*fires off the second shot*

You know, it's hilarous how the "season of peace" has spawned a war...

Let's bring in dear Senator Buttars...poor Buttars doesn't have enough to do with his day. Apparently ignorant of the war in Iraq, our new incoming president, AND the economic crisis, he got bored. He wants Utah legislature to declare it's opposition to the war on Christmas.

Obviously he's also ignorant of the First Amendment and history.

"It would encourage the use of 'Merry Christmas,'" Buttars said of the non-binding statement that is still being drafted. "I'm sick of the Christmas wars -- we're a Christian nation and ought to use the word."

Yeah, I'm sick of the "Christmas Wars" that the christians make up every single year too.

I don't know what's sadder, that it took a reporter and a lawyer to bring up the violation of the First Amendment or at how many Senators were asleep through history class. Maybe they didn't even bother to show up.

I get it, it's a resolution. It's really nothing more than a statement that "we support Merry Christmas". But it's also a statement that says "we don't recognize the Jews, Blacks, and others of our nation". You're putting Christmas ahead of Kwanzaa, Hannukkah, Yule, and those that actually do celebrate Festivus, and secular Christmas celebrators. So what, our beliefs are all secondary to yours? Once again a christian (and I mean that in the loosest possible terms) has made it abundantly clear that they will force us to face them whether we want to or not. Why? Why must you be in our faces constantly? The only problem with this thinking is that if we are forced to face you, then we have to do something about you.

This is also a government attempt to back a religion. Christians claim Christmas every year when they start this war on Christmas shit. If you're backing a religious holiday, then you're backing a religion. If you are backing Christmas to the exclusion of Kwanzaa, Hannukah, and Yule, you've tossed your hat in the Christian ring. Resolution or not, it's one that will be followed with lawsuits.

Don't even get me started on interfering with the free market and the irony of regulating businesses to say Merry Christmas while many christians condemn the same businesses for "commercializing" it.

This is getting beyond stupid. I read about a guy who was at a store and bought something and paid with his credit card. As the cashier held the credit card back to him she said, "Merry Christmas!" He says, "You too." She wouldn't relinquish her hold on the card and repeated "Merry Christmas." She thought she didn't hear him and said, "You too" again. She continued this behavior until he realized she wouldn't let go until he said "Merry Christmas" all the while glaring. He finally said it and was allowed to leave. I'd have said "oh you're not a christian either?" and reported her ass.

But the point comes to: Why are you such selfish little bastards? There's like a half dozen holidays in December and yours is ONE day. Diwali (I have no idea what that is), Kwanzaa, Christmas, Hannukah, Yule, and believe it or not, some folks DO celebrate Festivus. Hell, Hannukah lasts longer AND predated Christmas. Yule predated it too, in fact, they stuck Christmas in our Yule!

Also, Jesus actually celebrated Hannukah, you Christians are refusing to recognize the day that Jesus himself recognized! That can't bode well....

Sorry, got a little distracted.

Go victimized a christian, say "Happy Holidays" everwhere you go.

I've been tagged

Well, it seems my friend, SWFreedomLover, has tagged me. This seems like a very sneaky way of finding out what I'm reading since I'm THE book connoisseur of the web. ;) EVERYONE, who's ANYONE, wants to know what I'm reading.

RULE ONE, I have to grab one of the books closest to me, go to page 56, type the fifth line and the next two to five lines that follow.

RULE TWO, I have to pick five people who love books and who could receive the Bookworm award with honor. (note: I’m picking five people and assuming four of them love books, one I’m sure does…..LOL)

So here goes:

"Nonetheless, each floor has its own invisible peculiarities, lurking in wait for dancers' feet. Even the floor of Toronto's famous Drummond Theatre. The company had gone through two complete rehearsals, undress and dress, without a hitch; it was in the final onstage warm-up class, a scant hour before curtain, that John DeMarco, who had been dreaming of and working toward this night for all of his professional life, found the flaw with his name on it. It broke his ankle."

Starmind, Spider and Jeanne Robinson, Ace Books, 1995

The problem with five people is I don't know 5 other people who aren't already referenced, I only know 3. So I'm breaking a rule, but still tagging those I can.

My 3 are: Ron Britton, Watcher, and Sophisticat. All are very well read fellows.

Don't worry, new post in the works as well, sometime in the next couple of days. The War on Christmas has begun!!! I take my place in the front lines!!!!

Black Friday (How stupid are you?)

I don't want to know which of my friends participated in Black Friday. I really don't. I don't want to know how many of you chose to participate in an event that grows more and more out of control every year. L, I would like to note this is not a response to YOUR post, but a response to the many others who have decried ANY responsibility on the part of the shoppers.

I know it's "IN" now to blame those nasty corporations. It's all their fault for everything. I'm not a real corporate friend myself. There's much they do wrong and Black Friday COULD be handled better. However, in our rush to blame everyone else, let's not forget to lay this directly where it belongs: on you. Every single one of you that participates in Black Friday, ie going to the store and waiting in line, have contributed to this man's death. I get a good deal, I know how it is, especially when you're poor. However, many of you participating are not. I know some folks that have plenty of money and buy things not only they don't need (I mean, they did not WANT these items until they saw the deal and do not use them), but also don't have them in mind as gifts. Really, what is the point in buy 6 of an item you know you will not use and don't know if anyone you know will use? Just because it's cheap? Really? You do realize that the $200 you just spent will now sit in your closet until it's obsolete? Gape like a fish, but you know it's true. Well, maybe not, some of you will not consider your friends on their birthdays in order to get rid of this stupid thing and justify your shopping. You will then tell yourself next year, "Well, I got rid of them all, everyone loved them!" Maybe, and maybe they are better friends than you are. Since you all chose to queue at the doors of stores like animals, you have told the corporation yet again, "do with us as you will".

But let's get back to the real point here. Are we adults or are we not? Are we the decisionmakers in life, or are we sheep steered hither and yon for the corporate cash box? Are WE in charge of ourselves, or are we nothing more than ignorant masses here to feed the corporation? I say this in all superiority because I STAYED HOME!! I shopped some awesome deals online at midnight Thanksgiving night and was in bed by 1 am secure that my shopping for the entire Christmas season was over. I was in my pajamas, at home, cigarette in hand, getting free shipping. I know, not everyone can do this sort of thing, but if you can and you didn't, then you are a problem.

*coughs* Sorry for the gloatfest, but I do so love shoving your stupidity in your face and grinding it in. It's orgasmic. Anyhow, the fact is, we are in charge of ourselves and our behavior. While certain blogs (which will remain linkless) will decry the corporations as it's the responsabilité du joure, let's not rule out free will. We all know the madness of Black Friday, provided you didn't crawl out from under a rock buried in the center of the Earth yesterday. We are all aware of what our needs and wants are. It's not that I wouldn't LIKE to participate. We aren't broke, but a good deal sure helps out. It's just that I don't let what I want overpower my decency. My decency says we do not contribute to the madness. My decency says as I could do just as well elsewhere and lessen one person contributing to the standard mob mentality that we allow to run our nation. Black Friday is not the disease, it's a symptom of us, the human disease.

