Slingshot2Hell

Terri Schiavo autopsied

2005-06-15T16:38:00.000-07:00

Schiavo autopsy shows irreversible brain damage.

An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband's contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday. It also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused.

She was blind?? Bill Frist is an idiot. You obviously shouldn't judge things (and definately not make a medical diagnoses) based on an edited down video. Editing can accomplish anything.

Alaska Reinstates Aerial Wolf Hunt

2005-06-01T11:09:00.000-07:00

Alaska Overrules Voters, Reinstates Aerial Wolf Hunt

Sad. I really don't think ANY wolf hunting should be allowed anymore, considering they're barely in existence as it is. And why did the governor sign this back into law even when the voters voted against it. Does your vote really mean anything?

Founding Fathers and their Religion

2005-05-06T15:29:00.000-07:00

I know I haven't posted in awhile. I've been super busy (working 12 hours a day) and I still don't have internet at home since we've moved. (Stupid MCI.) Anyway, I just read this great thing over at LiberalForum.org and I just had to repost it.

America's Most Famous Deists

"The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy."
-George Washington

"The founders of our nation were nearly all Infidels."
-The Rev. Bird Wilson, an Episcopal minister and historian (lamented in an 1831 sermon)

Founding Father Quotes You Won't Hear on the 700 Club

Ex-Judge Moore felt that keeping a monument of the 10 Commandments in a courthouse was appropriate because he felt it was the foundation of American law. He obviously never read the Constitution of the United States.

"...but America was founded as a Christian nation," many say. Not so. Most of the more famous Founding Fathers were, in fact, Deists. Just listen to their own words.

The Constitution of the United States

Article VI, Section 3: “...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...”

George Washington

George Washington to Tench Tilghman, (March 24, 1784):
"I am a good deal in want of a House Joiner and Bricklayer, (who really understand their profession) and you would do me a favor by purchasing one of each, for me. I would not confine you to Palatines. If they are good workmen, they may be of Asia, Africa, or Europe. They may be Mahometans, Jews or Christian of an Sect, or they may be Atheists."

John Adams

From a letter to Charles Cushing (October 19, 1756):
“Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, ‘this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.’”

A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, 1787–88:
“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. … It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service [forming the U.S. government] had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses. …Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery… are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind”

Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11: Written during the Administration of George Washington and signed into law by John Adams.
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”

John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, (July 16, 1814):
"Cabalistic Christianity, which is Catholic Christianity, and which has prevailed for 1,500 years, has received a mortal wound, of which the monster must finally die. Yet so strong is his constitution, that he may endure for centuries before he expires."

Thomas Jefferson

Letter to his nephew, Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."

Thomas Jefferson to Jeremiah Moore, August 14, 1800
"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law, & ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man. They are still so in many countries & even in some of these United States. Even in 1783, we doubted the stability of our recent measures for reducing them to the footing of other useful callings. It now appears that our means were effectual."

Letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800
“[The clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man”

Thomas Jefferson, March 4, 1801, First Inaugural Address
"And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions."

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Edward Dowse, April 19, 1803
"I will never, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance, or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others."

Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, January 19, 1810
"But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State."

Letter to Alexander von Humboldt, December 6, 1813
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."

Letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814
“In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own”

Thomas Jefferson to Horatio G. Spafford, January 10, 1816
"You judge truly that I am not afraid of the priests. They have tried upon me all their various batteries, of pious whining, hypocritical canting, lying & slandering, without being able to give me one moment of pain. I have contemplated their order from the Magi of the East to the Saints of the West, and I have found no difference of character, but of more or less caution, in proportion to their information or ignorance of those on whom their interested duperies were to be plaid off. Their sway in New England is indeed formidable. No mind beyond mediocrity dares there to develope itself. If it does, they excite against it the public opinion which they command, & by little, but incessant and teasing persecutions, drive it from among them. Their present emigrations to the Western country are real flights from persecution, religious & political, but the abandonment of the country by those who wish to enjoy freedom of opinion leaves the despotism over the residue more intense, more oppressive. They are now looking to the flesh pots of the South and aiming at foothold there by their missionary teachers. They have lately come forward boldly with their plan to establish " a qualified religious instructor over every thousand souls in the US." And they seem to consider none as qualified but their own sect."

Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, May 5, 1817
"I had believed that [Connecticut was] the last retreat of monkish darkness, bigotry, and abhorrence of those advances of the mind which had carried the other States a century ahead of them. ... I join you, therefore, in sincere congratulations that this den of the priesthood is at length broken up, and that a Protestant Popedom is no longer to disgrace the American history and character. If by religion we are to understand sectarian dogmas, in which no two of them agree, then your exclamation on that hypothesis is just, 'that this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.'

Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
"One day the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in the United States will tear down the artificial scaffolding of Christianity. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

Jefferson's Autobiography
“[A]n amendment was proposed by inserting ‘Jesus Christ,’ so that [the preamble] should read ‘A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion’; the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination”

James Madison

Letter to William Bradford, April 1, 1774:
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise"

Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, Section 7, 1785:
“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”

Ibid, Section 8:
“What influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the Civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny: in no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty, may have found an established Clergy convenient auxiliaries”

James Madison, introducing the Bill of Rights at the First Federal Congress, Congressional Register, June 8, 1789:
"[The] civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner or on any pretext infringed."

James Madison, Detached Memoranda, believed to have been written circa 1817.
"The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority] shut the door of worship against the members whose creeds and consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics and Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain? To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers. or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor."

James Madison, letter to Robert Walsh, March 2, 1819
"The Civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State."

James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822:
"I observe with particular pleasure the view you have taken of the immunity of Religion from civil jurisdiction, in every case where it does not trespass on private rights or the public peace. This has always been a favorite principle with me; and it was not with my approbation, that the deviation from it took place in Cong[ress], when they appointed Chaplains, to be paid from the Nat[ional] Treasury. It would have been a much better proof to their Constituents of their pious feeling if the members had contributed for the purpose, a pittance from their own pockets. As the precedent is not likely to be rescinded, the best that can now be done, may be to apply to the Const[itution] the maxim of the law, de minimis non curat."

Benjamin Franklin

From Franklin’s autobiography:
“Scarcely was I arrived at fifteen years of age, when, after having doubted in turn of different tenets, according as I found them combated in the different books that I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself ”

“...Some books against Deism fell into my hands....It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quote to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations, in short, I soon became a thorough Deist.”

Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin: London, 1757 - 1775
"If we look back into history for the character of present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practised it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England, blamed persecution in the Roman church, but practised it against the Puritans: these found it wrong in the Bishops, but fell into the same practice themselves both here and in New England."

Ethan Allen

From Religion of the American Enlightenment:
“Denominated a Deist, the reality of which I have never disputed, being conscious that I am no Christian.”

Thomas Paine

Excerpts from The Age of Reason:

"My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

"Whenever we read the obscene stores (of the Bible), the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the Word of God."

"...when I see throughout the greater part of this book (the Bible) scarcely anything but a history of the grossest vices and a collection of the most paltry and contemptible tales, I cannot dishonor my Creator by calling it by His name."

"(The Christian) despises the choicest gift of God to man, the Gift of Reason; and having endeavored to force upon himself the belief of a system against which reason revolts, he ungratefully calls if 'human reason' as if man could give reason to himself."

“Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory in itself than this thing called Christianity”

Thomas Paine, Answers to Friends regarding The Age of Reason, Paris, May 12, 1797

"As I have now given you my reasons for believing that the Bible is not the Word of God, that it is a falsehood, I have a right to ask you your reasons for believing the contrary; but I know you can give me none, except that you were educated to believe the Bible; and as the Turks give the same reason for believing the Koran, it is evident that education makes all the difference, and that reason and truth have nothing to do in the case. You believe in the Bible from the accident of birth, and the Turks believe in the Koran from the same accident, and each calls the other infidel. But leaving the prejudice of education out of the case, the unprejudiced truth is, that all are infidels who believe falsely of God, whether they draw their creed from the Bible, or from the Koran, from the Old Testament, or from the New."

"It is often said in the Bible that God spake unto Moses, but how do you know that God spake unto Moses? Because, you will say, the Bible says so. The Koran says, that God spake unto Mahomet, do you believe that too? No. Why not? Because, you will say, you do not believe it; and so because you do, and because you don't is all the reason you can give for believing or disbelieving except that you will say that Mahomet was an impostor. And how do you know Moses was not an impostor?"

Andrea Dworkin Has Died

2005-04-11T11:09:00.000-07:00

Andrea Dworkin has died "peacefully in her sleep early on Saturday morning after a long battle with illness". Her books and writings affected me deeply, and I am sad to see her go.

