“If you thought comedy was dead, you should have been in Britain after the pope cited the opinion of a Byzantine emperor who died 600 years ago.”

That’s how Taki Theodoracopulos (yes, that is his real name) began his column in the latest edition of The America Conservative. Apparently a 49-year-old man named Ronnie Hutton was jailed in Britain after, get this, he was accused of “revving his car in a racist manner.”

As Taki puts it, tongue delightfully in cheek: “Yes, in these politically correct times, engines too can be racists, especially if revved up.”

Maybe Hutton really was trying to intimidate the Libyan couple who were in tradional Arab dress and walking nearby. (He says he was trying to solve an engine problem by revving it, as the article linked to above eventually notes.) And we’re not defending his two-word response to a retired police officer who intervened. But the idea of getting in any sort of trouble for supposedly revving an engine in a “racist manner” still strikes us as ridiculous.

Found this via Albert Mohler’s blog:

MADRID (Reuters) – Spain’s parliament is to declare support for rights to life and freedom for great apes on Wednesday, apparently the first time any national legislature will have recognized such rights for non-humans.

Parliament is to ask the government to adhere to the Great Ape Project, which would mean recognizing that our closest genetic relatives should be part of a “community of equals” with humans, supporters of the resolution said.

The move in a country better known for bull-fighting would follow a string of social reforms which have converted Spain from one of Europe’s most conservative nations into a liberal trailblazer.

Backers of the resolution expect support from the Socialist Party of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, whose government has legalized gay marriage and reduced the influence of the Catholic Church in education.

“With this, Spain will make itself a world leader in protection of the great apes,” said Pedro Pozas, general secretary of the Great Ape Project’s Spanish branch.

The resolution, presented by a Green Party parliamentarian, prompted criticism and some ridicule at first.

Spanish media quoted the Catholic Archbishop of Pamplona as saying it was ludicrous to grant apes rights not enjoyed by unborn children, in a reference to Spanish abortion laws.

Agent Tim has written A Sorrowful Memory, A Great Reminder, an excellent post that reviews what happened with Terri Schiavo. It has been almost a year since Schiavo’s feeding tube was permanently removed.

Agent Tim also has a list of other bloggers who have solemnly marked the anniversary.

In other news . . . .

A former Muslim is now facing the death penalty for converting to Christianity—in Afghanistan. (I will refrain from any comments on how this could happen in a country that the U.S. theoretically liberated.) As Michelle Malkin noted on her blog, this story hasn’t received nearly enough attention. Here are the details from VOA News:

An Afghan man who recently admitted he converted to Christianity faces the death penalty under the country’s strict Islamic legal system. The trial is a critical test of Afghanistan’s new constitution and democratic government.

The case is attracting widespread attention in Afghanistan, where local media are closely monitoring the landmark proceedings.

Abdul Rahman, 40, was arrested last month, accused of converting to Christianity.

Under Afghanistan’s new constitution, minority religious rights are protected but Muslims are still subject to strict Islamic laws.

Interestingly enough, those who have paid attention to the goings-on in Iraq know that the Iraq constitution is eerily similar to Afghanistan’s. The Iraq constitution states in Article 2: “Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation,” and: “No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.” (See the full text of the Iraq constitution here.)

But back to the news story:

Appearing in court earlier this week Rahman insisted he should not be considered an infidel, but admitted he is a Christian. He says he still believes in the almighty Allah, but cannot say for sure who God really is. “I am,” he says, “a Christian and I believe in Jesus Christ.”

Rahman reportedly converted more than 16 years ago after spending time working in Germany. Officials say his family, who remain observant Muslims, turned him over to the authorities. On Thursday the prosecution told the court Rahman has rejected numerous offers to embrace Islam. Prosecuting attorney Abdul Wasi told the judge that the punishment should fit the crime.

He says Rahman is a traitor to Islam and is like a cancer inside Afghanistan. Under Islamic law and under the Afghan constitution, he says, the defendant should be executed. The court has ordered a delay in the proceedings to give Rahman time to hire an attorney. Under Afghan law, once a verdict is given, the case can be appealed twice to higher courts.

This is the first case in which the defendant has admitted to converting and is refusing to back down, even while facing the death penalty.

La Shawn Barber has been blogging about this case, as has this woman, who writes:

It makes me humble and quite ashamed of myself when I read of the bravery and strength of faith exhibited by those who choose Christianity when it is the hardest thing to be.

Others who have posted some exceptionally interesting thoughts about the case: Junkyard Blog, Below the Beltway, and others.