Ah, that's not the right analogy, as we're not a cancer, mindlessly reproducing, ignorant of our effects...we just don't CARE. Look at the AP article.

Other workers were trampled as they tried to rescue the man, and customers stepped over him and became irate when officials said the store was closing because of the death, police and witnesses said.

Shoppers stepped over the man on the ground and streamed into the store.

"When they were saying they had to leave, that an employee got killed, people were yelling 'I've been on line since yesterday morning,'" she said. "They kept shopping."

How is Walmart responsible for THIS? How is any company responsible for the people who chose to continue shopping and whine because a man had the gall to die when they trampled over him in a rush to get to their "deal"? I get why not stop and help him, you surge forward or get trampled yourself, but to whine because the store is closing after you helped kill a man???? You want to blame the corporations for our "fellow man" (not mine) being so crass and having no decency? The corporations didn't foster this behavior. Something is seriously wrong with these people. If I hurt someone I will stop and try to help and suffer over what part I may have played. I DO NOT CONTINUE SHOPPING! You have decided a plasma tv is worth more than this person's life.

Look, it's bad enough to show up and later say, "I never expected this" after watching this shit on the news every fuckin' year. We'll just stamp "Retarded" on your head and put you on the special bus. But to then WHINE and continue shopping? You are a criminal. Not only have you possibly contributed to a wrongful act, but you have NO remorse. You're no better than a serial killer. I'm not exaggerating, you really are no better. If you want to blame the stores, the fundamental problem is not Black Friday, but YOU. You are trying to remove the blame that SHOULD cling heavily to your own shoulders. It doesn't matter that the corporations COULD find a safer way or better way to do this. This does not remove the responsibility for your actions and your behavior from yourself.

Are we human beings, theoretically capable of rational thought, or are we nothing but animals throwing feces? I can tell you what you damn well look like...

The True Dangers of Internet Porn

Wow. I'm not a big porn fan (hehe, I said big). While I'm a fairly lenient parent in letting my children view sex on tv provided it's in a context that they observe natural behavior in life, I do not subject my children to blatant sex for sex/entertianment's sake. We do not watch shows when there is no rational reason to throw a graphic sex scene in the middle other than to pull in the male viewer or titti-late. ;) While the Matrix 3 was not bad, I to this day do not see the purpose of tossing in Neo and Trinity's sex scene throughout the tribal scene. I do get the sexuality in the tribal dancing. One seemed sex for sex sake, the other was making a point of the culture. I can't explain it too well, but I get it.

So understand, I have a healthy view of sexuality in that I understand it's a fact of life and I'm no frigid virgin scared of a little willie (I know, I gotta stop that). I refuse to raise my children with that view myself. Now, going a bit further, if you're new to this blog, I'm a HUGE fan of personal responsibility. I tend to put a lot of people's behavior on their own shoulders. One should act, not react. If you choose to be reactionary, then you are choosing to give up responsibility of your behavior to your emotions.

Knowing all this, you can probably understand a few of the problems I may have with the above website. (Yes, I'm well aware it's selling a product, however, if you think this is the first time I've seen Vagina Madness, you're blind) If you click on the title you get taken to the Reefer Madness of Porn. I say this because this:

The price our young people pay is more often than not, addiction. The sexual images our teens view release chemicals in the brain (endorphins), our body eventually craves these feel good chemicals like alcohol or drugs--- serious problem though, the alcoholic can avoid the bars and situations… how do you avoid the images that pop into your head when you’re trying to study? When you see a new face at a party? You don’t, that’s why Internet Porn has been compared to crack cocaine– but worse!


sounds suspiciously like this:

At the heart of the campaign are two studies on the neurochemical effects of THC, marijuana's effective ingredient, published recently in Science magazine. The putative results: Marijuana is not only a "gateway" drug to heroin, but addictive in its own right. Just like alcohol and cocaine, marijuana is capable of "hijacking the brain's so-called reward system," Science reported, and priming it for future addiction.

Really? Seeing a penis is a "gateway" drug to donkey shows? Please say your fucking with me..please?

Internet porn is not a romance novel. It is not a sex education for beginners. In its simplest form it teaches a complete lack of intimacy—using another human being to masturbate oneself, and most often degrading the other.

Wow, and who would imagine that after thousands of years of some version of porn (do you really think there were no voyeurs in Ancient Rome? wrong) that the sudden slight convenience of internet porn verses mailed/cornerstore porn is going to ruin the view of intimacy, ESPECIALLY if the parents display a healthy view of intimacy? Now I'm not trying to be an ass, but if your kid is that stupid, the problem isn't porn. We have survived the advances of porn for thousands of years and, because of the internet, we are suddenly brainless monkies?

When viewing porn on the internet starts becoming an addiction, the viewer becomes obsessed with making/stealing time for this activity. He/she will turn down healthy invitations to social activities, preferring time with the computer, will find excuses to be home alone or locked in their room, etc.

Because no young boy discovers masturbation unless someone points it out to them, and they'd hardly disappear to the bathroom when they did find it. C'mon guys, admit it, for the first little while you did it a lot. I'm not giving you shit, but be honest.

Don Juan, move over—there is a new role model for young good looking guys—the predator! There is a generation of young men who think that sex is a game. They are the hunter and any girl is the hunted, the concept of relationship does not even cross their mind. They emulate the role models they see on porn sites, and strive to be like them.

And where the hell are you dad? While it's apparent that every generation would far prefer to lay the blame on something else, let's get down to brass tacks: Your fault. Now, it could be because we as parents do not get a handbook. We're flying by the seat of our pants here. However, at least admit you've made mistakes. We all have, nothing to be ashamed of. It could also be the example set by dear old dad. Dear old dad who divorced mom after 20 years because that hot thing on his arm is younger and prettier. Don't worry dad, mom does it too. You and your friends teach these boys where to get their ideas. Predators are glamorized as "playas" on tv yeah, but where the hell were you, from when he was a little boy? You obviously weren't teaching him proper respect for a woman. And the worse you treat women, well, the more he gets the idea that they aren't meant to be treated respectfully. Studies still show that the biggest influence on a child is his or her parents. So guess who's falling down on the job? The buck stops here, you are the weakest link, pick a phrase, but get it.

If you read "understanding your critical role" you see a ton of good ideas. I can't argue with any of these really. I suppose I could question just what exactly they mean by "protect" as it's constantly misused as "don't even let them know it exists", but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

I can't argue with "things you should know". Those ARE things you should know...if you're doing your job.

In the "6 Signs Your Kid Could Be At Risk" I have a problem with. At risk of what? A disturbing scene? Have you seen the NON-porn things these kids have sent to each other? What exactly is the risk here? Getting an idea? Knowing young men, they probably have already heard it from a friend and decided to accept/discard it. I'm really not sure what the risk is.