See her works and other stuff about her here.

Protesting in Baghdad

2005-04-09T11:25:00.000-07:00

Thousands of Iraqiis are protesting to end the Occupation of Iraq. Local take on it at Baghdad Burning and good pictures here.

Borderline Personality Disorder

2005-04-08T15:39:00.000-07:00

Sorry I haven't blogged in awhile. I've been moving into a new place, plus I'm having a lot of family problems, which are leading into problems at work, and thus I am rather stressed out.

Mental illness runs in my family on my mothers side. My mother has Borderline Personality Disorder.

The DSM-IV defines this as

A pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects, and marked impulsivity beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment. Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.

a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation.

identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self.

impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating). Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.

recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior

affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days).

chronic feelings of emptiness

inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights)

transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms

I myself have mental illnesses, although am not BPD (yet anyway). I actually have many of the problems described in Understanding the Borderline Mother of a child marked the "bad" kid. My brother was the "good" kid. This is called "splitting" - #2 on the list above. Described in I Hate You, Don't Leave Me:

The world of a BP, like that of a child, is split into heroes and villains. A child emotionally, the BP cannot tolerate human inconsistencies and ambiguities; he cannot reconcile anther is good and bad qualities into a constant coherent understanding of another person. At any particular moment, one is either Good or EVIL. There is no in-between; no gray area....people are idolized one day; totally devalued and dismissed the next.
Normal people are ambivalent and can experience two contradictory states at one time; BPs shift back and forth, entirely unaware of one feeling state while in the other.

When the idealized person finally disappoints (as we all do, sooner or later) the borderline must drastically restructure his one-dimensional conceptionalization. Either the idol is banished to the dungeon, or the borderline banishes himself in other to preserve the all-good image of the other person.

Splitting is intended to shield the BP from a barrage of contradictory feelings and images and from the anxiety of trying to reconcile those images. But splitting often achieves the opposite effect. The frays in the BP's personality become rips, and the sense of his own identity and the identity of others shifts even more dramatically and frequently.

Around 50% of the time my mother was an awesome, caring, loving mother, but the other 50% she was verbally and emotionally abusive, and all this confusion and "walking on eggshells" certainly left me with a great number of problems. I have had OCD as long as I can remember. I started suffering from clinical depression and trichotillomania when I was 15, and from self-injury shortly after that.

Needless to say, my mother and I now have a rocky relationship. Recently we were doing very good, but then a few weeks ago she just completely lost it. I get constant phone calls from her calling me names and other hateful things, she's flooding my family with suicide threats, and smashing up all the furniture in the house.

Everytime she gets like this, it's like a huge trigger for me. Even though I don't live with her, my mind is still on "high alert" when she is like this. I'm not getting enough done at work now, and my boss is ragging on me. It doesn't help that she calls me constantly at work to scream at me and tell me it's my fault she's going to kill herself. One day I had to unplug my phone because she wouldn't stop calling. But then everyone who needed to contact me complained they couldn't get ahold of me. I'm pulling more hair out than usual and am worrying about getting a bald spot - I haven't had one in 4 years, and would like to keep it that way.

I will need to keep my spirit strong to make it past this, and may not blog about politics and such for awhile while I focus on helping myself.

Good Reading

2005-03-29T09:40:00.000-08:00

Pagan Roots of Modern Holidays - The roots of all holidays "Christian America" celebrates.
Those Pesky, Pesky Women in the Ditches - "females have biological problems staying in a ditch for thirty days because they get infections".
Terri Schiavo's Blog - I'm sorry, but it is funny.
Fake but Accuarate Again? - on the GOP talking points memo on Terri Schiavo.
Would you like some relish with your crow? - Sheelzebub on the Saudi royal family leaving the country after 9/11.
Title IX Protects Whistleblowers, Supreme Court Rules - use bugmenot to bypass registration.
Could doctors refuse to treat gays under conscience clause laws? - Jessica on the new The Conscientious Objector Policy Act

Friday Cat Blogging

2005-03-18T10:31:00.000-08:00

Mia curling up on my sheets.

