Sunday, April 07, 2013
Republicans Make Reporting the Truth a Crime
ALEC is at it again. The American Legislative Exchange Council, a front for Big Oil, factory farms, prison corporations and their Republican shills, is ramming through another set of laws in state legislatures that will make reporting the truth a crime.
This time they're criminalizing the documentation of animal cruelty on video. Even when that cruelty is quite frequently a crime in and of itself. ALEC and Republicans in state legislatures are trying to -- and in some states already have -- make it illegal to record crimes such as the following:
Video shot in 2011 showed workers dripping caustic chemicals onto the horses’ ankles and clasping metal chains onto the injured tissue. This illegal and excruciating technique, known as “soring,” forces the horse to thrust its front legs forward after every painful step to exaggerate the distinctive high-stepping gait favored by breeders. The video also showed a worker hitting a horse in the head with a large piece of wood.The Humane Society turned the video over to federal prosecutors and the perpetrators of this crime plead guilty within a week.
These laws would also make it a crime for legitimate employees to record crimes they observe, criminalizing whistleblowing. Finally, ALEC is trying to brand groups who investigate animal cruelty -- like the Humane Society -- as terrorists:
One of the group’s model bills, “The Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act,” prohibits filming or taking pictures on livestock farms to “defame the facility or its owner.” Violators would be placed on a “terrorist registry.”Factory farms are afraid that they'll lose business when these videos go public, as one of McDonald's egg suppliers did when a video showed chickens living in cages surrounded by the carcasses of dead birds.
Are some of the videos selectively edited and inflammatory? Certainly. But unlike the videos made by Republican operative James O'Keefe, who destroyed ACORN by falsely portraying ACORN helping a pimp evade taxes, factory farms really do these things. It's true that many of the practices that look terrible are actually the best practices and are completely legal.
But, as one ag lobbyist pointed out, surgery on humans is particularly gruesome. Why then isn't ALEC passing laws that make it illegal to film open-heart or plastic surgery? Patients might forgo necessary treatment when they see a man's chest cracked open for heart surgery, and plastic surgeons might lose business when people see a woman's face literally stretched and pulled up over her forehead! And nothing is more disgusting than watching a doctor casually vacuum out some fat dude's gut with liposuction.
As I've written here before, factory farms can be a force for good if they clean up their act. Animals raised for food are not pets, and farm animals cannot receive the love and attention we lavish upon our cats and dogs. But if factory farms catch heat because they burn the beaks off chicks, so be it. Some people might be disgusted and swear off eating meat forever. But 99 out of 100 will go to McDonalds the next day and buy some Chicken McNuggets.
These laws are unconstitutional because they blatantly violate freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They make it illegal for undercover reporters to do their jobs and employees to document crimes committed by their employers.
For years Republicans like O'Keefe have been promulgating lies nonstop, but now they're passing laws to make it illegal for people to report the truth. They're calling people who are trying to stop violence terrorists. But I guess I shouldn't be surprised: it's been 1984 for almost thirty years now...
The new United States
Here is a wonderful short that sums up what the United States looks like in 2013. Enjoy!
The Bible?
Like many Christians in America, I tuned in to watch the History Channel's epic mini-series, The Bible. After a few minutes into the first episode, I realized how naive I was in thinking that it would be even mildly intelligent. I mean, Noah was Scottish, for pete's sake!
They made a small effort to make the characters...ahem...browner...but really, the main ones were white with Jesus looking like the usual seventh member of the Allman Brothers Band. Worse, the devil was black and looked like...well...
Can we ever get to the point in this country where being a Christian means taking an honest look at the historical times of the Bible and chucking all the western myths that go along with it? I'd like to see some scholarly and intelligent depictions as well ass analyses of the stories of the Bible rather than the those like this series from the History Channel which are made for someone with the maturity of a second grader.
They made a small effort to make the characters...ahem...browner...but really, the main ones were white with Jesus looking like the usual seventh member of the Allman Brothers Band. Worse, the devil was black and looked like...well...
Can we ever get to the point in this country where being a Christian means taking an honest look at the historical times of the Bible and chucking all the western myths that go along with it? I'd like to see some scholarly and intelligent depictions as well ass analyses of the stories of the Bible rather than the those like this series from the History Channel which are made for someone with the maturity of a second grader.
Saturday, April 06, 2013
File Under: Who the FUCK Cares?
