art, politics, religion: discuss
I didn’t realize Glenn was still around.
Looks like the old man has gained a few pounds on his way down unpopularity road.
The world that Glenn Beck idealizes in his imagination doesn’t exist in reality.
And he’s SHOCKED.
Someone remind that man to take his medicine.
This morning I saw this update at Facebook.
It’s a Rotten ecard that reads, “Congratulations on wasting $100 billion dollars landing a remote controlled buggy on Mars. Not sure how this is supposed to help us poor people here on Earth, but great job.”
Seeing something like that yanks at my cognitive dissonance. I love science and I love humanism. And I don’t want anyone misunderstanding the importance of space travel, but I don’t want them to feel left out either.
And part of me wants to post something like this:
To which, Glenn Beck’s the Blaze responded that there are multitudes of Christians who are helping the poor. It’s the dumbass, liberal media’s fault for not covering the topic.
See the masses posted at The Blaze here. Here’s one example:
Isn’t it weird that the photos were ignored by the right-wing media as well? It has to be covered by poor, little Glenn Beck’s blog in a last-ditch effort to show how awesome Christians are.
Oddly enough, they can’t produce the same captivating images that poured onto the Internet after August 1.
Why?
Dropping the rest below the fold Continue reading “Loving your neighbors all the way to Mars … just like a Jesus commanded”
For the record (regarding the below post about abortion), I missed the part of the Glenn Beck Newsletter about adoption. Apparently I had to scroll down. I was so caught up in the abortion link and reading that, I didn’t go back to the Glenn Beck page.
Here’s what the delBlazo said about adoption:
If anyone is encouraging you to surrender your baby to adoption, please contact us by phone or email us. Our volunteers have experienced adoption in their own lives, and they can tell you what it feels like to be adopted or surrender your own child. We’ll also help you find the support you need to keep your baby – the best thing for both of you!
Don’t let anyone tell you that adoption is the “right choice” or the “loving option” for your baby. YOU are the only mother or father your baby has, and no one will be able to take your place in his or her life. People who try to convince you to surrender your baby are probably in a position to get something out of the adoption for themselves – either money or your child himself.
Other people may tell you that you’ll be “giving a wonderful gift” to an infertile couple – this is NOT your responsibility. Your only job is to be the best mom or dad you can be for your baby. Your child isn’t going to want or accept any substitute for the real thing!
So obviously I need to re-think what I wrote.
But I can say, it was weird to hear Mitt Romney in a presidential debate bring up the “business of adoption.” I mentioned it in my review.
My parents tell me that they didn’t pay anything for my adoption. Which is great.
But this website says that it’s between $5,000 and $40,000. I have a friend raising money to adopt a Chinese baby, and it’s in the range of $28,000-$30,000, and their doing it under the tax-free protection of their church. So maybe they are saving a buck or two.
So, yeah, there may be a price involved.
One thing is for sure, delBlazo uses incendiary language every chance she gets.
I can’t fault delBlazo for trying to help mothers make the decision to keep their babies if they can.
Gosh, I know my birth mother had a hell of a time making her decision to give me up. And there are times when it was tough growing up and not having a biological connection to my family.
But holy hell, in comparison to where I would be now if I weren’t adopted, there’s no contest. I certainly had more opportunities than I ever would have. My little biological brother went through the wringer with his mom and dad (my birth mom — not birth dad).
It all comes down to this … when there are decisions that are huge, there are ambiguous answers. It’s like having relationship issues. Everybody has relationship issues, but there isn’t a person in the world you’re going to get the same advice from.
There’s no way to predict the future. My situation could have been different.
While I don’t envy my little half-brother’s life, he turned out okay. He’s got a beautiful wife, and a child. He learned from his parents mistakes. He doesn’t drink or do drugs (that I know of). He’s a good kid.
Dealing with these things is hard. And people need all the information that they can find.
So I apologize for missing the part about adoption.
Shame on delBlazo for demonizing adoption. DelBlazo needs a bit of a tongue lashing and to revisit the language she uses.
We all do.
Shame on anyone to make any decision — where people’s emotions and feelings are well on the line — harder.
Yesterday, I got an email from someone asking me to take a look at this article spotted in a Glenn Beck newsletter “The Blaze“. The person admitted that he knows I don’t like Glenn Beck, but to take a look anyway at the article about adoption.
I scanned the newsletter and found the headline that read:
“I Love Abortion” : Pro-Choice Activist Argues Against Adoption
Wow, right! Someone “loves” abortion? Pro-Choice Activist Argues Against Adoption? Wow wow wow.
