Today, Unicorn Booty on Facebook (FB Page ) posted a cute little story about Bryan Fischer, the leader of the American Family Association. He claims that "Gays Have 500-1000 Sex Partners In a Lifetime". And that gays can't be monogamous. So, marriage equality just ain't going to work for the gays. And of course he should know, AFA is "a Christian organization promoting the biblical ethic of decency in American society" (Wikipedia.org)
But there might be just a little more to marriage equality. Remember back to 1873 when the Supreme Court said Myra Bradwell couldn't practice law because "the paramount destiny and mission of woman are to fulfill the noble and benign offices of wife and mother." (Slate.com) There were such defined "roles" in a marriage. There wasn't much equality. A woman's place was in the home. But things have changed since then. Women aren't just stay-at-home and raise-the-babies types anymore.
So, to get full equality in marriage - all kinds of marriage - same sex marriages are necessary. "Same-sex marriage shows that people can make long-term, loving, sexual bonds with each other" without having to define the roles. Two hunter gatherers can be married, or two natural homemakers. Having roles defined at birth - by gender specifically - is not the way to make a marriage equal.
Now, Mr. Fischer... 1000 sex partners? Really?
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Monday, June 27, 2011
Taking Care of the Kids
It has been a while since I posted a blog here. I just spent the last two weeks on jury duty in Adams County. During my usual cruise through the Internet, there were many stories about how people just want to save the kids. After the trial I just sat on, there should be more done. Although I am not sure these things are what the kids need:
The American Academy of Pediatrics says that not only does sitting on the couch make kids obese, but all those bad fast food and junk food ads they watch "increase a child's desire to eat those types of foods." (CNN.com) Back in April, a New York City Democrat wanted to outlaw the happy meal and to "empower parents by making it harder for the fast food industry to target children with predatory marketing techniques." (TheQuirkyGlobe)
Another journal of Pediatrics has decided that it's not just the scary food ads that are hurting children. Violence, no matter how violent, also has an impact on the sleeping habits of 3-5 year olds. Michelle Garrison, Ph.D., with the Seattle Children's Research Institute suggests turning off the TV for an hour before kids go to bed. (CNN.com)
Now, California tried to take the violence on TV fight one step further and ban the sale of 'violent' video games. The State "says it has a legal obligation to protect children from graphic interactive images when the industry has failed to do so." The Supreme Court didn't agree with them and thought the law went too far with free speech rights and consumer protection. (CNNcom)
So, why bring all this up today? Well, the trial that I was a juror on the past two weeks says a lot about taking care of the kids. 20+ kids were left unsupervised -no parents around- on a Sunday night/Monday morning. They were drinking and smoking pot and decided to have a "rumble". The majority of these kids were under the age of 20. During this rumble, one young man was struck by a car and then smacked around with a baseball bat. Early that Monday morning, this 16 year old boy died. One of the young men who struck him, who is now just 21 years old, will spend up to thirty years in prison.
Is it the Pediatric Academy or journals or State Government or even the Supreme Court's job to take care of the kids? Not necessarily. Ultimately it has to be the parents' responsibility. Watch what they eat, monitor the TV and video game time, and maybe keep a little better eye on them.
The American Academy of Pediatrics says that not only does sitting on the couch make kids obese, but all those bad fast food and junk food ads they watch "increase a child's desire to eat those types of foods." (CNN.com) Back in April, a New York City Democrat wanted to outlaw the happy meal and to "empower parents by making it harder for the fast food industry to target children with predatory marketing techniques." (TheQuirkyGlobe)
Another journal of Pediatrics has decided that it's not just the scary food ads that are hurting children. Violence, no matter how violent, also has an impact on the sleeping habits of 3-5 year olds. Michelle Garrison, Ph.D., with the Seattle Children's Research Institute suggests turning off the TV for an hour before kids go to bed. (CNN.com)
Now, California tried to take the violence on TV fight one step further and ban the sale of 'violent' video games. The State "says it has a legal obligation to protect children from graphic interactive images when the industry has failed to do so." The Supreme Court didn't agree with them and thought the law went too far with free speech rights and consumer protection. (CNNcom)
So, why bring all this up today? Well, the trial that I was a juror on the past two weeks says a lot about taking care of the kids. 20+ kids were left unsupervised -no parents around- on a Sunday night/Monday morning. They were drinking and smoking pot and decided to have a "rumble". The majority of these kids were under the age of 20. During this rumble, one young man was struck by a car and then smacked around with a baseball bat. Early that Monday morning, this 16 year old boy died. One of the young men who struck him, who is now just 21 years old, will spend up to thirty years in prison.