Friday Random Ten

2005-03-18T10:15:00.000-08:00

The i|_uvU2 edition:

Ratatat - Crips
Alanis Morissette - Thank U
D12 - U R The One
Foo Fighters - The One
The Prodigy - Breathe
VAST - Dirty Hole
Eminem & D12 - One Shot 2 Shot
Debbie Deb - Look Out Weekend
Mary J. Blige -Family Affair
Gorillaz - Clint Eastwood

You can't blame men, so blame the women

2005-03-17T15:44:00.000-08:00

A comment by Shawn on this post at feministing says what I think too many people tend to think:

Nature is nature and you can't blame men for that. In other words, while I don't condone men leering at women and thinking of them as sex objects alone, a woman who dresses like a tramp is bound to be leered at. Explain to me why she dresses that way if she is not encouraging male (what I think for the sake of this argument we can define as "unwanted") attention?

So now men can't control themselves?? And what is a "tramp" anyway? I should be able to wear whatever the fuck I want without being referred to as a "tramp"!

How about the fact that men leer, yell, and grab at me when I walk down the street when I'm wearing a large sweater and baggy jeans? Am I asking for it? Cuz that must be what I want, right? And if women wears a short skirt on a date, are they asking to be raped? What do you propose I wear? A burka?

I'm so sick of this "boys will be boys - men can't control themselves so it's the woman's responsibility to control them" attitude!! Men need to start taking responsibility for themselves and realize that the world does not revolve around them! If I wear sexy clothing, it doesn't mean it has anything to do with YOU! Maybe I'm a lesbian and am looking for female attention! Or maybe I have a hot date with my boyfriend and am looking for his attention! Or maybe it's hot out and I got a cute new outfit I want to try out! If you can't keep your dick in your pants, stay at home and don't show your face in public.

Majority Rule and Minority Rights

2005-03-14T13:27:00.000-08:00

Often times conservatives arguing with liberals like to say "What are you complaining about? Majority rule, right? We won the election! Don't you believe in Democracy?!" Democracy is more complicated than just "majority rule".

All democracies are systems in which citizens freely make political decisions by majority rule. But rule by the majority is not necessarily democratic: No one, for example, would call a system fair or just that permitted 51 percent of the population to oppress the remaining 49 percent in the name of the majority. In a democratic society, majority rule must be coupled with guarantees of individual human rights that, in turn, serve to protect the rights of minorities--whether ethnic, religious, or political, or simply the losers in the debate over a piece of controversial legislation. The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of all citizens.

So just because Republicans are in control now, does not simply mean they can kill all the Democrats. Just because the majority of the population does not want gay marriage, does not mean we can simply ban gay marriage. Just because the majority of the United States is Christian, does not mean we can kick all the Jews out. We have many laws protecting minorities because history shows that majorities often repress minorities.

So please, enough with the "majority rule" argument.

California's Ban on Gay Marriage Unconstitutional

2005-03-14T12:33:00.000-08:00

A little bit of progress:

A judge ruled today that California's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, saying the state could no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman.
In the eagerly awaited opinion likely to be appealed to the state's highest court, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.

"It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Kramer wrote.

Let's hope the California Supreme Court doesn't overturn it. Bans on gay marriage are the most sexist laws we have in this country, and everyone should have the right to the same freedoms and privileges as per the Fourteenth Amendment of our Constitution:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Gays and lesbians are citizens, and marriage is a privilege, so who do these people think they are, to take that privilege away from citizens no different than themselves?

Friday Cat Blogging

2005-03-11T14:51:00.000-08:00

This is my cat Mia when she was a kitten. She's 1 year old now. Hoping to get new pictures of her if I can borrow my boy's digicam!

Friday Random Ten

2005-03-11T14:38:00.000-08:00

Motorcycle - As The Rush Comes
Kelis - Good Stuff
Jimmy Eat World - Pain
Kylie Minogue - Red Blooded Woman
No Doubt - Simple Kind Of Life
System Of A Down - Aerials
Fischerspooner - Horizon
Tool - String Quartet Sober
Butthole Surfers - Whatever
Marilyn Manson - The Beautiful People

Do you mean to tell me men and women are DIFFERENT??

2005-03-09T20:10:00.000-08:00

Apparantly, the asprin therapy doctors have been perscribing to prevent heart attacks works for men but doesn't do shit for women except give them stomach bleeding. Guess what? The tests that showed asprin therapy helped prevent heart attacks were all done on men! And they expected women were just men without penises, and maybe with a uterus if it hasn't wandered off. What a shock that women react different to what works well with men! So now they say this ''clearly demonstrate[s] the importance of studying women as well as men in major cardiovascular clinical trials." And in all trials of anything that will be adminstered to both genders I hope?

