Being all citizenish and junk

I very recently wrote about the bill making its way through my state legislature that would allow the teaching of creationism in public school science classrooms. At the time, it had only made it out of the Education Committee (sadly, by an 8-2 vote), but it has since gone on to pass the Senate 28-22.

This is simply unacceptable.

This afternoon, I got busy and wrote to my Representative (a Democrat), my Senator (a Republican), and my Governor (also a Republican). I wrote similar letters to all, but I reserved the most eloquence I could muster for Governor Daniels. After seeing some of the comments on a local station’s Facebook post about the bill, it only strengthens my belief that the last thing we need is to inject religion into our public schools, especially when it comes to science classes. It was amazing to see the misconceptions and downright perplexing ideas being voiced there, everything from “I say we let the kids decide!” to “Macro evolution hasn’t been proved, because you’ve never seen a species give birth to a new species” to that Golden Oldie “Man didn’t come from apes.” I’m happy to report that my head didn’t explode.

Anyway, here is what I wrote to Governor Daniels. I encourage my fellow Hoosiers who want to see a strong and vibrant scientific community and education in our state to write to your own legislators (if you aren’t sure who they are, you can find them here); I would even encourage anyone from out-of-state to write if you feel that this is an important issue. Who knows? Your state could be next.

Dear Governor Daniels,

I am writing in regards to SB 89, the bill under consideration in the Indiana Congress that would allow the teaching of creationism in our public school science classrooms. As I have watched the bill move out of committee and pass the Senate, I have grown increasingly appalled.

According to a study reported by Bloomberg and many others, America's schoolchildren rank 25th out of 34 countries in science education. It simply boggles my mind that Indiana's solution to this would be to inject a religious belief into our science classrooms.

Creationism has nothing to do with science. It is a creation myth that comes from a religious text, and as such has no place in a science classroom; some try to call it a theory, but it is not a scientific theory. Let me reiterate: it is a religious belief. Contrary to what some might think, most of us opposed to this bill do not wish that creationism never be mentioned. I would have no problem with it being discussed in a comparative religions class, a philosophy class, or a religious literature class. But keep it out of the science classroom.

Although we have differed on some issues lately, I truly believe that you want what is best for our state. You wish to create policies that will make us more business-friendly, and keep our best and brightest students in-state. Allowing this bill to become law will have the opposite effect. It will make us a laughingstock among the scientific community.

It will also result in an immediate challenge by organizations like the ACLU and the Freedom from Religion Foundation, and after millions of Indiana taxpayer dollars are spent in defense of this foolish and shortsighted bill, it will certainly be struck down by a higher court as unconstitutional. Similar cases in Louisiana and Pennsylvania have resulted in exactly that outcome. As someone who claims to be fiscally responsible, please don't force our taxpayer dollars to be spent on such a defense.

Please do not let this bill become Indiana law. As someone who spent her entire career in science, it breaks my heart that we are attempting to reverse advances in science by several decades. Veto this bill if it reaches your desk. The integrity of Indiana's science education depends upon it.

Thank you for your time.

The worst kind of desecration

You may have seen the story about what happened with Mitt Romney’s father-in-law about a year after he died. The Romney family decided to posthumously baptize him into the Mormon faith.

No big deal, you say? What’s the harm, you ask? Well, Edward Davies was an avowed atheist for his entire adult life, and had no use for religion. But Ann Romney allowed her husband and his family to disregard her own father’s lack of beliefs and perform some bullshit ceremony claiming him for their church a year after he was in his grave.

I find this absolutely disgusting on several levels. First, there is the absurdity that after someone dies, you can actually place them into any particular faith. Screw that whole free will thing and making your own decisions about what you do and don’t believe. Then there is the unbelievable arrogance of Romney’s family deciding that they know best about how to handle Davies’ afterlife.

But what really, really burns my bacon about this is that they would so disrespect this man’s intellect, individuality, and his ability to make his own informed decision. It was a big “screw you” to the guy after he couldn’t fight back—which also strikes me as quite cowardly. I don’t doubt that they tried to preach to him while he was alive, and when he refused to buy into their silly religion, they waited until after he died and THEN they pounced on him and claimed his ‘soul’ for their own.