Is it the Pediatric Academy or journals or State Government or even the Supreme Court's job to take care of the kids? Not necessarily. Ultimately it has to be the parents' responsibility. Watch what they eat, monitor the TV and video game time, and maybe keep a little better eye on them.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Funny Cuz It's...
Not true.
This week has been full of news stories about "Weinergate". Everybody has been talking about it. Even Barbara Walters told her "The View" co-hosts that the picture in question was definitely flattering.
Another tidbit of news today is the release of 24,000 emails that former Governor Sarah Palin had in her account while she was in Alaska.
Now, The Huffington Post decided to have a little fun with the two stories and posted some "Fake Emails". Happy Friday...
This week has been full of news stories about "Weinergate". Everybody has been talking about it. Even Barbara Walters told her "The View" co-hosts that the picture in question was definitely flattering.
Another tidbit of news today is the release of 24,000 emails that former Governor Sarah Palin had in her account while she was in Alaska.
Now, The Huffington Post decided to have a little fun with the two stories and posted some "Fake Emails". Happy Friday...
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Is it Protected, a Given Right or Hateful?
A man in Alamogordo, N.M. has worked with an obvious anti-abortion group, the Coalition About Needed Information (C.A.N.I.) to put up a billboard that discloses some personal, medical information about the man's ex-girlfriend. Basically he has told everybody on the main thoroughfare that his ex had an abortion. The ex-girlfriend has taken him to court for harassment and violation of privacy. A domestic court official has recommended the billboard be removed. (MSNBC.msn.com)
Now, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services does offer federal protections for personal health information. But that is primarily for "covered entities", preventing doctors and such from releasing the information. (HHS.gov)
This New Mexico man is probably not a covered entity. But is this his right to free speech? His attorney says "the First Amendment protects distasteful and offensive speech." So then it is just hateful?
Probably just hateful.
Now, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services does offer federal protections for personal health information. But that is primarily for "covered entities", preventing doctors and such from releasing the information. (HHS.gov)
This New Mexico man is probably not a covered entity. But is this his right to free speech? His attorney says "the First Amendment protects distasteful and offensive speech." So then it is just hateful?
Probably just hateful.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Oh to be Sarah
I have been away from the blog-o-sphere for about 10 days and wondered what I would write about when I got back to it. Well, shucks, what better thing to write about but dear ol' Sarah P...
Even soaking up the sun and the salt water of the gulf in Florida, couldn't miss the huge "non-political" family bus tour - her name emblazoned on the side as large as the U.S. Constitution. And she even tried to re-write U.S. History saying of Paul Revere: "part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there that, hey, you're not going to succeed." She was telling of his attempt to warn the "British" that they could not take away the guns. And her supporters decided that in order to make her "history" right, they would update the WikiPedia Page for Paul Revere. (Time.com)
And then there is a new feature length movie about Ms. Palin. It was made and conceived by conservative filmmaker Steve Bannon, and entitled "The Undefeated". Although she is definitely been defeated. And she has quit a lot. But Bannon thinks "you can't grasp the meaning of Sarah Palin until you understand the stewardship of Gov. Palin." Ok, well according to WikiPedia, stewardship is “duty of service”,"responsibility”, and “management”. And she quit being Gov. Palin. (CNN.com)
But the most exciting story today might be just how much her bosses and allies at Faux News "grasp the meaning" of Sarah Palin. On Sunday, a story about Palin ... included a graphic–featuring Tina Fey as Palin in an SNL skit from 2008. Now, Tina Fey might just get some votes in 2012... (Mediaite.com)
Oh to be Sarah... or better yet, be Tina!
Even soaking up the sun and the salt water of the gulf in Florida, couldn't miss the huge "non-political" family bus tour - her name emblazoned on the side as large as the U.S. Constitution. And she even tried to re-write U.S. History saying of Paul Revere: "part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there that, hey, you're not going to succeed." She was telling of his attempt to warn the "British" that they could not take away the guns. And her supporters decided that in order to make her "history" right, they would update the WikiPedia Page for Paul Revere. (Time.com)
And then there is a new feature length movie about Ms. Palin. It was made and conceived by conservative filmmaker Steve Bannon, and entitled "The Undefeated". Although she is definitely been defeated. And she has quit a lot. But Bannon thinks "you can't grasp the meaning of Sarah Palin until you understand the stewardship of Gov. Palin." Ok, well according to WikiPedia, stewardship is “duty of service”,"responsibility”, and “management”. And she quit being Gov. Palin. (CNN.com)
But the most exciting story today might be just how much her bosses and allies at Faux News "grasp the meaning" of Sarah Palin. On Sunday, a story about Palin ... included a graphic–featuring Tina Fey as Palin in an SNL skit from 2008. Now, Tina Fey might just get some votes in 2012... (Mediaite.com)
Oh to be Sarah... or better yet, be Tina!
