Monday, April 21, 2014

WHY I AM A LIBERAL – BOOK REVIEW: LEGISLATING MORALITY -Geisler and Turek

Taking for granted what they think “MORAL LAW” is.



WARNING


This blog does contain adult and gay material. If you are under your country's legal age (18 or 21), do not scroll down and leave this page now.



Thanks
OUR THANKS TO:
SICKORICO'S CRAP FOR MOST OF THE GRAPHICS

I only took two books on my vacation to Puerto Vallarta. I must admit that one of them had me so irritated because of the nonsense and right-wing crap that I was tempted to just put it down and count it as a loss. This was the case with “Legislating Morality”.

I am not going to enter into the details of why this book is so right-wing and tries to justify askew morality. At least that morality that is perceived to be correct by most Republicans and religious fanatics.



The premise is simple, these two authors are assuming that America is on “a moral free-fall” as well as saying that America has been experiencing a moral crisis. It even holds discredited Judge Robert Bork in a high place of esteem. Yes, the same asshole who was not confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice because of his radical extremist right wing ideology.

I happen to disagree with that, America has been evolving, it has found its way to be more inclusive and fairer, it has been able to celebrate diversity and at the same time retain the concept of “the melting pot” where each new addition to our society becomes an ingredient that enhances the stew in the melting pot.

Where it gets complicated is when these authors attempt to convince us that morality can be legislated and that it is done because of what they perceive to be an absolutist view of what is moral. They call it “natural law”.

Here again, I find myself in disagreement with all that. I don't think in terms of absolutes, I am more inclined to think that good and evil are relative. For example: to a lion a gazelle is good and to a gazelle, a lion is bad. But let's not go there, allow ourselves to be guided by common sense. I know that if I kill your brother, you will retaliate and kill my daughter. I employ the more common rule; that one called “The Golden Rule” and I do right by my conscience rather than doing what I am told by society or religion.

I am also guided by the idea that most everyone has goodness, compassion and goodwill within them. To those who are maladjusted or just plain insane, the rule can't apply. But I include in this category those who are misguided by greed, lust, power and even stupidity.
 

As I said, I was tempted to just put the book down and toss it in the garbage bin at the resort hotel. But I was by the pool, had no other reading material and continued the tortuous reading of right-wing crap.

They go about saying the old, tired concept that the Federal Government has been taking power from the States and blaming the Supreme Court for it. Never mind that the Supreme Court presently is a right-wing dominated court and we've seen the activist conservative judges hand us decisions like “Citizen's United” that have inflicted lethal wounds to our democratic process.

Then they embark on hypotheticals involving abortion. I am not going to dwell on that much either since I am a firm believer that life does not begin at conception (an acorn does not a tree make) but that if the fetus is not viable outside of the womb, then it is not a human life. There are instances where abortion is preferable; like when the life of the mother is in danger, when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest or even when the child being carried is not going to live or will be so seriously flawed that it will not have a chance at a normal life.

“A fetus is to a person as an acorn is to an oak. Sure, one has the potential to become the other, but is not that other in its current state. The rules governing the cutting of mature trees is not the same for gathering acorns for good reason; the potential to become something does not make you that thing.
You might counter than a baby is not an adult but both deserve the same moral treatment. Or that since the acorn and tree share the same DNA that they cannot be distinguished. Both counter arguments fail. Taking the last first, if I just died, I have my full complement of DNA. Do I deserve to continue enjoying all the benefits of a living person? Should I still collect my social security? After all, I've still got my DNA. And a baby and adult are indeed the same, simply an immature form of one to the other. A baby needs only nutrients and time to mature into an adult . An acorn is a different cycle of life; it must transform to become a tree, not just grow bigger. An acorn is not a tree as common sense would dictate.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schweitzer/mississippi-personhood_b_1083161.html



But it get better, the authors even go after Darwin's theory of Evolution and it had “replaced God”. I find this so typical of the religious fanatics that is laughable.







Where it gets into “THE SPREAD OF SECULAR HUMANISM” The concept that man as part of nature has emerged as a result of a continuous process and that “Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantee of human values”
 
 

You're damn right, I'll be dipped if at any time I will discard science and accept talking snakes, walking on water or virgin births. The ark is a bit hard to wrap my mind around, as is a 6,000 year old planet; and a vengeful God who makes us in his own image only to destroy us time and time again, to send his supposedly only son to redeem us and then allows him to be morbidly sacrificed on a cross is a bit too far-fetched even for some religious and Biblical scholars.
 