The general consensus seems to be so far, “This is what we fought for?”

Neither the Afghan nor the U.S. president have spoken out against the case so far, although they may not have been aware of this until very recently, or may still not be aware of it.

And this is one of them. Michelle Malkin has a post about two-year-old brain-damaged Charlotte Wyatt, who has been perhaps sentenced to die—against the wishes of her own parents.

The parents of Charlotte Wyatt have been told that doctors are to be allowed to let their profoundly ill baby daughter die if they feel it is in her best interests. A High Court judge yesterday lifted a previous ruling that she should always be resuscitated, on the grounds that the two-year-old was now on a “downward rather than an upward trend”.

Mr Justice Hedley heard an emergency application from doctors treating her that she had developed an aggressive chest infection and was unlikely to survive any moves to keep her alive.

“Medical evidence speaks with one voice, that ventilation simply will not achieve the end for which no doubt the parents would wish,” he said. Charlotte’s condition was said to be “deteriorating” last night. Her mother, Debbie, 24, from Portsmouth, still believes that if her daughter were ventilated she would recover.

But Mr Justice Hedley said there had been a “very significant deterioration in Charlotte’s condition”. It is the fifth time he has had to make a ruling about Charlotte’s treatment.

Doctors at St Mary’s Hospital, Portsmouth, had previously argued that her life was so intolerable that if her condition worsened they should be allowed to withhold treatment. Charlotte suffers from severe lung, brain and kidney damage. But her condition improved so much that last October the judge removed a ruling allowing doctors to let her die.

Her parents have started a blog which you can check out here.

StopTheACLU wants to know, “Is this the direction America is headed? Is this where the ACLU, and the “right to die” folks will take us?”

Rottweiler Puppy:

So what’s going on? Well, since the hospital treating Charlotte were betting on her contracting a life-threatening infection last winter, and since their original dns order was granted on the assumption that she was ‘almost certainly’ going to succumb over a year ago, it really does look as though the hospital, and Judge Hedley’s, positions haven’t changed all that much. Indeed, on the strength of this, latest, ruling, it seems Hedley didn’t so much lift the dns order last October as postpone it until such a time as Charlotte actually needed resuscitating.

What’s being practiced here, then, is a kind anti-medicine, where, bizarrely, doctors dash into court at the first sign of their patient’s ill-health and demand the right to withhold life-saving treatment. You’d be hard-pushed to conceive of a situation that more aptly demonstrated the utter moral sickness at the heart of the anti-life movement.

Right Wing Nuthouse has some excellent thoughts, as does Conservative Culture, who writes:

Strange isn’t it. Doctors walk out of an execution of a convicted rapist and murder. Then there is a doctor ready to kill an infant still in the womb. But no problem, just spout “Women’s Choice.”

See also Pro Life Blogs; WizBang; BizzyBlog; and Outside The Beltway.

Truly a disturbing story. Unfortunately, this type of thing appears to be happening more and more often.

Adam’s Blog has an interesting and extremely disturbing story on the possiblity of forced abortions in the Netherlands. It’s definitely worth checking out.

I happened to run across this picture at the Paleoconservative Youth Movement blog.

Apparently the Muslim in the picture is protesting the recent cartoon controversy, although the message on the sign (“Behead those who say Islam is violent”) is so obviously bizarre that it makes me wonder if it isn’t some sort of a joke.

If that guy is serious though . . . well, that pretty much speaks for itself.

It’s difficult to keep up with all the updates about the confrontation between Iran, the U.S., and the rest of the world over Iran’s decision to go ahead with a nuclear program, but by all accounts it appears as though the situation is quickly deteriorating. The latest Associate Press article reports that Iran’s president has “denounced” Western nations for threatening to refer Iran to the United Nations’ Security Council for possible sanctions:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Iran’s president said his country has not violated the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which allows signatories to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel.

“There is no evidence to prove Iran’s diversion (toward nuclear weapons),” Ahmadinejad said at a news conference.

His comments came a day after Iran threatened to end surprise inspections and other cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency if it is referred to the Security Council. Europe and the United States have been trying to build support for such a move, saying more two years of acrimonious negotiations have reached a dead end. But they faced resistance from China, which warned the move could only escalate the confrontation.

Iran insists its program is peaceful, intended only to produce electricity, but the U.S. and others believe it is seeking to develop atomic weapons…

It is interesting to note Iran’s brazen—bordering on downright stupid?—defiance of U.S. demands. We know that one result of the war in Iraq has been to further unify Muslims against the U.S., and as one friend suggested to me, it almost appears as though Iran is trying to goad America into attacking for perhaps the same purpose.

