Civil Disobedience?

No, not really.

I was looking at some of my blogs numbers, to try and find where my recent uptick in readership was coming from, and I noticed something interesting:

4/8/2015 to 4/15/2015

Apparently, behind the United States, I'm getting the next highest number of page-views from RUSSIA.  

Now, in light of their "Law" prohibiting "pro-Gay" or "Homosexual Propaganda," and in consideration of the many pro-Gay Rights and LGBT+ positive posts I've made over the years, it would appear that I'm helping people break that particular law, or am breaking it myself. (Yeah, I know: Assuming they can even SEE all of my blog, and the State isn't managing to block it.)

All the same, that really amuses me.  It pleases me greatly that I might be playing some nanoscopic role in helping people thumb their nose at Vladimir Putin and his absurd little scum-puddle of a censorship law. I certainly hope so, anyway!

So, in short, if you or your comrades are reading this: Fuck you, Putin! 

:P

...And they just keep coming!

WHAT A DAY FOR CONSERVATIVES, HUH?!

LOL

NASCAR decries Indiana Law! NASCAR! Fucking NASCAR!!! If the Right has lost NASCAR, then the culture war is over and WE WON!

Companies are actually Boycotting Indiana!  COMPANIES!  Not Liberal, LGBT advocacy groups but COMPANIES! JOB CREATORS! 1%'ers!  How far gone are the Republicans that they are now alienating BUSINESSES?!

Here's the Facebook Page of Memories Pizza in Indiana, who now proudly discriminate against Gays. Why don't you drop on in and offer a "review?" I did. I recommend that everyone does. (Not to be confused with memoriespizza.com, which they apparently never thought to secure the rights to.)

12 Sign that the Republicans are actually insane

HERE'S a Pastor who knows what Jesus stood for!

I'll leave you with these images that I snagged off of Facebook:

Because everyone knows that Fox viewers ARE, in fact the most INFROMED of anyone!

And, finally, because Zinnia Jones is so fucking awesome:

You really need to look that up. because that's funny as shit!

What's wrong with Indiana?

With regards to the following piece from Daily Kos, all I can say is...

Bravo. Probably the best post I've ever read from them, and I read them every single day.

What Do Conservatives Want When 

They Say "I Want My Country Back?"

Equal rights for all: Women, Minorities, all Religions, Atheists, LGBT folks, etc... Nothing short of this is acceptable. And yet states like Indiana and Arkansas and Georgia and Nevada and too many others are doing their damnedest to go in the wrong direction.

These laws have long since ceased to be about protecting religious freedom, because nobody's "religious practices" are threatened by doing business with a gay person. (Or a black person, or a Jewish person, etc...)  If you are in the business of selling bread for $2 that costs you $1 to make, you are not HARMED if a gay person buys some: You are $1 ahead. End of story. It's THAT SIMPLE. It is not a burden to anyone to expect them to do business, in the very business that they went into business to do! It benefits them. Tangibly.  Expecting someone to drive farther, pay more or go without IS doing harm.  It imposes a burden on that person, a tangible, economic burden that is the precise, legal  DEFINITION of harm.

Arguably the stupidest defense I hear of these laws was the following:

Governor Pence? That's ALL JESUS DID. His ENTIRE LIFE was about WELCOMING SINNERS! That's pretty much ALL HE DID!  Also?  (you ignorant fuck) WE ARE ALL SINNERS.  And should anyone say otherwise they are automatically committing the sin of PRIDE.  For you to claim that this law is what Jesus wants is to take the Lord's name in vain, to the highest degree.  

MARK 2 13-17 JESUS IS A FRIEND OF SINNERS!

And you, sir, are no friend to mankind, or to civilized society.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, 

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Does that sound familiar Governor? It should: You put your right hand on the Bible and swore to uphold it (not the other way around!) when you were sworn into office.  How about:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, 

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, 

that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Pretty "American" sounding, no? What part of that suggests that we discriminate?  What part of that says that people should be limited in their choice of who they love? Or marry?  What part of ANY of this allows one person to use their "deeply held religious beliefs" to harm another?

