The novelist John Updike has a new book out called “Terrorist,” where he tries to “understand” why the terrorist wants to kill innocent people. How original.

I was reading the most recent issue of Details, the ultra-liberal magazine that has about 20 ads before the articles begin. Updike proved himself to be an over-pretentious anti-Christian bigot. It’s kind of strange, the interviewer states that Updike is a Christian, but then Updike compares Christians to Islamic terrorists and that people of faith should not have faith anymore, at least if they want to be “cool” and not have faith (perhaps subscribe to the groupthink of atheism?). Here’s an excerpt:

Q: What do you think of the fundamentalist-Christian movement here?

A: I know how they feel–it’s the way my young character feels in my new book. His faith feels threatened by the modern world. But that’s the way it is. And you have to learn to live with it, and if you choose to keep some faith, you have to realize that you’re doing it kind of against the tide.

So, “fundamentalist” Christians, (Christians who believe in fundamental truths like murder and rape are wrong, for example) are compared to Islamic terrorists.? *Yawn*. Is this the best they can come up with?

It’s easy to attempt to dismiss an idea by associating with something unrelated. Islamic terrorists are not evil because they believe in a religion–they are evil because they support killing innocent human being in the name of religion (or in the name of anything, really). Terrorists also brush their teeth (well, some of them do), but that does not make brushing your teeth evil, or anyone that takes care of their pearly whites a “terrorist.”

The Nazis wrote with pens, but that doesn’t make writing evil. What are terrorists nefarious for? What were the Nazis infamous for? Killing innocent human beings. And sadly, that’s what liberals do, whether it is defending terrorists themselves (especially if they’re Islamic terrorists), murderers like Mumia Abu-Jamal, or defending abortion, infanticide, and leaving the disabled to die.

And what “tide” is Updike talking about? A tide of people losing their faith in a higher purpose, some kind of meaning, in favor of . . . what? A pseudo-religion of atheism or humanist religion? The atheist cult of communism killed millions of people, far more than any religion has (though Islamic terrorists would kill many more people if we were not stopping them)? I don’t think many people are turning from God; even if some people do doesn’t make it wise or correct.

I guess I should expect such faith-bashing from Details. After all, the other month they featured an article on gays from the army making porn, and the writer for Details joined in while he wrote it. Sick.

Here’s a good link for contacting your legislator regarding an untiered Internet: ItsOurNet.org.

Related: Net Neutrality: Save the Internet

It’s bad enough that the Dutch kill their sick and elderly as well as their unwanted newborns, under the guise of the euphemistic “euthanasia.” That country got even more evil recently: the pedophiles there are creating a political party. Sick. According to a Reuters article in the Australian newspaper “The Age,”

Dutch pedophiles are launching a political party to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and the legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals, sparking widespread outrage.

The Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party said on its web site it would be officially registered tomorrow, proclaiming: “We are going to shake The Hague awake!”

The party said it wanted to cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12 and eventually scrap the limit altogether.

“A ban just makes children curious,” Ad van den Berg, one of the party’s founders, told the Algemeen Dagblad (AD) newspaper.

“We want to make paedophilia the subject of discussion,” he said, adding the subject had been a taboo since the 1996 Marc Dutroux child abuse scandal in neighbouring Belgium.

“We want to get into parliament so we have a voice. Other politicians only talk about us in a negative sense, as if we were criminals,” Van den Berg told Reuters.

Um, you ARE criminals!

The Netherlands, which already has liberal policies on soft drugs, prostitution and gay marriage, was shocked by the plan.

An opinion poll published today showed that 82 per cent wanted the government to do something to stop the new party, while 67 per cent said promoting paedophilia should be illegal.

Why just 67 percent?? Only 67 percent of the Dutch think it’s wrong to promote the evil act of molestion or rape? But not everyone supports these pieces of crap. It’s good to know there are some moral, ethical people in the Netherlands:

“They make out as if they want more rights for children. But their position that children should be allowed sexual contact from age 12 is of course just in their own interest,” anti-paedophile campaigner Ireen van Engelen told the AD daily.

Right-wing lawmaker Geert Wilders said he had asked the government to investigate whether a party with such “sick ideas” could really be established, ANP news agency reported.

Kees van deer Staaij, a member of the Christian SGP party, also demanded action: “Paedophilia and child pornography should be taboo in every constitutional state. Breaking that will just create more victims and more serious ones.”

Exactly. These sick pro-rape wackos should be thrown into jail for just promoting the act of rape.

The party wants private possession of child pornography to be allowed although it supports the ban on the trade of such materials. It also supports allowing pornography to be broadcast on daytime television, with only violent pornography limited to the late evening.

Toddlers should be given sex education and youths aged 16 and up should be allowed to appear in pornographic films and prostitute themselves. Sex with animals should be allowed although abuse of animals should remain illegal, the NVD said.

The party also said everybody should be allowed to go naked in public and promotes legalising all soft and hard drugs and free train travel for all.

Wait, wait…? Toddlers getting sex education? What the hell? These people are pure evil. They also want to legalize having sex with animals, but don’t want to hurt them. These are disgusting creatures, poor excuses for human beings. They deserve a cold jail cell for the rest of their putrid lives.

Read the entire article

Sick. According to a recent article, a judge will let the media and public view child pornography.? Isn’t that illegal?

A judge will allow the public and the media to view a videotape in court that prosecutors allege shows singer R. Kelly having sex with an underage girl. In his ruling Thursday, Judge Vincent Gaughan said he saw no “overarching interest” in banning the tape from public view. Kelly has pleaded not guilty to 14 counts of child pornography. Prosecutors claim the videotape was made sometime during a nearly three-year span between January 1998 and October 2000, when the girl may have been as young as 13. Prosecutors and defense attorneys had asked Gaughan to limit the viewing of the video to only jurors, attorneys and the judge himself. They argued that the video is so lewd it would embarrass the girl, who is now 21.

