The Douchery of North Carolina

Well, after not having anything really relevant to write about yesterday, we have a outrage double header today. First, as I posted below, the Republican party is hard at work weeding out anyone with half a brain (or ability/desire to govern).  Now, I find out that North Carolina has passed their discriminatory anti-gay marriage amendment.  I am not sure what they call it, but I will tentatively name it the "There is something that I don't understand and therefor it is wrong and protect the family somehow American patriot amendment."   What a load of horseshit. 

Two things.  One: it is totally ridiculous that we can decide by a majority vote what rights people in a minority will have.  Not only is it ridiculous, it is scary; very, very scary.  Clearly, if you are not presently in the majority, you have no rights.  You may have privileges, but no rights.  What you thought were your rights were only the good will (and I use the term loosely) of the majority.

Two: Gays and Lesbians were already (profanity omitted) prohibited to get married by North Carolina law.  This isn't defense of marriage, they are on the offense.  Offense of marriage.  That does sound more like what is going on here.

Anyhow, I will leave you with this little thought...first go here and look at the picture.  Next, go here and watch the video.  Apparently, the golden rule applies in traditional marriage.  /snickers 

Back again

Alas, vacation is over.  Back to work, and I suppose I should get back to blogging as well.  Anyhow, I haven't really come across that many fresh outrages recently that I wanted to write about.  Maybe I am just getting numb to them.  I did happen upon a fun piece over at Project Reason.  Apparently, the world economy will utterly collapse this summer, and people who believe this will be transformed into superheroes or something.  It is not as much fun as a real end-of-the-world-doom-love-in, but it is fun nevertheless.  After all, the semi-apocalyptic group is led by a guy named de Jesus.  And nobody fucks with the de Jesus.

RNC: Obama at war with women.

For the RNC to release this video about Obama's "war on women" at this particular moment in history defies any scale of irony that I am capable of comprehending.  Seriously.  The KKK might as well release a video about Obama's war on black people.  

 

 Right.  It doesn't help that the video is barely coherent.  I feel I my brain has just experienced a trans-cranial ultrasound.

Facepalm. Hard.

Dear Atheists,

Please stop existing.  This just defies comprehension. 

Creativity

Hey!  I am really excited about this.  I am going to coin a new word!  Well, a quick Google search reveals some other instances, so perhaps it will just be a new definition for a word that is already in use.  Regardless, it is going to rock!  Ready for it?  Here we go: Nazidiot.  Pronounced "not-sid-iot".  Bam!  Definition: a person who cannot tell the difference between someone who is a Nazi and someone who is not.  Now please take my fun quiz to see if you are a Nazidiot.

Questions:

1.  Is this a Nazi?

2.  Is this a Nazi?

3.  Is this a Nazi?

4.  Is this a Nazi?

5.  Is this a Nazi?

6.  Is this a Nazi?

If you answered "yes" to any of questions 1-5, I am sorry, you are a Nazidiot.  Please seek professional help.  I know what you may be thinking: "Hey, I thought you didn't like Glenn Beck."  True, I don't, I really, really don't; but, guy's not a Nazi.  Crazy?  Arguably.  Annoying?  Definitely.  Nazi?  Nope.  Please enjoy this new addition to (or new addition to a new addition to) the English language!

All your uterus are belong to us

I wanted to write a blog entry about how invasive these "small government" conservative types are.  But Stephen Andrew at Freethoughtblogs.com preempted and outdid me with this wonderful piece.  Well said, sir.  Well said.

Angry

Atheists have a bad reputation for being angry.  Just the other day I was talking to a friend and the subject of religious fundamentalism came up.  About ten seconds in, my friend brings up that he can't stand atheists, they are so angry and always trying to force their views on other people.  I listened patiently for a while before revealing that I was an atheist.  That was fun to watch.

Truthfully, I have not met any "angry" atheists.  I am sure there are some people out there who are angry most of the time and also happen to be atheists, but the great majority of atheists I have met have been fun and genuinely caring people.

All that aside, today I am an atheist who is angry (correlation only).  The source of my anger is Susan G. Komen for the Cure.  The pink ribbon people.

Before I go further, I would like to say that I have nothing but respect for the foundations efforts in the battle against breast cancer.  What I can't respect is there decision to cut their funding for breast exams to Planned Parenthood, an organization that always seems to be at the forefront of women's health issues.

I also don't buy their reasoning.  According to a statement on Komen's website in response to the furious reaction of so many to this decision:

To support this new granting strategy, Komen has also implemented more stringent eligibility standards to safeguard donor dollars.  Consequently, some organizations are no longer eligible to receive Komen grants.

...

We regret that these new policies have impacted some longstanding grantees, such as Planned Parenthood, but want to be absolutely clear that our grant-making decisions are not about politics.

So why is it that Planned Parenthood no longer meets Komen's eligibility standards?  Apparently, Komen's board decided last year that they wouldn't support any organization that was under official investigation.  As it would happen, Planned Parenthood is under investigation by Representative Cliff Stearns of Florida.  He is an anti-choice Republican, and as you know, Republicans hate Planned Parenthood (my irony meter flipped out when I read that he is also trying to increase privacy protection for Americans).  According to this article, the president of Komen, Elizabeth Thompson, didn't know of any organizations other than Planned Parenthood that would be affected.  So it seems that to act surprised and say that they are just following their standards that they hold everyone to is a load of crap.  It seems far more likely that this restriction was put in place specifically to distance themselves from Planned Parenthood.

