Down the rabbit hole

When logic and proportion
Have fallen sloppy dead

~~ "White Rabbit" by Jefferson Airplane

I recently got into a brief discussion with someone when Ken brought up the subject of Alex Jones and his ban from several social media sites. (I told Ken later, "I can't punch you because you have cancer!")

I said that I thought the final straw was Jones saying that Sandy Hook was a hoax. The response was, "He didn't say that." 

I was a little taken aback and said, "Yes, he did." 

The response to that was, "There's a lot of misinformation out there. Find a clip where he said that and send it to me."

So I found the clip where he said it. Audio AND video.

And I sent it. 

Six days later, I got a response:

To all my friends and family, 
When it comes to our views on politics and religion, they are wide and varied, yet I believe we can find common ground in the bedrock of our First Amendment. We must support the right of all voices to be heard, or we will all be silenced. Please contact your government representatives urging them to reject censorship and uphold free speech. 
Respectfully, XXXXXX

That is some pure-D bullshit right there. I'm pissed. Let's break it down.

First, it was sent to only two of us. Hardly "all my friends and family." 

Second, Jones's comments were on social media sites, which have terms of use. If you violate those terms, these companies have every right to ban you from their site. 

Third, nobody is silencing Alex Jones. He still has a website and I guess he still has a radio show. I really don't know because he is not someone I pay close attention to because he is a fucking LUNATIC. This is not a censorship issue, it's an issue of hate speech, slander, fraud, and abuse of various social media platforms. 

Fourth, this Jones asshole said that the parents who lost children in a school shooting at Sandy Hook were ACTORS. That they faked their children's deaths. This is vile, unconscionable, and there is absolutely no defense of it. If you're defending this, I question both your morality and your sanity. 

Finally, this person should have had the guts to address me directly. Even if they couldn't do it in person, they should have had the decency to use my goddamn NAME in their response. My email with the video was not an attack in any way. I was kind, respectful, and loving. I was challenged to find a clip of Jones saying that Sandy Hook was a hoax because this person said, "He never said that." I found the clip and sent it to them and I got this shitty, generic response. 

No, I cannot and will not cut ties with this person for various reasons. But I have lost respect for them when it comes to this sort of thing. This showed me that they are in complete denial and will not accept any refutation of their worldview and narrative. I wrote recently that I was done trying to argue with supporters of the "president." This experience reinforces that. I attempted this outreach in good faith and this is what I got. It's not just a matter of not wanting to waste my time or energy. 

It's also that anyone who sends an email like this in response to my proof isn't worthy of debating me. 

De-evolution is real

Gotta painful swelling brain

Got me pulling out my hair

Gotta painful swelling brain

Clutching at my brain

~~ “S.I.B. (Swelling Itching Brain)” by Devo

I’ve been saying for a couple of years now that based on everything we are seeing happen in our country, Devo is a perfect soundtrack for our time. Their message of “de-evolution” that began in Akron, Ohio after founding members Mark Mothersbaugh and Jerry Casale experienced the Kent State University shootings in 1970 seems more relevant than ever.

I try to remain optimistic and I generally believe that we are moving forward as a society, despite how incremental our movement seems at times and despite the fact that we often seem to be going backward.

It was hard to feel optimistic this weekend as I saw the current resident of the White House assault one of the very things that makes our republic a great one: the freedom to peacefully protest. I won’t go into details because I’m certain that you’ve heard plenty about it. Suffice it to say that he is calling for NFL players who choose to peacefully protest racism in our country by taking a knee during the national anthem to be summarily fired.

Players have contracts and a union to protect them, so that’s a dumbass remark right off the bat. But beyond that, it goes against the very things that are enshrined in our Constitution. We have the right to freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble. Colin Kaepernick and other athletes who choose to exercise this are perfectly within their rights.

It did my heart good to see other players and coaching staff support the players who choose to do this. Even Terry Bradshaw kicked some ass by saying that the “president” was off-base and that the players have the right to do this, just like every other citizen in our country.