If there is one thing that really drives me nuts about liberals, it's their PC bullshit. I haven't had to put up with much of it of late because my various circles are all very laid back. Occasionally, though, if I'm over at the U for some reason, I'll make a comment about porn and the people there will be up my ass with a tweezers in less than a second.
"Don't you know that porn subjugates women?" they ask.
"Considering that women are the primary owners now of the porn industry, I'd say that's incorrect," I reply. I then add in examples from all the women I know that love porn and then the mouth foaming really begins. Fortunately, this is really the most I have to deal with it and that suits me just fine....that is, until, last week.
What a giant pile of horse manure. More importantly, who the FUCK cares? He called one of his long time friends good looking. Well, guess what? She is good looking. And so is he. In fact, she's fucking hot!! How's that, jack wagons? She is a fantastic ass and is very shagable, to channel my inner Austin Powers. But I guess we aren't allowed to say or even think such things because that leads to the raping and subjugation of women.
Who are these "critics" that forced him to apologize? If anyone knows, I'd appreciate a link so I can give them a piece of my mind. The extent to which things get exaggerated in this country boggles my mind. I thought we had come out of our repression about sex and were a much more open society where you can say things like, "Hey, she's a dime!"
More importantly, given all the misery in the world, don't we need all the compliments and positivity we can get?
"Don't you know that porn subjugates women?" they ask.
"Considering that women are the primary owners now of the porn industry, I'd say that's incorrect," I reply. I then add in examples from all the women I know that love porn and then the mouth foaming really begins. Fortunately, this is really the most I have to deal with it and that suits me just fine....that is, until, last week.
What a giant pile of horse manure. More importantly, who the FUCK cares? He called one of his long time friends good looking. Well, guess what? She is good looking. And so is he. In fact, she's fucking hot!! How's that, jack wagons? She is a fantastic ass and is very shagable, to channel my inner Austin Powers. But I guess we aren't allowed to say or even think such things because that leads to the raping and subjugation of women.
Who are these "critics" that forced him to apologize? If anyone knows, I'd appreciate a link so I can give them a piece of my mind. The extent to which things get exaggerated in this country boggles my mind. I thought we had come out of our repression about sex and were a much more open society where you can say things like, "Hey, she's a dime!"
More importantly, given all the misery in the world, don't we need all the compliments and positivity we can get?
Why, Again?
So, it seems that Rand Paul is gaining some cohorts to filibuster any new gun law that comes up in the Senate. What is he afraid of? I thought that getting some Democrats on board with any bill was going to be tough. Further, I thought that polls about gun safety don't matter and most of the public knows that all gun bills are secret plots to send law abiding citizens to re-education camps. He should be completely relaxed and simply allow and up or down vote, right?
Hmmm.....
Hmmm.....
To Hike or Not To Hike
There have been lot of rumblings of late regarding the minimum wage. The president has suggested that it be raised to $9 per hour. Elizabeth Warren has been a staunch champion lately on this issue has been summarily raked over the coals by the usual collection of mouth foamers with the same bullshit argument that claims they know something about economics and that liberals know nothing. Well, here are the facts, based on the simple economics they claim to grasp so easily.
If the minimum wage is set below the market equilibrium, it will have no effect on the efficiency of the market. Even though the government has set a price floor, the market is bearing a higher price so it doesn't matter. Yet, if the price floor is set above the market equilibrium, unemployment will occur because employers would be induced to higher fewer workers, given the higher cost they must now pay their employees. More people would enter the labor market and jobs would be scarcer.
So, the question becomes...where is the market equilibrium? Well, with so many different markets out there in this country, it would depend on which market you are talking about and that's why the mouth foamers can get away with painting with such a broad and dishonest brush. If there is to be a minimum wage increase, then there should be a series of studies that examine the market equilibrium for those markets most affected my the hike. I would think the service industry and the retail industry would be good places to start.
If the minimum wage is set below the market equilibrium, it will have no effect on the efficiency of the market. Even though the government has set a price floor, the market is bearing a higher price so it doesn't matter. Yet, if the price floor is set above the market equilibrium, unemployment will occur because employers would be induced to higher fewer workers, given the higher cost they must now pay their employees. More people would enter the labor market and jobs would be scarcer.