That’s some brazen language. Imagine if you were a conservative and you saw that, you’d be enraged!
So I read what the newsletter wrote:
LifeNews has uncovered a real doozy when it comes to abortion rights activism. On a website titled “RH Reality Check” (with the “RH” standing for “Reproductive Health”), progressive writer Jessica delBalzo has a headline that is sure to bring precisely zero surprise to many pro-life activists, but may also scandalize moderate pro-choicers. The headline reads, “I Love Abortion: Implying Otherwise Accomplishes Nothing for Womens’ Rights.”
Whoa! Jessica delBalzo is a jerk! Right?
To the Blaze’s credit, it includes three paragraphs of the whole thing and links to the piece. You can read it here.
So I read delBalzo’s ovum-powered piece and ended up agreeing with the premise. The idea she conveyed to me was that she’s had enough of the pejorative language about abortion, and that she’s going to go so far as to say she loves abortion for the sheer fact that women who make that choice stop the feelings of guilt and shame that religious people attach to this procedure.
The other thing about the article is that there’s not one mention of adoption. Not one. She doesn’t make a case for or against it.
I wrote a long email back to the person who sent me this article, and I attempted as much as I could to avoid sounding like a Hitler piece of shit. I’m not going to bore you with the entire thing.
I’m not for abortion, but I’m for those rights.
Man, this topic is tough.
It’s REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, EXTREMELY tough.
Then I stubbed my toe on the response I was looking for
Can we agree that the majority of those who hate abortion are religious? Most of them qualify as evangelical Christians. These same people believe that their God is the all-powerful, creator of the Universe. This is just a portion of what I wrote in my email response:
[I]f God is in control — as you’re sure He is — than this issue isn’t up to you. Not me. It’s between a woman and God. No more. No less.
Just like everything that you consider a sin is between you and God.
For me, my sins are between the person, people, or whomever I’ve sinned against. And I do not tolerate people who shove my sins in my face, as I do a handy dandy job of raking myself and my sins through the coals on my own. You may empathize with that.
Life is too short for this shit.
I love you. I love that you’re passionate. And I hope that we can either agree to disagree on this one or maybe you’ll agree that it’s not up to us.
Should God be all powerful, I believe God has every right to shut abortion down — on his own — in his own way. Let Him be in command. Practice what you preach.
Humanity doesn’t have to take every issue they think their God wants — based on no biblical passage — and make it so.
Why does God need humans — with all their flaws and sinful ways — telling other people what is and what isn’t right. God should have every opportunity to make his point known, and yet he’s unusually quiet on this subject.
Lost faith and using the trump card
Delivering this email helped me remember why it is I lost faith. It also allowed me to use the faith-based trump card in reverse. How often have Christians shut down a conversation because they drop God into conversation to give them the upper hand?
The church taught me that God is ALL POWERFUL. He’s wonderful. He’s a counselor. He’s a mighty God. Perfect. Just.
I’ve written often that God’s book had every opportunity to cover the issues that are fought over today, slavery, abortion, homosexuality, marriage etc. And except for homosexuality, God didn’t practice any foresight when addressing those issues, which — we argue — renders the homosexual issue obsolete as well. God also had a brilliant opportunity to teach humanity about germs, instead of demons, but he didn’t. I call that a failure of following through on all the things church leadership taught me.
If God is truly all-powerful, religious intervention is superfluous. If God is so wonderful and just, let Him take control. Let Him show the way. If He hated abortion, let him shut it down.
In the meantime, dear Christian readers, add this to the list of hypocrisies that make Christianity appear unsavory, unwelcoming, and petty.
When will people recognize that the very argument against abortion is an even larger argument against the God people claim is so powerful?
You who are without sin, cast the first stone.
You who are without temptation and premeditated sins to come, throw all the rocks you want.
The rest of you should reach out, open an ear, and be the best damn wretched soul that you can be. Support a woman, and her choice. And if that means you compromise, chalk one up to all the other times you compromised. Ask for forgiveness, and move on.
We have better things to talk about than whether or not a woman, given the myriad of situations she might have, needs to think abortion is the most evil procedure in the known universe.
Maybe after reading that love-based book you claim is so great, go read the lyrics for Amazing Grace again before opening your mouth in opposition to this topic again.
Over at Facebook, a “friend” liked a Glenn Beck article called, “OMG! Rick Santorum is Religious!?”