Gay Marriage in Washington

2005-03-08T19:18:00.000-08:00

The state Supreme Court is hearing arguments starting today about same-sex marriage. I hope my state is decent enough to allow it without backing out later. The whole thing is ridiculous. Haven't we learned anything yet?? We went through all this already with interracial marriage!

From Colbert I. King:

The Georgia Supreme Court in 1869 based its interracial marriage ban on natural law, observing that "the God of nature made it otherwise, and no human law can produce it, and no human tribunal can enforce it."

Hear the 1871 Indiana Supreme Court quoting an 1867 Pennsylvania decision: Racial separation is enacted not because of "prejudice, nor caste, nor injustice of any kind, but simply to suffer men to follow the law of races established by the Creator himself, and not to compel them to intermix contrary to their instincts."

The North Carolina Supreme Court in 1869 upheld the state's anti-race mixing law, stating that "the policy of prohibiting the intermarriage of the two races is so well established, and the wishes of both races so well known."

A host of state anti-miscegenation laws -- strongly backed by white public sentiment -- were upheld in state courts well into the 20th century. The reasoning was simple and absolute: Marriage between the races defied the natural order; intermarriage bans had legitimate historical roots and were based on a "divinely ordained" scheme. Conclusion: Government had the right to define marriage as a union of two persons of the same race.

An article in the Philadelphia Inquirer says it well...
Here are some arguments against miscegenation:

Would change America's social order - interracial unions foretold “race suicide”.
“Shall America remain white?” one worried physician asked a medical conference in 1924. Interracial unions foretold “race suicide,” the eugenic nightmare that haunted white America well into the 1960s.
Religion is against it.
“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red,” wrote a Virginia judge in 1965, upholding the state’s so-called Racial Integrity Act. “The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

And some arguments against gay marriage:

Would change America's social order, but of the "family" instead of "race".
If we abandon our taboos on gay sex, [Rick Santorum] claims, our prohibitions against other perversions—including incest and polygamy—will fall by the wayside.

But why? Incest clearly injures children, while polygamy would raise a host of serious problems surrounding property rights, child custody, and more. Gay sex—between consenting adults, remember—wouldn’t change any of that.
Most religions consider homosexuality a sin.

Turn on so-called Christian radio, and you’ll hear the same thing about gay sex: It violates the will of the Lord. In a less sectarian vein, Santorum simply deemed them unnatural: “In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality,” he said. “It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be.”
Man on dog?

Those are the two main arguments - the slippery slope, and the religious one.

Andrew Sullivan makes a great point in Slate:

The precise challenge for morally serious people is to make rational distinctions between what is arbitrary and what is essential in important social institutions. ... If you want to argue that a lifetime of loving, faithful commitment between two women is equivalent to incest or child abuse, then please argue it. It would make for fascinating reading. But spare us this bizarre point that no new line can be drawn in access to marriage—or else everything is up for grabs and, before we know where we are, men will be marrying their dogs.

If interracial marriage didn't end up with us marrying our children and raping our dogs, then why would gay marriages? The best objection to the slippery slope argument is said by Dahlia Lithwick:

These are projections into an unknowable future. Asking proponents of gay marriage to prove that these marriages won't be bad for kids or families is asking that they prove a negative. The law cannot know the long-term future social effects of legalizing gay marriage ... We can only determine whether it is fundamentally unfair to bar one whole class of citizens from a privilege constitutionally afforded the rest of us.

Our constitution says we shall all be treated equal, thus, it is not fair at all.

The whole excuse that the Bible or God tells us it's wrong is just stupid. The Bible tells us a LOT of things are ok or not ok and our laws don't reflect this. I have no problem if your church does not allow someone to marry, but if the government does it, it's clearly discrimination. What has brought this case to the Supreme Court here in Washington, is this passage of the constitution:

No law shall be passed granting to any citizen ... privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens.

From the Seattle Times:

"The privilege of civil marriage and the various privileges legally conferred by that status are not being made equally available to all citizens," King County Superior Court Judge William Downing said last August as he ruled in favor of same-sex marriage rights.

"The text is quite clear," said University of Washington constitutional law professor Hugh Spitzer, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting gay marriage rights.

