Prop 26 - Mississippi: On Tap For Tuesday

Tata posted this at Brilliant at Breakfast and I wanted to share. The letter was written by one of her Christian relatives.

All eyes on Mississippi this Tuesday...

Mississippi Proposition 26 – Think before you vote.

Proposals to provide single cells with the rights of citizens is dangerous on several levels. The ongoing desire of passionate groups to eliminate the reproductive rights of women is based upon the religious belief that a fertilized egg houses a human soul. That religious belief is based upon no evidence and a great deal of misguided faith. People who believe the special nature of humans is that we have a soul entering the body at some point in development and leaving the body at death also believe that causing that spirit to leave the body is considered manslaughter, if not murder. We have accepted the idea that once the brain becomes inactive (flat-lined) and the cells of the body continue to live, that the soul has left the body and that allowing the remaining cells to die is not considered manslaughter or murder. Those of us who have been to many funerals have heard clergy of all types describe death as the soul leaving the body behind and moving on to another journey.

The question that still creates much controversy is which event allows the soul to enter the body. Keep in mind that almost everyone understands that the brain is the part of the human body that houses the soul. Co-joined twins that have two heads have two distinct personalities and are treated as two people, regardless of how many body parts they share. A baby that is born with several duplicated body parts, but one head, is considered to be one person, not several. It’s all about the brain. If you are religious, you might accept the idea that God created a human brain to be able to house a soul. Identical twins develop from a single fertilized egg which is then separated after fertilization and those two cells then develop separately into two separate bodies. Does each twin have half a soul?

Trying to determine the beginning of a human life or any other life is nonsense. Life does not begin at fertilization or at birth, it began a long time ago and continues through a series of important events. One of the things we have in common with everyone on this planet is that all of our ancestors lived long enough to reproduce and pass those living human cells on to future generations. That long line of life involves a sequence of living human cells going through a series of beginnings and endings of significant events, not the beginning or end of life. The question of manslaughter or homicide is determined by whether or not the human cells or cluster of cells houses a human soul, and if one has caused that soul to leave the body. An atheist or agnostic might use the word independent intellect instead of soul, but the same points apply. If your religious belief is that a fertilized egg or a fetus in early stages of development houses an independent soul, that belief is protected in this country and our government cannot punish you for having that belief. The same should be true of my belief that the soul enters the body at birth, the first breath of the baby. Both events are important in the continuity of human life, fertilization to create a cell with the full genetic complement to develop a human body, and birth to bring the body and spirit together and a new, independent individual into the world. If a fertilized egg houses a soul, what happens to it as that first cell divides into a ball of cells and later into layers of types of cells and finally into specific body parts? Do all the cells house the soul, or does it move into the brain later? I contend that most of society will accept the idea that a baby taking its first breath is an independent individual with a soul (or underdeveloped but independent intellect). If your religious belief is that an independent soul is present in a fertilized egg, you have the right to that belief, but you do not have the right to impose that religious belief onto the rest of society. I believe that a pregnant woman is developing a human house, but that there is nobody home until birth, when that house becomes occupied by a soul.

Imposing religious beliefs of one group on all of society is something this country has fought since before its beginning as a nation. Shall we develop laws that prohibit driving or other activities on Saturday or Sunday because some people have religious beliefs that require them to refrain from those activities? Shall we force women to cover their heads and faces because some religious beliefs require that behavior? We respect the rights of individuals to worship as they please. We do not allow the beliefs of those individuals to undermine the rights of the rest of us. The greatest danger is to promote the idea that our country needs to allow religious fringe groups to control the rest of the country. Be very careful of how much control you want the government to have over your independent decisions and individual rights, even if in this particular case the proposition under consideration is consistent with your individual religious beliefs.

The Ununited States: Divided We Shall Fall

After reading the New York Times this morning I'm starting to seriously wonder if the US isn't destined to deal with a cultural divide for decades to come. And the situation seems to be deteriorating during what is perhaps the most important presidential election year in decades.

We have squabbled over race and gender, over pulling out vs. staying in (a reference to Iraq; nothing sexual here), and religion as a political issue and tool has reached new heights.

If we continue on our current trend of playing musical chairs with the primaries and the outcome being a different winner in each one, reflecting the vastly differing perceptions of what's most important with the electorate in each state, then we are in for one long bumpy ride to November and beyond.

Let's start with Shaker Heights, Ohio and work our way out to the broader picture. Six black teenagers beat a white lawyer to near death and it has rocked this small integrated suburb of Cleveland which has been a relatively peaceful model of integration for decades.

“The concept that something like that could happen here literally never crossed my mind,” said the Rev. Diane Ford Jones, an African-American resident of Ludlow.

Petty thefts are rising near the edges of Shaker Heights, so two years ago the city increased its police budget by $50,000 annually to pay for more patrols along the border, said Mayor Earl M. Leiken. Since the attack, unmarked police cars circle the Shaker Heights streets of Ludlow every five minutes. There is no increased police presence on the Cleveland side, residents say.

[...]

What has surprised Ludlow residents most since the attack is the reaction of people around the region. Cleveland has grown steadily poorer over the last five decades. Many people in the surrounding area believe that Shaker Heights will eventually be overwhelmed by Cleveland residents, many of them African-Americans, trying to escape the city’s high crime rate and struggling schools. They wonder why residents of Shaker Heights have not moved to more distant — and safer — suburbs.

