Shit That Pissed Me Off – 2/14
The star in question, Mia Talerico, is five years old.
Her show featured a play date in which her friend had two moms. You know, a healthy happy lesbian couple. Just the sort of thing that causes the bile to rise in the average Christian Right household.
So what’s the Christian thing to do?
Not being a Christian, I’m a bit uncertain. Can someone tell me if threatening the life of a five-year old girl is the Christian thing to do?
And can someone tell me how this kind of behavior comes even close to hating the sin and loving the sinner?
Also a memo to “One Million Moms” – you currently have only 60,000+ “likes” on Facebook. You could increase that number twice as fast if only you allowed lesbian moms!
And no, this article is not written by a Creationist. Rather it is written by someone who is angry at Nye and Ham. He says it was simply “dueling fundamentalists in action.”
He goes on to discuss atheists vs. theists but the thing is the debate wasn’t about atheism vs. theism. He seems more interested in a study by a social psychologist that suggests atheists hold their views more dogmatically than Christians. More than half of the article is about that study rather than the content of the debate. So the debate was simply a portal to talk about what he really wanted to bring up, which was the stubborn dogma of atheists.
Bill Nye was not arguing that there was no god. He was arguing that the evidence available overwhelmingly supports evolution over creationism. When doing that, he shouldn’t have been saying “I could be wrong.” Hell, he wasn’t even saying “there is no way a divine creator was ever involved” (even though I suspect that is what he believes).
He just said “the evidence does not support Biblical creation.”
And it doesn’t.
You know what? If you are going to interpret that as being stubbornly dogmatic, I have to wonder if your folksy middle-of-the-road attitude isn’t as dogmatic as the people you are criticizing.
The Salon article in question is from 2005 but it was shared with me this week and it ties in to my overall annoyance with people who use science like a buffet where they get to pick whatever they like and ignore the rest.
Mmmm! I’ll have me some of that gravity but evolution gives me indigestion!
I know people who believe in biblical creationism and I know people who believe in ancient aliens and this article links those groups by pointing out that they are both cherry picking information that the believe agrees with what they already believe.
The tendency is to look for things that confirm their existing bias and ignore any evidence that disagrees with their hypothesis. Ken Ham has stated that evolution is impossible because there was no death before Adam and Eve sinned. His search is only for data that (badly) supports his (insane) assumption. All other data is rejected.
Ancient alien theorists look for information that supports the idea aliens visited the Earth thousands of years ago and ignore any information that disagrees. Both the acolytes of Ham and the ancient alien believers argue that there is a conspiracy that exists against their “evidence” because people can’t handle the truth.
Honestly, aliens visiting the Earth sounds pretty cool. I’m not against such a discovery in the least. As soon as there is some credible evidence to support that claim, I’m totally on board.
A 6000 year old Earth, on the other hand, sounds boring and stupid. Count me out.
People being killed by a tiger is tragic. I feel awful for the families.
Let’s look at why the Tiger is targeting human beings, though. Oh, I see, it is because the animal is starving due to the fact she can’t find enough natural prey. Do you suppose that is because she has an insatiable appetite for gazelle (I know Tigers don’t eat gazelles) and has managed to eat every one of them in an 800 mile radius?
Or do you suppose it is because humans like other animals well enough until those animals want to use space we want for ourselves? Tiger habitat has been cut in half in the last twenty years.
The Tiger will be caught and destroyed, no doubt. For a species that is already horribly endangered, that is an unfortunate sacrifice but it makes sense because you really don’t want a Tiger picking off villagers in the woods. It hurts tourism.
Family members of the deceased are demanding remuneration for their suffering. I wonder if they’ll take the pelt?
The article starts out by referencing a story where a young man was falsely accused of rape. We all know this happens and it is tragic because it means that most every report of rape is treated with skepticism rather than belief and compassion.
So hey, don’t trot out an anecdote. Trot out a statistic that proves your point. A statistic that shows false rape accusations are more than a tiny fraction of all reports. Of course, he didn’t do that because no such statistic exists.
Then he points out that if a young man and woman get drunk at a frat party and end up having sex, they are, essentially, both drunken drivers of their own bodies and must, therefore, be considered equally responsible if a rape occurs.
Except a drunk woman can still say “no.” And a drunk man can still stop.
The suggestion here is that men are getting screwed over because they have to remain responsible even when they are drunk and women don’t.
Wrong. A woman can make bad choices when she is drunk. She can get behind the wheel of a car. She can take off her clothes in public and have a picture show up on the internet. She can consent to sex and regret it in the morning.
On the other hand, if she says “no,” she has acted responsibly and it is the responsibility of the drunk guy to step away.
There is no double standard. The standard is crystal clear. No means no.
First thing: they paid $13,000 for their wedding video.
Maybe I’m crazy but I didn’t have a wedding video because I couldn’t imagine ever wanting to watch my wedding again. I mean, I’m happy I had one and everything but I don’t need to keep looking at a younger, thinner me to remind myself that I love my wife.
So spending 13 grand on a video, to me, seems fucking nuts.
Having spent a crazy amount of money on the video, they are unhappy with the result.
They are so unhappy, however, that they are suing for 100K in damages.
I really can’t wait to hear how their lawyer tries to explain the punitive damages involved in having a wedding video you don’t like. Is there a secondary market for wedding videos that they won’t be able to tap?
Are they getting a divorce as a result of the video?
Or are they just greedy dicks?
Having watched the video, which isn’t that bad, I’m going to bet on the latter.
It’s really hard to get behind Conservative Christian values when one of those values seems to be “if a woman is molested, she should keep her mouth shut because it is her fault.”
To their credit, Bob Jones University seems to have caught on to their own creepy misogynist idiocy to the point that they hired an independent firm to help them deal with these cases. The firm is run by one of Billy Graham’s children so it should be right in line with Bob Jones’ core values.
Apparently, however, their findings weren’t to the liking of the University and they were fired before they could report anything.
I’m sure when the truth comes out, it probably won’t be as bad as it sounds.
It’ll probably be worse.
So we have more homophobic people using their children as a lightning rod for their own bigotry.
This mom, at least, has the courage of her convictions. When asked if her phone number could be shared publicly, she was happy to let the entire world know where she could be reached.
She now has thousands of people trying to call her to let her know she’s a bad mom. Which she is. She won’t let her son go to a birthday party because it is being hosted by two gay dads? Holy shit, lady, all your kid cares about is having some cake and playing with his friends. You are doing more harm to him by “sheltering” him from that couple than you would have if you’d just let him go to the stupid party.
I worry, though, that she will receive threatening phone calls. My hope is everyone who thinks she is a horrible bigot (she is) will leave polite messages telling her how hurtful her actions are to her own son. I hope nobody uses the words “bitch” or “cunt” or “whore” when they talk to her. I hope she doesn’t receive death threats.
Because none of those things will change her mind. More importantly, none of those things will teach her son that she is wrong.
His law will also give Muslim’s the freedom to discriminate against Christians, Christians the freedom to discriminate against atheists and atheists the freedom to discriminate against everybody.
What is puzzling about all this fear surrounding the idea that a mortician might have to prepare a homosexual for burial even thought they don’t really want to is the idea that they haven’t been doing this sort of thing already.
The difference that they are fighting is that they didn’t have to know about it. This crazy movement to make same-sex marriage legal has had a horrible side effect. Gay people are everywhere.
Now that people have to be open about their bigotry, they want to know that they will be protected when they are an asshole.
I love how folks are big proponents of the free market until the free market means that you have to do business with everyone and not just the people who conform to your narrow view of how people should act.