For once I agree with the ACLU – sort of:

Perched high above the ground in the middle of California’s Mojave National Preserve is a two-metre-tall structure known simply as the cross in the desert.

The white cross, erected 75 years ago by veterans to honour soldiers killed in the First World War, has plunged the U. S. Supreme Court once again into a debate on the separation of church and state.

In trying to defend the cross that sits atop Sunrise Rock, Justice Antonin Scalia has raised a far thornier issue: What does the cross represent? Is it a religious symbol of Christianity, and therefore an affront to other religions? Or is it simply a common symbol marking the place of the dead, which therefore transcends religiosity?

For now, the cross — made out of metal pipes — is covered with plywood to hide its significance.

The Supreme Court case, which is actually over complex land transfer rules, has prompted a fascinating philosophical exchange.

Peter Eliasberg, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Southern California, told the Supreme Court many Jewish war veterans would not wish to be honoured by “the predominant symbol of Christianity” and that the cross “signifies that Jesus is the son of God and died to redeem mankind.”

The lawyer is right: of course the cross “signifies that Jesus is the son of God and died to redeem mankind.” To pretend otherwise in an effort to surreptitiously slip Christian symbolism into public life is less than honest. The real problem is, the Cross and what Jesus bought for us when he died on it, is the foundation upon which Western civilisation was built: remove it and our concepts of good, evil, justice, charity, fairness, the sanctity of life and human dignity will all be blown away by the first puff of wind.

It has already begun: scientist, Peter Singer advocates infanticide for “defective” babies; situational ethicist Joseph Fletcher advocated decontaminating our gene pool by weeding out “idiots” and the “diseased” through compulsory abortions; Linus Pauling proposed a policy of segregating genetic “inferiors” by branding them with indelible marks; transhumanists like Lee Silver wish to develop human chimera (something that has already been done in the UK) by combining human and animal DNA to “improve” the species. These ideas have infiltrated today’s society, unfettered as it is by the restraints once imposed by the morality of the Cross. What a nightmare.

There are few things that I find less motivating than a motivational speaker and there is no motivational speaker that can provoke a stronger desire in me to do the opposite of what is being peddled than Anthony Robbins.

In one of Robbins’ latest endeavours, the use of other people’s tragedies to hawk his brand of self-stimulating vacuous ambition sets a new low even for motivational speakers:

At the same time that Spotted Dick is being renamed “Spotted Richard” to avoid giving the Flintshire County Council an attack of the vapours, we have this from the UN:

Children as young as five should be taught about explicit sex acts, according to guidelines from the United Nations.

The advice also calls for youngsters to learn about abortion, same-sex relationships and sexually transmitted diseases.

The draft report on sex education has been compiled by UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation.

Not to worry, everything should be fine so long as they can keep the children away from the Spotted Dick.

In a subtle move to counter their overly butch image, the police in the UK have come up with this:

The trans-gender police roadshow spreading the word at a gay festival.

Dressed in matching black t-shirts and handing out balloons, these are trans-gender members of the National Trans Police Association.

They were pictured at the recent Sparkle 09 festival in Manchester’s Gay Village in a bid to encourage the trans community to report more incidents to the police.

I understand the next pioneering effort will be to dress like criminals complete with tattoos and piercing, get to know the criminal community, hand out ducky little switchblade and lock-pick sets and encourage thugs to give themselves up on their own.

It’s not safe for a goat in Texas:

Jose Merced seems like an average Texan: He has a good job with an airline, a house in a suburban cul-de-sac, three chihuahuas and strong religious faith.

It is what transpired in a bedroom attached to his garage, however, that piqued his neighbours’ interest about five years ago. Police in Euless, a suburb of Fort Worth, received two anonymous calls warning that Mr. Merced, 46, was preparing to slit a goat’s throat.

When officers arrived at his door in 2004, they learned that for the past 16 years, Mr. Merced had been sacrificing more than goats — ducks, chickens, doves and turtles had all been brought to his door, and killed at the same time in ceremonies for a little-known religion.