Scenarios such as this are are likely to rise as the gulf between those who have and those who have not continues to widen. It's not so different from what is happening in other parts of the world where the conflicts between races, tribes, religious affiliations and class have people on the move seeking safety and security.

And in Montana, a small town has become divided over the issue of climate change which resulted in the cancellation of a speech at the high school by a Nobel laureate climate researcher. While this did not involve violence, it is no less abhorrent to see divisions erupting where we should be uniting. Unfortunately, the right-wing conservatives who are so hellbent on rejecting the mere discussion of the issue prefer to not only bury their own heads, but also prevent more open-minded folks the benefit of education.

The scholar, Steven W. Running, a professor of ecology at the University of Montana, was scheduled to speak to about 130 students here last Thursday about his career and the global changes occurring because of the earth’s warming.

Dr. Running was a lead author of a global warming report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the 400-member United Nations body that shared last year’s Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore. But when some residents complained that his presentation here would be one-sided because no opposing view would be offered, the superintendent of Choteau School District No. 1, Kevin St. John, canceled it.

[...]

Those who complained misunderstood the content of the talk, Mr. St. John said, but there was no time to explain to all of them that Dr. Running was a leading scientist rather than an agenda-driven ideologue.

“It was my failure to articulate who he is and what he was here for,” the superintendent said. “He’s a Nobel scientist, highly distinguished, but people thought he was something else. Academic freedom is very important here, and science education is very important here.”

Still, as in much of the West, Choteau is home to a deep-seated mistrust of environmentalism, which many here see as a threat to their agricultural way of life. The town has also been largely on the pro-development side of a long and sometimes bitter battle over whether to exploit oil and gas reserves along the wild Rocky Mountain front or to preserve it primarily for wilderness and wildlife.

Finally, there is the raw politics of the matter. Dr. Running specializes in an issue associated with Mr. Gore, not a popular figure among many in this predominantly Republican town.

One has to wonder about our fate as a nation when adversity to Al Gore is so strong as to disrupt and cancel important dialogue. And one school board member didn't even have the backbone to explain his opposition to the event.

Kirk Moore, the owner of a farm and ranch store, is a school board member who favored canceling the talk. But he declined to say why. “No comment,” Mr. Moore said. “Go talk to the superintendent.”

People of this mindset are spread far and wide in the US and they will stop at nothing to exert influence and control, not only over speeches and the contents of science textbooks, but also over elections. There is widespread evidence of their filthy tactics in South Carolina as they make a brazen attempt to impact the outcome of the all-important presidential primary.

Mudslinging in South Carolina began even before Christmas. Nearly 4,000 South Carolinians received bogus Christmas cards purporting to be from Mitt Romney that endorsed polygamy and talked about the “exceedingly fair and white” Virgin Mary.

[...]

At the moment, e-mail is flooding into South Carolina — after having appeared in Iowa and New Hampshire — alleging that Senator Barack Obama is Muslim, which he is not, and questioning his patriotism, based on a photograph in which he does not have his hand over his heart as the national anthem is being played.

The outrageous ignorance, bigotry and prejudice of the people orchestrating these smear campaigns would be laughable were it not for the fact that there are so many ignorant and prejudiced bigots on the receiving end.

What exactly is the value or the accuracy in calling our process "democratic" when it can be so easily manipulated at the primary level, before we even reach the ever-controversial November general election?

On the Democratic side, the most spirited defensive effort is being waged by the Obama campaign after an increase in e-mail falsely stating that Mr. Obama attended a radical Islamic school as a child in Indonesia, and that his parents raised him as a Muslim so he could run for president and subvert the government.

[...]

B. J. Welborn, a volunteer for Mr. Obama, said that she had recently noticed more comments about Mr. Obama’s supposed Muslim ties when making phone calls on his behalf.

“We don’t know where it is coming from,” Ms. Welborn said. “We have a lot of fact sheets, and we direct people to the Obama Web site. But some people just don’t want to listen.”

I'm noticing a common thread here with the earlier Montana climate change story. One of the biggest threats facing our nation today is not Iraq, Iran, North Korea, China, outsourcing of jobs or the economy in general. It really boils down to an unwillingness of so many people to fucking listen. They would rather drape themselves in the flag and drown out any reasonable opportunity to learn and discuss with a loud and proud pledge of allegiance, and a steadfast belief that God is on their side.

This shit is seriously undermining and discrediting our election process and it must be stopped. If such activity isn't a felony, it should be. This is not free speech. If their claims were truthful, then it's a fair part of a political campaign. But outright lies being disseminated in an attempt to influence the outcome of an election should be prosecuted as a felony, and the ringleaders of these smear campaigns are worthy of prison time.

By Tuesday afternoon, a group calling itself Vietnam Veterans Against McCain had sent out a crude flier accusing the candidate of selling out fellow P.O.W.’s to save himself.

By Tuesday evening, a group called Common Sense Issues, which supports Mike Huckabee, had begun making what it said were a million automated calls to households in South Carolina telling voters, according to one of the calls, that Mr. McCain “has voted to use unborn babies in medical research.” (The campaign of Mr. Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, said it had no connection to the group and had asked it to stop the calls.)