So, the question becomes...where is the market equilibrium? Well, with so many different markets out there in this country, it would depend on which market you are talking about and that's why the mouth foamers can get away with painting with such a broad and dishonest brush. If there is to be a minimum wage increase, then there should be a series of studies that examine the market equilibrium for those markets most affected my the hike. I would think the service industry and the retail industry would be good places to start.
Friday, April 05, 2013
State By State
With the signing yesterday in Connecticut of the nation's most comprehensive gun law, it's become obvious that the issue of gun safety and the drive to reduce violence related to guns is going to occur on a state by state basis. Connecticut now joins Colorado and New York in tough enforcement on assault weapons, magazine size and background checks. In addition, beefed up security provisions at schools were also included in the bill.
The feet dragging and hand wringing at the federal level seems less important now since the states are getting the job done without them. Certainly, there will be states that have more relaxed laws and some that have more restrictive laws. This presents us with a unique situation in which we can now compare which laws are effective in reducing violence and which ones are not by comparing the states.
With this Connecticut law, we now have a "Day One" from which to work and measure the effectiveness of a truly robust gun safety law. It will be interesting to see how it plays out, particularly in terms of the cherry picking that is likely to start occurring any second now:)
The feet dragging and hand wringing at the federal level seems less important now since the states are getting the job done without them. Certainly, there will be states that have more relaxed laws and some that have more restrictive laws. This presents us with a unique situation in which we can now compare which laws are effective in reducing violence and which ones are not by comparing the states.
With this Connecticut law, we now have a "Day One" from which to work and measure the effectiveness of a truly robust gun safety law. It will be interesting to see how it plays out, particularly in terms of the cherry picking that is likely to start occurring any second now:)
Thursday, April 04, 2013
19 Years Later
Say the word "Rwanda" and the first thought that comes into your head after that is usually genocide. But recent gains in health care in the tiny African country are so staggering that I'm hoping the first thought will now be of a more healthy nation.
19 years later, however, Rwanda is on pace to become the only country in sub-Saharan Africa to meet all of its health-related Millennium Development Goals, and the tiny pocket of Central Africa has posted some of the world’s most staggering health gains in the past decade, outpacing nations that spend far more per capita on healthcare.
In the past decade, deaths from HIV have fallen 78 percent – the single largest decline in the world during that time frame – while tuberculosis mortality has dropped 77 percent, the most significant decrease in Africa.
Between 1994 and 2012, they wrote, the country’s life expectancy climbed from 28 years to 56 and the percentage of the population living in poverty dropped from 77.8 percent to 44.9 percent.
Amazing! But how did this happen?
The government took the aid that was pouring in and put it directly into social programs and enacted universal health care for the small nation. In addition to the numbers of above, the chances today that a child in Rwanda will die by the age of five has fallen 70 percent.
These are all truly remarkable accomplishments that demonstrate how real results can be achieved very easily within a generation if government corruption is kept to a minimum and level headed leaders are put in charge. The rest of the countries in Africa should follow this model and bring their nations into the increasingly prosperous global marketplace.
19 years later, however, Rwanda is on pace to become the only country in sub-Saharan Africa to meet all of its health-related Millennium Development Goals, and the tiny pocket of Central Africa has posted some of the world’s most staggering health gains in the past decade, outpacing nations that spend far more per capita on healthcare.
In the past decade, deaths from HIV have fallen 78 percent – the single largest decline in the world during that time frame – while tuberculosis mortality has dropped 77 percent, the most significant decrease in Africa.
Between 1994 and 2012, they wrote, the country’s life expectancy climbed from 28 years to 56 and the percentage of the population living in poverty dropped from 77.8 percent to 44.9 percent.
Amazing! But how did this happen?
The government took the aid that was pouring in and put it directly into social programs and enacted universal health care for the small nation. In addition to the numbers of above, the chances today that a child in Rwanda will die by the age of five has fallen 70 percent.
These are all truly remarkable accomplishments that demonstrate how real results can be achieved very easily within a generation if government corruption is kept to a minimum and level headed leaders are put in charge. The rest of the countries in Africa should follow this model and bring their nations into the increasingly prosperous global marketplace.
Life?
Ever since I can remember, I have always wondered if there was ever life on Mars. Being the closest planet to us, I guess I have just assumed that perhaps at one time it did. Now it looks as though that was the case.
