Don't Mess With Me, It's That Time of the Month!

POSTED BY JHW22

Let me start by saying I love the men in my life. I respect them and they respect me. So when I make the following statement, please know I am only making it about CERTAIN men. Ready? Men need to SHUT THE FUCK UP about birth control! Now, when I see the majority of male pundits and commentators and journalists (or whatever the hell we're supposed to refer to them as these days) going ON AND ON about freedom of religion in regards to contraception, I want to yell loudly enough so that each one hears me: "WHAT ABOUT MY FREEDOM OF RELIGION!?!?!"

I appreciate the women, especially the Catholic women, all over the teevee and radio and blogs and articles standing up for a woman's right to choose what to put in her body to prevent the arrival of something unwanted in her body. I love that the women's groups, on the heels of the Koman disaster, are Fired Up! Ready to Go! But even these wonderful women, speaking on my behalf and many of yours, are missing the KEY POINT in the debate. This isn't just about health care or access to preventative care or a woman's right to equality in benefits no matter where she works. This absolutely IS a debate about religious freedom: WOMEN'S.

I would appreciate it if more of us started nailing this very crucial point: the Bishops are NOT the only ones in the debate with religious freedom to protect. Let's keep the focus on the sacred first amendment (one I believe in to my core). As an atheist and a strong supporter of the separation of church and state, I think it's a vile offense of a woman's religious freedom to have her employer impose HIS religious beliefs on HER health care. I don't care if the female employee is a Catholic and that 98% of Catholic women use contraception. I don't care what the numbers are. I wouldn't care if only 2% of Catholic women used it. What I care about is that NO WOMAN be denied access to basic health care because some MAN doesn't like her ability to regulate her own menstrual cycle based on HIS, not HER, religious beliefs.

So, data aside, health reasoning aside, this debate should be about religious freedom and we should be reminding the world, that we, as American women, are entitled to this very freedom and stop letting the debate sound as if only men have the right to practice their faith. These men to keep their religion in their pants, not mine!

Must See Interview

It's amazing how sharp former President Jimmy Carter still is at 86 years young. This interview is a must see just for the realization of how underrated and under appreciated Carter was and still is. His demonization by the right is shameful.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I'll update with the added video as it becomes available.

Herman Cain? Seriously?

Is this what passes for a serious politician in the eyes of the Tea Party, or whoever is actually donating money to Herman Cain?

At the beginning, he seemed like just another in a long line of wannabe candidates committing silly gaffes like confusing the Declaration of Independence with the Constitution while touting Constitutional tenets. But here we are, further on down the line from his initial foray into the world of American politics for his humble pizza mogul beginnings, and it would seem the more we know about Herman Cain's positions, the more we can categorize them, and him, as troubling to say the least.

White-knuckling the Constitution while agreeing with religious discrimination is disturbing.

Presidential hopeful Herman Cain on Sunday sided with communities that want to ban mosques, saying Americans have a right to oppose the construction of places of Islamic worship.

..."Our Constitution guarantees separation of church and state. Islam combines church and state," Cain said Sunday. "They're objecting to the fact that Islam is both a religion and a set of laws," Cain said of the opponents.

When asked if his beliefs constitute discrimination, Cain disagreed, saying: "I am willing to take a harder look at people that might be terrorists. That's what I'm saying."

Well, the Constitution doesn't literally guarantee separation, but as we can obviously tell, Cain is by far not a Constitutional scholar. And sure, he's just looking out for terrorists because you know, they're all Muslim. (Please omit Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, Ted Kaczynski, Britian's Robert Cottage and David Jackson, need I go on?)

Still, separation of church and state hasn't been what Cain's advocated in the past.

Repeatedly over the last several years, Cain has spoken out in support of letting local, state and federal government be used to promote Christianity. At a recent Tea Party rally, Cain angrily declared, “It was during the Fifties that the United States Congress voted to add ‘one nation under God’ with liberty and justice for all, because we are a God-fearing Christian nation!”