1. The family computer is conveniently placed in the basement, attic, back room
2. Your child has a computer with internet access in their room
3. Your child has their own laptop with internet access
4. You have not set parental controls on the computers that your children have access to
5. You never check the history on you’re computers browser
6. Your teen creates/finds situations to be home alone and on the computer

In other words, shadow your child constantly. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of supervision, but you have to learn at some point to start trusting your kid a little. If nothing else (especially if you're one of those constantly harping on what the "right" way to raise a child is), trust the method you used. Just as those who seek to be enlightened must maintain a state of unconscious wakefulness, you must maintain a state of watchful trust, tailored to your child. Some children need more watching than others, but they all need to feel that you believe in them to make the right decisions. By setting parental controls and checking their history and not leaving them alone, you show that you don't believe they can handle responsibility. This being the same little brat you bought a 2 ton metal machine that goes in excess of 100 mph. Wow, schizo much? You'll trust him to not run over someone and speed around (though it's been proven that damn near every teenage boy does) and yet can't trust him to not go into a sexual frenzy over the site of a vagina? Please be aware, this says a lot more about you than it does him.

The younger your children are when you start your action plan the less resistance you will meet; the following are the basic House Rules for all ages at all times.

Wow, David Koresh's guide to brainwashing: the sooner you can get them under your thumb, the sooner you can laze back and let the threat manage things. I'm not saying don't teach them young, but this phrase suggests making them malleable to better able to control them. Just remember, when you have made them so and are in control, you've left the back door open to everyone else that would like them malleable and controllable. Also, a sign that you're too lazy to BE a parent. As long as you maintain control over them, you don't have to actually teach them a thing, huh? What gets me is you treat them like little children as long as possible and then SEND them off to college. When the dean calls for the 8th time about Johnny's alcohol stash and Jenny's been busted blowing the football team again, you're surprised! Really? And it's all porn's fault, not yours for treating them like they're 5 until the day they moved out. You gave a 6 year old a credit card and now you're pissed because he spent 10k on toys.

Look, I see what it is. You're lazy. It only takes a village to raise a child when mom and dad don't want to do it. You have relegated the responsibility of your child to everyone else. The schools teach them sex, political views, acceptable behavior. The church teaches them values. The internet, the tv, the books must all be modified to suit what you want them to learn. What the hell do you do? Not a fuckin' thing. What gets me is you are the same lazy asses who get mad at what the schools teach them. "I don't want my kid learning that liberal bullshit/redneck religion". Well, they gotta teach them SOMETHING, you're damn sure not doing it. Don't bitch if you don't like it. You bitch, and yet you STILL don't take responsibility. You don't change it, you expect everyone else to change.

The buck stops here. We are the ones who CHOSE the responsibility of OUR children. I don't want to raise your kids. Chances are, I don't LIKE your kids. I may feel that some of the "child free" are some stuck up bastards but there's one thing they have right: They didn't choose to have children, YOU raise them. I didn't choose to have more children so what the hell makes you think I want responsibility for yours? If you want a village raising your kids, put them in a state home. Look how well that whole village thing is going for THOSE kids.

Filling a hole

Now I want you to follow me here. This is NOT a religious thing. If you pay attention, you'll get it. If you don't pay attention, well, don't expect me to be surprised.

One of the things that drives me absolutely batshit in this world is desperation. Not the feeling, that doesn't get me. It's the things people do that drives me nuts. A woman's husband dies. They've been married for 40 or so years. We're talking committed. In the wake of her husband's death, while desperately grasping for something to fill the hole his loss has left in her life, she's become a fundie christian. (Stay with me) She's turned her back on her entire life in order to find a meaning. Now, this wouldn't bug me, aren't we all looking for some sort of meaning? That our time on earth isn't worthless. That we will leave a mark that says "I was here and I did something".

We all do this and it's ok. It's human. But in the wake of a loss of any kind, one must expect that desperately clawing for any meaning is no better than having no meaning. You commit your life to some ephermeral that, within a few years, you realize really means nothing to you. In return for this desperate race to fill that hole, you have burned bridges that you may never get back.

I say this isn't religious because in THIS case, she turned to religion. I've seen cases though where people have undergone complete personality changes to devote themselves to charity, a friendship, children. You say, how can that be bad? Well, 1. You get to this point when, most of the time, you realize that this isn't YOU. This isn't who you are. 2. You're trying to replace something that can't be replaced. The funny thing is that anyone with a modicum of intelligence (I know I just greatly shortened that list) will tell you that it's not healthy to replace someone. Yet no one bats an eye when you replace someone with god or charity or some socially approved behavior. Really, it's no different.

I hear all the things. Maybe this is what she needed to get through. If this gets her to sleep at night, leave her alone. I'm not interested in how much sleep she gets. I'm interested in her working through what she feels to make decisions for her life that won't hurt her later. When you come back from any type of rehab, they say to make no big decisions for a year or so. Do you know why? So you don't try to replace the drugs/alcohol/etc with a dependance on another person or with a new type of addiction. Why would any such thing be different if you lost a spouse? Why would you make a sudden decision that the religion you've mocked all your life is something you should jump into? That the charity you've turned your nose up at is suddenly worthy of your time? Why is it no one points out the painfully obvious? No matter what you fill that hole with, it will never take the place of the loss. Don't change your life significantly until you are no longer grieving. Don't run to religion, sports, people, charity. Socially approved behavior or not, that does not make it more healthy behavior. Yet I'm the asshole for pointing that out.

If you cared you wouldn't accept her "conversion" to god, but recognize it for what it is: A lost, lonely woman clutching desperately for something to give her life meaning in the wake of losing a, if not THE, central part of her life. Let her grieve, help her, be the rational one at a time that she needs someone else to be rational.

Homeschooling, unschooling and "Bad Parents"

There's this site called babble.com. Apparently they allow articles that go against the grain of standardized parenting. Some homeschoolers on there. Joanne Rudnall wrote an article on her first attempt at homeschooling. She has chosen to use an unschooling method. IMO, a perfect method at least to start with seeing as how her son is 5 years old. The article is fine, I'm sure we could find places to disagree were we to talk, but the article doesn't bother me. The comments, WOW. What a bunch of losers. What gets me is the hoops they jump through in their mind to justify their OMG reaction with.

1. The little boy gets the appropriate amount of sleep for a young child, he just stays up late. Why is it that everyone thinks that everyone else has to follow THEIR timetable? I'm sorry, I'm not a morning person. I get my energy and my drive after dark. Since we've started homeschooling the kids sleep as they wish. My older children are up at the butt crack of dawn, greeting the sun as it rises to the sky. Myself and my younger children come blearily stumbling through the house after daylight to find that my oldest children are eating breakfast and have already started on today's lessons. I would hardly find this abuse. Ok, so their lives aren't lived by bells and whistles, ordering them when to stay or go. They learn punctuality, as I'm a great believer in it. We have appointments just like any other family and those times are strictly adhered to. Just in the rest of our life, a clock doesn't run it.

