Not so inconsistent with how Christianity has been practiced in the past (Spanish Inquisition ring a bell, anyone?) and the looting of resources of native cultures by "Missionaries"... even to the extent of hijacking a pre-Christian "pagan" celebration (winter solstice) in order to draw adherents... Why pick at historical nits when there are much more impactful transgressions related to the holiday celebration???

Congratulations! Your video, Skunk Sprays Inquisitive Bear, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 429 Badge!

Your video, Skunk Sprays Inquisitive Bear, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Nope....that's what you would expect....and nobody expects the Newty inquisition.

Everybody's singing the same song
It goes "tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight"
I never realized these artists thought so much about dying

But truth be told we all have the same end
Could make you cry, cry, cry, cry, cry
But I'm telling you
This is the best news you're getting all week

Oh sure it's ruling the airwaves
What remains of the airwaves
And we're frankly thankful for the market psychology you're hipping us to

And all the hits are saying the same thing
There's only tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight, tonight
Then life is finite
But shit, it feels like forever
It feels like forever

Oh is everybody feeling the same stuff?
We're all wild
Except for you
And you know who you are
This is a love song

And you're getting older
I promise you this; you're getting older
And there's improvements unless
You're such a winner
That the future's a nightmare
And there's nothing I can do
Nothing anyone can do about this

And oh, I'm offering you a chance to get even
But oh, you know very well the dialect of negation
Sure enemies haunt you with spit and derision
But friends are the ones who can put you in an exile
But that's not right

And you're too sharp to be used
Or you're too shocked from being used
By these bullying children of the fabulous
Raffling off limited edition shoes

And what's it you do again?
Oh I'm a reminder
The hobbled veteran of the disk shop inquisition
Set to parry the cocksure of men's sick filth
With my own late era middle-aged ramblings

Every lover favors the same things
It's all "touch me, touch me, touch me, touch me tonight"
We maybe realize what it is we need before we die

And luck is always better than skill at things
We're flying blind
Oh good gracious
I sound like my mom

But out of the little rooms and onto the streets
You've lost your internet and we've lost our memory
We had a paper trail that led to our secrets
But embarrassing pictures have now all been deleted
By versions of selves that we thought were the best ones
'Till versions of versions of others repeating
Come laughing at everything we thought was important
While still making mistakes that you thought you had learned from
And reasonable people know better than you
That cost in the long run but they don't know the short game
And terrible people know better than you
They're used and abused of the once so dear listener
So you will be badgered and taunted until death
You're missing a party that you'll never get over
You hate the idea that you're wasting your youth
That you stood in the background oh until you got older
But that's all lies
That's all lies

That's a convenient, but likely baseless claim. Do you have any peer reviewed studies to back it up?
It's the same thing that allows it in every religion. Immoral people assume leadership positions and instruct faithful to act atrociously. Christianity was just as inhumane, the phrase isn't "nobody expects the Muslim inquisition". It's misguided to get myopic about history in order to demonize one religion, they all fall into this pitfall, it's the nature of blind faith that it's easily abused.
A good question might be what is it about religion that it makes normal people act as if they have mental issues, and I think I just answered that.
Looking at the issue honestly, not biased against "them", is essential. It allows you to ask "did my culture find a way to stop this behavior, and if so, how." Since no culture seems 100% free from it, pointing fingers isn't helpful. Since it's true that they aren't the only ones to "be bad", how is it dishonest? What fact does it ignore?
The left is not the factually challenged side of the two. The left believes science, the right doesn't. Issue settled.

Love the inquisitiveness of Mrs. Furball.

And what Pograms are the church conducting? What inquisitions are the church conducting? What political leaders are the churches jailing? What scientists are the church burning? What bible translators are the church burning? What wars are the church waging? What crusades? What adultresses? What witches?

"Let me just tell you something -- for hundreds and thousands of years, this kind of discussion would have been impossible to have, or those like us would have been having it at the risk of our lives. Religion now comes to us in this smiley-face, ingratiating way-- because it had to give so much ground and because we know so much more. But you've no right to forget the way it behaved when it was strong, and when it really did believe that it had god on its side."

--Christopher Hitchens

You can't possibly be serious.

Very, very interesting -- thanks for the sift!

I'd love to see more, specifically about the US / Cuba talks and the Pope's involvement. As an atheist, I tend to think of Catholicism / the Pope / organized religion in general as generally having a primarily negative influence on world affairs (Crusades, Inquisition, birth control, anti-condoms, molestation, homophobia, etc.), but negotiating peace and better relations between the US and Cuba is a pretty undeniably positive thing.