It would be like when my Dad died, if I went to the family and said, “Okay, I know Dad was a man of Christian faith, but I think we should say that he was a pagan and have that kind of ceremony.” No, it’s even worse than that...it’s like if KEN had gone to my family and said that’s what he thought we should do. Either scenario is inexcusable and my family would have been right to tell us both to shut up and never dare to mention it again.

I find myself almost as appalled at the Davies family for going along with this. If anyone dared to suggest such a thing concerning my Dad, I think I would have lost it. And when I lose my temper, you’d best be afraid. Be very afraid. How the Davies family could have sat by and let this happen is beyond me. What a horrible disregard for how the man felt and how he lived his life.

Ken knows my wishes for when it’s my turn to bite the dust. If anyone tried to subjugate those wishes and force some sort of ceremony on me that I wouldn’t want, I know he’d stand up for me and make sure it doesn’t happen. If that happened to me, I’d come back and haunt whoever was responsible, and I’d do it in a really scary way. (I suppose I should point out that that is a joke. I have seen no evidence of ghosts.)

I wasn’t going to vote for Mittens, anyway...obviously. Before it was because I completely disagree with his current stances* (the universal health care and support for same sex marriage in Massachusetts was pretty cool...but he doesn’t like that stuff anymore) and find him an insincere panderer who will do and say just about anything to get elected; he’s someone who has no concept whatsoever of how average Americans are struggling to put food on the table, keep a roof over their heads, and manage to avoid bankruptcy because they didn’t have health insurance—or good enough health insurance—and couldn’t pay their medical bills after they had to deal with breast cancer or their child’s leukemia. (Just an example, of course. Nothing specific in mind, other than people I know who have had to deal with similar situations.)

No, he’s given me another reason to despise him. He didn’t care about his father-in-law’s wishes, and didn’t give a fuck about the guy’s thought processes and right to make his own decisions. All he cared about was adding another name to the roster of bogus conversions to his bogus religion. Shame on you, Mittens. You deserve a squirt with a water bottle! A really big, high-pressure water bottle.

*Current stances subject to change without notice. Candidate not responsible for any dissatisfaction experienced upon abrupt change of direction in policy. Side effects may include dizziness, heart palpitations, loss of libido, nausea, and projectile vomiting. Do not combine with teabagging. Massive quantities of alcohol can ease side effects. Please see your doctor if you experience any of these symptoms, or if you remain conservative longer than four years. Prolonged exposure can cause abrupt head explosion.

Science education an endangered species in Indiana schools

I make no bones about loving my state, despite its right-leaning ways; I live in a very Democratic county, and I’ve often defended my state based on what I experience here in my little nest of liberals. I was pretty happy when we recently voted in the youngest Mayor for a city of our size, Pete Buttigieg. Super smart guy, seems very decent, and I look forward to seeing what he does with our city. (Sadly, we are out of the city limits, so couldn’t actually vote for him. We supported him in other ways, though!)

However, I am deeply ashamed to see what my state legislature recently did. They sent a bill out of committee to be voted on in Congress. SB 89 would allow for the teaching of creationism in public schools, and it got an 8-2 vote out of the Education Committee to be passed on to the Congress. The Education Committee! 8-2! I’m surprised they didn’t just burst into flames right then and there.

As someone who has tried to show to friends from all over the country (as well as a few other countries) that not everyone in Indiana is a stupid rube, I can’t begin to tell you how humiliating this is. The bill doesn’t specify in which classes creationism can be taught, so it means that any school district in the state could allow it to be taught in science class. This makes me want to cry.

Creationism is not science. I honestly don’t know how I can state that any stronger or convince people who think that “Hey, what’s the harm? Teach both.” No. NO. You cannot teach creationism in science class because it is not science. It is based on a religious belief and on a religious book. Numerous court cases have upheld decisions that creationism and intelligent design are religious concepts, not scientific ones.

