You Keep Using That Word . . .

health care, christian, jesus, fail, obama, reform,

Harry R. Jackson, Jr. of Townhall.com keeps using the word "moral" in a way that makes me think he doesn't have any idea what that word means. Which is a little strange, because Mr. Jackson is a Bishop. Bishop Harry Jackson is chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition and senior pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, MD, and co-authored, Personal Faith, Public Policy [FrontLine; March 2008] with Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council.

This week I was shocked by the news that a long list of “progressive” the sarcastiquotes mean they're not! ministers came out in support of the administration’s healthcare plan. They claim that universal health care is a moral issue. yes, not allowing poor people to die solely because they are poor is indeed a moral issue. it must be embarrassing to need an atheist to tell you these things. Their belief is based on a very superficial social, moral, and economic analysis. they said that universal health care is a "moral issue". when did economic analysis come into play? Contrary to their assertion, the Church has never historically viewed healthcare as the government’s responsibility. yes, actually it has. (i just linked to a catholic website. to support my point of view. freakyweird.)

blahblahblah Encyclopedia Britannica blahblahblah Christians built all the hospitals blahblahblah

With the community in mind, I would advocate a healthcare system that responsibly reaches out to the poor and needy. got a thousand page plan to go with that? Unfortunately, the administration’s proposals (as it they now stands stand) would result in lessening the overall quality of care. i don't need proof: i've got bald assertions! While this sounds acceptable in theory, lessening overall quality of care sounds acceptable in theory? really? it is impractical. The delay or denial of surgery or treatment for some patients would become a death sentence. sure, but how do we know that's going to happen? and now, a link to rapture ready in which several British and Canadian rapturites defend their health care systems. (i just linked to rapture ready. to support my point of view. if you see four horses in the sky- run!)

blahblahblah scare tactic blahblahblah

How moral is it to create a healthcare system in which the sickest patients, no matter their income, are not tended to? if that were the health care system being proposed, that would be immoral. it's not. Everyone in the nation will agree that we should help as many people as we can and that there should be realistic limits on how much is spent on a single patient. sure, we can all agree on that. So why did “progressive” clergy side with the President? is there any real connection between the three preceding sentences, other than they were all written by the same person? anyone?

First of all, I believe they wrongly used a broad-brush assessment of a very complex situation. pot, meet kettle. Nowhere does scripture imply that the rich who are sick should not be visited or that the lower middle class sick person should be counted less worthy of help than the abjectly poor. and that has fuck all to do with the proposed health care bill? i'm sorry, did i miss the Liberal Agenda(tm) meeting in which we agreed to use health care reform to kill off all but the most poor? I would argue that Jesus calls us to value all life – not simply the value of the lives of the poor versus the lives of the rich. The question we should be asking is this: “Is my life worth less because I am worth more?” The answer is obviously: no. what. the. fuck. does this have to do with proposed health care reform? oh, wait, nothing. this is a scare tactic. he's counting on the fact that no one who reads this article is truly, desperately poor, therefore everyone reading it will now think, "well, fuck, i ain't dyin' for them trailer park bastards!"

is it moral to mislead people and incite class warfare, Mr. Jackson?

The second faulty assumption these clergymen make is that if you live in the right zip code, you can afford whatever the additional price of health services. The president has publicly acknowledged that many people go bankrupt because of “healthcare bills gone wild,” but somehow “progressive” ministers seem to think that “rich” people can just come up with the money. because jesus never said to give your money to the poor. and a tax rate significantly lower than taxes under Reagan will ruin us all. (what bible is this guy reading from?)

Third, under the currently proposal, the administration wants to create a Robin-Hood-like healthcare system. The system will take from the rich and give to the poor. Although the concept works well in speeches, it is flawed. Imagine a 30-year old homeless man receiving a pacemaker that has been paid for by revenue that came from denying my friend Arnie his vital surgery. Our nation cannot place a higher value on one of these lives versus the other. yes, that's exactly what's going to happen. Liberals: greatly opposed to people named Arnie. then again, who isn't? and why should homeless guys get pacemakers? I mean, c'mon now, they're homeless. what are they going to do with that pacemaker? that's right- buy booze.

blahblahblah ABORTION!!!1!!!eleventy!!!! blahblahblah

Is it moral that every healthcare premium I pay for my 50 employees will finance abortions, when these monies are coming from the tithes and offerings of people that believe that killing a fetus is murder? here's a funny fact: your healthcare premiums already do finance abortions, because health insurance does pay for abortions when the life of the mother is at risk, so suck it! plus, weren't you just bitching about taxes? is it premiums or taxes? Is it moral that elderly people are afraid that the plug will be pulled on them? no, but since you're the one scaring the elderly people . . . Can we guarantee them that their lives are worth as much as anyone else’s? funny you should mention that, since at the moment 47,000,000 people's lives are not worth as much as yours.