If we cannot have fair and square debates and untainted primary elections for both parties, and if early leaders in these races are selected based upon false accusations and smear campaigns, then our entire process is marred and essentially meaningless. We become a nation with a political process essentially controlled by thugs, bigots, racists, and religious zealots with suppression as their desired outcome. And that makes us not so much different from other countries in the world whose elections and governments are a laughingstock.


Crossposted at Big Brass Blog

Belief in Science: Bad for Job Security

Questioning “Intelligent Design” in Texas? You’re Fired via Crooks & Liars.

Chris Comer, guilty of misconduct and insubordination for daring to create "the appearance of bias" against teaching intelligent design. God forbid we actually teach science in our public schools instead of religious-based speculation.

The call to fire Comer came from Lizzette Reynolds, who previously worked in the U.S. Department of Education. She also served as deputy legislative director for Gov. George W. Bush. She joined the Texas Education Agency as the senior adviser on statewide initiatives in January.

Idiots!

I Don't Heart Huckabees

Mike Huckabee came to the Lone Star State on Sunday to troll for support in two churches, if you can believe that, and actually picked up a major vote of confidence from Pastor Jack Graham of the Prestonwood Baptist Church -- one of the largest in the country. I think that qualifies as a megachurch (or McChurch). With 28,000 members, if it were a town in Huckabee's home state of Arkansas, it would be among the top 15 in population. (And as txrad commented sarcastically to me, I'm sure they run a soup kitchen.)

Keep a close eye on this politician/musician/comedian. He's a shrewd one.

From the Dallas Morning News:

Pastor Jack Graham told the congregation of Prestonwood Baptist Church before Mr. Huckabee's sermon that Christian values have a crucial role in the political process. Although Dr. Graham said his church doesn't endorse candidates, his praise for Mr. Huckabee was unambiguous.

"It's very important that we vote our values, that we select folks and nominate folks who stand by principle and who live and proclaim and legislate according to the values we cherish," he said to enthusiastic applause.

Dr. Graham said the sermon from Mr. Huckabee, who is an ordained Southern Baptist minister, was a message of "God's word from God's man."

The "legislate according to the values we cherish" portion of that comment is the obvious code phrase meaning pretty much everything that Jesus preached against, or would have preached against had he lived in our current times.

"The more people hear Mike Huckabee, the more they like him," Dr. Graham said. "Everywhere he goes, in small groups as well as big groups, people are saying: 'This is a man who is saying what I think. This is man who is representing what I believe.'"

Carolyn Asher of Fort Worth drove to Plano Sunday morning to hear Mr. Huckabee. She said that his sermon solidified her support for him, and she compared him to President Bush.

"He upholds the values I believe in," Ms. Asher said. "He believes in Jesus, and he's not afraid to say so."

Oh dear God... excuse me, I think I need to pray. Did these people learn nothing from the past 6 1/2 years?

That is not a rhetorical question.

Mr. Huckabee gave up his work as a pastor to enter politics and become one of Arkansas' longest-serving governors.

He famously lost 110 pounds in the past few years and started running marathons. And as a little-known governor of a small Southern state, he started a presidential campaign that was given little chance to make a national splash.

Well, maybe he should have kept that extra weight on.

But seriously, for a governor so consumed with health, I find it very ironic that he served so long in Arkansas, and the state is still ranked 48th in health, according to a report released by the United Health Foundation.

From The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette:

The annual report said Arkansas’ strengths included a low prevalence of binge drinking and a moderate rate of high school graduation. Weaknesses included a high percentage of children in poverty, a high premature death rate, a high rate of cancer deaths, and low immunization coverage.

I guess he doesn't chalk that up as one of his proud accomplishments.


Crossposted at Big Brass Blog

That Sinking Feeling

How far has the Christian Right swung when they can't seem to agree on their ideal presidential candidate, or whether they even have one?

“There is great anxiety,” said Paul Weyrich, chairman of the Free Congress Foundation. “There is no outstanding conservative, and they are all looking for that.”

Just how bitter and mean-spirited does a conservative have to be to win them over and be considered "outstanding?"

Giuliani is too pro-gay rights, not hostile enough on the abortion issue, and most importantly, has been married too many times. Brownback is deemed too wetback-friendly. Huckabee is viewed with suspicion on the issue of tax cuts. Romney is simply not Christian enough and his great-grandfather had too many wives. And McCain is just... McCain -- like an out-of-control 18-wheeler on a long downhill run.

Will a genuine gay-bashing, abortion-outlawing, warmongering, Constitution-shredding, tax-cutter-for-the-rich, photogenic, blonde-haired, blue-eyed, white male Bible-thumping Christian from a pre-approved mainstream denomination with one beautiful wife and 2.5 adorable clean-cut children please step forward so these lunatics will stop all the unnecessary gnashing of teeth?

Because the ones currently running just don't seem to have enough hateful anger.

Bush Fans the Anti-Abortion Flames

The Shrublet weighs in:

President Bush marked the 34th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision Monday, telling thousands of abortion foes he shares their goal of seeing "the day when every child is welcomed in life and protected into law."

"Every" child? Come on. Let's say for instance, that Jenna was raped -- and just to spice up the argument, let's say she was raped by the ultimate boogeyman, a black dude. Or what if she was raped by Jeb? What if having the baby put her life at risk? Hey, it happens.