Well, what is it? Are we a Christian nation or do we believe in religious separation when it comes to politics? And this is after Cain has stated he wouldn't appoint Muslims to his Cabinet posts or federal judgeships should he become President. I suppose he'll need to reread his precious Constitution to refresh his memory on the No Religious Test clause.

Oh, and should we mention Cain thinks it's a good idea to have a Great Wall of Chine type of fence, complete with an alligator-filled moat as a deterrent to border immigration? Or that President Obama isn't a real black man? The more Harman Cain opens his mouth, the more he amazing us with jaw-dropping quips. And the more he reveals himself to be an unserious candidate despite Tea Party support.

False Belief -- in Oppression

Posted by JHW22

There are good and bad things about Facebook. The good is finding old friends, following amazing sources of information and just plain ol' goofing off. The bad includes wasting time, reading stupid comments from idiotic strangers and the worst: finding out things about your relatives that you wish you never knew. The latter has been an on-going problem for me since my elders joined Facebook and I have learned that aunts and uncles I always respected and considered intelligent, are in fact, tea baggers. Yes, I admit I have tea baggers in the family. What's a girl to do? I can ignore or I can address things head on. For the most part I ignore.

But when my aunt posted Red Skelton's interpretation of the Pledge of Allegiance -- accompanied by a horrible quotation, which I will cite, meant to incite the oppressed Christians of America -- I couldn't keep my mouth shut or my fingers still. What follows may perhaps be the end of a pleasant aunt and niece relationship. But as an atheist-American, I felt my personal values and the principles I hope to raise my son respecting must be defended -- especially in light of the meaning behind the Pledge and its meaning for all Americans to stand together and respect who each one is as a member of a nation who shares many beliefs and shouldn't pretend that one belief isn't held to a higher level of respect than the others.

Red Skelton interpreting the Pledge and what each word means. It’s quite moving actually. In fact, it further motivates me to ensure that more Americans actually have access to the same liberties and unity that the rest of us share. Pretty powerful stuff. Then he goes and ruins it by suggesting that “under God” should stay in the pledge and wouldn’t it be a shame to remove it and all it stands for. You can watch if you want, but I think I made a pretty fair summary.

And this is what I wrote to my aunt in response to her posting of the video:

I wish we applied those liberties and freedoms to all Americans -- like gay and lesbian Americans. It would be nice if we applied our patriotism to them.

I also think it's interesting that "Separation of Charch [sic] and State ,was never ment [sic] to Exclued [sic] ,But has been used in schools to undermind [sic] the teachings of Parents, and clouding what is right and wrong who can say what is right or wrong ,if we are never Tought [sic]" (well, heck that entire quote should be a [sic]) is meant to imply that those who believe in God are somehow jipped yet people who don't believe in God just have to accept that God is in the national pledge. God is spoken in schools every day in this country. How is that exclusion? Prayer IS allowed in schools. Any student or staff member CAN pray in school. All that the courts have ever said is that one prayer can't be said for all students. And really, isn't THAT inclusive? Perhaps you can't understand that as an atheist or a Jew or a Muslim that being required to say or hear a prayer of Christians is NOT a part of that UNITED and LIBERTY part of the pledge and THAT is why schools do not hold a daily prayer. Your God's name is spoken in schools. Please don't act as if YOUR beliefs are infringed upon.

I also find it insulting that the above quote from the Skelton page implies that only those who think "under God" has an impact on the teaching of right and wrong. Or that only those who believe in prayer teach what is right and wrong.

No, to me, it would NOT be a shame to remove "under God" from the pledge. To me it would take us back to the original version that actually included by not designating. It didn't say "under a non-existent entity". Only by putting the words in there did anyone even think that removing them would be excluding. Until then, Americans' views were represented. Now, only those who believe in God’s are. But that's OK: atheists aren't hurt by hearing the words, right? It doesn't hurt to hear words. So then why would it hurt to not hear them? Why is unification and liberty applicable to those who FEEL oppressed who never see that they are in fact getting what they desire and can't imagine how letting go would be more true to the concept of that liberty and unification they claim to hold so dear?