Curiosity encouraged me to click on it to read for myself. I’m not going to spend much time on this, as we all know that Beck is an easy target.
In a nutshell, Beck lambasts anyone who would criticize Santorum for his religious views or for saying that “Satan has targeted America” back in 2008.
Beck says that in a country with 95% of the population believing in a higher power, how could anyone criticize Santorum?
Satan, the evil being that God allows to exist so that he’s not accused of tyranny or un-just-ness. Satan, the guy who is responsible for you lusting sexually over your neighbor’s body. Satan, the guy who is responsible for cancer, disease, turmoil and tribulation.
He’s invisible and 95% of the American population knows he exists.
And he has targeted America and all free people.
With his invisible target devices.
What part of this am I not supposed to criticize?
“I personally think this is God’s will. I think He has us on a path, and I do think there’s a lot more happening than what we’re seeing. Personally I mean I think Rick’s a great guy, and he’s really smart and everything. But I think a lot more is happening than what we can actually see.”
Karen Santorum told Glenn Beck as she and her husband sat for an interview on his Web-based show, GBTV.
Wow.
“Are you a flake?”
Do you know a flake?
Do you think Carbon Dioxide is portrayed as harmful?
Does your gay husband try to cure gay people through prayer?
Do you hate science?
Do you call Koolaid, “tea”?
Do you misunderstand basic math?
Do you think Terry Schiavo was healthy?
Then Michele Bachmann is your lady!
Sometime in the last few weeks, I jumped on the offensive. I’m not sure why.
Julie Ferwerda recently asked me if I had my period. George W. recently emailed me to ask why I am so acerbic lately.
A couple weeks ago, I attacked a self-described atheist blogger for a poorly-considered post. Then I subscribed to Christian John Barron’s blog out of morbid curiosity for his topics and responses. I jumped in on one of the conversations, and I’ve been following it as new comments roll in.
Throw a little John Shore and Chuck Balsamic Vinegar and Ranch dressing in the mix, and you have a recipe that has spelled certain antagonism from yours truly.
I apologize for the last two references without links. Just move on if you don’t get it.
For all that’s good in the world, at first I thought John Barron was the worst blogger and the worst thinker ever. Lately, I’ve read positive responses to his post, and I’m shocked that these people really exist somewhere in the blogosphere.
I mean, really? I expect disputes over ideas. But the lack of reason and decent representation among the believing bloggers in the world needs incredible amelioration.
I read a lot of blogs, and I never respond to them. I may respond here, but I rarely take my views off the blog. So, yes, I have strayed from my regular demeanor lately.
This morning I was reading through comments again at John Barron’s blog, and in a bout of disillusion, I wondered if John Barron is a gigantic poe. But then even Barron was eclipsed by another person.
There’s a guy named Neil responding on that thread who has apparently escaped from an asylum, and he wants to take as many gullible minds back into his prison as soon as possible.
Neil will write and repeat just about anything he can find in the whiniest tone you’ve ever read, and then load his blog with support for Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and any other Christian (or Mormon) mind who represents the Divisive Crew. He quotes editorials from the Wall Street Journal’s notoriously conservative ideas that I didn’t think anyone took seriously. These are editorials to get their liberal readers bent out of shape and to keep them reading.
If Neil is not a poe, he is great PR for the atheist movement. Thank you, Neil for blogging and commenting on blogs. You make my perspective much more attractive.
Siding with that guy would be like eating a thorn bush and pretending to like it as you bleed from your mouth, esophagus and eventually your rectum as you pass that fibrous material through.
Squeezing Familial Cheeks.
Only a few of you read my blog post that attacked my dad’s fondness of Michele Bachmann. A couple of you sent me messages with your thoughts, and I solicited a few responses as well.
I don’t feel great about the blog post, but it was what it was. I edited the hell out of it. I read it to Tina a few times before finally deciding on the version I would publish.
What I wanted to write and what I published are two very different things. My original drafts were much longer and much more acerbic than the post I ended up with.
Believe it or not, it was toned down. Way down.
But what do you care?
What sucks is that I wrote a lot during the early days of the blog about not self-editing. And in the bitchiest, most mind-numbingly weepy voice, I am crying to myself that my blog has become what I didn’t want it to be.
Cry me a river.
I don’t intend for this blog to be taken seriously. I really don’t intend for you to take me seriously. I post a lot of jokes, and almost everything I write is tongue in cheek or honks-a-licious. Even when I’m attacking someone, I’m not squirting flames from my eye sockets.
I can’t tell you what to think. You interpret these things the way you want.