That is when I got to Chapter IV (How should we legislate morality on the tough issues) This is where the authors totally screw up their argument.


This is where the authors come out with egg on their faces in my opinion. They claim that we are “tolerating ourselves to death” and that “sexual behavior is beyond the ability or mission of government to influence”

Yet, these two are perfectly comfortable with the idea that for centuries, it has been the government who has been complicit with religious organizations in instituting “morality laws” ranging from out of wedlock offspring, adultery, racial apartheid, slavery, polygamy and homosexuality; all of them based on erroneous interpretations of the Scriptures with the unfortunate results of millions of people killed or imprisoned.

Then these two authors come up with the icing on the cake: how unhealthy homosexuality is, citing some debunked study published on the Omega Journal of Death and Dying” citing obituaries of homosexual deaths to be alarmingly higher than their heterosexual counterparts.


I should have stopped reading when the authors called it “the homosexual lifestyle” but I kept on reading and found out that they don't accept the concept that homosexuals are “born that way” as well as claiming that whether homosexuality is acquired or learned is irrelevant to the question of what the law should be”

Sadly, the authors make the fatal flaw of comparing criminal behavior to a homosexual condition. They ascertain that regardless of what gays are, they have to be subjected to the discriminatory and humiliating laws the religious fanatics have instituted through the ages.

The argument in this book is completely lost when the authors go into “anatomy, organ function and biology” because homosexuals are contrary to the facts of life.

This is where it really gets good...they go on to say “think about what happens during the act of male homosexuality” and then cop out by not going into explicit detail as to “not risk offense”.

No, they don't want to go into it but pose the question that such an act is a “natural act”? Because the design of the human body doesn't fit the traditional sex act.

The argument that the anus is designed for defecation and for that purpose only is flawed. If one is to employ that argument then neither the penis nor the vagina should be a “natural” organ for procreation because they are organs that serve the purpose of urination.


My question is this: Did these two bother to ask a gay person what is involved in the actual sex act? Did they consider that there is the possibility that there is also a great deal of intimacy and affection which is enjoyed by both?


Obviously these two authors did not, any gay person could have told them that it is perfectly normal to love another human being and express that love through the intimacy of sex. Any gay person could have also told them that the pleasure derived from the sexual act itself is just as intense and satisfying if not more than with heterosexual sex.

The misconception that anal sex is unnatural and unclean is also one of the flaws of these two. It can be unclean, it can also be painful, it can cause damage, but if it is done correctly, the pain will turn into pleasure and the addition of lubricants will facilitate coitus as well as preventing damage.

Why do these two authors think that gay sex exists? If it wasn't pleasurable nobody would do it. If the only criteria to avoid gay sex is that it does not help in reproducing then that too is misguided because there are millions of heterosexual couples who are barren.

However, these two go on about how regardless of whether it is acceptable for two consenting adults to engage in a homosexual act that it goes beyond that. They claim that homosexual acts are inherently selfish acts and not consistent with MORAL LAW.


How can this little adorable child be gay? 


 
Why would he be killed by his own mother?


Yet you have widespread hate crimes carried out by homophobes who are just following the teachings of their religion, some will even kill their own children if they think they are gay.


 

They claim that homosexual acts hurt and kill people and that the nation will not survive long if we encourage its people to engage in harmful behavior.

Let's put that idea to a test and look at Massachusetts where same sex marriage has now been legal for some time. I don't see a crack in the sky or a tear in the social fabric. I don't see a deterioration of society, and I do see a rise in committed relationships therefore strengthening the “sanctity of marriage”. The persecution and discrimination of LGBT people does nothing to enhance our society, just the contrary.


 
Remember what Eleanor Roosevelt said: “Nobody can humiliate you without your consent.”



















Thursday, April 17, 2014

THE RIGHT WINGNUTS ARE SO DESPERATE, THEY ARE CIRCULATING AN E-MAIL TELLING PEOPLE THAT ABC IS NOT PATRIOTIC BECAUSE OF NO LAPEL PINS.

Every election cycle the Republican-Teahadists have come up with this crap about how patriotic you are if you wear a lapel pin.


My reaction to this e-mail:

Patriotism is not measured by how many bumper stickers you have on your car or the lapel pin you wear any more than being a Christian is measured by how big that cross hanging from your neck is.
 