Does Bush expect us to believe he would oppose her having an abortion?

Outlawing abortion would not stop abortions and would create a dangerous environment in which women continued to seek illegal abortions. Oh, but I keep forgetting: we don't give a crap about women, just their unborn fetuses.

Abortion Mortality
The number of deaths from abortion has declined dramatically since Roe v. Wade.


Bush with his "culture of life" is so full of bullshit I don't know how Laura sleeps in the same room with him.

It's Possible the World is Flat

I got this via email this morning from Ms. Julien.

Screw science. Screw geology. The Grand Canyon is probably only 6,000 years old. To believe otherwise might cause some fundamentalist Christians' heads to explode or something.

Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

Would this be the same Bush administration responsible for the nicely progressing march of democracy in Iraq? No wonder it's so bungled.

This is so far-fetched it's laughable. It's a story you'd expect to see posted on a blog on April Fool's Day. Speaking of fools, as another year approaches, my level of excitement grows only because we're that much closer to January 2009 when the absurd clowns of this administration pack up their shit and leave. Whether they will be replaced by people with something resembling rational minds remains to be seen.

Oh, let's not forget evolution: "the greatest hoax of all time." Thanks, Misty.

Lesson in History: Dinosaurs Were on Noah's Ark

It just doesn't stop. It's as if these folks have some programming chip implanted which drives them to proselytize and ignore the 1st amendment.

Shortly after school began in September, the teacher told his sixth-period students at Kearny High School that evolution and the Big Bang were not scientific, that dinosaurs were aboard Noah’s ark, and that only Christians had a place in heaven, according to audio recordings made by a student whose family is now considering a lawsuit claiming Mr. Paszkiewicz broke the church-state boundary.

“If you reject his gift of salvation, then you know where you belong,” Mr. Paszkiewicz was recorded saying of Jesus. “He did everything in his power to make sure that you could go to heaven, so much so that he took your sins on his own body, suffered your pains for you, and he’s saying, ‘Please, accept me, believe.’ If you reject that, you belong in hell.”

The student, Matthew LaClair, said that he felt uncomfortable with Mr. Paszkiewicz’s statements in the first week, and taped eight classes starting Sept. 13 out of fear that officials would not believe the teacher had made the comments.

Since Matthew’s complaint, administrators have said they have taken “corrective action” against Mr. Paszkiewicz, 38, who has taught in the district for 14 years and is also a youth pastor at Kearny Baptist Church. However, they declined to say what the action was, saying it was a personnel matter.

“I think he’s an excellent teacher,” said the school principal, Al Somma. “As far as I know, there have never been any problems in the past.”

If he can't make a distinction between what he teaches at the church and what he teaches in a public school, then perhaps he's not the "excellent" teacher after all.

In a bizarre twist (but hardly surprising), most of Matthew's fellow students and the community have rallied behind Paskiewicz. Some have even called for Matthew to be suspended. He has already received a death threat. If you've followed very many incidents such as this, it is rather de rigueur among certain wacko fundies to want anyone who disagrees with them to... DIE.

What I do find surprising is that the school isn't in Virginia or Alabama... it's in New Jersey, 10 miles west of Manhattan.

Two-Faced Romney Steps In It.. Again

In 1994, Mitt Romney, in a letter sent to the Log Cabin Republicans, claimed he would be a stronger advocate for gay rights than Edward Kennedy. What a joke that turned out to be. The man is obsessed with restricting rather than promoting.

Pam had a go at him already.

But let's give him credit for something. Anyone who can put me in a position of agreement with Tony Perkins has really done a number.

“This is quite disturbing,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, who had praised Mr. Romney as a champion of traditional values at the group’s conference in late September. “This type of information is going to create a lot of problems for Governor Romney. He is going to have a hard time overcoming this.”

Say farewell to your political ambitions.

"The reason there are so few female politicians is that it is too much trouble to put makeup on two faces.”
--Maureen Murphy

Mitt Romney's Anti-Gay Crusade Continues

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is so hellbent on being the anti-gay presidential candidate in 2008 he simply can't leave the gay marriage issue alone in his state.


photo: Chitose Suzuki/Associated Press

Opponents of same-sex marriage rallied Sunday in Boston. About 8,000 same-sex couples have married in Massachusetts since gay marriage was legalized. The sky didn't fall. The wrath of God wasn't inflicted upon the people. Straight couples continue to marry and divorce, as before. Life goes on. And Romney just can't take it.

Mr. Romney, a Republican, said he would file a request this week for a justice of the Supreme Judicial Court to direct the secretary of state to place the question on the ballot if lawmakers do not vote on the issue on Jan. 2, the final day of the session.

The governor, an opponent of same-sex marriage who decided not to seek re-election as he considers running for president, made his announcement to the cheers of same-sex-marriage opponents at a rally on the Statehouse steps. Supporters of same-sex marriage staged a protest across the street.

This whackjob is a pro when it comes to twisting reason in an attempt to motivate his base of fundamentalist hypocritical bigots.