The Bible has little to do with any of this.

Why must history always repeat itself?

International Women's Day

2005-03-08T12:36:00.000-08:00

Today is International Women's Day! Here are some reasons to thank feminists:

If you're female and...

...you can vote, thank a feminist.

...you get paid as much as men doing the same job, thank a feminist.

...you went to college instead of being expected to quit after high school so your brothers could go because "You'll just get married anyway", thank a feminist.

...you can apply for any job, not just "women's work", thank a feminist.

...you can get or give birth control information without going to jail, thank a feminist.

...your doctor, lawyer, pastor judge or legislator is a woman, thank a feminist.

...you play an organized sport, thank a feminist.

...you can wear slacks without being excommunicated from your church or run out of town, thank a feminist.

...your boss isn't allowed to pressure you to sleep with him, thank a feminist.

...you get raped and the trial isn't about your hemline or your previous boyfriends, thank a feminist.

...you start a small business and can get a loan using only your name and credit history, thank a feminist.

...you are on trial and are allowed to testify in your own defense, thank a feminist.

...you own property that is solely yours, thank a feminist.

...you have the right to your own salary even if you are married or have a male relative, thank a feminist.

...you get custody of your children following divorce or separation, thank a feminist.

...you get a voice in the raising and care of your children instead of them being completely controlled by the husband/father, thank a feminist.

...your husband beats you and it is illegal and the police stop him instead of lecturing you on better wifely behavior, thank a feminist.

...you are granted a degree after attending college instead of a certificate of completion, thank a feminist.

...you can breastfeed your baby discreetly in a public place and not be arrested, thank a feminist.

...you marry and your civil human rights do not disappear into your husband's rights, thank a feminist.

...you have the right to refuse sex with a diseased husband [or just "husband"], thank a feminist.

...you have the right to keep your medical records confidential from the men in your family, thank a feminist.

...you have the right to read the books you want, thank a feminist.

...you can testify in court about crimes or wrongs your husband has committed, thank a feminist.

...you can choose to be a mother or not a mother in you own time not at the dictates of a husband or rapist, thank a feminist.

...you can look forward to a lifespan of 80 years instead of dying in your 20s from unlimited childbirth, thank a feminist.

...you can see yourself as a full, adult human being instead of a minor who needs to be controlled by a man, thank a feminist.

--Author unknown

via media girl

You're Right to Claim Bankruptcy is at Risk

2005-03-04T12:47:00.000-08:00

Republicans again are waging war against the poor backed with money from the rich. In US, money=power and the Bushies are making sure that is reinforced even more in case those poor-folk try to gain back any of their rights.

Here's a great post about the ridiculous Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 by Maryscott O'Connor and here about Class Warfare by media girl.

Friday Random Ten

2005-03-04T11:25:00.000-08:00

Coldplay - Beautiful World
Fischerspooner - Tone Poem
Afroman - Graveyard Shift
Ozzy Osbourne - Dreamer
D12 - American Psycho
Madonna - Music
Cake - Short Skirt Long Jacket
VAST - Dirty Hole
Finch - Letters To You
Tenacious D - Rock Your Socks

Where You've Been

2005-02-25T15:37:00.000-08:00

Bold the states you've been to, underline the states you've lived in and italicize the state you're in now...

Alabama / Alaska / Arizona / Arkansas / California / Colorado / Connecticut / Delaware / Florida / Georgia / Hawaii / Idaho / Illinois / Indiana / Iowa / Kansas / Kentucky / Louisiana / Maine / Maryland / Massachusetts / Michigan / Minnesota / Mississippi / Missouri / Montana / Nebraska / Nevada / New Hampshire / New Jersey / New Mexico / New York / North Carolina / North Dakota / Ohio / Oklahoma / Oregon / Pennsylvania / Rhode Island / South Carolina / South Dakota / Tennessee / Texas / Utah / Vermont / Virginia / Washington / West Virginia / Wisconsin / Wyoming / Washington D.C /

Go HERE to have a form generate the HTML for you.

Overweight Men With Skinny Women

2005-02-24T13:57:00.000-08:00

I've been reading a lot about something I constantly notice on TV: beautiful, skinny women are always paired with overweight men, but never the opposite. I was complaining about to my boyfriend about this last night and he pointed out to me that we fit that stereotype, so who am I to say anything about it?