This seems to me like another desperate attempt by the right wing fanatics to claim ownership of patriotism. It is ironic that not only are we able to love America but that those very people who wear the lapel pins and plaster the bumper stickers are doing just the opposite: they are actually traitors who have been destroying America for years.

 

They are the same ones who spread the hatred and division, they are the warmongers who got us into a stupid war and lied to us to do so, they are the ones who caused a horrible economic crisis by their failed policies, loopholes, subsidies and tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations, they are the same ones who after they tanked the economy refused to own their causing it, and have been sabotaging any and all efforts to help our economy recover.



These are the same people who call themselves patriots but who will not hesitate to spread a lie, to misinform, to accept tons of money from the Kochs or corporations and will in turn disenfranchise millions of voters....is sabotaging the democratic process patriotic?

They are the same ones who deny women equal pay for equal work, the ones who suggest that I am less worthy because I was born on this or the other side of a body of water....or the ones who deny me my basic right to love who I chose because it is different than what they perceive to be right.

So now Americans are no longer free to love America? Is there a new Federal law that is being implemented just for that?

I also noticed that our President, yes that one, Obama, still wears his lapel pin.


And this e-mail claims that we're losing everything America stands for? What America is that? Is it the 1950's America of Leave to Beaver, with segregated lunch counters and separate water fountains? Is it the America where gays were carried off in paddy wagons just for frequenting a gay bar? Is that the same America that would deny an education if your last name was Rodriguez or Garza?

Well, that America didn't work very well for some of us, and I don't care how many lapel pins you wear to tell me that you're losing that America because our country is not yours, it belongs to everyone, it is my country also and I'll be damned if I accept a lapel pin as a substitute for the real love for our country....these people are in my opinion traitors...not patriotic!

Lastly, why does it need to be circulated QUICKLY? Is it because they don't want people to have time to think?


Here is the e-mail in question:


“How sad........ that Americans are no longer free to love America!

Goodbye to ABC

IN GOD WE TRUST


ABC News Joins Obama and Bans American Flag Lapel Pins!

ABC NEWS BANS FLAG LAPEL PINS

This is what we get from the present attitudes in Washington.

Barbara Walters said that this was going to hurt ABC bad. And she works for

ABC.

YESTERDAY THE BRASS AT ABC NEWS ISSUED ORDERS FORBIDDING REPORTERS TO WEAR

LAPEL PIN AMERICAN FLAGS OR OTHER PATRIOTIC INSIGNIA.

THEIR REASONING WAS THAT ABC SHOULD REMAIN NEUTRAL ABOUT 'CAUSES'.

SINCE WHEN IS PATRIOTISM TO BE DISCOURAGED?

I URGE YOU TO BOYCOTT ABC AND ITS SPONSORS AND AFFILIATES.

WE ARE SLOWLY LOSING EVERYTHING OUR COUNTRY STANDS FOR AND EVERYTHING OUR

MEN AND WOMEN FOUGHT AND DIED TO PRESERVE!

PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO AS MANY AS YOU CAN.

THIS HAS BEEN VERIFIED THROUGH:

<http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/a/abcflag.htm>

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/a/abcflag.htm


THIS ONE NEEDS TO BE CIRCULATED...QUICKLY”


 PROPAGANDA not the same as JOURNALISM

I don't know about you, but I'd rather watch an anchor who tells me the truth and practices objective journalism but wears no lapel pins than watching one who does but spreads misinformation and tells me lies.  
 





Monday, April 14, 2014

Miami-Dade blocks voters standing in line from using the bathroom

If there was any doubt in your mind that Republicans loathe the democratic process...this is one excellent example, it is unconscionable, inhuman, repugnant.

Suppressing the vote is the work of the Republican Party across the land. Some states where the Republican Governors and the Legislature have control have gone out of their way to institute anti-democratic measures. With the lame excuse that voter fraud has to be prevented...when there is virtually no voter fraud, the Republicans have demonstrated their unwillingness to support a working democracy.

In Florida, where voting is at best chaotic and we have a crazy-ass Governor backed by a very recalcitrant conservative Legislature, things got way out of control during the last elections when we saw people waiting in line to vote for six hours or more.

Now they want to make sure that not only the waiting time is a nuisance, but that inconveniencing voters who are standing in line for long periods of time can not use the restrooms. All of course with another lame excuse: Something about the ability of those who are handicapped to access said restrooms.