The faux-surprise expressed in that statement is also irritating in that if it were genuine it would mean that Komen, a $400 million charity, lacked any sort of PR savvy.  How could they not expect a backlash to cutting funding for breast cancer screenings from someplace like Planned Parenthood that is constantly under attack from forces that are virulently (and inexplicably) against proper women's healthcare.  How are people to believe that this was not Komen caving to bullying from these anti-choice groups.


Anyhow, that is my little rant for today.  Planned Parenthood is accepting donations directly for breast cancer screening.  There are also some nice petitions to sign.

A simple guidemap to wedded bliss

A friend of mine posted this article on Facebook about "Why You're Not Married" by Tracy McMillan.  Sorry if you are reading that and you are married, but it is the title of the piece.  It is written to women who want to get married;  apparently women who want to get married for the sake of getting married.  So, why can't these ladies find themselves a man?  Why can't they "seal the deal"?  Simple, they are shallow, selfish, slutty, lying bitches.  And they are not good enough.  No really, that is what she says.  Seriously.  Read the article.  I read it about four times to see if I could glean something good out of it.

Now, I am not an idiot.  I know that being in a relationship requires you to make sacrifices and compromises, but McMillan actually suggests that women should be more like Kim Kardashian.  If you are a woman, and you want to be like Kim Kardashian (warning: I don't really know who that is) then by all means do so.  It is your life, right?  But to suggest that you "smile" and "wiggle" to avoid scaring men is repulsive.  Just keep your opinion to yourself, smile and be a good doting wife.  How else is a reader supposed to take that?

Beyond that I think that McMillan is painting with pretty broad strokes.  I am sure that there are shallow, selfish, slutty, lying women who want to get married, but are having a hard time.  I am sure that there are shallow, selfish, slutty, lying women who are happily married.  To suggest that in all cases the reason that a woman can't find a man that she wants to marry is because of six simple (and offensive) reasons is really undercutting how complex human relationships are.  Off the top of my head, I can think of many other reasons why two people don't get married.  Here are a few: finances, career, distance, different goals, children, fear, lack of interest, family pressure, peer pressure, illness and, yes, religious differences.  I am not going to expand on those and I would like to note that the list is not exhaustive, but I think you get the point.  Simply saying that X or Y is why someone is not married is a bullshit oversimplification, especially when applied to such a diverse demographic as unwed women (who want to get married).

Anyhow, maybe I am way off base here, and I am a man, so I feel weird writing about women's issues regardless, but this one really got under my skin.  Now that I got that out, would someone please be so kind as to write an article titled "Why You're Not Married to Newt Gingrich"?  I would love to read that.

Whoops!

I love the blog Bad Astronomy.  Phil Plait serves up awesome space pictures and videos, as well as pointing out and explaining things scientific that the media either ignores or gets wrong.  Whenever some big science story is breaking, Bad Astronomy is usually my first stop.  Today for example I went there to see if he had chimed in yet on the latest news about the unfortunately nicknamed Higgs Boson (the "god particle").   Sadly, he has not, although, I think that is probably because there has not been enough news yet. 

Anyhow, once I saw that there was nothing new on the Boson there, decided to peruse the other entries.  I came across one about holiday giving.  I was not happy to see this link on the Bad Astronomy page.  Don't get me wrong, I am happy that I know.  I am just upset because I usually drop a few bucks in the Salvation Army's buckets each year while I am shopping.  I hate to think that I have been supporting a charity for most of my life that openly discriminates against gays.  I guess I shouldn't be surprised, and perhaps I had been a bit naive.  At any rate, I will not be dropping any cash into any red buckets this holiday season unless it is part of a drinking game. 

P.S.  Bad Astronomy also has a list of charities that skeptics and atheists would find much more appealing.

There is crazy...

...And there is crazy.  And then, there is this.  Sun goddess???  What?!  Does the empress know?  Compared to this, Russell's Teapot seems pretty down to earth (yuk yuk yuk).   

I live in Japan...

Therefore, I am sometimes surprised when I get Jehovah's witnesses knocking on my door.  Today, it was two nice old ladies that were knocking, so I was on my best behavior.  I don't really speak Japanese, certainly not at the level of abstract language required to communicate about religion, so I didn't understand what they were saying.  They had a book full of colorful pictures.  First she pointed to a picture of a fish and a car.  Then to a picture of a salamander's foot.  I don't really know what this was all about, but I am guessing it has something to do with intelligent design.  On the flip-side, maybe they were saying that cars evolved from fish.  That would be hilarious.

Intelligent De-Fail

Having just written a post yesterday on civility in discussions of religion and non-belief, I was interested when I came across this article attacking biologist, and popular atheist blogger P.Z. Myers via Project Reason.  Now I understand that Professor Myers is not afraid to say how he feels, so to speak, and therefore it is not so surprising that some people might, from time to time, get upset with him.  I quite enjoy his writings, which I recommend you read if by some tiny chance you made it here before seeing his vastly more popular and established blog. 

Anyhow, back to the article in question.  I read through the piece which was one part ad hominem attack and one part tutorial in the inanities of intelligent design.  I felt the need to say...something.  But when I got to the comments thread it seems that someone had beaten me to the punch.  More like someones.  At last check there were 218 comments with the majority by far defending Professor Myers.  I think there were only one or two that were in support of the article.  Myers also replied on his blog.

Seriously, P.Z. Myers doesn't need me to publicize this.  I just wanted to say that, even though I tend to be less vocal, I do so enjoy seeing an ID pusher get shredded whenever I can.  Thank you secular internet.