Even though BOTH the prosecutor and the defense don’t want it viewed except by the people involved in the trial, this sicko immoral judge Vincent Gaughan thinks there is no “overarching interest” in not showing it.? Really? Viewing or possessing child pornography is illegal, and rightly so. Doesn’t it defeat the purpose if the media and public can view the illegal materials? R. Kelly has pleaded not guilty to 14 counts of child pornography. Other charges brought against him in Florida showed that he had child pornography on his computer at his Florida home, but because the search warrant didn’t specifically state that he was let off (probably due to him being rich and able to hire expensive lawyers who get criminals off on technicalities).Sadly, buffoons still buy the pseudo-musician R. Kelly’s CDs, even giving him awards. Does the public have a right to see a video of him peeing on kids? No. Only an evil entity lower than the pimple on the belly of a snake would want to see that. The proof that he is a rapist and ruined children’s lives is in a tape: R. Kelly should be in jail for the rest of his miserable life. Then he can’t sing, “I believe I can fly.” What a tool.

Al-Zarqawi, the head of Al Qaeda in Iraq, has been killed by a precision air strike. This was the monster who beheaded civilians and was behind many bombings. Now let’s find Bin Laden.

Another proponent of the Culture of Death uses faulty logic to promote killing patients:

Doctors should be able to end lives swiftly and humanely, a leading professor said.

Len Doyal, emeritus professor of medical ethics at Queen Mary, University of London, has called for the legalisation of voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia in the UK.

He believes that the medical profession should realise it is already killing patients when feeding tubes are removed from the terminally ill. Some would suffer a “slow and distressing death” as a result.

Writing in The Royal Society of Medicine’s Clinical Ethics journal, Professor Doyal said: “Doctor-assisted deaths are taking place on a regular and recurring basis in the UK. They should be better regulated.

“When doctors withdraw life-sustaining treatment such as feeding tubes from severely incompetent patients, it should morally be recognised for what it is - euthanasia, where death is foreseen with certainty.

Hitler would be very proud. Withdrawing feeding tubes actually is euthanasia, so he is correct there. But actively killing an innocent human being is very different from withdrawing life support such as a ventilator, since you are letting an incurable, unconcious person who cannot breathe on their own die in one case–letting nature take its course–compared to killing a human being before they naturally die.

First we have the Debra Lafaye lady who raped one of her students, whose lawyer stated that she was “too pretty for prison.” Now we have a judge from Sidney, Nebraska that stated that a convicted pedophile is “too short” for prison. Huh?

A judge said a 5-foot-1 man convicted of sexually assaulting a child was too small to survive in prison, and gave him 10 years of probation instead.

His crimes deserved a long sentence, District Judge Kristine Cecava said, but she worried that Richard W. Thompson, 50, would be especially imperiled by prison dangers.

“You are a sex offender, and you did it to a child,” she said.

But, she said, “That doesn’t make you a hunter. You do not fit in that category.”

So a person can just get probation after assaulting a child by just be a few inches shorter than most people? That is sick and crazy.

A pro-illegal immigrant Democratic candidate told a crowd that, and I quote, You don’t need papers for voting.

Francine Busby, a candidate for the 50th Congressional District in the San Diego area “was speaking before a largely Latino crowd in Escondido when she uttered those words. She said yesterday she simply misspoke.” Right. This is just more pandering to people who have broken the law. Anything for votes I guess.

Others blogging: Michelle Malkin, Independent Conservative, California Conservative, Conservative Culture.

From the “you can’t make this up” section, a 57-year-old murderer named Robert Kosilek wants tax payers to pay for his sex change surgery:

A man serving a life sentence for the murder of his wife is asking a federal judge to order the state to pay for a sex-change operation for him, saying that denying him the surgery amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.

…

Kosilek, 57, was convicted of strangling his wife, Cheryl, in 1990.

In 2002, U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf ruled that Kosilek _ who now goes by the name of Michelle _ was entitled to treatment for gender identity disorder, but stopped short of ordering the state to pay for the sex-change operation.

In 2002, U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf ruled that Kosilek _ who now goes by the name of Michelle _ was entitled to treatment for gender identity disorder, but stopped short of ordering the state to pay for the sex-change operation.

Kosilek sued the Department of Correction for the second time last year, saying that numerous psychiatrists who had examined him _ including two of the DOC’s own experts _ had determined that a sex- change operation is “medically necessary.”

“We ask that gender identity disorder be treated like any other medical condition,” said Kosilek’s attorney, Frances Cohen.

…

Two psychiatrists will testify that Kosilek functions “at a very high level” and that a sex-change operation is not medically necessary, McFarland said.

Dr. George Richard Brown, a psychiatrist who said he has treated over 1,000 patients with gender identity disorder since 1979, acknowledged that Kosilek’s depression and anxiety have improved since he began receiving female hormones. But he said that improvement was based on Kosilek’s sense of hope that he will be allowed to become a woman.

“I believe that she would kill herself,” Brown said, when asked by Kosilek’s attorney what would happen if Kosilek does not have a sex- change operation.

“I don’t believe she would consider life worth living without hope for completion of her treatment plan,” he said.

What a joke. Criminals that murder or rape should not even think about asking for tax payer dollars to pay for silly things like sex change surgeries. It’s bad enough they are allowed to work out and have better medical treatment than many law-abiding citizens. The age of entitlement seems to know no bounds.

Notice how the pro-sex change psychiatrist refers to this murderer as a “she” and “her.” So do the Associated Press and magazines like Rolling Stone, who deny reality and call a person by “she” even if the person is genetically and physically a man.