2. She took him to a bar. OMGOMGOMG!!!!! Ok, not the bars YOU hang out in, but a family friendly pub type bar. She's English, as I understand it, that's normal. Where's the objection here? Is it the alcohol? If so, arrest any parent who's ever had a drink at home. I don't care if it's an upscale bar...it's not the dive we go to where there are fights every night, someone's always loudly sloshed, and the waitress has brained a guy twice with her tray because he can't keep his hands off her ass. He's not even getting alcohol, he's drinking cranberry juice. Get over it.

3. Why do people assume homeschoolers are some elite bunch with a ton of disposable money? I've never met or heard such a person. Sorry, but we make sacrifices to be able to stay home with our kids and teach them. We don't get Red Lobster every night, we don't drive a new car, we don't have a cool tv, our clothes are not in style (but they are comfortable). Every homeschool parent I know or have heard of barely make ends meet. We aren't taking advantage of a easy life, we are sacrificing for something we feel is more important.

4. A beer doesn't equal getting wasted. So if we get to have a beer or margarita at 2 pm at the playdate, that's no different than you coming home to your kids and having a martini in front of them. We don't assume YOU get roaring drunk, why do you assume we do?

5. The children were naked, playing in the mud. It seems if you're going to let kids play in the mud, nudity is the best option. Especially if you're riding a subway home. I get it, to you nudity means everyone is having sex. I'm sorry, not all of us tie sex to nudity. Some of us actually get naked for other reasons. I took my clothes off last week for a strange man, spread my legs wide open, and accepted his entry. He was my gynocologist. No sex involved...pervert. If you think those paper gowns mean anything except to make you feel better, you have issues. I mean really, they are up your cooch, is the paper gown really doing anything to keep him from seeing it? It's just there so you feel dignified.

6. She hasn't read the unschooling handbook. I find it amusingly strange that an unschooling parent has said that another unschooling parent is at fault because she didn't get information out of THE unschooling handbook. Waitwaitwait, you mean to tell me, the person who believes learning is best on hand and in the world (not from books) is telling another unschooler that she can unschool best if she gets it from...waitforit....a BOOK?????

7. He watched Juno. THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TV FOR A LITTLE BOY....Ok, YOU watch Disney every day. Who are you to say what's "appropriate" for a kid you haven't met? Ok, I get it, YOUR kid isn't smart enough to get it so other people's kids can't watch it. Why don't we tell all the kids who can read 4 grade levels ahead of their own that yes, I know you understand it and yes, the "baby" books are simple, but you are only 6 and so MUST only read the "baby" books. That's no different from telling an intelligent child he can only watch Sesame Street and Blue's Clues because it's for his "age group". You want to keep your kid limited, I suppose that's your business. MY kid however is going to be challenged at every opportunity. I think all the "oh so now your so cool because your kid can watch Juno" comments are jealousy because their kid can't UNDERSTAND Juno.

8. She's being arrogant? So are you, you are arrogant enough to think you know her whole life from an article. You are arrogant enough to think your method of raising children should override anyone else's. You're arrogant enough to think your rant should matter to anyone. She's ENGLISH. Different sense of humor, different way of talking, get over it.

9. Why do people think sending a child to school is the way to prepare a child for "real life"? I really don't know anyone who sits at a desk all day with only breaks for bathroom and lunch, calls his boss to get permission to use the bathroom, never talks to anyone, and listens to someone else lecture them for hours on end except for breaks on pre-made worksheets. No one, my husband doesn't know anyone either and he knows TONS of people. (My husband doesn't need a fave five, he needs a fave 60). We all know people who have to take responsibility for their own job, have meetings, take lunch and sometimes have lunch with a client, leave the office to go work on clients things, talk all day on the phone, and stop between clients to make sure their paperwork is filled out. They can take an hour off at any point in the day to go for a workout if they are stressed, accept phone calls from their wives (except during meeting times), and stop for a coke and a snack. If you're more working class (such as a roofer or welder) you definitely don't see a desk that day and you INTERACT (not merely in the presence of) with others. Oh wait, I DO know one guy who does that (except for listening to someone lecture him all day, he does do that part). He's a programmer and he has deplorable social skills. People consider him abnormal because he doens't talk to people much. Ok, so this situation is abnormal for adults, but acceptable for children because they are in the presence of 30 other kids they can't talk to? Wow, you're right, that's SO much better. Also, that whole segmented day thing, is your day segmented? I mean do you ONLY work on certain things at certain times of the day? What happens if something happens outside it's segment? Yes, I'm being deliberately obtuse, but really, you people SHOULD think about it.

Hell, you people should think, but I suppose that's entirely too much to ask.

A Place at the Table

Every day we are told that we mustn't eat what we want, that we shouldn't enjoy our food, that whatever we're eating must be more than we should have, that we're entitled to only the most minimally adequate meals. Most fat people have heard this message again and again, sometimes in ways that are callous and cruel, and sometimes in ways that are meant as kindness--but all of them are hurtful.

We've been harassed and ridiculed by family members about every bite we eat. We've had restaurant menus snatched from our hands by our "friends." We've had complete strangers come up and criticize what we put in our grocery carts. The message comes through loud and clear: we don't belong there at the table with everyone else, not until we've atoned for the sin of being fat--and the only way to do that is to get thin, by whatever means necessary.

Moreover, fat people are refused some of the most basic rights and the respect due any member of the human family. We're fair game for ridicule and insulting, ignorant stereotypes in the media. We can legally be discriminated against in forty-nine U.S. states and virtually every country. Public accommodations--from theatre and airplane seats to essential medical equipment--often aren't accessible to people of size. Amazingly, we are blamed for our own lack, since many see it as our responsibility to abuse ourselves into a smaller body size, rather than the responsibility of providers of public spaces to accommodate a wider range of sizes; we are treated with contempt if we demand better treatment.

Medical practitioners are often quick to blame our weight for everything that goes wrong with our bodies. Some refuse to treat us until we've lost weight, effectively putting adequate care out of reach for many of us. They continue to prescribe diets (a treatment with a 95% failure rate), and blame us when this treatment fails yet again, often pressuring us to try something far more dangerous, like weight-loss surgery, or risky and questionably-effective drugs like "fen/phen."

Fat people aren't allowed to take their Place At the Table and enjoy basic rights and privileges that others take for granted--all because our culture has the idea that fat people are somehow less than human, and therefore shouldn't share the simple human right of fair and decent treatment. (Taken from A Place at the Table)

Catch up on Kathleen

So, you all saw the motion to squash was granted and Shoemaker was ordered to show cause.

So now she has responses. I urge you to go read this mess, but I'll try to sum it up here.