Some are trying to say that kneeling during the national anthem is disrespecting our country and all those who fought on its behalf. I do understand why some might feel that way but I don’t buy it. If you fought for our country, you fought to defend our Constitution, and the right to protest is very much a part of that. You might not agree with it, and that is certainly your right. But that is part of who we are. Kaepernick and others are exercising their rights.

I will defend that every damn day.

I have green eyes, too. 

In a related (kind of, but it’s a chance to mention my boyfriend in another life) story, James Comey gave a speech welcoming incoming freshmen to Howard University, his new, temporary gig as a guest lecturer and fellow. A few students decided to protest and loudly interrupted him as he tried to speak. He finished his speech but it was obviously not an ideal situation. Beyond my initial thoughts of “Leave him alone!”, I know that he’s a grown-ass man and as a prosecutor, Deputy AG, and FBI Director, he’s faced plenty of challenging moments, and he’s still standing (tall). It probably bothered me more than it bothered him.

I actually agree with the right of these students to protest. Considering what I said above about players taking a knee, how could I not? I would be a hypocrite if I said they didn’t have that right. I also think that they have a very valid point about racial bias in law enforcement. It is something that I think needs to be addressed.

But that’s exactly what Comey wants to do and it is what he was trying to do at the FBI before a certain orange thing fired him. (*sob*) He was working hard to diversify the FBI and it was an active push in his tenure as Director. Did he get some things wrong? Did he misspeak on occasion? Undoubtedly. But I don’t doubt for a moment that he is not even close to a racist and that he was and is committed to striving for justice and fairness.

So the students were within their rights but I wonder what they really accomplished? From everything I’ve read, Comey was always willing to listen to other viewpoints and try to learn from what others had to say. By shouting him down, they stifled that dialogue, and really...to what end? Quite a few other students seemed to feel the same way and said that they were there to hear various viewpoints and learn and discuss (and he got a standing ovation after his speech...I’m so proud!). That is exactly what college should be about, but it is also what our day-to-day interactions should be about. As Comey said, when you have a conversation with another person, you both listen, you both talk, and you both come away smarter.

Shouting down your opponents has its place when they are merely spouting nonsense and rhetoric. Shouting down someone who is trying to have a conversation with you seems counterproductive and ultimately futile. It accomplishes nothing.

This is admittedly not always easy for me. I have tried to have discussions with others who don’t see things the way I do, and when the other person refuses to accept objective reality and measurable facts, it really is an exercise in futility. I don’t want to give up and there are some days that I have more patience than other days. I try to maintain my sense of fairness and a willingness to listen to others, but if you want to debate with me, you’d best get your game on, because bullshit, strawman arguments don’t fly with me. If you go with ad hominem attacks, you’ve already lost. A high school friend wrote in my yearbook that you never, ever want to get into an argument with me, because you can’t win.

I’m not sure that’s true, because I will admit when I’m wrong, but don’t fling bullshit my way and expect me to believe it. If you try to shout me down, you might have silenced me for a moment, but I will write a freaking blog post. So there. As my crest says on this blog, “Verba volant, Scripta manent.”

Words fly, writings remain.

Let fury have the hour, anger can be power

You start wearing the blue and brown

You're working for the clampdown

So you got someone to boss around

It makes you feel big now

~~ “Clampdown” by The Clash

It’s been a weekend of extremes, as we watched what seems an obviously unconstitutional executive order issued by the Resident followed by spontaneous protests across the country.

Wow, that’s two weekends in a row! That’s gotta be a record, right? Well, I guess there IS something at which you excel!

The protests continue into this evening and I feel heartened by this response. The Yam seems to think that everyone loves him and loves what he is doing. I am pleased that so many of us are ready and willing to disabuse him of that notion.

I’m sure the Flamin’ Cheeto is absolutely fuming about the protests right now, especially because there is a significant one outside the White House. Hey, yobbo, look out the window! Surprise!

Now, I have no idea if this Twitter account is too legit to quit, but they have mentioned a couple of things that made it look like they really do have some inside info and are hearing things at their job. I cannot account for the veracity of this, so keep that in mind. However, after what we’ve seen this week, would you doubt it?