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
He seems to make the case...
In an op-ed today (on Faux News of all places), president and chief executive officer of Focus on the Family, Jim Daly wanted to tell everybody why allowing same-sex marriages is all wrong. He decides to point out that things that might "improve the social welfare" do not always succeed. Some have worked (woman’s suffrage and civil rights) but others have not (prohibition and no-fault divorce). He thinks that same-sex marriage falls into that last group of things that would have to fail. (FoxNews.com)
For no-fault divorce, he states that it creates a "consequence of kids now growing up without a father in the home." Or the expansion of welfare where "fathers no longer needed to be an integral part of the family." Doesn't the lack of same-sex marriage have other kids growing up without their two fathers in the house?
He also isn't in favor of legalized abortion in all 50 states. He says that because of it, "the beauty of life has been cheapened" and child abuse has skyrocketed. Not sure exactly how an increase in non-living children makes child abuse skyrocket, but how beautiful is life for living children who never get to see their two mothers happily wed?
He is not a huge fan of cohabitation because it "decreases a person’s appetite for marriage" and says a "home with two unmarried partners has proven to be the most dangerous place for children in the U.S." Not really a strong argument for prohibiting same-sex marriage, people are fighting for the right to sate their appetite for marriage and provide a loving two-parent home for their children.
Mr. Daly may need to re-Focus his family ideas. None of his arguments make much sense for denying marriage equality.
May have to agree with him on Prohibition, though...
For no-fault divorce, he states that it creates a "consequence of kids now growing up without a father in the home." Or the expansion of welfare where "fathers no longer needed to be an integral part of the family." Doesn't the lack of same-sex marriage have other kids growing up without their two fathers in the house?
He also isn't in favor of legalized abortion in all 50 states. He says that because of it, "the beauty of life has been cheapened" and child abuse has skyrocketed. Not sure exactly how an increase in non-living children makes child abuse skyrocket, but how beautiful is life for living children who never get to see their two mothers happily wed?
He is not a huge fan of cohabitation because it "decreases a person’s appetite for marriage" and says a "home with two unmarried partners has proven to be the most dangerous place for children in the U.S." Not really a strong argument for prohibiting same-sex marriage, people are fighting for the right to sate their appetite for marriage and provide a loving two-parent home for their children.
Mr. Daly may need to re-Focus his family ideas. None of his arguments make much sense for denying marriage equality.
May have to agree with him on Prohibition, though...
Monday, May 23, 2011
So Much Time, So Little Words
Now that we have all survived this past weekend's end of the world, there is going to be a lot of time on our hands. So much time. And what exactly did the Rev who predicted the end of the world have to say about his "miscalculation"? Not a whole lot.
He told a reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle that he was "flabbergasted". (Yahoo.com) Which basically means he was overcome with surprise and bewilderment. "I'm looking for answers ... But now I have nothing else to say."
Oh, and not much money either.
He caused such angst and stress this whole year, but he ain't got nothing else to say. Keith Bauer, a 38-year-old tractor trailer driver maxed out credit cards and was sort of hoping the rapture would relieve him of his debt. Robert Fitzpatrick, who spent $140,000 of his life savings for the rapture advertising, is dumbfounded.
And the Rev's Family Radio organization can't guarantee that the members will be reimbursed. Maybe Camping hopes for another rapture so he can get out of debt, too.
He told a reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle that he was "flabbergasted". (Yahoo.com) Which basically means he was overcome with surprise and bewilderment. "I'm looking for answers ... But now I have nothing else to say."
Oh, and not much money either.
He caused such angst and stress this whole year, but he ain't got nothing else to say. Keith Bauer, a 38-year-old tractor trailer driver maxed out credit cards and was sort of hoping the rapture would relieve him of his debt. Robert Fitzpatrick, who spent $140,000 of his life savings for the rapture advertising, is dumbfounded.
And the Rev's Family Radio organization can't guarantee that the members will be reimbursed. Maybe Camping hopes for another rapture so he can get out of debt, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)