Libertarianism in 4 Words

The hashtag #libertarianismin4words was trending on Monday, leading to some amusing critiques of what I will charitably call the political ideology, along with some breathless efforts to decry the ignorance of the mockers and some noble attempts to find four words to describe the libertarian worldview that weren’t all either “freedom” or “liberty.”

I haven’t exactly made my thoughts on libertarianism a secret around here, so I don’t need to rehash or go into any great detail here. I will note, perhaps gratuitously, that four words is probably a fair limit for defenders of the ideology, at least since my own experience suggests that it has nothing to recommend it aside from abstract nouns.


I took the liberty (see what I did there?) of Storifying some tweets that I found amusing. This is by no means a complete set of tweets I liked, but rather just the ones that came up on a quick search of the hashtag:

Here were my thoughts for those who, as always, claimed that the critics just. don’t. get. it:

Share

Take this Quiz, Y’All

My accent or dialect is closest to that found in Irving, Texas, or Baton Rouge or New Orleans, Louisiana, according to a New York Times quiz.

I find this a bit odd, considering I’ve never lived in any of those cities, and Irving, as part of the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, is a place I specifically endeavor to avoid. The map suggests that my dialect is common to much of Texas, though, so I guess it’s okay. Continue reading

Share

Famous Fictional ENFP’s

20131227-110305.jpgI don’t put much stock in the Myers-Briggs personality test—I rate them somewhere above palm readers, but below tarot cards. I do occasionally find it intriguing to see what anonymous researchers summarize about me. Someone has compiled a list of fictional characters based on their Myers-Briggs type, using a methodology they describe as “the best guesses of lots of fans” (h/t Michelle).

For those unfamiliar with the test, you can read about it Continue reading

Share

This Week in WTF, December 27, 2014

– This week’s headline requiring no additional commentary: Florida man tries to buy 12-pack of beer with baby alligator.

– Wait, here’s another one: Naked man on snowmobile terrorizes Swedish lake community.

Share

Stay Classy, Utah County Clerks (UPDATED x 2)

And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love…

A county clerk and chief deputy clerk in New Mexico resigned from their positions after the state’s Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage last week.

Roosevelt County Clerk Donna Carpenter and Deputy Clerk Janet Collins resigned from their posts early Friday morning, one day after the state’s Supreme Court ruled that barring same-sex couples from marrying violates the state’s constitutional right to equal protection.

Although an official reason for the clerks’ resignation has not been provided, county commissioners have told the Associated Press and other media outlets that both Collins and Carpenter made their intention of quitting clear, should same-sex marriage be legalized in the state.

Roosevelt County Commissioner Bill Cathey told AP that the two had made it apparent that they would quit “rather than be associated with that … she told us in the past that’s what she would do,” he said. “… I am personally very disappointed in the decision of the judges, and I don’t blame our clerk for doing what she did.”

***

Commissioner Jake Lopez, a Democrat, added to the ABQ Journal that the clerk and her deputy also told him their personal values interfered with their distributing of same-sex marriage licenses. “[Carpenter] said she would rather resign because she wasn’t going to provide any licenses to people who marry like that.”

***

Although gay activist groups in the state lauded the [Utah] Supreme Court’s decision, supporters of traditional marriage have vowed to continue fighting for a ban on same-sex marriage. Following last week’s court ruling, State Sen. Bill Sharer (R-Farmington) said that when the legislature reconvenes in January he will propose a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, and if the amendment is adopted by state legislature it will then be voted on by New Mexico’s residents.

“We shall continue the debate,” Sharer said in a statement following the ruling. “Until the people accept it, it is not settled.” Gov. Susana Martinez, a Republican, also said in a statement that she would prefer the issue of same-sex marriage be left to the voters, not the courts.

…Yes they’ll know we are Christians by our love.

Still, better that they quit than demand special religious exemptions to their job duties.

UPDATE (12/26/2013): Via my alert and fair-minded friend Ethan:

OK, you need to be fair; I’ve read stories of other county clerks there working through lunches and making extra efforts to process the large number of marriage license applications that were coming through.

UPDATE (12/30/2013): As of December 30, all of Utah’s county clerks have agreed to follow the court’s ruling, i.e. follow the law, i.e. do their jobs.

Share

Whatever Happened to Those Rumored Algorithms That Could Recognize, Uh, Other Human Features?

20131226-112955.jpgI have used Chatroulette exactly once, out of morbid curiosity. After being “nexted” 4-5 times by bored-looking dudes who were disappointed (either because I don’t have breasts or because I wasn’t showing what I do have—I don’t know & I don’t judge), I decided it wasn’t really my scene. It has led to a few funny moments, I’ve heard, but I got to wondering whatever happened to those plans I read about a while back for software to block the unwelcomely-pervy side of Chatroulette—yes, in my family, holiday banter includes discussion of penis-recognition software (or PRS, as I’ll call it.)

My brother-in-law and I had an interesting unusual discussion about the process of creating a PRS algorithm. Not so much about the coding itself as the awkward discussions that might begin with “Why do you have so many pictures of penises open on the desktop of your work computer?” But did those rumors ever lead to anything? Continue reading

Share

I Am an Atheist Who Celebrates Christmas

By Anita Mishra (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia CommonsDeal with it.

And a happy winter-holiday-of-your-choice to you and yours!

Photo credit: By Anita Mishra (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Share

I See Someone Else Already Said It

I’m glad I’m not the only one who saw a sort of reverse synergy between the right wing’s general reaction to the A&E/Phil Robertson affair and the ongoing Hobby Lobby case (h/t PZ Myers).

20131223-222308.jpg

The people saying A&E has no right as an employer to control what an employee says (Despite a contract) are the same people saying that Hobby Lobby, as an employer, has the right to control an employee’s birth control.

Y’all need to decide which way you want it.

Share

Texas Court Clarifies How to Appeal a “Dangerous Dog” Ruling

The law governing “dangerous dogs” is not as well-defined as it should be, with jurisdiction often split between municipal and county courts. Procedures may vary widely from one municipality or county to another, including between a municipality and the county in which it is located. In an attempt to be brief, if a dog bites or otherwise attacks someone, the local animal control authority may take possession of the dog, and a judge must make a determination as to whether the dog meets certain criteria to be declared “dangerous” (a statutorily-defined term.) The law mandates various requirements on the owner of a “dangerous” dog, including maintaining extra insurance and keeping the dog in an approved enclosure. If the court finds that the dog caused the death of, or serious bodily injury to, a person, it can order the dog destroyed.

Chapter 822 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, which covers regulation of non-livestock domestic animals (e.g. dogs, cats, etc.) does not provide specifics about appealing a municipal or county court’s determination that a dog is “dangerous”

In Romano v. Texas, a woman fostering a dog for a rescue group was bitten (the court says “attacked,” but I’m assuming one or more bites were involved) by the dog, an a Montgomery County justice of the peace ruled that the dog caused “serious bodily injury” and was to be destroyed pursuant to § 822.003(e) of the Health and Safety Code. The rescue group appealed to the county court, which dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, albeit without any findings of fact or conclusions of law. The group then appealed that dismissal to the 9th District Court of Appeals. Continue reading

Share