The Associated Press is reporting that Israel has suspended contact with Pat Robertson for his suggestion that Ariel Sharon’s stroke was punishment from God for “dividing” Israel.

The decision, announced Wednesday by Israeli officials, does not affect other Christian groups that also consider it their spiritual duty to support Israel as fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

Israeli leaders see the Christian allies as tireless lobbyists in Washington and elsewhere. The evangelicals also funnel millions of dollars each year to Jewish settlers in the West Bank and — before last year’s pullout — the Gaza Strip.

Tourism Minister Abraham Hirchson said he gave instructions to “stop all contact” with groups associated with Robertson. Last week, Robertson implied Sharon’s massive stroke was a blow for “dividing God’s land” with the withdrawal from Gaza and four West Bank settlements.

Needless to say, this is an extremely interesting situation here. I know there are a lot of people out there who firmly believe that the Jews are still God’s chosen people today, and that the land now known as Israel belongs to the Jews. I also know that a lot of these same people strongly support Pat Robertson and even agree with (or at least, are unwilling to criticize) the statement that Pat made about Sharon and his stroke.

But now the Israeli government—the supposed government of God’s chosen people—has cut off contact with Robertson for daring to say what he said. How do Christians, many of whom seem to hold to an “Israel first, America second” stance, deal with this? I am curious to see their reaction to this news, especially since Israel also said they would no longer deal with anyone who agrees with or supports what Robertson said:

“We want to see who in the group supports his (Robertson’s) statements. Those who support the statements cannot do business with us . . .,” Hartuv said.

UPDATE: Robertson has sent a letter apologizing for his statements.

In a letter dated Wednesday and marked for hand delivery to Sharon’s son Omri, Robertson called the Israeli prime minister a “kind, gracious and gentle man” who was “carrying an almost insurmountable burden of making decisions for his nation.”

“My concern for the future safety of your nation led me to make remarks which I can now view in retrospect as inappropriate and insensitive in light of a national grief experienced because of your father’s illness,” the letter said.

Israel isn’t feeling too forgiving, though:

Despite the apology, it was doubtful Robertson would be brought back into the fold of the proposed Christian Heritage Center in the northern Galilee region, where tradition says Jesus lived and taught.

The exclusion carries a special irony for a preacher who helped define television ministries: The planned complex is to include studios and satellite links for live broadcasts from the Holy Land.

Rami Levi, director of marketing for Israel’s tourism ministry, told The Associated Press that the government remains “outraged” by Robertson’s remarks.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has apparently shown significant improvement the last few days—so much, in fact, that the AFP is reporting that Sharon’s doctors have been stunned by his progress:

“He is a very strong person. If someone had told me this was going to happen a week ago, I wouldn’t have believed it,” said Felix Umansky in an interview Wednesday.

Sharon’s surprising recovery has sparked talk that the Prime Minister could be politically active again very soon and even participate in the upcoming Israeli elections in March. However, doctors are cautioning against expecting too much.

Despite growing hopes among supporters that Sharon might still be able to lead his new Kadima party into March elections, the Argentine surgeon stressed it could take months to know if he would fully recover his faculties.

If Pat Robertson felt Sharon’s stroke was punishment/judgment from God, than what does he make of what appears to be the beginning of an amazing recovery?

Even those of us who are not Catholic will be interested in hearing that an Italian court is going to decide whether Jesus ever existed or not—and whether the Roman Catholic Church is breaking the law by teaching that he did exist.

Via CNN.com:

ROME, Italy (Reuters)—Forget the U.S. debate over intelligent design versus evolution.

An Italian court is tackling Jesus—and whether the Roman Catholic Church may be breaking the law by teaching that he existed 2,000 years ago.

The case pits against each other two men in their 70s, who are from the same central Italian town and even went to the same seminary school in their teenage years.

The defendant, Enrico Righi, went on to become a priest writing for the parish newspaper. The plaintiff, Luigi Cascioli, became a vocal atheist who, after years of legal wrangling, is set to get his day in court later this month.

“I started this lawsuit because I wanted to deal the final blow against the Church, the bearer of obscurantism and regression,” Cascioli told Reuters.

Cascioli says Righi, and by extension the whole Church, broke two Italian laws. The first is “Abuso di Credulita Popolare” (Abuse of Popular Belief) meant to protect people against being swindled or conned. The second crime, he says, is “Sostituzione di Persona,” or impersonation.

The judge who has presided over the hearing has repeatedly tried to dismiss the case, but to no avail. You can read the entire story here.