The answers to the questions I just posed are obvious to everyone but you. The administration’s healthcare plan is flawed at best. your post: failtacular! I want to encourage all Americans to challenge their congressmen to vote against the bill as it stands. Let’s slow down the Obama express and create reform that we can really believe in! reform that preserves the lives, and money, of the rich. oh, wait, i'm not sure that's reform, exactly.

Michael Vick, My Dog and Second Chances

puppy, happy, abuse, animal, michael vick, eagles, crime,

As you have no doubt heard, unless you've spent the last few days waiting for Lassie in a well, Michael Vick has been signed by the Eagles. And, unless you've spent the last few years in that well, you also know that Michael Vick tortured and killed innocent dogs for entertainment. Some people call it "sport", I call it torturing and killing innocent animals that just want to be your friend.

All of the pictures in this post are of my best friend, Muggsy. (I didn't name him.) When I brought Muggsy home, he was between 1.5 and 2 years old. His tail never wagged and he didn't grin like that. He did pee himself anytime someone raised their hand, or their voice. Muggsy bit me the first time I tried to put a leash on him. He cried when I tried to pet him. Because someone like Michael Vick thought it would be fun to put out cigarettes on Muggsy's skin. Because someone like Michael Vick thought it was perfectly fine to choke, kick, beat and pour boiling water on a dog. On my sweet, cuddly friend.

It took a long time to get Muggsy to trust me, to understand that I was never going to hurt him, ever. He lacked any kind of "manners": didn't know "sit" or "stay", had never walked on a leash, was barely house trained. I trained without punishment by highly praising behavior I wanted, and punishing bad behavior with lack of attention. It took a while, and some modification of my own behavior*, but it worked.

Now I have a best friend who follows me around like a big, furry shadow. Muggsy can't bear for me to be out of sight, even for as long as it takes me to pee. He'll lay on the floor, nose pressed to the gap between the bathroom door and the floor, and sigh while he waits. When I return, whether from the bathroom or from work, there is celebration. He jumps and dances, tail wagging so hard his whole body wiggles, mouth wide open in a big smile. Muggsy sleeps as near me as he can get (I don't let him on the bed or other furniture), and wakes up to check if I'm still there. Sometimes he'll wake me up in the middle of the night to see if I want to play. Muggsy knows when I'm upset or in pain and his cure is always the same: pet my soft fur, you'll feel better. I always do.

So you can imagine how I felt when my favorite team signed Michael Vick. How dare they! How could anyone give that monster a million dollars? What message does this send about the severity of Vick's crimes, and the children! What message does this send to them?

Then I heard about second chances and regret. Muggsy got a second chance with me- the shelter wanted to put him down. They didn't have the resources to deal with a dog as traumatized as he was. So why shouldn't Michael Vick get a second chance? Maybe Vick was as traumatized at some point in his past as Muggsy. I don't know. Muggsy bit me out of fear and pain, maybe Vick's motivation was much the same.

The honest truth is, I don't know. On the one hand, I want to believe that Vick is truly remorseful, that he really can change. I want to believe that people can learn a lesson and better themselves instead of just sinking further into the muck. On the other hand, I haven't seen too many people who really have changed. Am I influenced by wanting to believe the best about the Eagles? Sure. Am I influenced by my desire to poor boiling water on the person who hurt Muggsy, and really, Vick'll do in a pinch? Absolutely. My motivations are too muddled, my anger too deep to evaluate this situation rationally.

We'll have to see, I suppose.

