Tag Archives: Obama

Real Marriage Equality

I keep hearing about this preacher out West who is being arrested for refusing to perform a same sex marriage.  This is where I knew that the gay marriage cause was going to go and the biggest reason that marriage should have never become a service of the state.  For better or worse, when this country was founded, it was a bit more of a religious time, and marriage was a huge part of day to day life.  As much as the founding fathers wanted to separate church and state, this became a function for the state to recognize what was or was not a marriage.  They were government functions, and most of the WASPs that were in the country at the time could not foresee where we have taken relationships to in the modern era.  But that is not the point of freedom.  We have to imagine all possibilities and say that even these things that we haven’t even thought of yet, they will be protected and they will remain free.

As I have mentioned in many other places, I am Pagan and proudly so.  I have a faith where being in a relationship, even one defined as a marriage, where monogamy is not a tenant.  Now, no matter what your personal convictions are, I am a firm believer that people will always do as much as they can get away with when it suits them.  In states where “adultery” is legally defined as having sex outside of the person that you are married to, and committing adultery can forfeit your assets to the “injured” party,  people will lie when it suits them.  Relationships end for all kinds of reasons, open and monogamous alike.  It is not up for a court to decide that just because an open marriage doesn’t work, to get to give a moral say just because one party has proof.  We all know that these kinds of morality laws are on the books from state to state.  In Maryland here, it is illegal to have premarital sex in a hotel room.  Now we justify that such things are never enforced, but the point is that they have every bit as much legal merit as not murdering, and if someone ever made a case against you, then there is little to nothing that you can do.

That is why this preacher being arrested scares me.  He was simply practicing his faith.  I am not saying that the government should not allow this gay couple to wed, but how is it not a vendictive action to go after someone that disagrees with you, is practicing their own freedoms, and you choose to infringe on them and then make him have to hire lawyers and go through all this legal mess.  It isn’t as if the preacher was a state employee, but the case here is that he did have a state licence to perform marriages.  State sanctioned religion.  It will never end well, and no matter what the legal decision ends up being, you are going to have a decision in it that will be looked at and used against the American people putting more stupid laws on the books that infringe our rights.

Advertisements

The Anorexic

I really haven’t given much of an update in a while as to what I’m up to.  My most recent project is a documentary that I was hired to do regarding the state of Maryland’s taking the child of a family because the child had anorexia and had complications resulting from the disorder.  The child had already been in treatment, prior to the state’s involvement.  Going into this, I knew that there were a lot of questions that would need to be asked, especially regarding why the state felt like they needed to take the child away, which can become a rather hairy subject when the person paying the bills is the person who is going to be under a great amount of scrutiny, hypothetically paying me thousands of dollars to make a two hour inditement of him being a bad parent, and yet he was steadfast in the truth that the government is overstepping their bounds and that other parents should be aware of what is going on, though his politics are a bit right of my own (proud centrist) I can definitely appreciate a parent that is upset and lashing out.

His reasoning is to give more red tape to the government before they are able to separate children from their parents with his case hopefully being heard by the supreme court in Maryland.  After a few interviews and background discussion with educators and people in the medical field, they have very mixed opinions, as they believe it to be already too difficult with so many children being abused at home or being neglected.  Some of the points I will be exploring is the way in which once the state takes custody of a child, the state then appoints a lawyer to represent the child to the state, when that lawyer does not take into account the wishes of the child.  The state giving out bonuses for children to be taken away from their homes to social workers.  Why the state has their doctor give the prognosis of children in question, even in cases that go beyond that doctor’s scope of practice, and more so that when other medical professionals regard that prognosis, that there are no repercussions?

I have to say that it is still too early to give my opinion.  There are many questions I want answered on both sides and totally understand why many people are so suspicious of his claims, and see how some could see the parent as bringing this situation on himself, but look forward to talking with the other side’s legal team soon and look forward to sharing my conclusions.

Ebola

This is not generally what this site is about.  I’m sorry if what I am about to say seems less credible, but I have someone close that works for the state health department here in Maryland, and yesterday they had a meeting concerning the Ebola crisis.  No media was allowed, and for what I’m going to assume was because any media understanding of how inept this is being handled.