Delete this comment if you want. And delete me if you want. But please, realize that there are two sides to this issue and your side is the one most upheld and yet most manipulated to make you feel outrage over something that isn't real. Christians are not oppressed each day that "under God" is said in our public schools. Christian children are not oppressed when they get public support of their beliefs. Atheist children learn right from wrong.

My favorite reverend, Reverend Welton Gaddy, said this:

"Well, it also seems a little bit religious hypocritical because —religiously hypocritical—because in most traditions, authentic prayer and meditation are acts that are done alone for the spiritual communication and meditation of the one involved. And all of the protests that we‘re seeing today is not in favor of prayer as defined in historic religious traditions, it‘s about public prayer.

And I have always argued, whether you‘re talking about the National Day of Prayer, or whether you‘re talking about enforcing prayer in school, the issue is not prayer, the issue is proselytization, doing something in public that is supposed to be a private act, that is convincing others do it exactly the way you do, or feel guilty about it or move to the periphery of society."

The Wingnuts Are Coming, But We Have Hope - UPDATED

"I'm a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job."

Seriously? What doctor will be unable to do his or her job because of gay marriage?

Maggie Gallagher, President of the National Organization for Marriage insists that their latest "gay marriage will make us all gay" commercial is "based on real incidents." Looks like it's a little too scripted for my taste. And badly scripted at that.



Once again, these people cannot separate legal, state sanctioned marriage and a religious marriage ceremony. This has nothing to do with their faith. By the way, does the state require a marriage license or is just the religious ceremony okay? Yeah, that's what I thought.

(H/T GottaLaff, TPC)


UPDATE (4/11/09 10am): The NOM pussies have pulled the audition videos from YouTube claiming copyright infringement! HA! It's too late, bigots. It's out there. Everyone knows it's out there. I'm leaving it up just to see that sad, sad notice when pushing play.

I'm also glad the rubes are having an "open and honest" dialogue on their blog by rejecting probably 95% of comments they disagree with during their moderation. I knew it would happen, so I wrote a very respectful comment asking to please provide me with the information or guide me to something on the NOM website to verify the claim that a California doctor had to choose between his faith and his job because of gay marriage. I got no answer and my comment was never published. What a surprise.

The sad part for them (but good for us) is that everyone else knows it as well so the commenting generally stopped before it even started. Pretty sad to get a total of 14 comments over 5 posts for a group that claims to be two million strong for marriage.

Christian "Activists" Disrupt Hindu Prayer in Senate

From The Times of India:

WASHINGTON - Christian activists briefly disrupted a Hindu invocation in the U.S Senate on Thursday, marring a historic first for the chamber and showing that fundamentalism is present and shouting in the U.S too.

...three protesters, said to belong to the Christian Right anti-abortion group Operation Save America, interrupted him by loudly asking for God's forgiveness for allowing the ''false prayer'' of a Hindu in the Senate chamber. "Lord Jesus, forgive us father for allowing a prayer of the wicked, which is an abomination in your sight," the first protester shouted. "This is an abomination. We shall have no other gods before You."

...they continued to protest as they were headed out the door by the marshals, shouting, "No Lord but Jesus Christ!" and "There's only one true God!"

So much for America's "Melting Pot". Here's the video:

...Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the incident showed the intolerance of many Religious Right activists.

"They say they want more religion in the public square, but it's clear they mean only their religion." Americans United Executive Director Rev. Barry W. Lynn, said.

"America is a land of extraordinary religious diversity, and the Religious Right just can't seem to accept that fact," Lynn said. "I don't think the Senate should open with prayers, but if it's going to happen, the invocations ought to reflect the diversity of the American people."

Just goes to show that fundamentalists are out there in every facet.