Just one more reason I’m glad to be a girl.
(Hat tip Upon Further Review…)
Sign of the Apocalypse #154: Pat Buchanan Agrees with the Rabbi
Crooks and Liars has the video of the Daily Show on the media coverage of the Schiavo Fiasco here.
Friday Limerick
Ode to the Real Euthanasia Candidates (or, Please Put Us Out of Our Misery)
The revolting yet priggish Bill Frist,
Is first on our expendables list.
I can tell him, “So long!”
With no hope I’m wrong
That he’ll never, ever be missed.
Next up is our leader King George;
Who hopes an alliance to forge
With bigwigs galore
And wingnuts who ignore
The two groups’ vast moral gorge.
And what of Jebbie, his brother?
In him we find yet another
Who in Terri sees
A chance to please
Both the fundies and a ballbreaking mother.
And lastly the prick Tom DeLay
As repugnant as long is the day.
Oh please pull the plug
On this hideous thug
And send him at last Satan’s way.
Friday Blogrollin'
Here we go:
Preposterous Universe. Go read anything; it’s all good.
Liberty Street, whose author generously shares a very emotional story here from the perspective of someone who lost a daughter and shows with subtlety that it can be done privately and with dignity.
Alas (a Blog). This is a recent favorite.
Heraldblog. All good, all the time.
Oliver Willis, who should have been on my blogroll a long time ago.
Who Says It's Women Who Can't Hack the "Food Fight?"
Yesterday, over at Big Brass Blog, a brave (ahem) anonymous commenter said about me:
[F]rom your writing in general (vitriol, aggression, hate, intolerance) I'd say you were one of the least respectful people I've encountered in my blogosphere.My response:
Yeah, I'm a regular Ann Coulter of the Left.
Not that witty, I know, but I just couldn’t be bothered arguing. Who cares?
Why share this little anecdote? Well, to point out that criticisms of bloggers come with the territory. Sometimes they’re fair, and sometimes they’re not. But hey, as they say, if you can’t take the heat, then get out of the kitchen. Or, perhaps more accurately, if you can’t ignore the heat, then stop turning on the stove.
Yesterday, a lesser known blogger posted a critique of Atrios’ Eschaton that was critical, but respectful. Atrios responded by providing a link, which was followed by the Atriosian Army, who proceeded to do the dirty work that Atrios no doubt knew that they’d do. It got ugly—and it didn’t have to.
Pam’s got the whole story at Big Brass Blog.
Bush and Political Opportunism, Part 9,826 and Counting
The Sun-Sentinel reports (link via Raw Story):
As the second hurricane in less than a month bore down on Florida last fall, a federal consultant predicted a "huge mess" that could reflect poorly on President Bush and suggested that his re-election staff be brought in to minimize any political liability, records show.Read the rest at Big Brass Blog.
Two weeks later, a Florida official summarizing the hurricane response wrote that the Federal Emergency Management Agency was handing out housing assistance "to everyone who needs it without asking for much information of any kind."
Open Thread
Okay, the religion discussion is getting hard to keep up with across three different comments threads, so let's continue it all here, shall we?
Keep going, everyone--it's superb! I've really enjoyed reading all your thoughts on the topic.
Eugh
JJ’s got a fun (though rather revolting) post up over at Big Brass Blog that starts with this:
Fast food is one of the 4 main food groups that keeps me alive. I have tried dieting but just can't get past my recommended daily allowance of cheeseburgers. However, this makes me think twice about the quality of food that I am consuming……and ends with this:
…tell us what has been your worst fast food experience?I know you’ve got stories to share, Shakers. Head on over.
Question of the Day—Part Two
This one’s for secular liberals.
As part of the first question, I outlined my own difficulties with trusting and understanding religious liberals, but maybe your beef with them (if you have one) is different. If so, this question’s for you.
Secular libs, what’s your main problem with religious liberals?
(Please note, this is specifically about religious liberals, not the fundies with whom we all have a problem.)
Question of the Day--Part One
This one’s for the religious liberals.
I think part of the reason that there are many liberals who feel intolerant toward religious people is that when the fundamentalist adherents of any of the major religions are questioned about positions that seem anti-women’s equality, anti-gay, anti-choice, and even, in some cases, racist, they can cite places in their religious texts that do indeed inform those positions, if not overtly advocate them.
A source of pride among liberals is, of course, a respect for logic and reason, and many secular liberals, myself included I must admit, struggle to reconcile a respect for religious liberals when it seems as if calling oneself a Christian (for example) and also denouncing the idea that homosexuals are hellbound sinners (for example) requires a certain amount of intellectual dishonesty.