The first and biggest thing that was covered were emails that were found by an independent researcher finding that the Ebola strain we are now facing is now airbourne.  This means that if people have it, then by their very breathing, they can be spreading it to everyone around them.  Generally when something this dangerous is that contagious, then quarentines start to run rampant, because a whole fuck load of people could die.  The reason that we know that is because of the nurse that was infected in Dallas, because she was wearing a surgical mask.  The current magic bullet theory is that what disrobing, she somehow digested some infected fluids.  Bullshit.

The next big thing is that Maryland has no money for protective suits for state workers.  So in a meeting designed to instruct the very people who would be the first responders.  Now imagine that you are one of these people, that is working in the medical field in a state where they are treating many of the stricken, and you find out that the CDC is not adequately giving out information (airbourne) to contain this virus, and that you will then be asked to be in a closed room to treat the infected without protective equipment, all but ensuring that you will also become infected.  That is like asking AIDS doctors to administer the cure with their dick without the use of a condom.

To further underlind the incompetency of the CDC, they actually issued a statement during the conference, to trained medical professionals no less, stating that the only people at risk of having Ebola were those that originated from West Africa or people who had traveled there.  This of course is a fantasy that went out the window the moment that people here started to become infected or that Dallas nurse boarded an airplane.  What makes it even more upsetting is that if these idiots actually believed their own nonsense, then why is air travel from the only place where you can get such a deadly communicable disease still allowed access into our country.

The CDC even went so far as to say that the reason that this is being allowed to spread is because of racism, because medical people have not been wanting to treat anyone from west Africa, even after being told by the CDC that only people from there were carriers, despite not having the ability to protect themselves in the process.  Again, another major Obama blunder that will end up killing lots of Americans and it is all because we are racists.

Phil Robertson

I really have had a hard time with this one.  I really can see both sides to this one and I can also see why both of the main view points on this is completely wrong.  I should probably start off by pointing out that I am not Christian, but I am religious.  I am Celtic Pagan, and while I don’t want to go too much into my own personal faith here, because it really doesn’t matter in terms of who I am as a person, it scares me that someone claiming to have a faith is being viewed the way that it is being viewed.  I have absolutely nothing negative to say about gays of any sort, in terms of their lifestyle being a sin or what have you.  I really don’t care what people do in their own homes, and am in no place to judge about sexual propriety.  Pat would probably also tell you that I am going to hell as well.  To him, or at least to many Christians, all people, of all other faiths, that are not Christian are going to go to Hell.   That is what he believes.  I understand this idea that even though those were his beliefs that he should have kept them quiet because he represents this other company and that they have a right to fire one of their employees that does not agree with their company line.  But this isn’t somebody who is truly representing the company.  That is like saying that any of the other reality stars that the A&E network carries represents the network.  Mr. Robertson is not their CEO, and really doesn’t represent the company any more than the crazy cat lady from hoarders.

One of the first things that upsets me about this is just how little of an actual argument or a reflection of religious freedom in this country this ploy for attention is.  Consider just how much support the Duck Dynasty clan have received since the controversy.  The controversy would not have come about if there had not been consequences.  I mean really think about the average viewer response had he said what he said, the LBGT movement reacted like we can expect them to, and A&E simply been like, he is a religious redneck with a shotgun, deal with it.  Did you really expect him to embrace you?  I’m pretty sure that even fans of the show would have thought that was a little harsh, but because he was banned from the show, even if it was just on paper as he was reinstated just before new episodes that were filmed well before all of this so they would include the patriarch, will now be that much more advertised.  Because there was a reaction, that was well calculated to make him look like a martyr, sales of the Duck Dynasty merchandise has skyrocketed, and guess who owns all of that.  It is not the Robertson family.  What would have been an interesting campaign is if fans of the show actually boycotted the show, realizing that even though the t-shirts they were buying had the face of their favorite character, that in fact their hard earned money was going into the very pockets of the villain that fired the man they were trying to defend.