*I can't leave food out, I have to empty the garbage immediately after placing meat or bones in it, and Muggsy will not bark or otherwise alert me if he needs to go out. He'll just stare at the basement door. If I'm in another room, I can't see that. So, if I haven't seen him in a while, I have to go find him. Sometimes, he's just sleeping. Oh, and he recently figured out how to make the icemaker in the fridge give him delightfully cold and crunchy icecubes, so I have walk across the kitchen floor carefully.

Throwaway Post - Catan

settlers of catan, catan,

I'm busy and headachey, so I thought instead of a snarky takedown of idiocy, I'd treat you to one of my favorite things: Settlers of Catan. It's a board game, also recently an xbox arcade game, and it's fun. Yup, that's it, fun. It's easy to learn, but because of the variables built into the game, difficult to master. The board game can be played by 2-4 people as young as 8, and the xbox arcade version can be played against computer opponents or real people.

Anyway, I highly recommend Catan, and if anyone has any board games they'd like to recommend, feel free.

The Government Can't Do Anything Right

socialism, health care, obama, whole, foods, mackey, conservative, liberal, funny
MB Shopper, at the Whole Foods message boards, wins an internet for the following description of everything the government can't do right:

Sigh.

Once again, for the benefit of the goernment-can't-get-anything-right flock:

I AM AN AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE SHITHEEL

This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US Department of Energy. I then took a shower in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility. After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC regulated channels to see what the national weather service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I watched this while eating my breakfast of US Department of Agriculture inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the Food and Drug Administration.

At the appropriate time as regulated by the US congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and tTechnology and the US Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal departments of transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issed by the Federal Reserve Bank. On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the US Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to ny house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and fire marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all it's valuables thanks to the local police department.

I then log on to the internet which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration and post on freerepublic.com and fox news forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.

----

And apparently, the Global Positioning Satellite system is POS, right?

The only reason government doesn't work is because conservative Republican administrations defunded and/or patronage staffed them with people with ties to special business interests: to wit the last FDA, Dept of Interior and Agriculture under Bush. No one seems to have a problem with pumping over $500Bil to the Defense Department which last I hear is a socialized entity.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if you don't like paying taxes, move to sunny Somalia. Your earnings will be entirely tax free.

Profiling the Nonbelievers

atheism, atheist, survey, christian, agnostic,

A survey of the nonreligious in the US was performed (they surveyed 5,000 people), and I have to say, the results are interesting.

In the category of "things I already knew", nonbelievers don't really agree on a label:

The survey found the population to be less homogeneous than previous studies have typically portrayed them to be. Forty-eight percent described themselves as atheist, 12 percent identified themselves as agnostic, 22 percent chose the label humanist, 7 percent called themselves spiritual, and 5 percent chose other.

When given the option to choose multiple terms to describe themselves, 77 percent checked "atheist," 63 percent marked "humanist," 29 percent reported "agnostic," and 3 percent checked "spiritual." But when forced to choose only one label among the four, far fewer individuals identified themselves as humanist (24 percent). Meanwhile, 57 percent preferred the label "atheist."

Which is interesting because 75% of nonbelievers are "somewhat, mostly or absolutely certain that God does not exist." I think we need to start mailing out dictionaries, people, because that is the definition of "atheist". Of the remaning 25%, 15% just weren't sure one way or the other, and 8% were sure that god exists, but not of anything else.

Most atheists, as atheists will tell you, had some type of religious upbringing, ranging from casual to fundamentalist:

Nearly a quarter of nonbelievers had childhoods with little parental emphasis placed on religion. A quarter of them experienced a moderately religious childhood and 35 percent reported being raised with a strong or very strong religious emphasis.

The survey really gets interesting when we start getting into how nonbelievers live and think:

When compared to churchgoers, surveyed nonbelievers were predominantly male, more highly educate, more likely to be never married or cohabiting, and had fewer children living at home.
Nonreligious individuals were also found to have greater "openness to experience," which involves a high need for cognition, intellectual engagement, and xenophilia (interest in new experiences), than religious individuals. Among the differences between believers and nonbelievers in regard to education, gender, marriage, and child-rearing, openness was the strongest predictor of lower religious belief.

Churchgoers, on the other hand, reported higher "agreeableness," or a quality of being amiable or nonconfrontational as opposed to skeptical of others. The low agreeableness among nonbelievers indicates that strong nonreligious individuals appear to be somewhat less likely to acquiesce to or to trust others, the report stated.