In “real” life, my tone is almost always sarcastic. I hide behind sarcasm, because lots of people never hear a disruptive word in their life from a real person.
Or maybe they do.
If you like peanut butter, I can make fun of you for it.
Is it out of character to be acerbic?
I am in an bitter, ill-tempered phase. It happens every so often. I have gone through periods of attack before. Take the Pullmans WA for example. Hell, I wrote some great pieces on my family back in the day that I’ve tried to stop, because I worry about offending them at every turn.
My tone might reflect that my stance as an atheist has been weakened by the sheer fact that others who are jumping on this bandwagon are doing it for much the same reason Michele Bachmann became a Republican … it was the only other option.
I don’t believe that atheism is an alter call of whimsical choice. It’s not a fairy whispering in your ear. I took a road to atheism through the thickest, strident, most educated Christianity that money, research, and environment can give a person.
I resent when people arrive at a place without enough thought. I resent when someone calls himself a former atheist turned Christian, because not worshiping Jesus for 3 months equals “atheism”.
That’s why I resent Christianity. Most Christians only arrive at Christianity because they were born in that environment, and then they stay there for the rest of their lives, because it’s comfortable. They may falter, or slip from their beliefs, but they never lose it, because it’s way too engrained in their psyches.
Calling myself an atheist is difficult. Stopping myself from praying, almost impossible. Admitting it to strangers like climbing Mount Impossible. I’m a chicken shit. I don’t tell everyone I’m an atheist. Just like I don’t think everyone has the right to call himself a Christian or a follower of Christ, or whatever PR trend the Jesus Christ movement is aiming for right now.
Perhaps if more people started from scratch, we’d have much better dialogue. What if “born again” was taken seriously? Instead of thousands of delusional “born again” experiences into the SAME mindset. How about giving research, oppositional views, and other ideas a fair shake? How about only aligning oneself with a “worldview” after shedding as much of the propaganda they were handed as kids as possible?
I was bred to be a Christian. I call myself an atheist. I am not settled on atheism. I am constantly researching, because I haven’t closed down the possibility of ANYthing being wrong.
Are you open or are you deadset that your belief is the way, the truth and the light? Why do you call yourself what you call yourself? Did you arrive there because of a shallow, lazy search? Did you strip off the ideas your parents gave you as a child?
Do you look at the world and because of guilt and anguish want other people to live by a standard you found completely impossible to live by?
If you don’t strip yourself of your ideas, how can you live with your decision?
Whatever your conclusion is, have you considered it’s wrong?
As you may be aware, my parents and sister visited Le Café Witteveen this week. They arrived on Tuesday, and I asked if they’d stay an extra day. They left Saturday morning at 3 a.m. for their 13-hour drive back to North Carolina.
We had a grand time. I loved having them. They are family, and an amazing one at that.
I could cook for more than Tina multiple days in a row. I love the challenge, and the payoff. I was highly critical of the meals I made this week. Tuesday, I made shrimp tacos. Wednesday I made turkey burgers and sweet potatoes. Thursday I made pizzas (which I’m not sure I can screw up at this point except for when cooking for regular-reader Aaron (SAW). On Friday, I made enchiladas and salad.
The enchiladas weren’t all that great. But it’s always fun to cook and to cook for someone else. Every experience (failed and successful) are learning experiences.
We filled our time the best we could. Tina and I both agree that since we don’t see them very often, it’s important to squeeze the most out of our visits.
Many of you remember how vocal I’ve been in the past about how stressed I used to get when visiting the parents or vice versa. Since I’ve had the blog, my views have changed. I feel that even if I don’t tell my family directly how I feel, I have an outlet for expression. As you know, my dad is a regular reader here. And I’m glad he reads what I write. I love that my dad can read my blog, because I’m not as verbal as he is. I feel he knows me better now than ever. And the blog has become a form of communication, not directly intended for him or anyone … but myself.
I’m not quite sure that “cunt” is strong enough for how I feel about the above clip.
Coulter is a shithole for degrading adoptees and homosexuals. If she were claiming to lead thought in the group I was associated with, I would throw her out with the Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh trash. She’s the third horseman in a group of ridiculous buffoonery. What an absolute embarrassment to good and decent humanity these people are.
In case your curious, this is the interview that is being referenced above.
These thoughts are from the group who oppose abortion.
How much cognitive dissonance must you have to be a part of the republican party?
If you have an unwanted child, abort him or her with destructive language.
That’s peachy cool!
Le Café Wittypoots 