With that being said, once we have established that this is a commercial venture, and is being brought out inorganically to drive a divide amongst people without actually furthering the argument or actual thought, much like how abortion is talked about on campaign trails, not because any political figure actually has a shot in hell to affect the issue one way or the other, unless they are campaigning for a supreme court justice, which of course are appointed.  Why do politicians talk about an issue that they have no affect over (I’ve even seen local sheriffs talk about it)?  It is because they know that both sides are very passionate about the issue and they know that is a way to endear themselves, and keep the conversation away from they own record, or more complicated issues that most of our population doesn’t properly understand.  It is part of division culture, that we have to take sides with very little information, without ever really trying to examine the issues and a way to make them better for all involved.

So what is the religion debate in this country and how do I feel about it?  I agree with the first amendment.  I think that we as a population should be free to worship as we choose.  The problem with that, is that we are a country that is a conglomeration of a lot of different cultures, and there is a huge coloration between the two.  I also believe that there needs to be a separation between church and state.  It is the only way that a bunch of people from many different faiths can all not hate each other.  We have to be reminded of what we have in common, not constantly be forced to deal with why we are different.  I personally don’t care how or what you worship, but don’t want to be personally subjected to it.  There is a very annoying idea that I read about a lot concerning the founding fathers being Christians that would be rolling over in their graves that children are not allowed to pray in schools, and while I agree that many rights groups have taken things to an extreme, there is a reason for that.

Here is the point that we need to realize.  That religion can be offensive.  Religion is not PC.  Religion, if it intends to answer the question of where it is that we came from and connect that to where it is that we are going after we die, needs to be very, very old.  Ideals that might seem antiquated in modern society are the basis for what religion is.  While it might seem offensive, or against convention, but I think to put your faith into a religion, you have to take every aspect of that faith.  I hate the modern practice of picking and choosing what it is that you believe.  So many Christians that I know call themselves Christians, but they don’t believe in the parts that are against modern morals, and for us as a society to expect such convictions is wrong.  Religions are a bit racist, passing down old feuds and old societal rules that we can not properly judge without becoming a little bit bigoted for judging.

I recently read a post about the ACLU complaining about prayer for soldiers and how this evil organization was trying to take God away from men in uniform, who “obviously” need it going to war overseas.  I seriously doubt the ACLU would have become involved if their had not been some complaints from someone involved.  I served in the military and fought overseas.  I again am not Christian.  I was forced to sit through multiple prayers that were not even thinly hidden to be Christian in origin.  The only masking was as to what denomination that was being represented.  I would also like to inform you that as of when i got out in 2011, it was against regulations for the Army to hire Chaplains that were not Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, or Hindu.  That means that Pagans, Wiccans, and Buddhists were out of luck if they sought spiritual guidance.  I also want you to guess how many times the Jewish, Mormon, Hindu, or Muslim Chaplains were allowed to lead prayer during ceremonies and other mandatory formations.  While I fully agree with the purpose of having Chaplains in the military, and that there needs to be that sort of counseling,  the existence of systemic bias goes a long way to show the issues with religious rights in this country.  Consider marriage in this country.  There are many definitions of family in the world.  There is the homosexual argument, but think of Polygamists such as in the Mormon and Muslim faiths.  Consider that many Pagan faiths do not believe in monogamy.  Consider how state laws set up marriages, so that if there is any infidelity that can be proven that the other partner gets a huge pay day.  Consider that in terms of immigration, they do not recognize homosexual or poly relationships of any kind.  You have to be in a monogamous Christian outlined household.  Then you think about the Muslims that live in Michigan, who play the call to prayer loudly, early in the morning.  Many non-Muslims have complained.  Think about gay pride parades that are almost pornographic.  I have a lot of kinky sexual practices, yet I can’t imagine an I like to choke people parade for white heterosexuals.  There is something about the majority that scares people.  They should just have to deal with everything, and then, there is the backlash that the majority, Christian, white people have in the form of Duck Dynasty.  They are a majority of this country, and while you might not think that if you live in a big city on the East coast, there is a lot of room between you and California.

The point is that both majority and minority should been mutually respectful of one another.  Both sides need to realize that to be tolerated does not mean that the other side has to like them.  That is ok.  We don’t need to continually keep picking sides, because the more that we do, the more that we allow ourselves to be used by a system that doesn’t care about us or the issues that they are presenting to us nearly as much as they enjoy controlling us and keeping us divided for their own profit margins.