I knew Latin American countries were highly Catholic, but I kinda figured that some of the USSR anti-religious stance would have rubbed off on Cuba. I guess maybe it did, but the missile crisis and fall of the Berlin wall / end of the cold war was long enough ago that Cuba has greater freedom to make up their own minds on this sort of thing.

Enough so that perhaps the Pope's involvement was necessary, or at least very helpful, to act as a mediator between the two sides. Props where props are due.

Anyway, all quite interesting.

If vegans are getting into arguments with you about whether their food is healthier than yours, well, maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. I listen to my buddy extolling the benefits of his paleo diet. If he's quick about it, I don't see the harm, whether he's right or not. If he won't shut up about it, or tries to push it on me, he's being a jerk. It sounds like you might have met some vegans who are jerks. So have I.

I also don't think your final question was genuine. You've clearly thought about this long enough to see how avoiding animal products reduces the amount of mistreatment. If you don't think it's important, or you don't think it's worth it, that's fine. The population of dairy cows is large enough that the 1-2million vegans in this country certainly affects how many are bred and subjected to the treatment they receive.

But telling me I shouldn't want meat is just bizarre. It should be pretty clear by now that I'm a vegan because I object to needlessly killing or mistreating animals, and try to reduce that number. I'm not offended by eating meat, just what has to happen to get it on my plate. If Nike used child slave labor to make its shoes, and I didn't approve of child slave labor, would you criticize me for buying another brand of shoes because I "shouldn't want shoes?" Meat tastes great. I don't like killing animals. There is no contradiction between those two sentences.

It sounds like your issue is with the "tells you all the time" part of your analogy, and that's tricky. On the one hand, people who sermonize and try to vilify your decisions are being jerks. On the other hand, if a cause is important enough, it's clearly worth being a jerk. It's a sliding scale. Civil rights campaigners were moralizing jerks too, but in hindsight, we mostly feel they were justified. The inquisition, less so. Some animal activists feel they fall reasonably well on the scale.

There's a long history of people trying to make other lead moral lives. And there's a long history of people getting various degrees of pissed off about it. I would encourage you to tell individuals who actively annoy you to stuff it, and to just relax about the rest of us.

And if you want moralizers to leave you alone, I'd also encourage you not to call their moral choices "stupid" on the internet. Counter-intuitive, I know, but give it a try.

First of all, Flassbeck is the only(!) prominent economist in Germany arguing strictly against the madness of austerity. But he's living in the border region between France and Switzerland, so he's a European more than a German.

Among all the economic think tanks in Germany, only the union-sponsored IMK makes a credible case against this madness. Everyone else is more or less in line with the neoclassic perspective. Not a Keynesian in sight, much less a post-Keynesian group.

But now to the meat of the issue. There will be no major political shift in Germany in the near future. As Flassbeck stated, only a single party opposes the financial inquisition commonly known as the Troika. Unfortunatly, it's the socialists, and despite overwhelmingly popular policies, they are still an absolute no-go for large swaths of the demos thanks to the authoritarian regime in East Germany. Sucks, but it is what it is.

So it's up to the French people once again to save the continent from itself. Noone else has the balls or the influence to put an end to this misguided union. How likely is it for the French government to openly challenge German hegemony soon? I wouldn't bet on it. Which means the Greeks are fuuuucked².

In any case, what would it take for Greece to stabilise? And by stabilise I'm talking about a return to a manageable level of unemployment, a working healthcare system and social safety net. A conservative guesstimate would be a public deficit of ~10% of GDP for at least 5 straight years. Alternatively, the EIB would have to prop up Greece with €50b a year for the same number of years. To get a working bureaucracy, to undo four decades of nepotism, Greece would basically need a generation to reestablish itself as a state – and it would require appropriate financing.

Now remember which of Syriza's demands is painted as most controversial right now: debt restructuring. Debt restructuring, while neccessary at some point, is entirely pointless as long as the fiscal policy remains contractionary. Greece needs austerity to stop, right the fuck now. Greece needs to provide income-generating jobs for its people. All the talk about debt is utterly pointless, because at 25% unemployment, we're looking at permanent damage in every way imaginable. The social toll alone should be completely unacceptable within Europe if we truly gave two shits about human dignity.

So, even if Syriza get their way tomorrow, Greece would still be flushed down the shitter. Syriza's proposal is contractionary. Any primary surplus in this situation is contractionary.