CheMin and SAM identified some of the key chemical ingredients for life in this dust, including sulfur, nitrogen, hydrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and carbon, researchers said. Intriguingly, the mix also suggested a possible energy source for indigenous Martian life, if any ever existed in the area. "The range of chemical ingredients we have identified in the sample is impressive, and it suggests pairings such as sulfates and sulfides that indicate a possible chemical energy source for micro-organisms," Paul Mahaffy, SAM principal investigator at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., said in a statement.
So, not just the possibility of life but also an energy source for that life. Stunning! I'm hoping that as more tests are done we will learn exactly what kind of life existed on Mars. And perhaps there will be more discoveries as Curiosity continues her mission?
CheMin and SAM identified some of the key chemical ingredients for life in this dust, including sulfur, nitrogen, hydrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and carbon, researchers said. Intriguingly, the mix also suggested a possible energy source for indigenous Martian life, if any ever existed in the area. "The range of chemical ingredients we have identified in the sample is impressive, and it suggests pairings such as sulfates and sulfides that indicate a possible chemical energy source for micro-organisms," Paul Mahaffy, SAM principal investigator at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., said in a statement.
So, not just the possibility of life but also an energy source for that life. Stunning! I'm hoping that as more tests are done we will learn exactly what kind of life existed on Mars. And perhaps there will be more discoveries as Curiosity continues her mission?
Wednesday, April 03, 2013
Texas Murder Shoots Holes in NRA School Gun Plan
At the same time speculation is rife over whether white supremacists were killing prosecutors in Texas, the NRA has announced its plan to reduce gun violence in schools. Of course, the NRA's plan is to put more guns in schools, in the hands of people whose main job is teaching kids. Just like the main job of Mike MacLelland, the Dallas-area prosecutor who was murdered Sunday, is prosecuting murderers, pimps and thieves. MacLelland had started carrying a gun to work because another prosecutor had been killed.
So, we'll ask the Sarah Palin question, with absolutely no disrespect for the brave victims in Texas: how's that gunny-savey thing workin' out for ya?
In July 2012, MacLelland won a life sentence against an Aryan Brotherhood enforcer. MacLelland then indicted 34 Aryan Brotherhood members in November (the US attorney in the racketeering case has just withdrawn in fear of his life). On Jan. 31, Mark Hasse, another Kaufamn County prosecutor, was gunned down. MacLelland believed the Aryan Brotherhood could have been responsible, and started carrying a gun. Police had been stationed outside MacLelland's home for weeks, but the protection ended recently. I don't knock MacLelland for carrying; I probably would have done the same thing. What else is there to do, other than run like a coward? But carrying a gun is simply not effective protection when patient, determined assassins are after you.
Futher fueling the possible white supremacist connection was the murder of the chief of Colorado prisons on Mar. 19, and the subsequent shootout in Texas, when the killer, Evan Ebel, was stopped and killed by police two days later near Dallas.
We don't know if the Aryan Brotherhood, a white prison gang involved with prostitution and drug running and apparently run by men currently in jail, has anything to do with the Texas killings. Many are saying these actions don't fit their profile. And today another person of interest was identified in the case, a former local official who lost his job in a corruption probe.
What the slaying of Mike MacLelland does tell us is that guns can't protect you. The bad guys can always bide their time, hide in the shadows, snipe you from 200 yards away, wait until you're otherwise distracted, and then gun you down like a dog. They're not going to schedule a shoot-out with you on Main Street at High Noon and settle things like real men.
By demanding people be able to get guns without background checks, buy laser sights, bulletproof vests and infinite amounts of ammo online, the NRA is allowing bad guys like the Aryan Brotherhood, Mexican drug cartels, domestic and foreign terrorists, and crazies like James Holmes to arm themselves to the teeth.
The idea that a good guy with a gun is the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a delusion. Because the bad guy with a gun usually believes with all his heart that he's the good guy. And the fact is, the good guy can easily turn into the bad guy after one too many drinks, getting cut off by some idiot on the freeway, suffering a bad divorce or age-related dementia, or mistaking a cellphone for a gun.
Which is why the NRA plan will increase the number of children killed by guns in schools, due to weapons dropped in bathrooms (which appears to happen all the time), weapons left in desks where children can take them, good guys suddenly snapping for the reasons listed above, or disturbed kids bashing the good guy in the back of the head with a chair and taking the gun. And if an Adam Lanza does break into the school, clad in Kevlar and sporting an assault rifle with a thiry- or hundred-round clip, the good guy with the gun is probably the first guy to get shot.