If this is true, I say…

BRING IT, MOTHERFUCKERS.

Here’s the deal. These are Americans exercising their constitutional rights to assemble peaceably. I read of no incidents or arrests at the Women’s March last weekend and only one incident this weekend when police had to use pepper spray on a handful of protesters. (I have no further knowledge of that incident so I cannot comment on whether or not it was justified.)

If you really want to see the shit hit the fan, mobilize the National Guard against Americans who are assembling peaceably. Have them bludgeon people, pepper spray them, hit them with water cannons. Please proceed, Governor.

Then you’ll see the true demonstration of power. That power lies not in your efforts to suppress the people of the United States. It lies not in your strong-arm tactics against all those who oppose you. It lies not in your pathetic attempts to be worshiped and adored by everyone, or your clumsy and obvious lies about the size of your crowds or your supposed standing ovations or your vote count or your non-existent mandate. Or the size of your hands, for that matter.

The true power lies in US, the people of the United States. Those of us whose families have been here for decades, if not centuries, and those who have just arrived on our shores, and everyone in between. WE THE PEOPLE will show you who holds the real power in this country.

Count on it.

(Aside: Please note that Mick Jones is wearing brothel creepers in this video!)

My bags are packed, I’m ready to go

Well, not quite. We’ve got everything laid out, but Ken, the Master Packer (hush your mouth) still needs to get the suitcases loaded. And we aren’t leaving on a jet plane...since I stopped working, we’ve been driving down to Florida rather than flying. ROAD TRIP! Unfortunately, we can’t really take our time getting down there, so it will be Interstate travel. On the way back, we’ll probably get a little off the beaten path, and that is always fun and often an adventure!

It’s our annual trip to our timeshare at New Smyrna Beach, and I look forward to it every year. Some wonder why we go to Florida in the summer, but we like the hot weather and a warm ocean, and our timeshare is right on the beach, so we get a very brisk ocean breeze. We’re looking forward to seeing my Aunt June and Cousin Greg, who live in Daytona Beach and are coming down to have dinner with us. (Unfortunately, Greg’s son Russell is off doing military training as he prepares for his last year of aviation school at Embry-Riddle, so we won’t get to see him. An amazing and super smart young man!) Other than that, we have no real plans for our time in Florida other than our usual ‘vegecation’: reading, ocean, beer, sun, and visits to some of our favorite restaurants. (Mmm...a walk down the beach for a burger at Breakers! My mouth is already watering! And real Key Lime Pie!) Of course, this year, we’ll also be watching the Olympics in the evening. I think that’s a first for our Florida trip. In fact, I’m sure of it.

As for my reading, I’ve been struggling a little bit with Of Human Bondage. I’m enjoying it, but I’m not tearing through it, so I think I want to set it aside on this vacation and read something a little more fun. I’ve chosen The Audacity to Win by David Plouffe, about the 2008 Obama run for the presidency. Yes, I know I’m a little bit insane, but I started reading it today, and I’m already loving it! I’m getting fired up about this fall, so I’m happy with my book choice. My Kindle is well-loaded and ready for bear, so I may choose a fun book after that...maybe an Egyptian mystery or something like that.

On our way back, we’ll be making a stop in Charleston (I’ve never been there, so I’m looking forward to seeing if it’s a place we might want to revisit, like Memphis.), and then a couple of nights in Raleigh. I’m super excited about that, because we get to meet our long-time blogger and Facebook friend, the fabulous Ms. Sheria! She is a total peach, and I am so excited to meet her. Lucy and Ethel, baby! I guess that would make Ken Ricky...?

We’ll be taking our laptops and blogging from Florida, although I’m not sure if it will be every day. But there will be pictures!