1. She (Kathleen) doesn't agree with us, and that harms us. Lots of folks don't agree with me, I think it's a bit of a stretch to call it harm.

2. She used science and sense to prove us wrong, thereby making us look like we're wrong and forcing us to defend our science.

3. Her husband uses the wikipedia...oh the agony.

4. You have to post this verbatim:

Ms. Seidel states in her web site that others aid her, including her husband. That renders her activity a conspiracy to dissuade potential Federal litigants and their witnesses by intimidation and to penalize those who are not dissuaded by injury to their property interests, particularly their employment.

Others help her and somehow this turns into witness intimidation. I missed the part where it was proven she intimidated anyone. But then again, legalese confuses me.

5. My personal favorite. She claims to be a wife and mother, but she is so smart she must be getting help. Apparently us wives and mothers are entirely too stupid to look things up for ourselves and have good study skills.

6. She agrees with the pharma companies, so she MUST be getting help from them. Although you gotta love a man that puts someone else's opinion up as "beliefs" in quotes...as if they aren't real and poor little dumbass Kathleen, wife and mother, was led to a toxic well and dumb enough to drink. You guys know how much I hate pharma companies, but even I don't jump to this conclusion without a good reason.

You ought to go read this stuff..there's even testimonies as to how Kathleen's opposing viewpoint has harmed those involved. Quite frankly, if they were harmed it was due to their own behavior in objecting to having opposing viewpoints published. It's my understanding that this isn't the first time they've tried to use the courts to undermine science because they felt threatened that it didn't agree with them.

Neurodiversity

I'm not a legal person. Legalese tends to make me feel that my brain is going in circles and is not under it's own control ( can we declare legalspeak detrimental to one's health?). But this sounds like the worst kind of idiocy I've ever heard. Pretty much, this man's defense seems to be wives and mothers are entirely too stupid for this level of sophistication and there's some things I don't understand going on. Which says a lot more about him than it does about anyone else. He appears, in his response to show cause, using his own words, as a neanderthal and a whiner ("no one agrees with me, I"m going to squash opposing viewpoints so I don't look stupid"). IMO, he doesn't need outside help to look ridiculous, he does just fine on his own.

California's crackpots

I'ts been a few days since California ruled that same sex marriage is ok. The nuts have come out of the wood work like mad. If it's not christian "love" a la "kill all homos" (only the guy ones, you rarely hear diatribes against lesbians), it's how "unnatural" de gayznezz is, or it's how California has violated the will of the voters (amusingly enough, that's happened LOTS of times, but as long as it benefits them it's ok). They desperately grasp for any string that will pull the horses back. They swear in November it'll be different, or they threaten to overturn the state constitution.

Amazing, isn't it, how fast they turn on our US Constitution or their state Constitution when it doesn't do what they want?

Realize folks, if there had been a vote for interracial marriage the majority would have voted against it. If there had been a vote to allow women's rights, it would have been the majority against it. However, I now have the right to vote, marry a black man, or hell, marry a black woman. Get used to it. You keep pushing it and there will be an over turning of our Constitutions. The right to arms can be removed as fast as gays can be added. The right to freedom of religion can be removed as fast as same sex marriage added. You want to open this can of worms, go ahead. But realize, there are educated folks out there, that know that the right to bear arms is there to fight against tyranny, that freedom from religion serves both the atheist AND the christian, and that same sex marriage is a HUMAN right. You're gonna have to give up something, it seems you'd support same sex marriage because it's the least of your worries.


That and it's none of your fuckin' business to start with. I promise, I will be the first in line to vote against gay marriage if it passes and gay men show up to your house in droves to make you marry them. Somehow though, I don't think they want anything to do with your stuck up, bigoted ass. I wonder why?

Update on Kathleen

Kathleen successfully got the subpoena quashed and the lawyers has to show why he shouldn't be sanctioned.

From the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, Case No. 1:08-mc-00013-JM:

ENDORSED ORDER granting MOTION to Quash Subpoena.

Text of Order: “Granted. Attorney Clifford Shoemaker is ordered to show cause within 10 days why he should not be sanctioned under Fed R Civ P 11 – see Fed R Civ P 45(a)(2)(B) which requires that a deposition subpoena be issued from the court in which the deposition is to occur and Fed R Civ P 45 (c)(1) commanding counsel to avoid burdensome subpoenas. A failure to appear will result in notification of Mr Shoemaker’s conduct to the Presiding Judge in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James R. Muirhead.
(Entered: 04/21/2008)

Read it all at her blog, with appropriate links here

I am Kathleen!

The gall of some people

Maybe I have a different idea of what it means to be a friend...well, I know I do. It's a very good reason why I don't have many friends. These days no one really knows what it means to BE a friend. "Friend" has become pretty fucking shallow these days. Apparently all a friend is good for anymore is to have someone to brag about your kids to, hang out at the beauty shop/mall/arcade, and stab in the back at the first opportunity. It amazes me that I'm 32 years old and the meaning of friendship hasn't really changed since 3rd grade....my grandmother though, has friends. Like real friends. "I'll go through some hardship to be there for you" friends. Which is why I have only THREE friends. Don't worry, no one "betrayed" me...Just understand, a friend is there no matter what. This is what I believe a friend is. If you really want to get right down to it...I have 20 or 30 friends. People I haven't talked to in a long time because our lives went seperate ways, but we care for one another and will still be there. I have 2 friends that I hadn't spoke to in years because they moved and some bad shit happened to them...but they heard from another mutual friend I needed help and HITCHHIKED to come give it. Now THAT's a friend.

My husband has the most shallow fucking friends...I swear. Ok, let's straighten this out. My husband has two best friends. One is C. C was actually MY friend from high school. We grew up together, went to the same college. When S and I met, they met and became extremely close. C and S have a real friendship. When C got married naturally we made room for his wife. She's hard to get close to, she's painfully shy, but after several years I hope she feels like she's a member of us. Then there's J. He's a nice guy, in that whole "I'd have a beer with him" type of thing. That's really it. He and my husband grew up together. They were best friends since they were like 4 or something. In each others wedding, played Little League together, y'know I'm really hard pressed to find anything he's done that is best friend-ish. He's like an arm's length friend. Anyhow, moving on. J has this girlfriend, maybe wife, we've met her twice. The first time she seemed quite the snot. J and I aren't friends, his girl and I are not friends, his girl and my husband are not friends. There's your background.

