The Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents the federal government from granting the rights to same-sex couples that married couples enjoy on the federal level, is under fire from President Obama and Congressional Democrats. Obama is no longer supporting it, and Dianne Feinstein and others are sponsoring what is being called the Respect for Marriage Act. This act would ensure that homosexuals in states where same-sex marriage is legal would be entitled to the same benefits heterosexual couples get.
I say about time! But why was this not pushed when the Democrats had control of the House and the Senate? It is obvious that the bigoted Tea Party Republican controlled House will never agree to this. However, the fact that this idea is being discussed in Congress means that it is already on it's way to being repealed, and it's only a matter of time before this occurs. I say The Tea Party bigots get behind this and actually support the freedom they incessantly talk about.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Monday, July 18, 2011
Casey Anthony Verdict Updated
As the nation watched the trial of Casey Anthony, captivated at every turn, everyone assumed that the evidence the prosecution was presenting was accurate. The only question was whether the evidence pointed strongly enough to Anthony being guilty or not. However, the evidence was not completely accurate. Are you surprised prosecutors are fabricating evidence?
We all heard on the news that there were 84 searches for chloroform on Casey Anthony's computer. However, this is not true. There was only ONE search. John Bradley is the developer of the software CacheBack, which was used to prove that there had been 84 searches for chloroform. There was a problem with the software, and when it was fixed that was when John Bradley discovered that it was only one search. He says he notified the prosecution and the police. As we all know, they did not correct the record.
Many people have said Casey Anthony escaping a conviction is a failure of the justice system. How could an awful murderer get away with such a heinous crime? This is a good question, but a better question is whether the evidence the prosecution used was not accurate in other areas of the trial. How much did they lie? It's not unheard of for a prosecution to manufacture evidence, as DNA testing has exonerated many that were wrongfully convicted. It seems as though the conclusion to draw from this may not be that the jury made the wrong decision, but that the prosecution was not completely honest.
We all heard on the news that there were 84 searches for chloroform on Casey Anthony's computer. However, this is not true. There was only ONE search. John Bradley is the developer of the software CacheBack, which was used to prove that there had been 84 searches for chloroform. There was a problem with the software, and when it was fixed that was when John Bradley discovered that it was only one search. He says he notified the prosecution and the police. As we all know, they did not correct the record.
Many people have said Casey Anthony escaping a conviction is a failure of the justice system. How could an awful murderer get away with such a heinous crime? This is a good question, but a better question is whether the evidence the prosecution used was not accurate in other areas of the trial. How much did they lie? It's not unheard of for a prosecution to manufacture evidence, as DNA testing has exonerated many that were wrongfully convicted. It seems as though the conclusion to draw from this may not be that the jury made the wrong decision, but that the prosecution was not completely honest.
New Harry Potter Film
This is really out of the ordinary for my blog, but I feel as though I should briefly give my opinion of this movie. It is great. It keeps you hooked the entire time. And after it ends, you are wishing there would be more. It's not often a two and a half hour movie can seem to go so fast. I felt like I was only in the theater for 20 minutes. Anyway, if you have not seen this movie, I strongly urge you to see it ASAP!
Why America Does Not Need Another Conservative Texan
Haven't we tried this experiment before? George W. Bush was given a fiscally sound government and completely bankrupted it. Huge tax cuts for the rich, a prescription drug bill, a new Department of Homeland Security, No Child Left Behind, and two wars that were all not paid for. America's reputation was ruined around the world. Torture was temporarily legalized. And same-sex marriage was used as a wedge issue to turn out bigoted voters. These are just a view of the problems that the former President caused.
Now let us turn to Rick Perry. In his book published last year, "Fed Up: Our Fight to Save America From Washington, he espouses some very indefensible positions. Recall that during the health care debates he made national headlines for saying that Texas should secede from the Union if the federal government did not stop overstepping boundaries. Therefore it is not surprising in his book that he says the New Deal and the National Income taxes are both "marches toward socialism" and should be rolled back. He denies evolution and global warming, saying that it is just natural cycles of the earth to the latter and intelligent design is the better explanation to the former.
The common thread that unites Rick Perry and George Bush is that they both let their ideology shape what they perceive to be true or false, rather than letting what is true or false shape their ideology. The National Academy of Sciences and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change both have said it is HIGHLY probable that the vast increases in the earth's overall temperature are due to human activity. Evolution is accepted by virtually every reputable scientist of any kind in the world. But Perry and Bush both denied these findings because they do not want to face what is happening around them. It is a curious phenomenon that conservatives like Bush and Perry deny global warming, even though it is not a partisan issue whether it is actually occurring. It just is, and dealing with is what the debate should be about, not whether it is happening at all. That is the height of willful ignorance.
Now let us turn to Rick Perry. In his book published last year, "Fed Up: Our Fight to Save America From Washington, he espouses some very indefensible positions. Recall that during the health care debates he made national headlines for saying that Texas should secede from the Union if the federal government did not stop overstepping boundaries. Therefore it is not surprising in his book that he says the New Deal and the National Income taxes are both "marches toward socialism" and should be rolled back. He denies evolution and global warming, saying that it is just natural cycles of the earth to the latter and intelligent design is the better explanation to the former.