Jose Merced astutely acknowledges that Goat sacrifice is never going to be popular in Texas; nevertheless, he is insisting that he has a right to practice his religion in spite of what the neighbours think. Curiously, the law is agreeing with him – which goes to show that the law, once freed of its tether to Judeo-Christian morality, has become just as deranged as Mr. Merced and his exsufflicate god.

In addition to the occasional goat and chicken, during 2005, with the law’s permission, the good people of Texas also sacrificed 77,374 babies to the god of convenience in abortion clinics – which goes to show that the law is not just daft, but scelestious.

Oh, sorry, it’s “poly” for polyamorous – what used to be called fornication. It would appear that it’s the next Big Thing, meaning that the poor old Anglican Church – in its never ending pursuit of trendy cultural decadence – has some catching up to do.

Terisa and Matt and Vera and Larry—along with Scott, who’s also at this dinner—are not swingers, per se; they aren’t pursuing casual sex. Nor are they polygamists of the sort portrayed on HBO’s Big Love; they aren’t religious, and they don’t have multiple wives. But they do believe in “ethical nonmonogamy,” or engaging in loving, intimate relationships with more than one person—based upon the knowledge and consent of everyone involved. They are polyamorous, to use the term of art applied to multiple-partner families like theirs, and they wouldn’t want to live any other way.

The idea of “ethical nonmonogamy,” or engaging in loving, intimate relationships with more than one person” is begging for liturgical enshrinement by heretical bishops like Michael Bird. I am looking forward to the inevitable densely impenetrable theological reflections that explain why being poly is not contrary to the machinations of contemporary biblical deconstructionism. Rowan Williams is half way there already:

Rowan Williams believes that gay sexual relationships can “reflect the love of God” in a way that is comparable to marriage, The Times has learnt. Gay partnerships pose the same ethical questions as those between men and women, and the key issue for Christians is that they are faithful and lifelong, he believes.

… “definitely come to the conclusion” that the Bible did not denounce faithful relationships between people who happened to be gay.

Substitute poly for gay and the Anglican church can take another confident step towards oblivion.

Human vs dog health care:

In the last few years, I have had the opportunity to compare the human and veterinary health services of Great Britain, and on the whole it is better to be a dog.

As a British dog, you get to choose (through an intermediary, I admit) your veterinarian. If you don’t like him, you can pick up your leash and go elsewhere, that very day if necessary. Any vet will see you straight away, there is no delay in such investigations as you may need, and treatment is immediate. There are no waiting lists for dogs, no operations postponed because something more important has come up, no appalling stories of dogs being made to wait for years because other dogs—or hamsters—come first.

Things aren’t much different in Canada: our much vaunted health care may be “free” but it doesn’t work very well.

A few years back our dog was sick and needed an ultrasound on his liver; the wait time was 1 day. Coincidentally, my wife also needed an ultrasound; the wait time was 2 months. While at the veterinary hospital I suggested a two for one discount – dog and wife – but was turned down.

My dog tells me that he finds it comforting that all humans are treated equally (badly) in our free health care system – but he doesn’t want to enrol.

This is what happens when you redefine marriage:

Amy Wolfe, a US church organist who claims to have objectum sexuality, a condition that makes sufferers be attracted to inanimate objects, plans to marry a magic carpet fairground ride.

This follows a “courtship” of 3,000 rides over ten years with the 80ft gondola ride called 1001 Nachts.

Miss Wolfe, 33, from Pennsylvania, will change her surname to Weber after the manufacturer of the ride she travels 160 miles to visit 10 times per year, according to reports

“I love him as much as women love their husbands and know we’ll be together forever,” she said.

Miss Wolfe first fell for the ride when she was 13: “I was instantly attracted to him sexually and mentally.

“I wasn’t freaked out, as it just felt so natural, but I didn’t tell anyone about it because I knew it wasn’t ‘normal’ to have feelings for a fairground ride.”

Ten years later, she decided to go back to Knoebels Amusement Park to declare her love. She now sleeps with a picture of the ride on her ceiling and carries its spare nuts and bolts around to feel closer to it.

Of course it’s normal: it could be the fairground gene and even if it isn’t it is simply a lifestyle choice. Who are we to judge what is normal; soon you will both be getting married in an Anglican church, adopting babies – if you don’t reproduce any little nuts of your own – and organising pride parades.