Spontaneous Monotony

Yes, apparently practising your religion (a human right, remember) is now illegal in Scotland. Celtic goalkeeper Artur Boruc has been given a police caution – which results in a criminal record – for the heinous crime of crossing himself.

Numerous politicians (Alex Salmond, who said ‘The procurator fiscal has taken leave of their senses.’, most notable among them) have condemned this assault on religious freedom, but whether they will actually do anything about it (a new law perhaps?) remains to be seen.

[EDIT] The Crown Office has issued a statement to the effect that (as suggested by Neil’s comment yesterday) the caution given to Artur Boruc was for other ‘offensive gestures’ rather than crossing himself.[/EDIT]

Yes, the solution to the so-called ‘obesity crisis’ is for Tony Blair to promote another crony to the rank of Minister (at taxpayers’ expense of course) and set lots of new targets. Of course, the simple solutions are being ignored. If proper cycle paths were provided (as opposed to painted sections of road which are not protected in any way) then lots more people would cycle rather than driving or using the bus. Perhaps if indirect tax hadn’t increased so much (warning: 92.4kb PDF, see p.6) then more people would be able to afford health food and gym memberships. But remember folks, keep working (or, for those of us not yet in the work force, buying things, as half of VAT still goes to the Exchequer rather than the EU), millions of extra government bureaucrats need your money!

Equally distasteful is the suggestion (not from politicians, but from some members of the public) that obese and overweight people should not receive NHS treatment for illnesses caused or aggravated by their weight. Everyone pays large amounts of money in tax towards the NHS, on the understanding that it will be there when they need it. If we are to withdraw treatment from fat people, then we should apply the underlying principle fairly, and also withdraw it from others whose risk-taking increases their chances of requiring the NHS service they’ve paid for. Like car drivers, people who exercise (stress fractures, heart attacks from over exertion, etc.), people who take stressful jobs, people who live in areas with high crime rates. Since the choices these people make also increases costs to the NHS, surely they should also have treatment refused if we are to enact the demands of those who would refuse it to the overweight and obese?

The Association of Chief Police Officers has asked for various ‘anti-social behaviour’ powers to be transferred from the courts to… the police. Yes, the police would be judge, jury and executioner and would not have to produce any evidence that their target had done anything wrong. Of course, anti-social behaviour is a devolved matter, so these plans would not apply in Scotland. Thank >insert name of deity of choice < for the Scottish Parliament.

PS: I’ve just noticed that a spokesman for the Police Federation – which represents the rank-and-file officers – has said that ‘enforcement of the law and some form of punishment should be two separate processes’. There may yet be hope

See Also

• Guardian Unlimited – Police want new powers of ‘instant justice’

Now, you might be aware that I’m no great fan of DRM-infected downloans. However, Amnesty International has a new ‘Make Some Noise’ fundraiser which will sell you 7 downloads for £5. Although they are available in WMA and AAC (complete with DRM viruses), they can also be downloaded in uninfected MP3 format at the same bitrate (the site claims they are 192kbps, they are in fact 167kbps, but what difference does 25kbps make?) as the DRM-infected files.

The pack comprises covers of John Lennon songs by groups such as Snow Patrol, the Black Eyed Peas and Maroon 5 – the latter of which did Happy Christmas (War is Over), the only one I’ve listened to so far given that it’s half even at night.

And no, I didn’t know anything about it when I wrote the previous post.

See Also

• Amnesty International – Make Some Noise

Over the past few years there has been an increasing craze for doing stupid stunts to raise money for charity. Sure, I can see the point of something like Band Aid, or at the other end of the scale a school ‘bring and buy sale’ – by actually selling something these raise funds from people who wouldn’t otherwise give money to charity.

However, I don’t see the point of sponsoring people to do stunts. If you are going to donate money to charity, then there is a fair chance that you are doing so because you think it is the right thing to do, and would have done so anyway (unlike, say, Band Aid, see my reasoning above). Why would such a person be more likely to donate to charity just because somebody promises to bunjee jump off a helicopter, or wear a dress made out of grass for a month? (OK, these are made up but you get the idea)

Apart from the ‘but why? argument, there is also something to be said for the problem that such stunts are actually less useful to charities than ‘straight’ donations. Why? The costs of doing the stunt itself.

For example, the latest media good guy aimed to raise £100,000 by walking across the River Mersey. Of course, there is no information on how much he actually raised, but that is not my problem with the stunt. The problem is that (for obvious safety reasons), he had a hovercraft and a helicopter following him for the duration of it. In other words, the costs of hiring, crewing and fuelling a hovercraft and a helicopter for an hour are deducted from the amount raised for the charity.