• An Australian art exhibit featuring photos of nude 13-year-olds got the go ahead after a brief police shutdown. Apparently some famous artists complained and the government decided it would be difficult to prosecute the photographer on child pornography charges. I'm not sure what would be so hard about it: ladies and gentleman of the jury, here is the photograph of an underage nude child; here is the person who took the picture. The child welfare advocate who made the complaint summed things up well IMHO: "This a picture of a naked 13-year-old child. We are just handing our children on a bloody plate to pedophiles."

• Closer to home, a couple in Ohio requested time in their local library to offer a financial planning seminar, using a room available to any and all non-profit organizations. Unfortunately they planned to quote the Bible occasionally in their discussions, an admission so heinous their request was refused. Maybe they should have said they were going to have a discussion on pornography -- that would have garnered them a top spot on the reservations list.
  

• Wonderful news out of England where a mother attempted to abort her baby, then found a few weeks later that the procedure hadn't worked. The language in this article surprised me -- the author continually referred to the baby surviving the abortion procedure, the son of the woman, etc. Don't they know it's supposed to be called a fetus, a by-product of conception? But I guess the Webster definition doesn't really apply anymore -- you call it a baby or a by-product based on whether or not the mother wants it. Yeah, that makes sense...

• And finally, England tries again for outrageous story of the week, and succeeds. A man got to laughing so hard at something on the telly that he fell off his couch, whereby the neighbor called the police because he thought something was wrong. The police came and eventually pepper-sprayed and arrested the aforementioned laugher after he got mad and tried to shut the door on them.
  

UPDATE: The laugher is summarily bumped as outrageous story of the week by a bunch of Canadian problem-gamblers suing casinos for letting them in. Yes, you read that right. Sounds like they've been taking lessons from their Southern brethren -- this sounds a bit like suing McDonald's for making the Big Mac too good to resist. Is personal responsibility really just a thing of the past?