S got these 4 tickets to an Astros game. Apparently these seats are THE SHITZ!!!!!!!!eleventyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dudes, you get those type of tickets you call 1. Your bestest friend 2. Your best friend 3 & 4. A couple of cool dudes you like to hang with. Well, C's wife just had a baby so S calls and they do that guy high school thing. "Fucker I got some tickets..brag brag" and what it pretty much comes down to is 'I want you to come with me, but life has you and I just wanted you to know I thought of you FIRST'. So naturally step 2 is call J. They haven't hardly spoken in MONTHS. The only reason J knew WE'D had a new baby is because last time they talked we had just found out I was pregnant. So if he had the time free you'd expect "yeah, I'll be there". I mean, hey, hang out together, catch up, have a good guy time. (I take S's guy time very seriously because he has so many responsibilities..I feel he really needs that). Instead J says "I haven't spent much time with the gal pal, mind if she comes if you have an extra ticket". WTF???? So you take my husband's extra ticket and then bring your girl who is going to take up the majority of your time? WTF????? Be man and buy the damn tickets off of him. Otherwise you're just taking advantage of a good friend and being a not so good one to boot. You don't take your girl to a guy's time at all, but even if you feel that for some damn reason it's necessary, you damn sure don't take the ticket from a guy who you're probably going to hardly talk to all fuckin' day. You wanna spend time with your gal, great, but do it on ya'll's time. Say you can't make it and hang with her. That's fine. But how the fuck do you say, "Sure, I'll take the ticket that wasn't intended as gift and now I want a second one so I can spend the day with my gal". WTF is wrong with you people? He wasn't giving you a ticket, he was inviting you to join him.

S says it doesn't bother him and perhaps it shouldn't bother me. But it does. I feel he's taking advantage of my husband and my husband's good nature. My husband avoids confrontation. He doesn't like the negativity that comes with confronting someone. He lets me take care of that for the most part. However, MOST OF THE TIME, when it comes to soley HIS friends and HIS family, I stay out of it. There's shit I ain't stepping in. Next time I'll suggest other buddies than this one to go hang out with, since J doesn't feel S is worth hanging out with. Just taking his ticket.

Sex offenders

This is actually two different subjects. However, I'll do the daily dose of stupidity first for those who just come for the rants.

BBC News has an article where the Pope comes out against sex abuse and how disappointed he is the US bishops aren't getting this under control. And do you know why priests are screwing little kids?

He laid part of the blame for the crisis, of which he feels "deeply ashamed", on a breakdown in US values.

and:

"What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today?"

Because apparently the answer isn't to let your damn priests get married and fuck. The answer is to make Americans watch Disney. It's not AMERICANS doing it, it's PRIESTS who happen to be American. If it's really American tv then why don't the church stop paying cable subscriptions? Or should I take the second sentence above to me 'why protect children from pervert priests under our control if we don't also step in and protect them from CSI?'. Look you guys, your concern is priests and the child sex scandal. Don't blame it on shit OUTSIDE of your church, blame it on the laws of the church. YOUR CHURCH is the problem. Out of all the jobs in the world where there are more child sex offenders, it is only PRIESTS and TEACHERS. Teachers I get. Pervs like jobs that get them around their target. The sad thing is, even teachers fall a far distant second to the amount of child sex offenders in the Catholic church! A good many of the teacher sex offenses we see on the news is the 15 year old boy fucking his hot math teacher. Believe me, 9 times out of 10 he WANTED it. He was all over her like...well, like a 15 year old getting the chance to fuck his hot math teacher. Just let the priests fuck. Nothing brings you closer to the glory of an invisible being like the glory of an orgasm. If nothing else, think of it like this: Your god gave you dicks. Your god gave you the sexual urge that goes with those dicks. Glory your god by using the gifts he gave you, and the priests will fuck other women (GROWNUP WOMEN) and not little kids. I'd rather hear of 7 Jimmy Swaggerts in the Catholic church than ONE priest even THINKING about molesting a child. Which brings me to another point: Do you realize how many Baptists have been busted fucking around on their wives? And the church is still going strong. People don't want associated with the Catholic church because apparently even the ones that aren't raging child molesters COVER UP FOR THOSE CHILD MOLESTERS. Criminal charges people, have you heard of them? You don't retire them to a fuckin' GARDEN. If you cannot police your church, then shut up and let us police them. Don't give me that "we take care of our own problems" shit. You have an obligation to god to protect the weaker (children). You aren't just letting down those kids, your letting down your god. Unless he approves of mollycoddling pedophiles. Then he's a sick bastard too.

So onto Sex Offenders part 2.

I'm not "FOR THE CHILDREN". It's a cry used to manipulate the populace when you don't have a rational leg to stand on. It's the new way of stirring up mob mentality. Terrify the parents (who are obviously retarded).

However, that being said, there are certain things that are non-negotiable when it comes to my kids. My husband comes home today all kinds of excited. We are looking for a house. All these kids and 2 bedrooms are just not enough. He found what he thought was an awesome one. I have to admit, the bathtub made my heart speed up 1/2 a snail's pace. I was too busy waiting for the other shoe to fall. The house is great, even though it's not enough bedrooms (one of these days I'llget him to understand we NEED 4 bedrooms. A big bedroom in a 3 bedroom house is not good enough). Anyhow, so I'm listening to all the GREAT features. They are great. I got alittle held up in the fact that we'd be renting the house and the owner is using part of the garage for storage. Not cool IMO. But what, for me, was the big problem was the OLD MAN LIVING ABOVE THE GARAGE. ON the property. Not next door in his own house, but ON THE PROPERTY. My husband says, "she says he's real nice and keeps to himself". So I'm not even getting second hand knowledge here, I'm getting it THIRD HAND. I have a problem with this. If there's an old man living next door, you tell your kids to stay in their own yard until you get to know the guy. You poke your head out the door every so often, count heads, and make sure no wierdo is hanging out over the fence talking up your kid. Sit in the kitchen, drink your coffee and watch out the backdoor because if the dude comes on your property, SOMETHING is up because he doesn't belong there. Maybe he's telling you he saw a waterleak under your house, maybe he's a perv. How do you watch an old man who's SUPPOSED to be hanging out in the backyard? And what kind of freak-o's will he have over that may hang out there with him? I know you can't live your life by mights and maybes, but this isn't he MIGHT come steal our tv (which I could handle), this is he MIGHT mess with our KIDS. If you bust him IT'S TOO LATE. If the tv goes missing and you find out its him, no biggie. Have him arrested buy a new tv. This is a bit more than a damn missing tv. S got irritated at me. "You say I don't think it's important enough to move and I find a great place and you blow it off over one thing". Not one little thing buddy. A BIG one. A HUGE one. I don't care if he's quiet and keeps to himself. I've SEEN a real life child porn ring busted. Not in the room seen, but I knew damn near all the participants (small town). One of the guys owned the video store I rented at all the time. Really nice guy, nice wife, kept to himself. Quiet type. He was a star in several of the movies they busted. In fact, out of the 5 guys busted, only ONE was someone we all wouldn't let on our property. HE didn't surprise us. The other 4? Very nice men who went to church, friendly, seemingly decent folks, married. Yes honey, it's just like on tv. They aren't exxagerating, it is more often the nice old man next door than the goth guy down the street. S "You just assume he's a criminal". Yes, because we're not talking about our tv, we're talking about our kids. I assume everyone is a criminal, it doesn't stop me from moving next door to them. I just be aware. This guy stops me, because it's MY KIDS. Maybe I'm being mean and he's not a perv. Odds are he's not. But I"m not hurting him by assuming he is. I would be hurting my kids by assuming he isn't and putting them in his reach.