YOUR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ENDS AT THE TIP OF MY NOSE.

And your law is a disgrace.

It is NOT like so many others - established to protect ACTUAL religious practices, particularly those of minority religions and Native Americans. It is a perversion of those laws, twisted to amount to no more that a political backlash against the progress that's been made against the bigotry that holds us back from bringing TRUE equality under the law to all people.

In closing couldn't say it any better that Steven D. did in the Kos article that I linked to:

I don't want my country back.  I want a better country.  One that truly provides liberty and justice for all people.  And I certainly don't want a country where anyone can discriminate against anyone else of whom they do disapprove and escape liability for that immoral and otherwise unlawful act under any pretext, be it freedom of religion, racial superiority or traditional values. 

I never want to go back to the country that existed when I was born. The one that exists now needs far too much improvement as it is.

Bravo, Steven. Bravo.

What if he was black?

Stumbled across this vid from the Young Turks.  This took place not far from where I live and work.  Let em just say that Cenk got it 100% correct.  That guy's Black? He's DEAD. Immediately. End of story.

And,yeah: The open carry laws have gotten out of hand.

A Great Victory!

So I bought MY lottery ticket (64 in total, actually, including the pools I'm in), and before anyone talks about the "tax on people who are bad a math" (a sentiment I'd typically share) let me just say that I've calculated MY odds of winning at least a share of the jackpot at 1 in 2.75M (much better than the official, single-ticket odds of 1 in 176M) and the expected value of a ticket right now, given the lump-sum, after-tax jackpot payout is around $2.63. So this is one of those rare times that the $1 ticket price is actually a good deal.  (Hey: If Vegas had a game that paid out $2.63 on average and only charged a buck to play, it would be dead broke in no time!)

But I couldn't care less if I win or not, because earlier today I ALREADY won: The Michigan State House passed the Autism Insurance Reform Bill and starting October first, my two sons will have their speech and language therapy covered under my BCBS plan.

I would like to thank our REPUBLICAN Governor, Rick Snyder, for making this a legislative priority (even though it was the REPUBLICAN-controlled State Senate who stalled the bills, back in 2010, after it was passed by DEMOCRATICLY-controlled State House!) and also to everyone who sent emails, made phones calls, wrote letters, walked for autism, signed petitions, donated money or in any other way supported this incredibly important legislation and cause.

But there remains much more work to do: Twenty States remain that still allow Insurance Companies to discriminate against Autistics, seven of which have legislation pending votes later this year.  For more information about Autism Insurance Reform in YOUR State, go to www.autismvotes.org.  Working together, we CAN make a difference, and my State is now part of that example!

Freedom of Religion

In the past, I’ve certainly made no secret about my feelings towards religion. In fact, I’ll admit that I'v not been shy about treating it with open hostility. But through it all, I have claimed to hold Religious Freedom as a matter of principle: That while freedom OF religion REQUIRES freedom FROM religion, it is still, “FREEDOM OF RELIGION.” And the time has come for me to defend this principle, and to defend what might be my least favorite religion of all, ISLAM, from a violation of this principle.

I want to issue, without equivocation, a strong condemnation of the new laws in France and Turkey banning the public wearing of Headscarves by Islamic women, and the new law in Syria banning of the wearing of the full veil by female Islamic teachers in the classroom. These laws are clear violations of these individuals' basic human right to free religious expression and represent what I believe to be an abhorrent violation of human rights.