I have no problem with creation myths being taught in comparative religion classes, as long as they are elective classes. I have no problem with creation myths being taught in literature classes as part of a study of religious books of various cultures. But teaching it in science class? I have a serious problem with that. America is lagging behind in science education compared to the rest of the world, and this will only make the problem worse.

This is nothing more than religious indoctrination being taught in our public schools. This so-called “education committee” (exaggerated, sarcastic finger quotes) does not seem to comprehend the implications of this. First and foremost, if by some stupid chance the Indiana state legislature actually passes this bill (and I wouldn’t put anything past them), it will most assuredly be challenged and after long legal battles, declared unconstitutional. This will cost the Indiana taxpayers millions in legal fees. Second, it is obvious that the ‘creationism’ they want to teach is that of the Judeo-Christian faith. That is a direct violation of the First Amendment, which states that no religion shall be promoted above any other, so are they prepared to dictate the teaching of ALL creation myths? There are quite a few.

Finally, let me reiterate. I can’t state this strongly enough. Creationism is not science. It cannot be proven, it cannot be duplicated, it is in no way, shape, or form anything even resembling science. It can’t even be studied in order to see if it’s credible. It is not a scientific theory. Some claim that it is, but that shows a lack of knowledge when it comes to the scientific method. It is a religious concept, and as such, has no business in the science classroom. There is no “teaching the controversy,” because there IS no controversy. Evolution is scientific; creationism and intelligent design is religious.

We’re getting close to the Super Bowl, and we’re going to have people from all over the country coming to Indiana. I find it embarrassing that this comes at a time when my state legislature has actually moved this idiocy out of committee. Governor Daniels wants us to be seen as a great place to do business. It would be nice if our legislature would not pass this stupid bill that makes us look like a great place to have a hoedown while we all dance around in our overalls and eat corn and thump our Bibles. Gahhh!

If my day keeps goin’ this way

...I just might break somethin’ tonight. I’ve been channeling Limp Bizkit for the past few days, and I have spent quite a bit of time swinging on my very last nerve.

You know how it is when something happens, and it’s not good, but you know you can shake it off and forge ahead? Then another thing happens. And another thing. When you snap, you try to do it in a controlled way that doesn’t hurt anyone too badly, and you pretty much succeed with that...then one more thing happens that leaves you a hot mess of anger, befuddlement, sadness, and just plain pissiness. You’re left vacillating between whether to go fling yourself onto the bed and sob into your pillow or rip the head off of the next person who dares to cross you.

I’m happy to report that I did neither, and I am in a much better frame of mind now. I spent some time feeling low, and I was angry and upset, but no one was permanently maimed. I’m kind of learning to walk away from some things, because I’ve realized that there are times that it does no good; you can provide the most eloquent argument in the history of mankind, provide facts, provide personal anecdotes that add to the emotional appeal of your entreaty, and it all runs face first into a wall of stubbornness and intransigence. I’m learning that this ultimately hurts only me. I was shaking in my anger and losing sleep, and just generally feeling crummy, and I came to the realization that I don’t have to engage.

Don’t worry...the fight hasn’t been knocked out of me yet. I’ve just decided to be a little more selective with my battles. I’ve got better things to do than argue just for the sake of arguing, especially when someone doesn’t really want to have an actual discussion. They just want to smack you on the head repeatedly with the sledgehammer of their own opinion, with no possibility of giving an inch. I like to discuss things, and I do my best to stay polite and civil. I think that I am willing to admit when I’m wrong, but I don’t back down from facts. (For the record, “because the Bible says so” is not a fact.) When someone refuses to accept a fact as a fact, you know it’s pointless to continue.

To paraphrase Dr. Evil, the details of my distress are inconsequential. It doesn’t matter who it was or what happened, and I wouldn’t detail that here, anyway. I am not speaking to anyone specifically, because there were multiple incidents. What matters is that I am not going to be drawn into anyone else’s melodrama, and if your intention is to pick a fight, you won’t find one with me. I had a few moments when I was ready to go all American Psycho on some people, but I didn’t. There is too much fun to be had in the world and plenty of good things to read and see and listen to...and dealing with your drama doesn’t fall into any of those categories for me. Sorry, but I have better ways to spend my time.