That last bit explains a lot. The primary complaint among Christians about atheists is that atheists are rude and arrogant, which is a complaint most atheists don't really understand. No, we're not rude and arrogant, we're just outspoken, we reply. Or, hey, I was plenty polite until you starting poking me with that stick.

Now I get it. Christians value amiability highly. Atheists value skepticism. Given these opposing values, it's easy to see why Christians are so easily offended by atheists' . . . well, atheism. Questioning another person's beliefs doesn't really qualify as amiable, even if you are gentle and polite about it, and atheists are just acting out a valued quality, skepticism.

The survey also puts to bed that ridiculous "depressed atheist" meme, though I doubt the fundys will notice.

The survey found few differences between the religious and nonreligious group in regards to mental well-being. Contrary to popular belief, the nonreligious population is not any less happy or satisfied with life than the religious, the survey suggested. Reported life-satisfaction was well within the average range for both groups. Self-described spirituals, however, were less likely to report being satisfied with life.

In other notable findings, the survey revealed that more confident nonbelievers were the most emotionally healthy, relative to the "fence sitters" or religious doubters.

"[H]aving uncertainty regarding one’s religious views appears to be associated with relatively greater emotional instability," the report stated.

Makes sense. Unresolved issues will do that to a person.

Sarah Palin was for Death Panels

palin, sarah, death, panels, health care, obama, democrat, republican,
before she was against them.

Yesterday, Sarah Palin doubled down on death panels, claiming

“President Obama can try to gloss over the effects of government-authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his top health care advisers are clear enough,” Palin wrote. “It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.”

In April of 2008, however, she introduced legislation that included- wait for it- death panels!

WHEREAS, Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions. [...]

WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives.

WHEREAS, the Foundation for End of Life Care in Juneau, Alaska, and other organizations throughout the United States have endorsed this event and are committed to educating the public about the importance of discussing healthcare choices and executing advance directives.

That is exactly the same leglislation that Sarah Palin is now calling death panels. Apparently, one year and four months ago, end of life counseling was the Republican way, but today it's roving government death squads, seeking out grandparents and the disabled hidden in your attic.

What a difference a Democratic President makes.

Rep. Broun Godwins the Entire World

hitler, godwin, conservative, GOP, obama, wingnut, socialism, marxism,

There is no possibility of reasonable discussions with a good portion of the GOP*. Exhibit "A": Representative Paul Broun of Georgia (do I need to tell you which party?) Godwins the entire world in his latest delusional rant.

"It may sound a bit crazy and off base "may"? "a bit"?, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may—may not, I hope not—but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."

In case you're not familiar with what Broun is referring to, it is Obama's proposal for a civilian reserve corps that could handle postwar reconstruction efforts such as rebuilding infrastructure—an idea endorsed by the Bush administration. Remember, Broun? Those guys you loved? Were just in power until 6 months ago?

"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist." Yeah, we probably shouldn't take history lessons from people that can't remember last year.

Broun said he believes Obama would move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national security force. I love all the weaselwording. "If he does . . . I believe . . . he may . . ." Once you've Godwin'd, you don't get to hide behind "I said he might do it . . ."

Obama has said he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and favors "common sense" gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he'll at least enact curbs on ownership of assault weapons and concealed weapons. entirely different from banning gun ownership. seriously, who the fuck needs a concealed assualt rifle? As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally.

"We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. No, he was not. Hitler was elected to a fairly minor political office, that's true. But he was appointed Chancellor of Germany (not a democratic move) and then appointed himself Fuhrer (again, not democratic) I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. which is why you've mentioned Hitler three times in as many minutes? What I'm saying is there is the potential of going down that road."

This is what passes for reasoned discourse? This is what the First Amendment has come to? Godwinning the entire world every time someone sticks a microphone in your face? How long do you suppose it will be before some unhinged wingnut with concealed bazooka decides that the only way to save the world from SuperMarxistBlackHitler is to kill people? Given the hysteria, the extremity, the insanity, of right wing speech lately, I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet.

Mark my words: in a world where a congressman can call the President of the United States Hitler- with no consequences- violence is guaranteed. The only question is when.

*UNRR is more than capable of reasonable discussion. I just wish the entire GOP was like him.