Wow – where did THAT come from? I mean… The whole idea of the veil? I find beyond absurd. It’s a symbol of the oppression of women in particular, and of people in general by the Religion which, more egregiously than any other in the world, seeks to dominate all forms of government and public life, and which invariably seeks to outlaw all other forms of religious expression. Islam is, IMHO, the worst religion for this reason: It carries by far the most restrictive superstitious taboos, has by far the least tolerance for dissent and violation, and if left unchecked, aggressively integrates itself and it’s tenets into the State and into the Public Laws. And once it does this, it commits grave violations of human rights and despicable acts of human suppression. And to the extent that any country in the middle east (or anywhere else) DOES NOT do this, it is directly proportional to how SECULAR their government remains. IOW – it’s like I said before: How crazy you are is X times the amount of how religious you are.

So how can I so strongly condemn Islam and yet defend the veils, headscarves and burkhas? Simple: It all comes down to freedom.

I have said before that I can respect anyone’s religious beliefs provided that they are kept:

1) Out of the classroom
2) Out of our laws, and
3) Out of my face

An Islam – at least within Islamic states – aggressively violates all three. So if we’re talking about a case where someone is FORCED to wear a scarf, veil or burqua? Or for that matter, FORCED to pray, FORCED to fast, FORCED to tithe, etc… Then yes: I condemn that. But it is not the place of ANY government to tell someone who BELIEVES in that level of modesty (for example) and CHOOSES to wear the Scarf, Veil or Burqua that they CANNOT.

Just as government should not be able force any religious prohibition upon me, nor should any government prohibit me from accepting a religious prohibition voluntarily should I choose so. (Hey, this applies anywhere: I fully support the rights of nudists and naturists everywhere as well. But that doesn’t mean I’d support outlawing clothes!) No human being should be told that they MUST or CAN NOT participates in a religious ceremony, practice, tradition, custom or taboo.

The Separation of Church and State must be ABSOLUTE, for the protection of BOTH ENTITIES.

I don’t see how it can be any clearer.

------------------------------------------

BTW – I’d like to point out that this reasoning is very consistent with other positions that I hold with equal vigor:

1) I abhor abortion, but would protect most abortion rights.

2) I despise guns, but oppose most gun control measures.

3) And (in this case) while I despise what the Veil represents, and condemn its forced usage, I cannot abide the idea that it would be TAKEN AWAY from someone who believes in it, and choose to wear it for themselves.

And these are not contradictory, because for me, it comes down to CHOICE: I may not agree with the choices you make but I fight, kill and die for your right to make them. (And I will also fight, kill and die to prevent you from taking them away from someone else!)

-----------------------------------

One last thing…

It should be noted that the ALCU, that “secular enemy of organized religion everywhere” (according to the Christian Funny-Mentalists in THIS country) agrees with me.  And I applaud them  for their efforts in each and every one of those cases!

Trying to have it both ways?

I was reading Snopes.com the other day and found what I thought was a rather ironic juxtaposition of articles. The first one was a “Correctly Attributed” blog entry from the rather conservative Country Music Legend Charlie Daniels. (Hey – credit where it’s due: he may be on the wrong side of politics, but even though I HATE country music, I still say that “The Devil Went Down to Georgia” is one of the greatest songs ever written.) It’s basically a slightly more principled defense of the new Arizona Immigration Law than the Right has been offering for several weeks now. It goes without saying that I disagree with his overall judgment on the law, but there was a whole lot less overt, outright racism then we’ve typically seen. It focused on the idea that the LAW is the LAW and you cannot break the LAW. I’m not going to bother to disassemble this entire philosophy right now, but it should be pretty obvious that this country has a well established system for CHALLENGING laws that we think go too far, and there is ample precedent for such laws being struck down. Given the controversy, it’s almost a given that this law will find it self in that process. And if it’s just frustration about the Federal Agencies not enforcing existing law, all I have to say is: That’s their discretion! What AZ has essentially done is say, we don’t like how YOU’RE enforcing the law, so we’re going to do it ourselves. If anyone other than a STATE did that, I’m sure even Mister Daniels would call that “VIGILANTISM.” (And the Supreme Court may yet decide that AZ DID overstep.) In any case, if he’s truly not racist, as he claims he’s not, then I’m sure he would not approve of vigilante action as a means of enforcing immigration law, or indeed ANY law.