The common thread that unites Rick Perry and George Bush is that they both let their ideology shape what they perceive to be true or false, rather than letting what is true or false shape their ideology. The National Academy of Sciences and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change both have said it is HIGHLY probable that the vast increases in the earth's overall temperature are due to human activity. Evolution is accepted by virtually every reputable scientist of any kind in the world. But Perry and Bush both denied these findings because they do not want to face what is happening around them. It is a curious phenomenon that conservatives like Bush and Perry deny global warming, even though it is not a partisan issue whether it is actually occurring. It just is, and dealing with is what the debate should be about, not whether it is happening at all. That is the height of willful ignorance.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Herman Cain Thinks Mosques Can Be Banned
Herman Cain, the former CEO of Godfather's pizza and current Republican Presidential nominee, said in an interview on Fox News Sunday that any community that disapproves of a Mosque has the right to ban it. He also made a very interesting argument for the separation of church and state, "Islam combines church and state. They're using the church part of our First Amendment to infuse their morals in that community, and the people of that community do not like it. They disagree with it."
What is striking to me about this description of Islam is that it can apply to many portions of Christianity in America today. Many conservative pastors today speak out against "god-less liberalism" and claim that Republicans are the candidates that must be supported because they align with "Christian values." Putting aside the fact that Jesus would never have supported a party that was so in bed with corporations it lost sight of actual reality, they are claiming that their religion guides them in voting, and if the Republicans do win, they expect them to support the right-wing conservative Christian agenda of outright discrimination against homosexuals and draconian restrictions on women's reproductive rights because of a belief that life begins at conception, all the whole not defining life and going against the scientific evidence. If this is not infusion of church and state, I don't know what is!
I cannot imagine a Republican coming out and saying, conservative Christians have too much influence in our government. They push for discrimination against homosexuals, restricting women's reproductive rights, banning stem cell research that has the potential to save millions, and push lies that intelligent design is a viable "alternative" to evolution. I only ask for consistency.
What is striking to me about this description of Islam is that it can apply to many portions of Christianity in America today. Many conservative pastors today speak out against "god-less liberalism" and claim that Republicans are the candidates that must be supported because they align with "Christian values." Putting aside the fact that Jesus would never have supported a party that was so in bed with corporations it lost sight of actual reality, they are claiming that their religion guides them in voting, and if the Republicans do win, they expect them to support the right-wing conservative Christian agenda of outright discrimination against homosexuals and draconian restrictions on women's reproductive rights because of a belief that life begins at conception, all the whole not defining life and going against the scientific evidence. If this is not infusion of church and state, I don't know what is!
I cannot imagine a Republican coming out and saying, conservative Christians have too much influence in our government. They push for discrimination against homosexuals, restricting women's reproductive rights, banning stem cell research that has the potential to save millions, and push lies that intelligent design is a viable "alternative" to evolution. I only ask for consistency.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
California Gay Curriculum Law
The law passed by California, SB 48, which includes teaching about the contributions of homosexual people in history, is being challenged in court. Conservatives, who already hold strange political opinions to begin with, are challenging the law because they believe it will lead people to see homosexuality as normal and thus result in same-sex marriage. And same-sex marriage is a very evil thing indeed under this view.
I find it strange that conservatives would oppose a law that was actually teaching history. History happened, and if homosexuals made contributions to society as a whole there is nothing people who are against homosexuals in their quest for equal rights can do to change that. There is no "revisionist history" going on here, but simply an accurate portrayal of events. With the number of being people bullied for being gay lately, one would think that conservatives would soften their stance on homosexuality. However, blind bigotry seems to rule the day for them, as they oppose any efforts to show the general populace homosexuals are not as scary and perverse as the conservatives want us to believe.
I find it strange that conservatives would oppose a law that was actually teaching history. History happened, and if homosexuals made contributions to society as a whole there is nothing people who are against homosexuals in their quest for equal rights can do to change that. There is no "revisionist history" going on here, but simply an accurate portrayal of events. With the number of being people bullied for being gay lately, one would think that conservatives would soften their stance on homosexuality. However, blind bigotry seems to rule the day for them, as they oppose any efforts to show the general populace homosexuals are not as scary and perverse as the conservatives want us to believe.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Michele Bachmann's Crazy Church
Salem Lutheran Church, in Stillwaters, Minnesota, have identified the office of the Pope as the anti-Christ, which is the figure in the Bible that will institute a one-world government and cause everyone to follow him and deny the divinity of Jesus. Michele Bachmann has been a member of this church for more than decade. She and her Church both deny they are anti-Catholic.
Growing up as conservative Republican Christian, I am very aware of the view that many of them hold that says Catholics are not even Christians. They use strange rationale like Catholics pray to Mary or that you don't need a Priest to speak to Jesus. Anyway, many of their views are very anti-Catholic among, and there is no reason to believe Bachmann does not hold this view. It would be different if a person were anti-religion, but being a conservative Protestant and then attacking Catholics just makes you look really stupid. All of them share outrageous beliefs, with Protestants saying salvation depends on believing a person actually came back from the dead, even though that NEVER happens in any case thus experienced. They also discount being a good person to get to Heaven, which means people like Ghandi are going to hell. It would be wise for one to examine one's own beliefs before attacking those of another.
Growing up as conservative Republican Christian, I am very aware of the view that many of them hold that says Catholics are not even Christians. They use strange rationale like Catholics pray to Mary or that you don't need a Priest to speak to Jesus. Anyway, many of their views are very anti-Catholic among, and there is no reason to believe Bachmann does not hold this view. It would be different if a person were anti-religion, but being a conservative Protestant and then attacking Catholics just makes you look really stupid. All of them share outrageous beliefs, with Protestants saying salvation depends on believing a person actually came back from the dead, even though that NEVER happens in any case thus experienced. They also discount being a good person to get to Heaven, which means people like Ghandi are going to hell. It would be wise for one to examine one's own beliefs before attacking those of another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)