Before I go, just a quick commentary on the Chick-Fil-A brouhaha. (And yes, I WILL be paying attention to politics while we’re on vacation! You have been warned.) This cartoon says it perfectly for me. I don’t dispute the right of Dan Cathy to spew whatever bigotry he wants to spew, and I don’t disagree with his right to contribute his money to whatever hate groups to which he wants to contribute. But rest assured: if you are the owner of a company and you come out with your thoughts on social issues, there are going to be people who disagree. And you know what? We have every right to push back, protest, and voice our disagreement. The First Amendment works both ways. I don’t believe anyone is suggesting that Dan Cathy should shut up and not voice his feelings about marriage equality. But I’m also not going to shut up about my opposition to that viewpoint, and I am going to continue to support the right for everyone to have the same rights as the rest of us. This is constantly being framed as a religious issue, but it is not. It is a human rights issue. Dan Cathy, you put it out there. Don’t cry ‘foul’ when people push back. Welcome to the jungle, baby!

For a couple of great reads about it, I recommend this recent entry from Hemant Mehta, as well as my friend Mark Olmsted’s blog post. I approve of these viewpoints.

Catch ya soon!

Don’t tear down that Wall!

Today I finished Attack of the Theocrats: How the Religious Right Harms All of Us—And What We Can Do About It by Sean Faircloth. Don’t be put off by the long title. This is a book well worth reading!

Faircloth provides background for Jefferson’s “wall of separation between the church and state” with various quotes and writings from Jefferson, Madison, and other founding fathers. I know there are people who disagree, but I honestly cannot understand how anyone can think that the framers of our republic intended anything other than this separation. Faircloth then discusses the rapid erosion of this barrier over the past three decades or so. With Kennedy’s speech concerning his Catholicism, it seemed that we had left much of this behind us. Then came the religious right in the ‘70s, and they proceeded to do their best to take us back to the Dark Ages...and unfortunately, they have succeeded to a great extent, and are still working hard at it.

Faircloth provides numerous examples of how much we’ve regressed, including our decline in funding for science education and the inevitable loss of standing in the world when it comes to cutting-edge research, but he saves particular ire for parents who refuse medical treatment for their children because of their religious beliefs. I share his outrage, and agree that this medieval practice of treating children like possessions must stop. We must end medical exemptions due to religion when children are involved, and I believe we should prosecute parents who withhold medical treatment.

Sean lays out a detailed plan for how we can plan for a better future and get the message out, and advocates involvement and activism. He makes the point that although it’s a good thing to protest religious displays on public grounds or in government buildings, we might be better off focusing on the physical harm done in the name of religious freedom. I think one of his most important points, though, is how to better communicate. We can often be rational and unemotional to the point of being robotic. I am guilty of this myself. He recommends giving a human face to the dangers of religious bias in our laws; for example, instead of merely providing statistics about the increase in cases of preventable infectious diseases because of parents’ religious beliefs or faulty science beliefs, we can provide examples of real children who were harmed by such beliefs. There are real and serious consequences to these things, including deafness, blindness, permanent organ damage, and even death; although we value our objectivity and rationality, sometimes you just need to tell the damn story.

To be perfectly clear, Faircloth’s position is not one of prohibiting religious freedom. In fact, I don’t know of anyone advocating a secular approach to government who demands this. Everyone is free to practice as they wish. But the lines must be drawn at allowing harm to come to children because of religious bias, or basing laws on any religious tome. Those who believe we should have prayer in schools or teach creationism in our science classrooms are invariably advocating for the Judeo-Christian religious viewpoint. I don’t see anyone clamoring for a muezzin calling our children to prayer every day!

And that is the broader point here: the First Amendment is a protection for the government from religious bias, and a protection for religion from government bias. If the government endorses Christianity, what is to stop them from one day enforcing another religion? A religion that Christians don’t like all that much, or maybe even a religion some Christians think is evil? It is a sword that cuts both ways, and it is to everyone’s best interest, as well as the best interest of our country, that we abide by what Jefferson and other founding fathers intended. I am certain that their intentions did not involve basing our laws on the Bible or any other religious book, planning foreign policy in accordance with Biblical prophecy, or allowing American children to perish because of religious beliefs, no matter which religion.
I think anyone, religious or nonreligious, would benefit from reading this book. Faircloth makes excellent points about the danger of tearing down the Wall. He is non-confrontational, but makes it clear that the senseless maiming and deaths of children or of anyone because of religious bias is simply not an option in 21st century America.