“A decision not to vote is a decision to usurp the Constitution, to abandon democracy and substitute a form of what this nation’s founders called tyranny, that is, the imposition of the will of those in power, on the people,” Mr. Romney said. “The issue now before us is not whether same-sex couples should marry. The issue before us today is whether 109 legislators will follow the Constitution.”

This frothing-at-the-mouth hatemonger needs to be slammed down hard. It was bizarre enough that he was governor of Massachusetts -- a man who is ultra-conservative even by Utah standards. He clearly is not mentally fit for his presidential ambitions.

“One of the tenets of the Constitution is that you do not put the rights of a minority up for a popularity contest,” said Mark Solomon, campaign director of Mass Equality, a group that supports same-sex marriage. “It is one of the very principles this country was founded upon.”

Precisely.

Oh Canada, Don't Mimic Us!

I do wish these people would get on with their lives, worship as they please, and STOP trying to shove their belief systems down our throats with discriminatory laws.

Before now, the Christian right was not a political force in this mostly secular, liberal country. But it is coalescing with new clout and credibility, similar to the evangelical Christian movement in the United States in the 1980s, though not nearly on the same scale.

Today, half a dozen organizations like the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada work full time in Ottawa, four of which opened offices in the past year, all seeking to reverse the law allowing gay marriage.

I'd like to say I told you so. What do you expect when you elect a conservative evangelical Christian Prime Minister?

“With the legalization of gay marriage, faith has been violated and we’ve been forced to respond,” said Charles McVety, a leader of several evangelical Christian organizations that oppose gay marriage and president of the Canada Christian College in Toronto.

[...]

[McVety] asked the Rev. Jerry Falwell and other American evangelical leaders for advice on building a religious movement in Canada and traveled Ontario and Quebec in a red-and-white “Defend Marriage” bus.

It's such a familiar refrain. My advice: Get off the bus; it's going nowhere. You folks might consider directing your Christian anger in a more positive direction..something crucial.... like Darfur.


photo credit - Jean Levac/The Ottawa Citizen

AFA Wants It Both Ways

The American Family Association is overcome with glee after NBC pulled the plug on a segment in an upcoming Madonna concert set to air in November. The AFA seems to be taking credit for the decision after 750,000 email messages were sent in protest to NBC from AFA "supporters."

Backing away from a confrontation with religious groups, NBC says it has decided not to show pictures of Madonna mounting a Crucifix when it airs her concert special next month. During her song "Live to Tell," Madonna sings from a mirrored cross wearing a crown of thorns.

Dr. Don Wildmon, chairman of the AFA, said:

"We appreciate the fact that NBC has seen the power of the pocketbook and decide to cancel [that] scene from the Madonna special," says Wildmon in a press release. "The network should never have even entertained using the scene, but we appreciate their removing it from the special."

Apparently, the AFA is just pleased as punch at their power to stifle free speech in having NBC censor a portion of an artistic performance which they deemed offensive. However, they are not so supportive of an employer in Virginia allegedly firing a human resources employee for having a "vote for marriage" message handwritten on the window of his truck:


Photo by Nikki Fox, Courtesy of Daily News Record)

Luis Padilla was reportedly terminated from his employment at a Cargill Foods plant in Harrisonburg because of a written message on the rear window of his pickup truck that read: "Please, vote for marriage on Nov. 7." That is the day when voters in Virginia will be considering a proposed amendment to the state constitution protecting traditional marriage.

According to the Daily-News Record in Harrisonburg, Padilla -- who worked in Cargill's human resources office -- was dismissed for insubordination when he refused to remove the message, which company officials could be considered harassment. He apparently had removed the sign when first requested, then later posted it again and parked his truck outside the company parking lot.

"This action exposes the hypocrisy of people who claim to stand for 'tolerance' but who instead do all they can to silence all opposing views," says Dean Welty, [a spokesman for the Family Foundation-affiliated Valley Family Forum.]

The AFA is trying to push a one-sided agenda down both lanes of a two-way street. If Padilla should be allowed to display his message so prominently even though Cargill employees who are proponents of gay marriage might feel uncomfortable with it, why strip Madonna of a portion of her message?

Those offended by Madonna's stage props are not required to watch. Employees, on the other hand, are required to show up for work.

I must be honest here though. Armed with the information I have thus far, I'm not comfortable with Padilla being fired for having a political message on his truck. It's not as though he tried to hold a pro-marriage (or anti-same-sex marriage) rally on company property. If I had a bumper sticker on my car encouraging a vote against the marriage proposition, I'd be absolutely livid if asked to remove it in order to keep my employment. Unfortunately, that is the nature of ”at-will” employment and it is legal.

Here's a link to The Daily News-Record piece. (Embeded link not working)
http://www.dnronline.com/news_details.php?AID=6909&CHID=1

Crossposted at Pam’s House Blend

Mitt Romney's Verbal Littering in Boston

Mitt Romney is spewing intolerant and untruthful rubbish again. Speaking to a group gathered in Boston for the Family Research Council's annual "Liberty Sunday" event, here's what the presidential hopeful had to say:

"Here in Massachusetts, activist judges struck a blow to the foundation of civilization — the family," Republican Gov. Mitt Romney, a likely presidential candidate, told an applauding crowd of about 1,000 people, some of whom responded with "Amen."

What (the judges) ignored is that marriage is not primarily about adults; marriage is about the nurturing and development of children. ... Every child deserves a mother and a father," he said.