I have a minor degree in theology, and I’ve studied with some brilliant Jesuits who were, frankly, unable to ever give me a satisfactory answer to that question. I’ve heard everything from the Bible has gone through many translations to hate the sin; love the sinner, but none of them really convinces a secular (and rational) liberal that either you’re not relying on some kind of convoluted mental gymnastics to justify or erase the parts of your religion you don’t like, or that you’re not quite as dependable a political ally as you assert.
So I’m opening it up for discussion. It’s part and parcel of the discussion started below, which I found quite fascinating, and now I want to see if we can talk about the real problem, which is, to put it succinctly, a mistrust of religious liberals.
Religious libs, how do you square your own tolerance and egalitarianism with some of the more intolerant and decidedly illiberal teachings of the religion to which you subscribe?
Me and You and God
I consider myself an atheist, in the sense that I have no relationship with or belief in any type of anthropomorphic god. I believe there is plenty about this existence that is outwith the capacity for human understanding, much of that falling into a category that might best be described with that muddy and imprecise word "spiritual," but I am, for all intents and purposes, an atheist.
That said, I have respect for those who are religious, as long as they don't wield it like a weapon and regard my beliefs with the same respect I extend to them—a reciprocity generally determined by one’s opinion about whether religion belongs in the public sphere. Once it starts creeping beyond privacy and into a place where I am expected to conform to religion’s expectations of its adherents, that’s when the problems begin.
There have been a lot of problems with just that sort of invasiveness lately, and, consequently, the intensity of the response of the nonreligious to such incursions has escalated. To that end, the Green Knight, a liberal Christian blogger, whose contributions on religious topics are invaluable, has written an interesting piece on the intolerance of the Left toward religion, questioning, quite fairly, whether much of the contempt shown toward religion (and, by association, religious people, irrespective of their politics) was birthed by possible injustices meted out by the religious (or just plain old intellectual snobbery), and noting, quite rightly, that we’re going to have to excise those demons if we don’t want to alienate potential allies.
It’s a dialogue we need to have on the Left; undeniably there is a backlash against religion as a result of the insurgence of religiously driven wingnuttery that has become such a prominent part of the national debate, but many liberals have become incapable of tolerating the merest presence of godspeak. And not all religious people are intolerant; indeed, some of the kindest, most inclusive, most welcoming people I’ve known have been devoutly religious, letting a belief in God inform a rare and wonderful empathy, rather than narrowly construe their boundaries of acceptance into something odiously judgmental and unrecognizable as an intention of the tenets of any major religion. It is tempting, and easy, to cast the religious in together as a uniform lot, especially when the most vitriolic of their numbers are the ones who seem to have the loudest voices. But good godly people dissociate themselves from that garbage, and we should be willing to do the same.
Cackle...Sob...Cackle
Me4President on irony:
In an effort to appeal to both liberals and conservatives, I have come up with a new campaign slogan. I think the "I support the troops, Fuck the President" is good. But I need those swing voters. Therefore me and my crack campaign staff of myself has come up with a new one.It kind of makes me laugh and cry at the same time.
I believe everyone has a right to live and I am willing to kill to protect it.
Karl Rove will be so jealous. Especially after I turn it into a fake news story.
Compassion Fatigue
Mahablog hits the nail on the head:
This is going to sound very cold, I realize, but it's the honest truth: I was reading the umpteenth news story quoting poor Mrs. Schindler pleading for somebody to step in and "save" her daughter, and a wave of pure, unadulterated annoyance swept over me. I suspect I am not alone.Indeed. And with 87% of the American populace wanting to be put out of their misery were they in the same position as Terri (and I tend to believe that most of the remaining 13% don’t fully comprehend what her situation actually is), most probably feel little compassion for the Schindlers, and a great amount for Terri (and her husband, Michael). The Schindlers, you might reasonably suspect, have lost the plot, and are not acting out of anything but self-interest at this point. And you’d be right (as noted by Emma at the American Street):
The Schindlers have had the Florida governor and legislature at their disposal for the past several years, and now the United States Congress and the President have taken unprecedented steps to intervene in their little family drama. Today the Schindlers are shopping federal courts to find one that will give them what they want. I don't watch much television news, but I bet the Schindlers are on somewhere on cable nearly 24/7.
I don't know what percentage of Americans have watched a hospitalized love one die, or what percentage have dealt with heartbreaking questions about DNR orders, life support, organ transplants, etc. I suspect that a whopping majority of people over the age of 40 have been there and done that. And, nearly always, these decisions are made quietly and privately. It doesn't occur to most people to make a federal case out of their grief.
How many of these Americans are looking at the Schindlers and thinking, who the hell do you think you are? How many are thinking, I loved my baby, my child, my wife, my father just as much, but I could let them go without setting the whole country in an uproar.
One of the most enlightening documents is the Guardian Ad Litem report that had to be filed under Florida’s Terri’s law(which was later found unconstitutional). Several sections spoke to the Schindler’s motivations. Here’s the most horrifying:That’s some seriously fucked up shit right there. (I’d like to say something more eloquent, but my brain is only capable of its basest animal reaction to that gruesome revelation, I’m afraid.)
Testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive. Throughout the course of the litigation, deposition, and trail testimony by members of the Schindler family voiced the disturbing belief that they would keep Theresa alive at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb, and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open heart surgery. There was additional, difficult testimony that appeared to establish that despite the sad and undesirable condition of Theresa, the parents still derived joy from having her alive, even if Theresa might not be at all aware of her environment given the persistent vegetative state. Within the testimony, as part of the hypotheticals presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it. Throughout this painful and difficult trial, the family acknowledged that Theresa was in a diagnosed persistent vegetative state.
My sympathies for the Schindlers dried up right about here, out of fear, I think. Or horror. They would keep a mindless, limbless husk in a bed, because it would make them feel joy?
Terri doesn’t need saving anymore; the Schindlers do. Although I fear they are as far beyond help as is their daughter.
(Associated reading: Digby on the very real possibility that this is an example of “‘conservative’ people who want to control their children's lives long past the time they are legally and morally allowed to do so.”)
What She Said
What She Said’s Morgaine is putting together a list of liberal male bloggers. Now, I could have just put in all the names of my favorites, but instead, I’m going to let you go over and introduce yourself to Morgaine.
She has a great blog (which has now been blogrolled) and a kickass blogroll rife with cool bloggrrls, which you should definitely check out while you’re over there.
Have fun!
Question of the Day
Finish this simile:
Tom DeLay is as corrupt as...
Or, if you don't like that one:
The Bushies' radical agenda is as scary as...
Have at it!
McCain’s Slide into Irrelevance Continues Unabated
Not to be all Seinfeldian about this or anything, but what is with this guy?!
Sen. John McCain said Tuesday the conclusions of a commission investigating intelligence failures on weapons of mass destruction should not lead to new questions about whether the Iraq war was justified. "America, the world and Iraq is better off for what we did in bringing democracy," McCain said…(Read the rest at Big Brass Blog or Ezra’s juke joint.)
The Bozo Show
All right. I have just about had it with these plonkers (link via AMERICAblog):
IMAX theaters in several Southern cities have decided not to show a film on volcanoes out of concern that its references to evolution might offend those with fundamental religious beliefs.
[…]
The film, "Volcanoes of the Deep Sea," makes a connection between human DNA and microbes inside undersea volcanoes.
[…]
IMAX theaters in Texas, Georgia and the Carolinas have declined to show the film, said Pietro Serapiglia, who handles distribution for Stephen Low, the film's Montreal-based director and producer.
"I find it's only in the South," Serapiglia said.
Critics worry screening out films that mention evolution will discourage the production of others in the future.
"It's going to restrain the creative approach by directors who refer to evolution," said Joe DeAmicis, vice president for marketing at the California Science Center in Los Angeles and a former director of an IMAX theater. "References to evolution will be dropped."
Seriously, get with it, people! This ain’t the fucking dark ages. Nitwits!
By the way—my disagreement with something never stopped me from learning about it (which is why I can always out-debate fundies on the topic of what’s actually in the Bible, for example). In fact, I’ve always found that challenging my own beliefs by investigating alternative theories to be an enlightening experience. It’s called knowledge; check it out sometime.
And if your faith is so fragile as to warrant your avoidance of anything that might challenge it, it’s not really much of a faith at all, is it?
Take Me Out to the Ballgame
I’ve noticed there are quite a few baseball fans who frequent Shakespeare’s Sister, and those who have been around here awhile know that I am the most tragic of baseball fans—a diehard Cubs fan (still currently in mourning over the loss of my beloved Alou).
So the following is for all of you, and is also an homage to my dad, to whom I owe many of the good parts of myself, including both my passion for politics (even though my political leanings are perhaps not what he had hoped) and my passion for baseball.
When my dad was a kid, he was a spectacular baseball player—a pitcher. He had an awesome arm that fell to the mercy of its own talent; this was just before regulations were instituted prohibiting pitching limitless consecutive innings, and so at 21, he blew out his elbow after years of overuse. However, the year before, he had the opportunity to pitch against Satchel Paige.
Satchel was 65, and had arrived in West Lafayette, Indiana as part of a tour of retired players. An exhibition game was held with the local team, and my dad had the great honor of being the starting pitcher. The game was called for rain; the All-Stars won, in no small part due to the paralyzing awe that plagued their young opponents.
After the game, my dad was able to speak with Mr. Paige, and their picture was taken for the paper.
I’m 30 years old, and I have heard this story countless times. Last night, I asked to hear it again. And I will ask to hear it again and again, each spring, as I anticipate the start of a new season.
Play ball!
Attention!
For any California readers that might pass through, I give you Marching Orders, a great blog for Callyfornyuns. March on over and check it out.