I do not think that word means what you think it means

We’re having a fairly lazy sports-filled Sunday (Illinois basketball and then football playoffs) after a busy Saturday. We went out to eat with Shane and Matt, then headed over for a show at the Morris Center (a Vegas show, The Rat Pack, made its way to South Bend, and it was fantastic), and had a nightcap with them at South Bend Chocolate Cafe. Good times!

While all this was going on, Notre Dame’s men’s basketball team was in the process of defeating the #1 team (20-0 Syracuse), a game that we had tickets to but sold so we could go see The Rat Pack show. Argh! I never wished so much that I had a clone! We were both a little bummed that we weren’t there for the big game, but we enjoyed our evening out and have no regrets.

Newt Gingrich was also busy beating the pants off his opponents (try not to dwell on that image too long) in South Carolina. I’m rather delighted by this outcome, because it means that the Republicans are in complete disarray, and currently many in the base are breaking for Gingrich. Newt Gingrich. It just boggles my mind. Apparently his debate performance Thursday night garnered him a whole bunch of last-minute support from the evangelical base in SC, which also boggles my mind. In discussions with some of my like-minded friends, we speculated that they are digging his belligerence because they think he can really put President Obama “in his place” (which I happens to think is in the White House) in a debate. I guess that whole electability thing doesn’t worry them too much, or Newt’s extremely negative favorability rating, or that he was forced out as Speaker of the House, or that he paid a $300,000 ethics fine, or...well, you get the idea. The guy’s got baggage the size of a small country. No, they just want to see a smackdown in a debate between Gingrich and the President. My mind is still boggled.

[Sidenote: Newt, shut up about your stupid “Lincoln-Douglas style debates” already. If, by some bizarre chance, you end up being the nominee, you’ll get your chance to debate the President, but you don’t get to dictate the terms. The thought of listening to this bloviating garbanzo bean (as columnist Frank Bruni famously called him) ramble on for hours makes my head hurt and my stomach churn. He’s like the hangover of the Republican party...without the previous night’s fun.]

Newt fired them up at the debate with his attack-dog response to moderator John King’s question about his marital woes, and his second wife’s assertion that he asked her for an open marriage. (I won’t go into details, but you can watch the clip here if you haven’t heard about it.) How DARE anyone ask him such a question?! (It reminded me of Will Ferrell yelling “You don’t talk to me like that!” to his family in a skit. I wonder if Newt drives a Dodge Stratus?) You know why John King dared to ask it, Newt? Because you pretended to be some sort of highly moral person when you were leading the impeachment effort against President Clinton, all the while in the midst of a long term affair with a congressional staffer. It’s your hypocrisy that we hate most. Because of that, it was a legitimate question. The way he turned the outrage around and made himself a victim was a sight to behold. The arrogance and self-righteous indignation just oozed out of him.

Anyway, in Newt’s blistering attack on King, he scolded the entire “elite media” for engaging in such tactics, and accused them of protecting President Obama by attacking conservatives. I think that is absurd, but what I want to focus on here is the constant use lately of the word “elite.”

Elite media, liberal elite, east coast elites, Hollywood elites...you name it, they’re tossing around the word left and right (so to speak!). I think it goes without saying that this is a insulting term for them. It seems to be a code word for “not like us.” In other words, all those elites look down on you and think you’re stupid, but hey, I’m not an elite, I’m just like you! (Kindly ignore that part about Newt’s PhD in history, and his million dollar line of credit at Tiffany’s, okay? Thanks.)

I am bothered that this has become a bad word to a certain portion of the population. The Free Dictionary defines ‘elite’ as:

1. a. A group or class of persons or a member of such a group or class, enjoying superior intellectual, social, or economic status: "In addition to notions of social equality there was much emphasis on the role of elites and of heroes within them" (Times Literary Supplement).
b. The best or most skilled members of a group: the football team's elite.