A blow to the foundation of civilization? What a waste of time and a load of smelly crap. Trying to blame same-sex marriage for the failings of traditional marriage and family break-ups has gotten tiresome. Calling it a blow to the foundations of civilization is an asinine exaggeration of incomprehensible proportions. Only an idiot could truly believe this.

Tony Perkins, president of the FRC, chimed in with more of the same rhetoric:

"When we look at what has happened with same-sex marriage, as it began in this state and threatens to spread across the country, we've seen in its wake the loss of religious freedoms and the ability to speak out based upon one's moral convictions."

Come again? If that were true, he wouldn't be speaking at the event. If it weren't so friggin' nauseating, it'd almost be comical watching the fundies scrambling to try and salvage right-wing Republican hopes in the November 7 mid-term elections.

I'll be loudly applauding the sinking of that rusting ship. I'm tired of the incessant lies, smear-campaigns, and scandals. I'm tired of being the scapegoat for the problems of a segment of American society of which I'm not even a part.

Crossposted at B3

Quote of the Day

Hat tip to Pam and her "Liberty Sunday" coverage.

"I believe it's from the pit of hell itself, that this movement is inspired, that it has a satanic anointing...The civil rights movement was inspired and given by the Holy Spirit, birthed in the church and bathed in prayer...But the gay rights movement, I believe, was birthed and inspired by the Antichrist."-- Rev. Dwight McKissic of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Texas, on The Homosexual Agenda at FRC's last wingnut gathering, the "Values Voter Summit."

Texas homobigot Baptists are hard to beat when it comes to blowhard bullshit.

The Male Torso Fracas

It doesn't bother me, nor am I particularly turned on by it, even as a gay man. I don't have saliva running down my chin. I'm not the least bit concerned that an unscheduled erection in the mall is going to blow my cover. Not so for the American Decency Association.

One of several evidences of Abercrombie & Fitch returning to their old patterns of displaying risque pictures. Another picture inside the store displays a topless female with hands covering her breasts.

Oh, heaven forbid, another breast episode. It's a body. It's natural. Get over it. If it makes your heart begin to race and you fear going to hell in a handbasket, just get control over your emotions. Pretty simple really. But it's more fun to stir up a big media stink and get some publicity for your fledgling organization.

Needless to say, they are calling for a boycott. Here's a better idea: Buy your own mall, only rent to Christian businesses and shop there!

Duh!

Want to know what indecency is? this and this and this one.
But you won't find any mention of those on the ADA website. And that's my definition of obscene.

The Greening Gaying of Wal-Mart

The Family Research Council vitriol was spraying again last week regarding Wal-Mart's partnership with the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC).

From the FRC:

While the NGLCC professes to promote the "interests of the LGBT business community," this is not all they have done. Recently, they described efforts to defend traditional marriage as an attempt to "write discrimination into the Constitution..." The NGLCC also advocated attaching a pro-homosexual "hate crimes" amendment to legislation intended to protect children from violent sex offenders. Their advocacy delayed the legislation for several months. It is unfortunate that Wal-Mart has joined forces with an organization whose mission opposes many of the values shared by rural and small-town America. It is precisely the interests of average Americans that Wal-Mart has prided itself in promoting. Now, by surrendering to the radical homosexual lobby, Wal-Mart has entered the political arena with no economic benefit to their company or their customers.

Why is the homosexual lobby always "radical" as opposed to the efforts of the religious lobby to clearly write discrimination into the Constitution? What could be more radical? Traditional marriage doesn't need defending and has never been under attack.

Wal-Mart is simply doing what any corporation eventually has to do: make an effort to be inclusive and expand their customer base. As for the interests of "average Americans," apparently the FRC can't seem to grasp the concept that us queerfolk are part of the "average" America -- whatever the hell that is. (I can tell you if they were to look at a snapshot of "average America" they probably wouldn't like what they see -- but that's another blog post on the topic of immigration.)

I'm gay. I was born in the rural small-town America they have conquered. I spent several years in college about a half-hour drive from Wal-Mart's corporate headquarters. I also remember having a vibrant downtown area in my small hometown. There were clothing stores, "dime" stores, hardware stores, and a couple of nice supermarkets including a Safeway. I remember my sense of civic pride when a Gibson's Discount Center opened on the outskirts of town. Then Otasco closed their small downtown store and opened a much larger and nicer store next to Gibson's. My little town seemed to be booming when I was in my mid-teens.

Then came Wal-Mart. It wasn't long before both Gibson's and Otasco shut down. And the downtown area is virtually vacant today. Over the years, various vacant buildings also burned to the ground, never to be replaced. Downtown now has ample parking but there's no reason to park there. So much for those "values."

Wal-Mart is well aware of the negative publicity they have received over the years regarding any number of issues from the hundreds of job-losses in American small-towns, to low wages paid to employees, poor benefits, reports of forced overtime without pay, etc. They have essentially been fighting negative publicity for years. They are aware that some of us are vehement about not shopping in their stores, myself included.

As their older "average" clientele begins to die off, they know they must adapt in order to continue growing. This is why they moved in the direction of offering more organic products. (See my prior post: The Greening of Wal-Mart)

What exactly did Wal-Mart do to "surrender" to the "radical homosexual lobby?"

