Shit that Pissed me Off This Week – 1/25
This winner has admitted the abuse and has been sentenced to three years in prison. However, he feels that the sentence is too harsh so he is appealing. The judge has allowed him to go free on bail during the appeal.
Apparently, the mitigating factor is his health problems.
Uh…who gives a flying fuck about his health problems? The guy sexually abused his daughter for ten years! He doesn’t deserve compassion because he has health problems. He deserves to be miserable.
Nobody should feel sorry for this guy. Nobody should be considering “balancing factors” in his sentence. They should just lock him up and throw away the key. He gave up the right to fight for quality of life issues when he decided that he needed to ruin the life of his daughter.
Except, apparently, he didn’t. What the fuck is wrong with people?
It’s old news in one way but the more you learn about how the Catholic hierarchy covered up for sexually abusive clergy, the more you have to ask yourself how they can claim the right to represent the moral compass of anyone.
At issue here is not the fact that priests are more sexually abusive than other subsets of society. Statistically, they aren’t. The problem is the way the church sheltered these individuals and, knowing these men were capable of sexual abuse, they placed them into new congregations. Over and over and over again.
And then they have the nerve to preach about the moral implications of gay marriage???
Issuing an apology from the pulpit is not good enough any more. If the Catholic church wants to be taken seriously on issues of morality, they have to see if they can make it a year without another news article about a priest caught with his hand in an altar boy.
As soon as they can pull that off, then we’ll let them back into the debate. How about that?
The thing that surprises me about most pro-life groups is how anti-contraception they are. I realize there is the religion connection but seriously, if you don’t want women to get abortions, one of the ways to do that is to ensure that they are having protected sex.
So in a really busy graphic, what this pro-life group tells us is that contraception isn’t reliable (based on bad data) and that, therefore, you shouldn’t use it.
Basically, they is saying that contraception causes abortions. Because it doesn’t work. I think. Honestly, it is about the most fucked up pro-life thing I’ve seen in forever. I think maybe they should stick to talking about when babies have heartbeats and stuff.
And come on, pro-life America! By being anti-contraception, you completely mess with your basic message. You are against abortion and you want to make it illegal. I think you are completely wrong but now you want to go further and try to convince women that contraception is totally unreliable (even though it is). What is your goal? To convince women that abortion is a necessity because birth control is too unreliable?
Or is it to make women ashamed of enjoying sex and not wanting babies?
Look, I’m not nuts about the electoral college either but here’s the thing, if Republicans feel that they need to rig the electoral math to win, they have a problem. Shouldn’t they just – I don’t know – field better candidates?
How about they back off on the social conservatism that is rapidly losing voters for them? How about they stop doing whatever the religious right tells them to do?
Nah. That just doesn’t make any sense! Why change your message when you can just change the rules????
So what they are doing is trying to allocate electoral votes “fairly” but they do it in a way that would have won Mitt Romney more votes in Virginia than Obama even though Obama won the popular vote in Virginia.
George Bush didn’t win the popular vote in 2000but when that happened, you didn’t hear any Republican’s clambering to “fix” the electoral college. I also note that republican legislatures in states like Georgia and Texas aren’t pushing this kind of agenda. It’s only happening in states that the Democrats won like Virginia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Does this surprise anyone?
What is the real goal of this kind of legislation, to make things more fair? Or less?
The author really hates cats, though. They use a picture of a fierce-looking house cat to drive home their point.
As a cat owner, I do understand that cats pose a threat to bird populations because they are hunters and carnivores. This is definitely an issue in New Zealand, where the article originates. Feral cats are clearly a threat to a bird population that is, in large part, flightless.
So let’s just hate on the cats instead of the cat owners, huh? Let’s tell people that they are horrible for wanting a pet instead of telling them to control the animal that they are supposed to be responsible for. If feral cats are a problem, I completely understand the need to do something about that. However, rather than telling people that owning a cat is wrong, teach them how to be a responsible pet owner.
The conclusion that cats are “parasites” and “serial killers” ignores the fact that many people actually find cats soothing companions. The same can be said of dogs, snakes, rabbits and every other animal humans choose to keep as pets. Personally, I happen to appreciate my cats when they sit in my lap after a hard day at work. I also appreciate the fact that I don’t ever see mice in my house. Cleaning up hairballs is also an underappreciated perk.
Rather than asking people to help with the problem in a reasonable way, this article lays blame squarely on the animals because of what they are and not on the people who are responsible for them. Instead of enlisting the aid of cat lovers, this article will alienate them. Well done.
Holy fuck does the Christian right have a persecution complex.
While they have control over half of the political discourse in this country, they decide to whine that Christians are having civil rights issues that rival a bunch of people who were treated as property because of the color of their skin. Yeah, that seems roughly equivalent to being told that you have to put the ten commandments in a church yard rather than a courthouse.
Nobody is telling Christians to sit in the back of the bus or to that we need to have segregated schools.
Actually, I would argue the Christians who are home schooling their children are segregating themselves.
School is for learning. Church is for worship. If you don’t like that kind of “segregation,” find yourself another country where separation of church and state isn’t written into the constitution.
How about Iran?
Without clicking on the link, see if you can guess why!
What could it be?
Did you guess that a rape victim who gets an abortion could be sent to jail for up to 3 years because she was tampering with the evidence?
Yeah. Me either.
Because what kind of stupid crazy legislator would decide that a rape victim should be sent to jail for three years just because she doesn’t want to carry her rapists baby to term? I mean besides Michele Bachmann?
Now here’s the tricky part. I don’t know for sure but I would bet that these whackadoodle elected officials don’t expect this bill to pass. They just introduced it to make the rest of the bill look less extreme and therefore make it more acceptable.
And I have to admit, it could work. They’ll just say “oh golly – we’re sorry! We aren’t going to try to send women to jail for getting raped. That would be downright cruel. We’ll just get rid of that part of the bill.”
And everyone will heave a sigh of relief and they won’t bother to read the bill that actually gets passed because at least they aren’t trying to send rape victims to jail anymore.
If that is actually what they are doing, it’s kind of brilliant.
Which is why that is probably not what they are doing.