I live in Florida, and I don't know about you, but this is enough of an incentive to go out and vote, even if I have to wait 8 hours and piss in my pants.





Sunday, April 13, 2014

Mat Staver: Christians Might Overthrow The Government Over Gay Marriage

Staver hopes that the coming second revolution will be non-violent, "but you never know what will happen."


Now that crackpots like Mat Staver don't have the Reverend Phelps to do the talking for them and help them spread the hate...he's prognosticating that the American people will overthrow the government over gay marriage.


It baffles me to think that assholes like him would actually want to enter into a civil war to prevent a minority from enjoying the same rights everyone else has. We've been there, done that and the Civil War proved to be a disaster in terms of life and treasure and those who wanted to have discrimination and hatred lost.

He says that it's the Christians who will wage that war, yet, there is nothing Christian about what he is suggesting since Christ never uttered one single word condemning homosexuality.

 
 

All I have to say to this human phlegm is: TRY IT YOU MOTHER FUCKER and since you love hatred more than you love your country, you will be tried for treason!










Saturday, April 12, 2014

THE REPUBLICAN AGENDA IS THE SAME AS THE KOCH BROTHERS'

KOCH'S PRESIDENTIAL ASPIRATIONS

If you think that the evolution of the Republican Party into one of the most repugnant and regressive ideological machine America has ever known is just a spontaneous, grass-roots, common sense, patriotic, free enterprise oriented and a logical evolution of conservatism, you are in for a surprise.

All you have to do is look at the MANIFESTO that the Kochs published when one of those bastards (David) was running as Vice-Presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party.

In essence, you will find all the present day Republican talking points, platform and ideological trends are also the same as David Koch's back then.

From one after another of Ryan's budget plans, (yesterday the Republicans in Congress voted for Ryan’s most despicable budget yet). NPR reports that “the sharpest cuts would come to health care programs for the poor and uninsured,” including a FULL repeal of Obamacare. And while poor and middle class families would see tax hikes, the GOP’s billionaire donors like the Kochs would see an $87,000 tax break.

 

 

Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:34 PM PDT

Astounding: David Koch's 1980 VP Run: Kill Medicare, Social Security, Minimum Wage, Public Schools

In 1980, David Koch ran for Vice President on the Libertarian Party ticket. Courtesy of Senator Bernie Sanders' press office, the 1980 Libertarian Party platform consists of literally dozens of odious positions, which Republicans today should be called upon to repudiate. Republican candidates and elected officials are having powwows with the Kochs, and why think that the Kochs have grown more moderate in their dotage?

This is a critical document that enables Democrats to tie Republicans to their genuine policy preferences, not the milquetoast lies and half-measures they claim to believe in.

Republicans' main ally and benefactor had the following platform, in part:

Taken from the blog post by Senator Sanders, available at

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/...

Here are just a few excerpts of the Libertarian Party platform that David Koch ran on in 1980:

 

 

“We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”

 

 

“We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”

“We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”

“We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”

 

 

“We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”

 

 “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”

 

 “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”

“We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”

 

 

“As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”

“We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”

“We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”

“We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”

“We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”

“We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

“We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”

 

 “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”

“We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”

“We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”

“We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”

 

 

“We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”

 

 

“We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”

“We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”

“We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”

“We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”

“We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”

“We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”

Now, ask yourself this question: If the Koch brothers were able to somehow capture all three branches of government, would America be a place you would want to live in, be able to survive, or even be proud to call your country?

If what these two human phlegm brothers is what you want, then by all means support all Republican ideas and vote for them. I am sure they are measuring the White House drapes right now and the only issue of significance remains which one of the Koch brothers would be Emperor and which Co-Emperor.

But if you have that visceral dislike for President Obama, try to dig deep behind that feeling and ask yourself the question: Do you oppose Obama because he opposes everything these two bastards have somehow interjected into the Republican philosophy or do you dislike those but just hate Obama because he's black?

 

 

Lastly, don't think for one minute that what motivates these two arrogant traitors is greed...although it has a lot to do with it but since they have more money than God and can throw it away in order to buy elections, there is one underlying reason: Their father was a member of the John Birch Society and the two assholes want to bring validation to that once despicable organization.

In my opinion they should be brought to justice and tried for treason, collusion, corruption and voter fraud.

What the Koch brothers are suggesting is called ANARCHY!