Am I just following stupid gender roles without even realizing it? I consistently date overweight men, in fact, I PREFER them that way. My mom asked me why once, and I told her it was simple: they treat me better. They appreciate me more than someone who is used to having model girls all over them. And frankly, I have less competition. It's not like I'm not attracted to the guys I date, quite the opposite, I just don't happen to be attracted to the guys based on skinniness, and I happen to find a slightly overweight belly adorable.

Also, overweight and unhealthy are not always the same thing. I prefer guys who eat healthy like me and aren't try to gain MORE weight. My boyfriend and I go to the gym together regularly and are both health conscious.

On top of all this, I'm paranoid about gaining weight and thus LOSING my boyfriend. Because I know what he is attracted to, and it's not me+50lbs.

Has the media's images of women ruined me?

Mr. Gonzales's Testimony

2005-01-07T13:32:00.000-08:00

Alberto Gonzales is an idiot.

He was asked if he believed that other world leaders could legitimately torture U.S. citizens. He replied, "I don't know what laws other world leaders would be bound by." (The Geneva Conventions would be among them.) He was asked whether "U.S. personnel [can] legally engage in torture under any circumstances." He answered, "I don't believe so, but I'd want to get back to you on that." He was asked whether he agreed, at least, with Mr. Ashcroft, who said he didn't believe in torture because it produced nothing of value. "I don't have a way of reaching a conclusion on that," he said. Those senators who are able to reach clear conclusions about torture and whether the United States should engage in it have reason for grave reservations about Mr. Gonzales.

I wasn't a fan of Ashcroft, but at least he didn't believe in torture. He doesn't "have a way of reaching a conclusion" of whether torture is worth it or not? And he doesn't like the Geneva Conventions because "limit our ability to solicit information from detainees"? What is our country coming to? People are all worried about our "morals" citing gay relationships and disbelief in God, but we're totally ok with torture?

Torture is inhumane and there is no excuse for it. If you don't get information from prisoners - tough. When our founders started United States they mentioned nothing of gays but they clearly stated torture was not to be tolerated. I think this country's priorities are all off track. Maybe we should start torturing Gonzales so he gives us some REAL answers ("I'd want to get back to you on that" - ??).

What's better than Tivo?

2004-12-20T10:30:00.000-08:00

BitTorrents! Why should I pay cable a million dollars and STILL have to watch advertisements?! Instead of kicking off all the torrent sites, they should accept the competition and COMPETE. Make the service better than the free stuff, and I'll pay for it. That shouldn't be hard, considering no file you DL is going to be as good quality and you can't watch it on you're TV (unless you have video out on your comp, which most ppl don't). Corporate America sickens me. The fact that multi-billion dollar corporations have more power and rights than individuals (who are supposed to be the gov't) makes me want to scream.

Jonathan Magbie

2004-12-11T04:47:00.000-08:00

What has our gov't come to when we're killing quadriplegic people in jail and arresting special ed students for marijuana. Give me a break. Why aren't we arresting the violent people?? You know, those folks with GUNS??

Oh, nevermind, those are the good guys....

Meteor Shower

2004-12-11T01:30:00.000-08:00

I love meteor showers. Unfortunately, I live in Seattle, and here's what the weather looks like this week:

Today

Sun

Mon

Tue

Showers

High: 50°
Low: 37°

PM Showers

High: 48°
Low: 40°

Showers

High: 48°
Low: 43°

Showers

High: 48°
Low: 39°

well fuck.

Abstinence-Only Programs

2004-12-08T16:24:00.000-08:00

So we're lying to our children now because we think somehow that'll keep them from having sex? Does anyone REMEMBER being a teenager? This propaganda doesn't work. A teen wants sex for all the same reasons everyone else does, and so what? If they're gonna do it (which they are) the best we can hope for is they don't get a deadly STD. Telling them condoms don't work is just gonna keep them from bothering with condoms. Sure, I suppose scaring them away from sex is deadly might help, but why does that threat change when you're suddenly older? You turn 20 and suddenly the danger is past?? You marry someone and suddenly they're blessed by god to be immune to any disease? It's okay to be pregnant at 18 but not at 17? What happens when the scared children grow up (which they will)? Won't they still be scared? Waiting till marriage these days is not necessary. Humans are sexual beings, and after puberty, humans WILL be sexual. With the protection and birth control that is available, shouldn't we educate our kids to be safe throughout their life, however they choose to live it?