I can't afford to trust anyone. I have a job protecting these little defenseless people I love. That's not to say he doesn't take his job as the same seriously. It's just, I came from the criminal element. I KNOW as only a kid growing up in that can. I really do assume everyone is a criminal. We move next door to a sweet old lady with a lot of traffic, I WILL assume that she's selling drugs to beef up her SS. I will still talk to her, I might be wrong, probably am. But when the cops show up to pick the gal up, I'm never surprised...

Bloggers unite!

I had a list of things I wanted to cover today, just general bullshit, bad drivers, stupid people, etc etc. However, I come home to find something more intolerable. The blogger at neurodiversity.com, Kathleen, is being harassed. Kathleen runs an autism site. I don't profess to know much about autism, just enough to make me sound stupid if I was dumb enough to talk about it like I had a clue. I call it harassment, but the woman was issued a subpoena for pretty much her entire life. The lawyer represents a widely known autism case I'm not familiar with. Quite frankly, I would suggest you read the subpoena and her response to it, at her website here: http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/150/ for the details. Many of her commenters feel this is a strike against getting the truth of autism out. I don't know about all that, but this is a strike at bloggers everywhere. Whether you blog to inform, a la Junkfood Science, or blog your frustrations a la Fundie Watch and What's Going On?. This subpeona demands, as if she had some effect on the case itself, her compliance in some pretty serious demands that are not at all relevant to the case in question. In fact, the case was began in 1994, some ten years before she ever began blogging. It seems they are offended that she has the unmitigated gall to disagree quite heavily with them. The demands are wide reaching, and even if she did have something to do with the case, some are a stretch of your imagination. They've even gone as far as to include her entire blogroll on the subpeona, simply for the crime of being on her blogroll. At least one of those bloggers have nothing to do with autism! They didn't actually read the blogs apparently, just included the whole blogroll.

Many of the comments think this is about autism, and I won't deny it is, but this is also a strike against us all. Blogging is word of mouth anymore. Blogging is our voice. Just think of the blogs you read and which ones inform you, and how much you rely on their voice (hopefully only after serious intelligent thought) and realize that these are people who's voices would never have been heard if it wasn't for the internet. I find Junkfood Science just vital on my list of things to read. Sandy is my access to transparent medicine as she outlines everything she writes. Hers is a voice I'd to have done without if it wasn't for blogging. She's my reassurance that some medical proffessionals are fighting the abuses from within. Imagine how bitchy and disillusioned I'd be without her, now that you've seen me with her. What's Going On? keeps me up to date on my favorite subject, the abuses around us, since I just don't have the time anymore to find the gems she finds so well. I rely on her good sense, her skepticism, her information when I don't have a second all day until bedtime, and then I just want to check on my friends. Without The Rest of the Story, I wouldn't know that there are others out there as upset as I am over abuses of not just smokers, but science itself. It's a comforting thing that probably adds years to my life. And thank goodness for Watcher, who without Fundie Watch, would leave me smack in the bible belt so frustrated I'm not sure if I could keep myself out of prison.

Not all these blogs are information, or even valuable information, but can you imagine if the Concerned Women for America's Matt Barber tried these tactics to silence Watcher or Ron Britton ((Bay of Fundie). What about the innocuous deafgamers.com? Would the gaming industry pull a stunt like this because the site cost them customers due to being rated as "Not Deaf Friendly"? That one is a stretch, but apparently, no amount of stupidity is beyond people. If such a tactic can be used to silence Kathleen, then cannot such a tactic be used to silence us all? You don't have to find an interested reporter anymore to blow the whistle, there's the Internet...or will there be if any jackass can subpeona your entire life, even if YOU have absolutely nothing to do with the case, just because you said something he didn't like? In these days the newspapers are not a reliable source of information anymore, this is all we have. And while some bloggers are idiots, others are invaluable to us all. I wouldn't even silence the idiots so that those of use can't be shut up. Imagine you've been unfairly targetted by a lawyer for something in your blog, how else will you spread the word? Should that lawyer be able to file against you, costing you money and abusing our legal system? Yes, this is about autism, but it's about so much more, too.

I am Kathleen!

Deaf website

Most of you know I suffer from progressive hearing loss. I try to prepare for it, but it's preparing for the unknown. So sometimes I am struck with the things that I may not be able to do. I'm pretty ok with it, no matter what it is. The things I truly love for the most part don't need the ability to hear....except my games. Oh my games. PC games, console games, online games, rpgs...RPGs MAN!!!! *coughs* Umm.yeah, so I'm a geek.

Point being, it never crossed my mind that someday I may not be able to play many of my games AT ALL. I mean, I am going deaf, and some of my games have a heavy dialogue thing going..but I got a very awesome headset that helps....it didn't occur to me that if I needed a top of the line headset, that I may have some issues later when I can't hear. So imagine my surprise, and surprising gratitude at www.deafgamers.com. I'll be linking it in the side panel as well. But I wanted to draw attention to it. If you know a deaf gamer, this is a great site and I may even contribute in with online games myself, as those don't seem to be covered as well. From their About:

At Deaf Gamers the way we review the software is a little different as it's from a deaf persons perspective. Text/visual feedback is a key issue for a deaf person and many has the occasion been when a deaf games player has purchased a game only to find no visual feedback or very little of it (this can ruin the game for them). As you will know, conventional game reviews usually don't provide this info and the deaf gamer is left guessing. This is where Deaf Gamers comes in and tries to redress the balance.

This is just a little piece of it. There's a bit more info for those that are interested. But check it out if you are deaf or send it to someone else you know who could use it.

A full out rant just for Eli

A few?? A few??? Phelps, Bush, Swaggert, Robertson, Falwell, Dr. Laura, Alan Keyes, Jesse Helms, Don Knickles, Trent Lott, Reggie White, The American Family Association, Paul Cameron, then you count all the christians that support them, then all the christians I'm surrounded by constantly here in the Baptist bible belt, and the fact that I was raised Christian, the in laws that swear that not only I'm going to hell but taking the hubby with me since he no longer attends church. Then let's not forget the bill so that christians can harass others and it's not a hate crime. However, let me go out with a sign that says my god will send christians to the darkest hells like they do gay people and watch them all scream persecution! You people think it's persecution if we don't put "Merry Christmas" on every store! Here's the majority of your high profile christians:

1. sex offenders
2. pedophiles
3. Phelps (does god really want him disrespecting men and women who die for our country by picketing thier funerals and disrespecting grieving families?)
4. Phelps (that man's HATRED for gays is only surpassed by the late Falwell's hatred for feminists...real christian like)
5. Spreaders of hate
6. Homophobic, which is none of my business except they picket and pick on the gay people
7. Go read Fundies say the darnedest things...read some of the hate and vitriol, in fact, read all over the internet
8. Adulterers
9. Hypocrites
10. Whining, insensitive dramatics

You say there's no proof...sure is. There's proof every time christians picket gays, most of Congress, the marriage amendment,

If I'm picking the weakest, that's because that's all we see. ALL WE SEE. Those claiming christians are being persecuted because Walmart put up "Happy Holidays", yet none of us are demanding to put you in gas chambers. Hollering persecution when YOU don't get fired for being pagan or muslim. YOU HAVE YOUR OWN FUCKIN' TV CHANNEL and you still cry about being "picked on" because we won't let you put religion up in the courthouses. Guess what, I pay my taxes too and I'm not a christian! This is my country too. While I'm happy to share it with you, I will not let you marginalize me. I haven't met just teenage christians, I've met them young and old. THE TEENAGERS WERE ACTUALLY MORE CHRISTIAN THAN THEIR BIBLE THUMPING PARENTS!!!