NGLCC excerpt:

Wal-Mart is the latest company that has heard our message about completing the circle of corporate diversity. No longer is just marketing to the LGBT segment enough. No longer is having a corporate non discrimination policy that includes sexual orientation enough. If a company is as truly committed to being a good corporate citizen in the LGBT space as they are with other diverse communities, then they need to buy back and invest in LGBT community-owned businesses like they do with other diverse segments. Their supplier base, those from whom they purchase goods and services, must look like the customer and employee base they have or are trying to attract.

OK. Which side seems more rational here?

Wal-Mart profits recently fell off 26% after their decision to withdraw from Germany. They are aware of the need to reach out to more Americans than they have in the past. Those small-town older rural shoppers are not only going to get older, shop less and eventally die off, but it's obvious the LGBT and LGBT-friendly market in general has more income to spend than the previously targeted rural "family-values" shoppers.

I'm not ready to shop there yet. But I'm a step closer. It's what they want, and eventually, will need.


hat tip: BlueGal for prodding me on this piece.

Phelps Klan outnumbered at Kansas protest

Meade, Kansas is in the news again. Remember the hotel with the rainbow flag causing such a ridiculous brouhaha?

Fred Phelps decided his mentally-challenged gang of Christothugs had to get a piece of the action...

If followers of anti-gay pastor Fred Phelps thought they were going to find support in tiny Meade, Kansas they were mistaken. The militant group demonstrated across the street Sunday from a small hotel that stirred up a local hornets nest when it displayed a rainbow flag.

About 30 of Phelp's followers, mostly relatives, held signs saying "God Hates Fags", and "AIDS is God's curse."

Not far away a crowd nearly double in size help up their own signs. "God Loves Fags" read one sign. "Go home" read another.

The flag flap began earlier this summer when the son of J.R. and Robin Knight presented them with the colorful flag he'd picked up in California. The Knights put the flag over the entrance to their tiny Lakeway Hotel.

It's good to see the tiny town can muster up a crowd for a counter-protest.

Congressional crapwipe

House fails by 47 votes to push the gay marriage ban amendment forward. Still, the vote was 236 in favor of this BS and 187 against.

The Traditional Values Coalition said it was a "good thing for traditional marriage" that the measure was unlikely to pass because it wasn't clear enough in ruling out civil unions between gays.



The amendment was sponsored by the lovely Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.) Be sure and send her your kindest regards. BITCH!

meanwhile....
the Senate will not even get enough votes in support of stem cell research to override a Bush veto.

"It is immoral to destroy the youngest of human lives for research purposes," said Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan).

Here are those rug-rat wanna bes he's referring to.


Photo credit: University of Wisconsin-Madison

Sunday Morning Ramblings

This photo probably needs an explanation.

A crowd at the 50th Annual Bradley County, Arkansas Pink Tomato Festival watched candidates for governor, attorney general, lieutenant governor, state treasurer and the U.S. Congress stuff pounds of the official state fruit into their maws, in an effort to demonstrate reverence for the Natural State’s peculiar brand of retail politics.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Attorney General Mike Beebe said he was hoping to avoid the fate of former Arkansas governor and U.S. president, Bill Clinton, who, he said, “did something unbecoming of a governor” after eating too many tomatoes one year.

Can we get some additional details? I'm curious!



Also from today's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette is this column by Philip Martin, and worth the read.

Fred Phelps’ God isn’t the one for the rest of us

I note with relief that not too much attention was paid to the visit by the Westboro Baptist folks of Topeka, Kan., to the funeral of the serviceman in Beebe last week. Half a dozen kookballs venting their hatefulness is more circus than news event; the First Amendment might protect their speech but it shouldn’t guarantee them an audience.

Apparently it wasn’t even the first team; Fred Phelps wasn’t there, just some of his kinfolk. There are lots of funerals to cover these days, lots of occasions to preach the bad news about the irascibility of Old Testament Jehovah—who hates America and anyone with half an ounce of compassion.

It has been suggested—and not just by conservative commentators, who recognize the damage Phelps and his brood inflict on their cause—the Westboro bunch are engaged in some elaborate scheme to discredit evangelical Christians. So extreme are their actions and words that it’s not difficult to see their shtick as satire, a disturbing bit of Andy Kaufmanesque performance art. (If you can think of a greater obscenity than picketing the funerals of the Iraqi war dead than proclaiming that God has sent these young men and women to hell because America is still a relatively tolerant country, please keep it to yourself. )

I prefer the simpler explanation: Fred Phelps is mad and evil. And sufficiently charismatic to have assembled a small group of followers. He is a petty Hitler, without the political gift. He will come to a bad end someday, and he will leave no lasting mark upon the planet. He is more to be pitied than despised; however, I’ve not evolved to the point that I can weep for him.

It seems only fair to recognize that he is no Baptist—he runs his “church” from his home and is not affiliated with any real Baptist organization—and certainly no follower of Christ. He is an extremist who speaks for no one but himself. No decent person could buy into his creepy theology.

Yet last week the U.S. Senate came quite close to voting on a proposed Constitutional amendment that would restrict marriage to “one man and one woman.” Forty-nine senators voted for cloture—basically in favor of the amendment—while 48 voted against it. Three senators didn’t vote; Arkansas senators Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor cast “no” votes.