That made it very interesting for me to read the NEXT post, which was an update about the Cross Memorial being placed on federal land. What does the LAW say about this? Well… primarily it says that openly Christian memorials can not be erected on Federal Land. And SEVERAL court cases not only upheld that judgment, but even upheld it against several clumsy and still unconstitutional compromises, and even struck down several CONGRESSIONAL actions to try and find a remedy that didn’t involve removing the cross. (Which was put the illegally and without proper authorization in the first place, I might add.) As I read this, I just kept thinking, “Hmmmm, I wonder what Charlie Daniels thinks about the LAW in this case.” I mean – the LAW was clear, and it was upheld numerous times, so what’s the problem? REMOVE THE DAMNED CROSS!

And while I will never presume to speak for a Musical Legend, why do I get the feeling that Mister Daniels probably feels that the cross should stay, and to hell with the Law. IOW: That it’s the LAW that must change.

Now… that’s his prerogative. EVERYONE has some law they don’t like; that they’d like to see repealed or revised or enforced or enacted anew. I’m got tons of ‘em. So there’s nothing wrong with that. Just don’t pull that “The LAW’S the LAW” bullshit whenever it suits you and then act like the law can be challenged whenever you don’t like it. Some laws are just no damned good, and it a matter of interpretation how to APPLY the law in any given case. That’s why we have COURTS, and a CONSTITUTION. So you can’t have it both ways.

Now… as for the guy who STOLE the cross? Speaking for myself, as an individual, I say, “RIGHT ON! BRAVO! And JOB WELL DONE!” The cross has no place on federal land, and was never authorized to have been put there in the first place, and our government should have the balls to enforce the law as had been interpreted MANY TIMES by the court. BUT – to avoid the hypocrisy charge on vigilantism – I will gladly concede that, should the perpetrator be apprehended, he should and must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I applaud the act, but he was the one who decided to take his chances legally speaking. I hope he’s never caught. But if he is, and if he’s convicted, you won’t hear me complain. I’ll SYMPATHIZE, but hey: The law’s the law, right?

Life in an Arizona, and Mexican, border-town

I’ve been on the road, traveling on business the last couple of days, so I haven’t had a chance to blog. Coincidentally, I’ve been staying in Arizona and crossing over to our assembly plant in Mexico. It’s been interesting to see and hear peoples reaction to the new immigration law – especially from those American Citizens of Mexican decent; people who were born here and have lived here they’re whole lives, went to school here, married here, had kids here but who now may face the possibility of having to proove that they’re Americans.

Now… it should go without say for any of my regular readers that I am completely opposed to this new law. It’s beyond racist – it’s downright fascist. It’s the kind of thing the Nazi’s did to root out suspected Jews and that we did in our country, prior to the civil war, to Blacks and Freedmen and escaped slaves living in the North, who, lacking the proper paperwork, faced deportation and enslavement to the south. There is such a long, dark and despicable history of this kind of nonsense that I fail to see how “Show me your papers” can be remotely acceptable to ANY American.

Or, as the Mexican-American driver who picked us up and drove us to the plant said, “You can be pulled over now for driving with a sun-tan.”

I was a bit surprised that there was not MORE venom, to be honest, but perhaps he figured he should keep things polite in mixed company. That and this particular gentleman is also one of the funniest guys I’ve ever met, so maybe that's just not his way. Seriously, it’s like taking a ride with Cheech Marin. He even looks and sounds a bit like him. But I digress.

