
Observations and inanities by a second-shift assistant supervisor in the Puppy-Grinding division of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy® (our motto: "Sure it's cruel, but think of the jobs!"), your host, Brent Rasmussen.
Some follow-ups in the news.
Don't read this if you want a happy-happy Friday.
Following-up to a couple of news items I've written about previously, let's first talk about a real tragedy. A week ago I wrote about a couple of additional entries in the "Taser Abuse" category, in which an obviously disturbed man in NYC fell to his death after being tased. Well, yesterday the NYPD lieutenant who gave the order to tase the man committed suicide:
NYPD Officer Kills Himself Over Taser Episode
The officer was remorseful and distraught. He apologized and sought the family's forgiveness. Then he went to his unit's headquarters Thursday morning and fatally shot himself, just hours before the family laid the victim to rest.
"The lieutenant was deeply distraught and extremely remorseful over the death of Iman Morales in Brooklyn last week," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said. "Sadly, his death just compounds the tragedy of the loss of Mr. Morales."
The suicide marks another tragic turn in a case that has raised questions about the use of Tasers by the nation's largest police force.
Like I said last week: "Gee, I can't imagine why."
Tasers, ideally, should only be used as a last-resort alternative to the use of a firearm. More departments across the country are putting such directives into their protocols for use of Tasers. But as the multiple abuses of this technology attest, this is not how Tasers are *actually used*. How many more people will have to die, be permanently injured, or just be tortured by these things? How many more cops will have their careers/lives screwed up by them?
There are some technologies which are just too dangerous as configured to be put into broad use. You don't have cops routinely carrying rocket launchers or grenades, even though there are conceivable situations where they might need such. Homeowners cannot install deadly traps to prevent intruders. Tasers are such a technology. Yeah, it is certainly possible that proper education could change how they're used, as could some technological tweaks to the device itself. But the current reality of how and when they are used needs to be radically changed.
*sigh*
OK, here's another item. Back in June I wrote about the death of 16-year-old Neil Beagley out in Oregon, who died as the result of a urinary tract blockage. Simple medical treatment (most likely) would have saved his life. But he did not get that treatment because he and his parents were part of a Christian church that rejects medical treatment in favor of faith healing.
Well, his parents have just been indicted in his death:
Parents In Faith Healing Death Arrested
After Beagley died, a medical examiner ruled his death could have been prevented had his family taken him to a doctor.
Based upon findings from the grand jury, the Clackamas County Circuit Court issued arrest warrants Wednesday for Jeffrey Dean Beagley and Marci Rae Beagley in connection with their son's death.
Clackamas County prosecutors said the Beagleys turned themselves into authorities Wednesday after a grand jury indicted the couple on criminally negligent homicide charges.
Good. As I said in June: "*sigh* I'm just sick of this bullshit from the religious nuts. Seems like you can't turn around without hearing of yet another kid who has died because either they or their parents were brainwashed by the local shaman."
And remember - this case may or may not stand, since Neil was over 14. And it was only recently that Oregon enacted legislation which removed a religious shield for people guilty of this kind of child abuse. From the same article above:
The Oregon City-based Followers of Christ Church isn't associated with a mainstream denomination. It has 2,000 members, most of who live in the Oregon City and Gladstone area.
After several children from the church died in the 1990s, Oregon lawmakers passed new laws striking down legal shields for faith-healing parents.
State senator Peter Courtney helped pass the law after an 11-year-old died of diabetes. The boy's parents tried spiritual healing instead of insulin.
"After several children from the church died in the 1990s..." Think about that. You watch the children of other people in your little cult *die* from lack of proper medical treatment. But you still listen to the shamen about how the Sky-Daddy will save your kid. How fucking crazy do you have to be to do that?
Gah. Sometimes I despair of our future.
Jim Downey
HT to ML for some of the information above.

















Two views
I'm not sure whether I despair more over those people waiting for Sky-Daddy to save the child or those who think the child must be special because Sky-Daddy wants him back. In either case, it's an abrogation of responsibility at various levels. It's not just the abandonment of parental responsibility for a child, which I think exists in all cultures, though the age at which the child is expected to be independent and responsible for himself will vary. Part of that responsibility, I think, involves learning about the treatment available; if, after reviewing the information available to you in light of your prejudices and decisions about life, you choose to refuse the treatment, so be it; you are at least exercising some level of responsibility by doing that research. I may think it's a stupid decision on your part, and you may face certain consequences if you make that stupid decision on behalf of somebody in your care, at least you're entering that decision with clarity. The wilful ignorance of some of these religious fruitbats just avoids that entirely.
It also seems to me that there is an avoidance of something I think of as emotional responsibility. I remember being in the childbirth center where my wife was having a prenatal appointment. I overheard one woman say to another, "I'm sorry about your loss," and I gather this was about a miscarriage, a loss that my wife and I had experienced twice. Our feelings were all over the place in different ways on each of these occasions, and I don't think we handled them or their consequences well, but at least we had them and expressed them. The woman being addressed here just said, "It's the lord's way," in a monotone, and I remember thinking, "Have you cut yourself off from feeling anything about this? Is that what turning it over to god means? Cutting off your capacity to feel?" That was at least 22 years ago, and it still pisses me off. Once you cut yourself off from independent feelings and turn all that over to Sky-Daddy, you leave yourself capable of anything, such as murder in SD's name, etc.
But of course that's serving a higher cause.
OK, now I've depressed myself further. I think I'll go home. My work is done here.
Frank Moorman, skeptic
Another interpretation
Regarding the "It's the Lord's way" comment--
When my Mom died, I couldn't talk about it in public--couldn't even mention it or hear it mentioned--for about six weeks without bursting into tears. A comment like this can be a good way to deflect discussion you just can't bear, whether you are a believer or not. Sure it would be more honest not to imply you believe, but sometimes in times of stress, it just isn't worth it.
Post new comment