This is not a derogatory term, folks. I would hope that anyone who has a job would strive to be among the elites of their profession; this seems a desirable thing to me, rather than a scornful epithet. In my daily dealings, I would love to be able to encounter the elite of those providing service to me, whether it’s a grocery store clerk, a mechanic, or the radiologist reading my mammogram. Elites are good, by their very definition: they are good at what they do. The right wing seems to be portraying them as some sort of foppish dandies who look down their noses at the common people. A clever bit of spin, but highly inaccurate.

Personally, I would like my politicians to be more than a little elite. Not in a monetary sense, but I definitely want the best and brightest leading our country and drafting our laws and deciding our court cases. The next time someone calls you an “elite,” I suggest thanking them for the compliment and for their high regard of you. Maybe it will make them go home and look the word up so they understand exactly what it means and why you didn’t take it as an insult.

Chumtossing in the Palmetto state

I watched the Republican debate last night, and I think I’ve finally recovered. That was traumatic (and I’m really not exaggerating...more in a moment).

I find myself bizarrely fascinated by the spectacle of these debates. I watch with a strange combination of horror and hilarity. I find that I need to concentrate on the latter in order to not blow a vein, and I’m usually live tweeting with friends and a handful of journalists I follow. (You can find me on Twitter @Luvrte66.) Sometimes Dan and George make appearances; sometimes Tom; last night it was Ryan. We make some serious points, but throw a few jokes and sarcastic remarks in there, too. The journalists that I usually see on there are David Corn of Mother Jones, Chuck Todd of NBC, and last night Democrat strategist Paul Begala and Time correspondent Michael Scherer were on there. They have some very astute comments and pertinent points. I’d say that they’re generally quite fair, although they’re pretty much on the left side of the aisle, so they express horror at some of the same things that I do.

Last night was especially awful for me because of the South Carolina audience. They were out for blood. They came across as angry and combative. They booed Juan Williams for asking Newt if his remarks about poor kids working as janitors or about food stamps (He offered to go to the NAACP and discuss why jobs are better than food stamps. Yes, he really did.) were racially insensitive. Williams was one of the moderators, people. He was doing his job in asking tough but reasonable questions. They booed Ron Paul when he said that we should really be “doing unto others” when it comes to attacking people...that we carpet bomb these countries and then wonder why people hate us. That’s right. They booed the Golden Rule. They cheered when Perry said that “South Carolina is at war with this federal government and this administration” concerning the Voting Rights Act. This in the state that first seceded from the Union, starting the Civil War, and to add a little double shock powah, on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day! Impressive. They also cheered Perry when he made the incredible statement that because members of the Obama administration condemned the behavior of the Marines who urinated on Taliban corpses, they show “disdain for the military” and are engaging in “over-the-top rhetoric.” Never mind the fact that desecration of corpses not only undermines what we are trying to accomplish there, it is illegal according to military law. But that’s a discussion for another day. When Perry said that the Marines in question should not be charged with a criminal act (again, ignoring that the military considers it exactly that), the crowd cheered.

What really got to me, though, was when one of the moderators asked a question of Romney about immigration, and began his question with the statement that Romney’s father was born in Mexico after many Mormons fled to Mexico to avoid prosecution for polygamy. As soon as the moderator stated that George Romney was born in Mexico, the crowd booed. They BOOED! At the mere mention of the country, which happens to be one of our allies! I still cannot believe that happened. I had a moment of despair and depression, but today I’m channeling it into contempt and anger. Paul Begala tweeted this:

I completely agree with him. I’ve seen the behavior of these crowds—this was definitely the worst yet—and I have just been appalled. Obviously, I’m pretty far to the left, but there are plenty of people who are more in the middle, moderates and independents who are still making up their minds, and I don’t see how any moderate person could see this behavior and think it’s anything short of dangerous and mean-spirited lunacy. It is of some consolation to me that the more the crowds egg them on, the more the candidates attempt to play to them and toss out more and more red meat. It may play well with audiences like that in South Carolina last night, but when it comes to the general election, I’m guessing it won’t be so warmly received. And there is plenty of video to be mined for use this summer and fall.

