THIS WEEK IN SECULAR NEWS Back to the dark ages: Because he's smarter than all those scientists, "Health" Secretary RFK Jr. has done his own research! Apparently, it’s not germs causing illness, but rather "miasma theory," a non-reality-based fantasy from pre-science days that boils down to "bad air makes you sick." Kennedy expands this ancient fairytale to include modern "environmental poisons" like, gasp, vaccines and pesticides. Experts, those sticklers for evidence, are quick to point out that vaccines are, you know, effective. It's a bold move for a Health Secretary to embrace ideas predating modern medicine. More. Ain't no love like Christian hate: Despite GOP leaders quickly calling him a Marxist, Vance Boelter (accused of the Minnesota lawmaker assassinations) held deeply religious and conservative views. Friends and colleagues describe Boelter as a devout evangelical who attended Trump campaign rallies. He was also an evangelical pastor who traveled to Africa, where he was recorded preaching about the U.S. as a "bad place" where churches don't oppose abortion. Authorities found his kill list of abortion rights advocates at the scene. More. Happy birthday, Donnie: The Satanic Temple (TST) proudly announced the June 14th opening of "The President's Yuge Most Beautiful Tremendous Satanic Abortion Clinic" in Maine. This telehealth clinic, TST’s third, aims to combat decreasing abortion access by providing free, religiously protected care. Emphasizing that the Satanic Abortion Ritual is a recognized religious practice, TST seeks to expand their network, with patients only covering prescription costs, advancing their mission for accessible reproductive services for all. ✊ More. This is fine: The Supreme Court will hear a case challenging a New Jersey subpoena seeking donor information from faith-based "crisis pregnancy centers." These centers, which are fronts to spread anti-abortion propaganda, use misinformation and scare tactics to trick vulnerable patients. New Jersey's attorney general seeks to investigate whether the centers mislead donors or clients about provided reproductive health services. The narrow question is if centers can federally challenge the subpoena on First Amendment grounds, but it touches broader abortion rights issues, pitting free speech against consumer protection. More. |
|