Greece is done within the Euro. The use of a foreign currency makes it impossible to use appropriate fiscal policy on their own. Unfortunatly, but also intentionally, the currency issuer, the ECB, is placed outside the democratic control of the European Parliament, or any national parliament for that matter. Fiscal policy within the EZ was taken out of the control of our elected representatives to ensure that the neoclassic/neoliberal approach was irrevocably built into the system. We can thank Germany for that, by the way.

There is a shortage of spending in Greece. There is a shortage of spending in Spain. There is a shortage of spending in Portugal, Ireland, Italy, France. There is a shortage of spending in Germany, for fuck's sake. Put the ECB under control of the EP, add full employment (2-3% unemployment) to its mandate, and have them finance the appropriate programs at the national level. The output gap in Europe is so massive, the un(der)employment so vast, they could spend a trillion Euros and inflation would still not reach the agreed upon target value of 2%.

All it would take to change the rules is consent from every national parliament in the union. Might as well go skinny-dipping instead.

I just watched Paul Mason's interview with Varoufakis and it's been rather depressing. Most of what he says is perfectly reasonable given the structural confines of the EZ. But it's all based on a belief in "mutual interests", a belief that negotiations can, and will, lead to a "mutually beneficial deal" with the financial inquisition.

Not sure if he's just adhering to his role as FinMin or if he truly believes it. I'd say it's a questionable assumption at best. From over here, it certainly looks like the creditors' position is "pay up, bitch!", end of story. Schäuble is not going to compromise, the majority of parliament is all in on neoliberalism and most of the electorate either doesn't care or even consents. Merkel might agree to a deal, given how she holds no convictions whatsoever except that being in power is better than not being in power. But Schäuble cannot be reined it with half the party being in lockstep with his actions.

No deal worth signing. Either full capitulation or they'll continue this charade with their buddies from PASOK and ND.

I suppose it's a bit of a chicken and egg question. I'd say that the reason you can make fun of the pope without repercussions is because of the relative prosperity and subsequent education levels in the west. It certainly wasn't always the case (the Inquisition, etc).

I tend to think that Islam would follow a similar course if it's adherents had a better standard of living. Education and comfort are kryptonite to religion

From teh Interwebs in case you're thinking the octopus is being abused:

SEATTLE (Reuters) - A giant male octopus caught on cell phone video scaling his glass display tank at the Seattle Aquarium and reaching several tentacles over its open top has sparked Internet speculation that the massive mollusk was trying to mount an escape bid.

But aquarium officials say the octopus, named Ink, was not attempting a jailbreak in the video, which has gone viral on the Internet, but simply learning to embrace his new home with all eight arms.

"It was not an escape attempt," aquarium spokesman Tim Kuniholm said of the video, in which Ink inched his way up the cylindrical glass tank to squeals from onlookers. "It's a new exhibit and the animal was exploring his boundaries."

A Seattle aquarium employee later put Ink's arms back inside the case, and a so-called "evening cap" was fastened on top to help keep the curious fellow in place, Kuniholm said.

"Octopuses are very inquisitive by nature, and in this case ... Ink is an overachiever," he said.

Ink is one of two new giant Pacific octopuses on display at the aquarium. Found in Puget Sound, they are the world's largest species of octopuses, weighing on average about 90 pounds (41 kg) and measuring 20 feet (6.1 meters) across.

Kuniholm said the two male octopuses are kept in separate homes at the aquarium because the species is solitary by nature, with males and females coming together only to mate during their short 3-to-4-year lifespan.

In the next year, Ink will be released back into the wild as part of an ongoing education and conservation program for the species, the aquarium said.

(Reporting by Victoria Cavaliere; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Sandra Maler)

"teaches right behavior"....
Do you mean like owning slaves, murdering infidels and heretics, raping women, crusading, inquisitioning, conquesting, etc.... Yeah, great book of morality, and wonderful moral behavior exhibited by it's believers...not.

It's only because people fail to follow the religious ideas wholly that religion is tolerated at all. If people acted like the fanatical Muslims, taking every word as law and acting on it, Christianity would have been outlawed in the US at the inception of the country (indeed, many of the founding fathers seemed to want this, at least in part). The 3 major western religions all require 'holy war' to spread the belief system if read honestly.

What he said is that only psychotics need religion to restrain them from immorality. If you aren't psychotic, religion harms you more than helps you.

Any catholic hospital would qualify as one opened by psychotics, since one of their 10 important rules is "no statues of anything", yet they do nothing but worship statues and icons. They institutionally ignore any 'rule' that's inconvenient, and insist on absolute adherence to any that further their current goals, which may change 180 deg tomorrow. Sure sounds psychotic to me.