As for being traumatized? I had a bad dream last night in which the President was shot, and later died. I don’t recall any details about it, probably because it was so disturbing to me. It’s one thing to disagree with this President, but the behavior of the crowd last night was deplorable and downright bloodthirsty in its intolerance. I haven’t been quite so disgusted during this process as I was last night. It also solidified my resolve to do what I can to make sure President Obama has four more years and to keep these pandering cretins out of the White House. (Ron Paul excepted. I don’t want him in the White House, but it’s for other reasons, not because he panders.)

There’s another debate this Thursday, in Charleston. What will happen in that one? Will the audience burn an effigy of the President as the candidates look on with indulgent grins?

Sunday Morning Gloatmeal

I saw this picture of Tim Tebow on the Interwebz, and looked up the verse.

...But those who hope in the LORD will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint.

Note that it doesn’t say anything in there about “verily, they will not get their asses whupped by the New England Patriots.”

And that is exactly what happened last night when Tebow’s Broncos went to Foxboro. Tom Brady and the Patriots didn’t just beat them; they methodically tore apart their offense, their defense, and pretty much every shred of their dignity. I’ve never been a Patriots fan (although I respect Tom Brady and think he’s an incredible player...they’ve just knocked my Colts out of the playoffs too often), but last night I was cheering for them as they demolished the Broncos 45-10.

Here’s why I am going to gloat about this, and why I don’t feel sorry for Tim Tebow. As I wrote about the other day, he wears his faith on his sleeve and although he can’t get away with painting Bible verses in his eyeblack anymore (that’s not allowed in the NFL), he still thanks his lord after every win, and literally takes a knee after every touchdown. I’ll give the guy credit: he really does seem to be a decent guy, doesn’t seem to be just giving lip service to his faith, and doesn’t seem to be a hypocrite about it. But to paraphrase an old saying, you live by the faith, you die by the faith.

Because he IS so vocal about his beliefs, he’s drawn much attention to himself. After a string of unlikely wins, some people were saying that maybe God really was intervening on Tebow’s behalf. As I said in my previous entry, the absurdity of thinking that any deity is interested in a football game just boggles my mind, and I find it offensive in a broader sense. First that anyone would actually pray for their team to win, and second that anyone would find worthy of worship a deity who thinks it’s more important that Tebow gets his win than alleviating starvation and suffering around the world. I mean, really...if you have that kind of power, and you spend your time influencing games instead of helping people who are suffering, you’re kind of a douche.

Anyway, so Tebow’s got everyone talking about his lord and about his faith and all this stuff. But this time, it seems that his lord was out of town, or maybe his DirecTV went out or something, because it looks like he wasn’t paying attention to the game. The Broncos didn’t just lose; they lost in a spectacular fashion. Will Tebow think about this? Will he think, “You know, maybe I should just play the game and work on getting better and not draw this kind of attention to my faith,” or even “You know, maybe God was trying to tell me to shut up and work on my game”? I doubt it. There will be no lessons learned here. Instead of thinking that maybe his god doesn’t care about the game, he’ll think something like “Okay, God didn’t help me this time, but he will next time.” Whatever.

In the meantime, you’ve got some people thinking that this was a game of good vs evil. Yes, an acquaintance of a friend really thought that evil (Tom Brady, who they think made some bad choices when it came to his dating life) triumphed over good (the saintly Tim Tebow) in this game. It’s laughable, it really is...but it’s also horrible that someone would judge Tom Brady as evil—not just having poor judgment, not just being kind of a playah, but actual spawn-of-Satan EVIL—because he was trying to beat Tim Tebow in a divisional playoff game. A football game, people. FOOTBALL. GAME.

So I don’t feel sorry for Tebow. He brought this upon himself. You know who I do feel sorry for? The other Broncos players who have to put up with all this attention paid to Tebow and his religion. There were plenty of people last night who were cheering for the Broncos to lose. I’ve never hated the Broncos. They’re not my team, and the Colts rarely play them, so I have nothing against them. But I was rooting for them to lose, and I laughed when they lost badly. Not because of any of the other players but because of Tebow’s self-centered assumption that his god gives a rat’s ass about whether he wins or loses. I enjoyed the righteous smackdown. If Tebow takes anything away from this, I hope it’s that he should just shut the hell up and play football.