Exceptionally exceptional exceptionalism

You hear a lot these days from the teabaggers about what a remarkable place America is.

I don't dispute that; it is a remarkable place, in ways both good and bad. The same country that produced Thomas Jefferson also embraced slavery for several decades; the country that enacted ground-breaking civil rights laws a few decades ago still discriminates against a significant portion of its citizenry; it is a country of breathtaking beauty and one of urban decay; ours is one of the most prosperous countries in the world, and we still have people starving and going without medical care; the same country that gave us Barack Obama (and if you still think he's not an American citizen, please just go away...you bore me) also gave us Sarah Palin.

Yeah, it's a mixed bag all right.

I love my country. I am proud of our accomplishments, but realize that there is still much to be done. I don't believe we're perfect, and we have made mistakes. I believe it is important to take responsibility for that, and to apologize to those we have wronged. We are a young nation, and we are a work in progress.

So I resent the hell out of it when people like the aforementioned Sarah Palin say that I'm not patriotic because I find fault with some of the things that we've done, or dare to declare that perhaps we are fighting a war we shouldn't be. I may love my country, but that doesn't mean that I'm willing to goosestep in agreement with everything we do, or adopt that ultra-nationalistic jingoism of "my country right or wrong." What I find amusing is that what is truly most exceptional about America is what teabaggin' idiots like Palin, O'Donnell, and others would do away with first.

When Jefferson, Adams, and other framers of the Constitution began working on it, they were still witnessing the effects of religion upon governments. They had recently won independence from a country that had established a state religion. It was called the Church of England, for pete's sake. In a remarkable act of courage, rebellion, innovation, and vision, they broke from centuries of tradition and expressly forbade that our government would ever be capable of promoting any religion above another, forcing people to believe a certain way, or taking away their freedom to worship--or not worship--as they chose.

What an amazing and precious thing they gave us in their foresight to prohibit such a thing. All one has to do is look around the world at countries that operate as theocracies and see what is happening in their countries. Stonings for adultery; hangings for homosexuality; prison for those dissidents who would question the status quo and go against the state-sanctioned religion. Every time someone like Palin talks about how our Constitution and our laws are based on the ten commandments, or a Paladino talks about children being brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is a valid option, or Christine O'Donnell shows her unbelievable ignorance of this most basic tenet of our freedoms, they disrespect the framers of our Constitution and show their ignorance of just how amazing that document is.

We've seen some pretty astounding things in the past few months, but I think O'Donnell's ignorance of the First Amendment takes the cake. Naturally, her campaign is trying to spin it that she was saying expressly that the phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the First Amendment. I wish Chris Coons, her opponent (and the front runner, thank science), had been more forceful in saying that no, it is not, but the sentiment is there, it has been proven over and over again in the writings of Jefferson and others, and it has been upheld and strengthened throughout repeated court rulings. Her complete lack of comprehension of the deepest meaning of the First Amendment and its importance to our freedoms as individuals is absolutely mind-boggling to me. Anyone who wants us to get back to our "Christian roots" is also ignorant of the framers' intent and beliefs. I would remind them that if they get their wish and Christianity is declared a state-sanctioned religion, kids are led in prayer in school, Bible study classes are on the curriculum at every school in the country, and their religion is the law of the land...it can just as easily be taken away and replaced with a different religion at some point. Perhaps one day we'll have our first Jewish President, and he or she will declare that Judaism is the primary religion in the country, and it must be taught in our schools. I wonder how much they would like that? Or maybe one day, we'll have a Muslim President. (Let me state again that if you still think Obama is a Muslim, just go away. Seriously.)

For all their talk of protecting our freedoms and our liberty and the Constitution, they are certainly quick to subvert that document, and they seem eager to take away one of our most fundamental freedoms of all: that of religion. Apparently as long as it is done in the name of their own personal religion, they think it is just dandy. Jefferson and others did their best to protect us and our country from such demagogues. We need to make sure that we carry on their vision and not let our country or our freedoms be usurped by these people.