The other thing that surprised me at first was that I saw no support, at all, from ANYONE, regarding this law. And you’d think in a border town, you’d have a considerable amount of support. I mean… if there’s a THREAT, it’s going to hit them first, right? But I as talked to more people, I found over and over that the people in border towns have a unique perspective on the issue: To them, the issue of immigration has a HUMAN face to it. They invariably have friends and co-workers on both sides of the border. To them, these people that will now face this unreasonable harassment are their friends and their neighbors and co-workers and in some cases employees. They LIVE with and WORK with and PLAY with these PEOPLE. And thus they see them as PEOPLE. And when you put a human face on a problem, it becomes a lot harder to look another human in the eye and say, “No. I will not help you. I will not protect you. I will not respect your rights, or your humanity.” The only people who can look at someone and say that, who can look as some, living and breathing right in front of them and feel nothing but fear and hatred, are racists.

Now, I’m not suggesting that those living farther from the border, who feel this same fear, and who support the law, are racist. Not at all. If you’ve never MET a Mexican, then there’s no reason to expect your opinion of them to be educated by more than stereotypes, and the imagery that Fox News shows you, with the intention of feeding that fear. The racist is merely the person who, upon meeting someone who doesn’t FIT the stereotype, refuses to let go of it. I’ve met precious few people who have actually gotten to actually know Mexicans, who still buy into the stereotypes afterwards. And those that do? Well, they’re either cops or racists. And I say cops, because police officers are another group that have unique perspective on humanity: They typically only ever see the worst of it. So while I don’t excuse a cop who’s racist, in that case, I can at least understand where it comes from. All the [name your racial subgroup]’s that s/he’s interacts with are usually being arrested and charged with crimes. And while they should recognize this fact, I can’t fault someone as much who’s merely reaching the conclusion that the data they have supports. Although… as my relatively racially insensitive cousin would attest to, even after going on a fairly racist tirade about all the various immigrant groups he’s had to deal with: There’s no trash like white trash. Even in his Right-Wing eyes, they’re STIILL the worst. He still dreads the trailer-park call more than any other.  I find that oddly and ironically amusing. But I digress.

As for the stereotype? Let me tell you something about Mexicans: These people work hard. They work like dogs and get paid SHIT. And I’ve met no shortage of Mexican managers and engineers that are smart as whips, and work harder than I even try to. I consider myself to be fairly intelligent (if you’d gathered that yet) but I’ve stood awestruck at some of the things these guys have come up with, and the production lines they’ve designed and built. No way I could ever do that. No way in hell. And I’m an engineer! And the line operators? Oh my god, break neck speed, with many, many steps in each operation, and yet this plant has won quality awards! So these people should be the poster children for hard work and ingenuity, and instead they’re described as lazy and stupid. And do you know what they’re paid for this, including the cost of benefits? $65 dollars a WEEK. For a 40-hour shift! Now, I do realize that $65 dollars goes a little farther in Mexico than it does here, but still! For $65 a week, you’d be lucky to get me to even show up! Let alone give a shit about the job, or do it well! And the ones that DO come here? Those hardened criminals, who’s only crime is walking across an arbitrary line in the sand as the sought a better life for themselves and their family? These people work the SHITTIEST jobs available, again get paid SHIT, and in this country get NO benefits for doing so. These people work hard in a way that puts most Americans to shame.

I thought we were a country that valued hard work? I thought we were a country that valued entreprenuerial spirit? That valued that drive to excel, to build a better life for yourself and your family? That celebrated a person who, like my father and so many of our parents, the first in their family to go to college? Well… apparently only if your brown skin really did come from the sun, and wasn’t something you were born with.

Well, these people are my colleagues and co-workers and many have become my friends. And I’ve had a human face put on that stereotype and on the "problem" of immigration, and I can no longer abide the racial sentiments of those who have experienced no more of the Mexican culture than what Taco Bell has to offer. I CARE about these people, because I KNOW these people. And I won’t stand by while their hard work and talent and ingenuity are slandered.

As far as I’m concerned, Governor Jan Brewer and Senator John McCain are unfit to serve the public, for giving into to this fear and xenophobia.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I plan to do a separate post on stereotypes before doing one on immigration.