Shit that Pissed me Off – 9/6
It seems odd that DC would object to the marriage of Batwoman on the grounds that she is getting married to a girl. Honestly, it is probably more likely that they don’t want Batwoman to get married because it limits the story line and we’d rather have superheroes be miserable. They can’t be miserable if they are happily married.
Still, when you have a high-profile openly lesbian character who can get married (seeing as she proposed to her girlfriend and everything), why wouldn’t you go ahead with it? Especially given popular opinion on such matters?
Is it likely that there is a large contingent of homophobes currently reading Batwoman? I mean, she’s also Jewish so Neo-Nazis clearly would want nothing to do with her.
DC is pretty quiet about the whole thing but it appears their decision to stop the wedding was part of the reason the current writing team has decided to leave the comic.
Reading the article, I’m actually more concerned at the level of creative control DC has been exercising over the title. They don’t seem to trust their writers all that much.
I think they should have trusted their writers about letting Batwoman get married, though. Something tells me that issue would have sold a lot of copies.
A wedding photographer in New Mexico refused to take pictures of a same-sex marriage and he lost a court battle because it turns out that he was discriminating against a protected class of citizen. Nobody would be supporting him if he’s refused to take pictures of an interracial marriage or a Jewish marriage because that is pretty obviously wrong.
But same-sex marriages are different, I guess, in that you can still be a dick to gays. Or at least people think so. The court didn’t agree.
So the jackass in the video I linked to says, in effect, “hey – if the courts make you take pictures of gay people, just put bible verses on the backs of the pictures telling them how much god hates them!” Brilliant!
Now I have to say that if I had a photographer who refused to take pictures of my wedding because they were a bigoted idiot, I’d move on to the next guy but that’s beside the point. Point is, the solution here is probably just as illegal. Unless the photographer puts it on the back of every photograph he prints. Because then it isn’t discrimination. He’d probably go out of business but at least he would be discriminating.
The other thing that pisses me off about this video is that the dumb fuck says that printing a bible verse on pictures someone bought and paid for is freedom of the press. I guess that’s like putting together Legos in a public park is freedom to assemble.
Now the reason the city planning board nixed this particular request was because of town ordinances requiring buildings be under a certain height. in fact, the cross would be almost three times as tall as anything else in the town.
But that doesn’t matter because it’s discrimination! if I wanted to erect an 11 story red A in my yard, I should be able to do it! Would it be ugly as fuck? You bet!
But this is a free country and if I can’t
waste spend $100,000 on a giant religious symbol, what can I waste spend it on?
My friend Bill Young actually hits the nail on the head with this one when he points out just how much that $100,000 could buy if it wasn’t being spent on building a cross tall enough to crucify about 20 Jesuses.
I’m not opposed to spending money on things that make a community look nicer. A giant lower case t, however, doesn’t beautify anything.
Because I love Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, I’m really looking forward to this movie. Problem is that I’m at the Renaissance Festival every weekend and most of my weeknights are pretty full. That means I probably won’t catch the movie until it comes out on video.
Yeah, I know, first world problems suck.
I, however, have the good fortune to live in a first world country and in this particular country, The World’s End is currently in theatres and I don’t know when I’m going to get a chance to watch it.
I read the skeptical blogs a lot and there have been a lot of folks upset with Dawkins about his failure to support skeptical feminism. In fact, he has been downright hostile to the notion at times.
I disagree with him on this issue and if it is simply a matter of disagreement among skeptics, there isn’t a big problem. Dawkins has the right to voice his opinion and others have the right to tell him they feel he is wrong.
However, the story in question suggests Dawkins went further in blacklisting (or at least attempting to blacklist) another skeptic/atheist with whom he strongly disagrees. Now I wasn’t there. I don’t really know what happened. It looks like a pretty serious dick move to me.
One of the points of this article is that you should never meet your idols because they are bound to let you down. I think it is better to say this – you should stop idolizing people.
Dawkins has been very important as an out and vocal atheist. He has encouraged others to be out and vocal. He is also a great advocate for evolution and has written some fantastic books that should be read far more often than “The God Delusion.”
But hey – he’s just a person. I’ve never met him but I already know that.
I’ve met Rebecca and she’s awesome. I don’t idolize her, though. I like her, sure. She’s a lot of fun. Her Prometheus costume at CONvergence kicked ass.
But she is also just a person.
The one thing that Dawkins, Watson and I can all agree on is that we, as atheists and skeptics, should be careful about putting anyone on a pedestal. Most of us are against idolatry on general principle. Dawkins is not perfect and he is not always right. Neither is Rebecca. Neither am I.
He should recognize the importance of diverse opinions within the skeptical community. Including opinions that are not his own by people whom he may not particularly like. It would seem that he failed to do that.
That’s too bad. For me, he didn’t fall too far, though, because I didn’t trick myself into thinking he was any better than the rest of us.
Note: I don’t want to imply that the person reporting this incident did something wrong in idolizing Dawkins or imply that I condone what Dawkins (allegedly) did. I’m simply pointing out the inherent danger in idolizing anyone.
A lot of people applaud this post as it tells young women that they shouldn’t post suggestive pictures of themselves on the internet. The writer, a mother of boys, tells these young girls are sending the wrong message.
I hate to use the term slut shaming but this seems a lot like slut shaming. Hey girls, it says, if you post a sexy picture of yourself on the internet, you give boys the wrong idea and then they can’t help themselves.
As the parent of two boys, I feel like my primary duty is to teach them that any abusive behavior towards a young woman is their fault and not the fault of the young woman.
This blog post seems to advocate for the idea that young women should be ashamed of how they present their bodies and I don’t feel that message is worth sharing. She wants to raise sons with strong morals but part of that job is allowing young women to be sexy if they want but helping sons understand those women are being sexy for themselves.
I’m not nuts about how much public money private sports teams manage to get to build new stadiums but after this report on MPR, I’m even less pleased with how the Vikings bullied the state into spending millions of dollars since the Vikings hardly have to spend a dime.
Oh sure, they guarantee a certain percentage of the costs. It isn’t as if that money is coming out of their pockets, though. That money comes from the NFL, fans and naming rights. Potentially less than 1% of the total stadium bill will be out of pocket money for the Vikings.
I think professional sports teams are important to a community.
But Football is the biggest sport in the country and owners of football teams are swimming in money. If they want a new stadium that helps them make even more money, why aren’t they the ones footing most of the bill?
I’m guessing most of these owners are conservatives who believe that the government shouldn’t be in the business of handing out welfare to the poor. Getting government to foot the bill for a new stadium sure feels like welfare to the rich.
Sushmita Banerjee had written a book about escaping the Taliban and this week she was taken from her home and shot to death.
The people who killed her, no doubt, believed they did so by divine right.
Nothing funny or clever to say here. Just keep wondering why anyone would want to believe in a god that would approve of such behavior.
And if, by some crazy chance, god actually does exist, I’m advocating pulling our free will. We aren’t doing a very good job with it.
And if this wasn’t free will, god is an asshole.