For Palin, O'Donnell, and all the others that just can't seem to wrap their simple little brains around the concept of it all, I have the same questions that they ask of anyone who wonders about our motives and our actions when we question things in our country: Why do you hate our founding fathers? Why do you hate America? YOU do not get to decide who is a patriot and who isn't. YOU do not get to tell me that I hate my country, or hate our troops. YOU do not get to dictate morality based on your religious beliefs. Your actions and ignorance show what I think is a deep-seated disrespect for the fundamental rights laid out centuries ago by those men who were the sort of deep thinkers and philosophers that you seem to ridicule as elitists today.

This is MY America, too. And you can't have it.

Prohibiting the free exercise thereof

I know that a lot of people aren't going to like what I write here. That's nothing new, of course, but this one might be an opinion that really won't be very popular with many folks. In fact, I still haven't solidified my own opinion on it. I have been pondering it, though.

The title of this entry comes from the First Amendment, which states that Congress "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." There is much discussion lately, and much Bookfacing taking place, concerning the proposed construction of a mosque near Ground Zero. There are a few Facebook groups that are against it, with most people saying that it would be a slap in the face to America, that it is an outrage, and so on. How dare Muslims build a mosque near the site of such a tragedy, when people of their own faith are the ones that caused it? Even some Muslims feel that it is not a good idea and are against the construction.

I do understand that some might see it as a horrible affront, almost mocking in its audacity. I'm American, remember? I recall how I felt that day and in the subsequent days. We all do.

However, my first thoughts upon seeing some of the outraged posts and reading some articles about it was of the First Amendment, and that not only do they have the right to build a mosque, they also have the right to build it there. (As long as approval is met, and the Manhattan Board approved it 29-1, with 10 abstentions, last month.) I think it's important to keep in mind that the Muslims who perpetrated the attacks were religious extremists, just like Christian fundamentalists who do things like protest at military funerals holdings signs that say "God hates fags" (the charming Fred Phelps and his minions at Westboro Baptist Church) or people who decide it's perfectly okay to murder a doctor who performs abortions (still a legal procedure in the United States, in case anyone has forgotten). There were also Muslims who were killed in the 9/11 attacks. When the buildings came down, people of many faiths, no faith, and many different nationalities were killed.

Timothy McVeigh was raised in the Catholic church, although he seemed to break with his faith as he got older. I wonder if anyone would protest a cathedral being built near the site of the Oklahoma City bombing the way they are protesting this mosque? Some might say that Muslims are free to practice their religion, no one wants to restrict that…except for not allowing it to happen close to Ground Zero. A couple of thoughts there. First, what is the appropriate distance? A hundred yards? Five hundred yards? Ten miles? Not within the continental U.S.? And who would define that distance? Secondly, those of us who oppose school prayer also use similar words to say that it is not restricting anyone from praying on their own time, merely that it is constitutionally inappropriate to have a government-financed institution participate in prayers led by teachers or administrators on school time. However, the difference is that this group that wants to build the mosque are not forcing anyone to worship a certain way, or to pray; they want to build a mosque for people of their faith to attend on their own volition. They are also not financed by the government. Public schools are different, and there should be no proselytizing whatsoever in such an institution.

As I said, I do understand why some people would be bothered by this. However, our Constitution states that we respect all religions, or those who choose not to practice religion. The building being proposed will also function as a community center and will include a pool and a book store. If they are attempting an outreach for the good and improvement of the community, isn't that a positive thing?

I do have some conflict about this, because even though that was almost nine years ago, it's still a very painful memory. However, denying any religious group their right to build a place of worship is not how we operate. It does look as though it will go through. Mayor Bloomberg supports it. Perhaps it is time to come to terms with the fact that the Constitution does apply to everyone...even people you might not agree with, or even like.

Note: This post is in no way a defense of Islam, merely a defense of their right to build a mosque where they have legally obtained land and permits. I think I've made it clear how I feel about religion in general, no matter which one it happens to be. Personally, I say build the community center, but leave off the mosque part and stop indoctrinating children. I would say the same about a Catholic cathedral or a synagogue or Christian church. Good things can be done for people and for the community without the entanglements of religious proselytizing.