And yes, they do act holier than thou. It's not just me. Anytime you go around looking down on people for not choosing your way, it's holier than thou. You do it in your post to anonymous with "If you are plagued by your past actions, I can understand it. There are burdens that come with failed relationships, and the best way to cope is to turn them over to God." If that just doesn't scream condescension and superiority I don't know what does. He never said he was plagued by his past actions. In fact, quite the opposite. What made you toss that in there? What purpose did that serve except for you to deride his choices, albeit subtly, by labeling his relationship(S) as failed? Especially as he'd only mentioned one that both parties parted on good terms? Then you follow up with: "The point I want to make to you is that inserting drama that you completely invented simply for drama's sake means you no longer get to be taken seriously." Pardon me, but who made you god on that blog? There it is again, that subtly condescending, "Ok,now you're throwing a wittle fit, so you gotta go pway with the wittle kids" attitude. I've read the bible, TWICE, at no point do I recall God or Jesus saying you're supposed to talk down to your fellow man. And then I love this one: "You don't even understand why your rant against those mean judgemental fundies exposes that you are more interested in..."blah blah bullshit...You presume to know what he's thinking? You mean to tell me YOU understand his rant but he doesn't? Are you actually saying that because of your "superiority" (whether you attribute it to god or intellect) tells you what he feels and believes better than HE does? WOW. I'm an intellectual snob and an asshole and even *I* don't go around telling people I know what they are thinking better than they do.

Now, one more thing: "You want to be one of the enlightened and you desire to put fundies like me in my place."

Don't tell me what I want unless you want to hear what I want. I want your church to clean up your public image and your own fellow worshippers before picketing my gay buddies' parties. I want your church to read your bible and know it better than *I* do before you come up to me with your tracts and your flyers. I want your christians to go talk to a Jew that's been persecuted in Germany before screaming persecution, but you better hurry, I think there's only one left. I want your christians to shut up, quit whining, and live WITH the rest of the religions in our country (which means I want your religion to stay too, just SHARE). Which means no picketing Walmart for putting up "Happy Holidays" because a few other religions have holidays in the same time frame. It also means keeping YOUR religion out of public schools so that you don't interfere with my teachings, but to be fair, I will also keep MY religion out as well. But don't bitch when you get your religion in and mine follows in right behind it. It also means that when I say Happy Holidays, don't take it wrong, take it like I mean it. I WANT YOU TO HAVE A JOYFUL HOLIDAY SEASON NO MATTER WHICH ONE YOU CELEBRATE. I want christians to do what I do: Don't go bugging people about who they worship UNLESS ASKED. If you want to testify about Jesus, then LIVE LIKE HIM. I want your religion to publicly denounce those high profile folks that claim christianity while sinning as bad as the devil before you give me shit about "painting you all with the same brush". I want your worshippers to see the new pagan store go up in town and welcome the PERSON and wish them well even if you don't agree with their beliefs. In return I will give you EXACTLY the same amount of respect you give the rest of us. I want to wear MY religious symbols without worrying about, not only if my husband will lose his job, but also if he'll even be able to get another one that pays just as well without moving. I also want to wear them without being approached by christians, sneered at by christians, or hearing smart ass not so christian remarks from them. I also want to be able to have a bad day or a bad experience without someone like you coming along to tell me that it's because I don't have gawd in my life. What, do christians not have bad days or bad things happen to them? I can assure you they do. I was Christian for 12 years before I lost the faith and I was physically abused. The bad thing is what drove me from the church were the followers. As Ghandi once said, "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." I don't have a problem with Jesus or God, I have a problem with christians. And if I understood the Bible correctly, so does God and Jesus (have a problem with christians I mean). Don't attempt to psychoanalyze me, Eli. You won't like what you find in there. I believe in letting gays marry and pagans have parades in the streets and the right to choose and atheists having "God" removed from anything the government puts out. I believe in religious freedom and the freedom from religion. It's shocking in there.

I also want world peace and an end to starvation, and I'll likely see that LONG before I ever see a christian do all of the above.

Hoax

Last entry was a hoax..leaving it up for posterity.

Hehe, non-smokers targetted

Boss sued for sacking non-smokers

A German boss is being taken to a tribunal for firing non-smokers and replacing them with smokers who "fitted in better".

Thomas Jensen, head of a telesales company in Buesum in northern Germany, has laid off three non-smokers at his company and said he will not be hiring any more.

He said: "Smokers have always been our best employees. Non-smokers interfere with corporate peace.

"Our non-smoking employees were actually convinced that they had the right to smoke-free zones. They just complained all the time about smoking, and I don't like grumblers.

"It was also very disappointing that the non-smokers would distance themselves from the smokers at social events - it didn't build any team spirit. From now on, I'm only employing smokers."

The three sacked workers are now suing him for unfair dismissal.

Ok, ok, I've always said I don't support firing smokers for smoking on their own time. No one should be fired for being a smoker. I DO support this,not because I support treating non-smokers any differently,I don't, but because maybe this is what's needed to reverse doing this to smokers. I think it's wrong to fire someone for their off hour behavior. When the company pays you 24/7, then they can run your life. Until that day happens though, there's company time and private time and the twain shouldn't meet. I think this should make blatant the hypocrisy in firing smokers for smoking off company time. Unfortunately you must break a few eggs when making an omelet and I'm sorry that 3 people will have to suffer while we repair the damage the anti-smoking agenda caused. However, there have been more that have suffered from the discrimination for being smokers and well, something has to fix it. So please, file your lawsuits. I hope you lose, because smokers haven't won yet. However, I DO hope it succeeds in making it clear that company policies targeting your off hour activities (or in this case, lack there of) are unacceptable. I also hope that maybe being on the receiving end of this type of behavior will also shed some light on how it feels to be treated badly for something that you CHOSE to do.And please, if you are a business owner who supports the choice to smoke, why don't you take a leaf from the same page and fire your non-smoking employees. Let's shove this type of hypocrisy to the front pages!