign” (language used by all of the contenders for nomination, including John Edwards) is taken as code for some sort of uprising at the Democratic Convention at the end of this month. Clinton herself has recently stoked these absurd notions by refusing to rule out having her name included on a ballot at the convention. Somehow, such a publicly divisive gesture is to help “party unity”, the current mantra of DNC bigwigs. The problem, however, is that the targets of such attempts at unity now proudly proclaim the acronym PUMA, or “Party Unity My Ass”, a fitting epitaph for their self-destructive mentality…

This is the logical conclusion of illogical practises. This faction of Clinton loyalists (which we must bear in mind are not by all accounts a fringe minority) intend either not to vote, or in many cases to support McCain in the general election. We might call this the ultimate act of taking one’s ball and going home, as it were. Despite the fact that, for example, McCain is a strong opponent of abortion rights (in contrast to the vast majority of Clinton supporters), these men and women are willing to endure a minimum of four years of policies they by and large oppose, for the simple fact that they feel (“feel” being the operative word here) that their candidate has been unfairly treated by the media and by her Democratic opponent.

If such people should provide the so-called “Nader-factor” of the 2008 election, in drawing enough votes away from Obama to cost him the election, a successful Clinton campaign for the oval Office in 2012 is by no means guaranteed, but there is at least one thing we can say for certain: Come the fifth of November 2008 those at www.hillaryclintonforum.net will have elected exactly the president they deserve.

Clinton prepares for a Pagan sex romp by donning ritualistic clothes she will wear while aborting foetuses in their second trimester.

For the second time in as many months, budding Northern Irish theocrat and general uber-bitch Iris Robinson MP has descended to new levels of wanton ignorance with her pronunciation before a Northern Ireland Grand Committee that “There can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing innocent children”.

Iris Robinson MP, in her human form above.

This would-be-laughable-if-she-wasn’t-an-elected-offical statement is apparently typical of the heterosexual life partner of the North’s First Minister Peter Robinson, who recently had these words of advice for a local homosexual man who had been assaulted because of his orientation:

“I have a very lovely psychiatrist who works with me in my offices and his Christian background is that he tries to help homosexuals – trying to turn away from what they are engaged in,”

Mrs. Robinson punctuated these particular shitstorms with her declaration that “It is the government’s responsibility to uphold God’s law” during a radio debate regarding abortion laws in the North.

There is a final metaphorical kick in the nads- Did I mention she happens to be the Chair of the Health Committee?

In any case, as all good liberal boys and girls know, Mrs. Robinson is entitled to spew whatever invective she likes in the name of free speech. Perhaps, if we are feeling generous, we might even applaud her honesty. After all, it does say in the Bible, that homosexuality is an abomination. At least Mrs. Robinson is being consistent.

Well…sort of…

“What I say I base on biblical pronouncements, based on God’s word. I am amazed that people are surprised when I quote from scriptures. It shows the churches either aren’t preaching God’s word or are watering it down,”

In the interests of the Biblical consistency Mrs. Robinson aspires to, I have taken the liberty of pointing out/paraphrasing a few other divine edicts which are also mandated in Leviticus, which, unlike Mrs. Robinson, is not simply obsessed with the notion of anal sex. Bear in mind, that the government is supposed to be upholding these laws, according to Iris.
[The following is derived from material found in The New Gay Book of Lists by Leigh W. Rutledge]

1: Dear Mrs. Robinson, please be careful never to use the Lord’s name in vain, or you’ll have to be put to death. (Lev. 24:16)

2: Make sure never to cook your husband a nice fry-up of sausages and rashers in the morning. It’s unclean you see, something to do with cloven feet and chewing the cud… (Lev. 11:7–8) [ If you look elsewhere you’ll find shellfish are also prohibited, so no prawn cocktail for lunch today either!]

3: Have you got any pets? They’ll be handy if you sin unwittingly, although you’ll have to be specific. Depending on what sin you commit you’ll be sacrificing anything from bulls to turtledoves. (Lev. 4:1–10)

4: Better get your husband to make sure none of those psychic hotlines are operating out of Northern Ireland. As you know from reading Leviticus, these people are to be put to death. (stoned, if we’re being specific) (Lev. 20:27)

5: If you’re finding this all a chore to follow, having to buy animals every day to atone for your various sins, creating a healthy and nutritious diet that avoids pork, shellfish, and blood pudding (Lev. 3:17) why not buy a slave to take some of the work off your hands? (Lev. 25:44–46) says it’s ok, so long as you buy from the nations around you. Or tourists, they’re fair game too.

6: I know it doesn’t apply to you, paragon of femininity that you are, but you might want to warn your clean-shaven husband that he’s violating the word of God. Lev. 19:27 clearly prohibits the trimming of the hair or beard.

7: While you’re busy upholding God’s law, don’t forget to make it illegal for disabled people to go to mass. (Lev. 21:18–23) Especially not the dwarfs.

8: Better tell the farmers, no breeding cattle of different kinds, no sowing two kinds of seed in the same field and for the love of all that’s good and holy, under no circumstances must you let a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee!!! (Lev. 19:19)

Perspective is a wonderful thing.

Categories are now a bit more organised and finally got around to adding links/blogroll. Feel free to add more links guys, you all should have the option to do so in the dashboard. Manage -> Links -> Add.
Also, seems to be a pretty positive reaction to the podcast. Expect moar!

I just want to thank the members of the JOI that were out tonight, was great fun. We learned many things. Mainly that I am indeed able to down a double naggin of jack daniels in next to no time. Also my capacity for birthday cake is huge. Oh and met Gavin and John Mortel tonight they’re very good folk and I envisage a drunken night out again with them.

Aside: I owe gavin a drink and Eoin 10 euro.

Aside Aside: They’ll never get it from me, muhahahaha!

What say we all.?
(Found while searching for a good image of “cooties”.)

The League of Awesomeness, you decide.

Was a great day yesterday.

As part of an effort to restructure his online footprint, Cian will no longer be blogging on this site, and so he has asked me to carry on in his stead. He has taken this decision due to growing fears that his blogging could jeopardise his future career prospects, and because somebody recently dug up something he wrote over a year ago and used it against him. However, given that Cian and I are so similar, it may reasonably hoped that my replacing him makes very little difference to the overall standard of contribution to the Journal of Integrity.

Looking forward to blogging with you,

Athens 5000

(Btw, Cian still wants the money that some of you owe him, and he would like it sharpish).