But Arkansas senators had political cover—our state is one of 11 that have passed amendments prohibiting gay marriage. So Lincoln and Pryor can safely claim that while they personally oppose gay marriage, they see no need for a federal amendment. (Who are we to presume to tell the citizens of Massachusetts or New York or California what to do?)

In the past I’ve suggested that most Arkansans aren’t really interested in denying gay people the rights, privileges and obligations that redound to the legally coupled; they simply don’t like the idea of gay folks being “married.” If it’s the semantics that bother them, the solution is apparent: Civil unions for everyone. If you decide you want to spend your life in partnership with another consenting adult, fine—you go down to the courthouse and file the paperwork. Civil unions are secular and legally binding contracts.

(The state could even continue to allow consenting adults to enter contracts tantamount to what we now call “covenant marriages”—all we’re altering is the semantics and leaving the “marriage” designation to spiritual institutions.)

If you want to have that union sanctified by a religious entity—if you want to be “married”—then you go to a priest or rabbi or prophet or shaman or Uncle Doug and sanctify your civil union by getting married. The state has nothing to do with “marriage”; it’s a sacrament, and its between the people who enter into the covenant and their God.

And yes, one supposes that under this system it would be possible for one to “marry” a toaster or a blue tick hound (or, as Pee Wee Herman once did, a bowl of fruit salad), but one still couldn’t enter into a civil union with anyone or thing other than a single adult. And purely sacramental “marriage” wouldn’t exempt the parties from any secular laws.

Does this effectively nullify the meaning of marriage? I don’t think it does. While certain people might make a mockery of the institution in the same way Fred Phelps makes a mockery of Christianity, most of us would go on with our lives without giving it too much thought. Gay folks would have their marriages acknowledged and respected by most folks—and those who oppose the idea would be free to consider those kinds of marriages illegitimate.

Some citizens prefer to live secular lives; they mightn’t seek for their union to be recognized by anyone. But others wouldn’t be forced to set aside their convictions to accommodate someone else’s idea of what marriage means. Any congregation would be free to recognize and welcome anyone it chooses.

Divorcing marriage from state sanction makes sense, because the state has no legitimate interest in what consenting adults do in the bedroom or how they arrange their domestic lives. Separating the religious aspects and returning them to the churches—endowing clergy with the power to solemnize these civil unions as they simultaneous perform the marriage—would only seem to strengthen the role of religious institutions in our lives.

Certainly there are sexual practices unworthy of society’s support and protection. Not all sex is loving, not all arrangements are supportable, but whoever and however an adult human being loves is at least none of the state’s business; adults can decide.

Not that anybody with any sense really believes this is about protecting marriage anyway—what it’s about is appealing to the sort of voters who tend to see politics as a Manechian struggle between good and evil. For there are people who are deathly afraid of things they don’t understand, who are reassured by the soothing tones of freshscrubbed TV demagogues. I don’t know that there’s anyone in public life today who genuinely believes gay marriage or flag burning is anything but a strategic issue, but there are plenty willing to use such issues to their political advantage.

It’s an un-American strategy, but it works. But only for now, and only with a frightened minority, the sort of people susceptible to revisionist history who are eager to believe they’re being persecuted because victimhood absolves them of any responsibility for their thwarted lives. The sort of people who might entertain the theology of a Fred Phelps or, in another day and age, a Gerald L.K. Smith. Or someone worse.

If you pander to these interests, you run the risk of becoming their hostage—there’s a part of the Republican party I don’t recognize anymore, a scary fringe with rictus grins and hearts embalmed with malignity and cynicism.

In time, the politicians who have exploited the fearful ignorance of this ugly, dangerous minority for political gain will be shown to have been desperately out of touch with mainstream American values. For most of us who believe in God believe in a God of love, not the primitive monster that stalks the fetid imagination of Fred Phelps.

6/6/06

WOW! After living through that circus yesterday and wanting to demolish my TV while Chimpasaurus Rex was having his puppet strings pulled by Herr Rove, I thought perhaps today would be a respite.

I had not downed my first cup of java before running head-on into a full page ad for Ann Coulter's new piece of rabid drivel.

There was so much anger on most blogs yesterday over this amendment controversy. AmericaBlog was doing a great thing by encouraging everyone to call their senators and representatives and ask probing questions. I tried to sit back and just enjoy the frenzy.

Seriously, it's so blatantly obvious there's issues out there not being taken care of by Congress and with them spending so much time on this nonsense wedge issue, I don't understand why Americans aren't foaming at the mouth. There are plenty of people out there who are angy because this was even being considered. However, I'm not one of those.

I think it's great because it showcases what kind of representation we have and how seriously they view their positions (not very). We should all be outraged. They care more about pandering to those fundies than taking care of any real business. And it should be clear by now, based on some of the more outrageous comments, that the battle is not really even about gay marriage so much as being about the future of our nation, our constitution, and everyone's basic fundamental rights at citizens. I've never heard so much backward logic coming from the mouths of so many in one day.


This just off the wires:

The Vatican said on Tuesday that gay marriage, abortion, lesbians wanting to bear children and a host of other practices it sees as threats to the traditional family were signs of "the eclipse of God."

Pretty soon they'll be accusing us of killing God.