The murders of Mike MacLelland and Mark Hasse were well-planned and executed. Much the way the assaults at Columbine, Aurora and Newtown were well-planned. When bad guys have time to plan and have access to massive firepower and protective gear it's impossible to prevent them from killing. The only way to stop them is to prevent them getting the weapons in the first place.
More guns equals more death, as has been well-documented in suicide and domestic violence statistics. The math really is that simple.
So, we'll ask the Sarah Palin question, with absolutely no disrespect for the brave victims in Texas: how's that gunny-savey thing workin' out for ya?
In July 2012, MacLelland won a life sentence against an Aryan Brotherhood enforcer. MacLelland then indicted 34 Aryan Brotherhood members in November (the US attorney in the racketeering case has just withdrawn in fear of his life). On Jan. 31, Mark Hasse, another Kaufamn County prosecutor, was gunned down. MacLelland believed the Aryan Brotherhood could have been responsible, and started carrying a gun. Police had been stationed outside MacLelland's home for weeks, but the protection ended recently. I don't knock MacLelland for carrying; I probably would have done the same thing. What else is there to do, other than run like a coward? But carrying a gun is simply not effective protection when patient, determined assassins are after you.
Futher fueling the possible white supremacist connection was the murder of the chief of Colorado prisons on Mar. 19, and the subsequent shootout in Texas, when the killer, Evan Ebel, was stopped and killed by police two days later near Dallas.
We don't know if the Aryan Brotherhood, a white prison gang involved with prostitution and drug running and apparently run by men currently in jail, has anything to do with the Texas killings. Many are saying these actions don't fit their profile. And today another person of interest was identified in the case, a former local official who lost his job in a corruption probe.
What the slaying of Mike MacLelland does tell us is that guns can't protect you. The bad guys can always bide their time, hide in the shadows, snipe you from 200 yards away, wait until you're otherwise distracted, and then gun you down like a dog. They're not going to schedule a shoot-out with you on Main Street at High Noon and settle things like real men.
By demanding people be able to get guns without background checks, buy laser sights, bulletproof vests and infinite amounts of ammo online, the NRA is allowing bad guys like the Aryan Brotherhood, Mexican drug cartels, domestic and foreign terrorists, and crazies like James Holmes to arm themselves to the teeth.
The idea that a good guy with a gun is the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a delusion. Because the bad guy with a gun usually believes with all his heart that he's the good guy. And the fact is, the good guy can easily turn into the bad guy after one too many drinks, getting cut off by some idiot on the freeway, suffering a bad divorce or age-related dementia, or mistaking a cellphone for a gun.
Which is why the NRA plan will increase the number of children killed by guns in schools, due to weapons dropped in bathrooms (which appears to happen all the time), weapons left in desks where children can take them, good guys suddenly snapping for the reasons listed above, or disturbed kids bashing the good guy in the back of the head with a chair and taking the gun. And if an Adam Lanza does break into the school, clad in Kevlar and sporting an assault rifle with a thiry- or hundred-round clip, the good guy with the gun is probably the first guy to get shot.
The murders of Mike MacLelland and Mark Hasse were well-planned and executed. Much the way the assaults at Columbine, Aurora and Newtown were well-planned. When bad guys have time to plan and have access to massive firepower and protective gear it's impossible to prevent them from killing. The only way to stop them is to prevent them getting the weapons in the first place.
More guns equals more death, as has been well-documented in suicide and domestic violence statistics. The math really is that simple.
Tuesday, April 02, 2013
What Kind of A Culture?
What Would He Say?
The Christian Science Monitor had a cover story a couple of weeks back titled, "What Would Mao Say?" that was most illuminating. The first three paragraphs say it all.
Yang Youwei owns a slaughterhouse, holds a big chunk of shares in a nearby coal mine, sits on the coal mine board, and runs the company that sells the mine's production. He drives a black Rolls-Royce. He walks like a capitalist; he talks like a capitalist. He is easily the richest man in this small village 300 miles south of Beijing. And he is also Yangjiaxiang's top communist, secretary of the local party.
Welcome to the paradoxical world of today's Chinese Communist Party.
Modern day China is an excellent illustration of why there is virtually no chance of the world ever seeing a truly totalitarian government ever again. Sure, we still have our stragglers like North Korea and Iran as well as failed states in Africa and the Middle East but these are obvious outliers. If want to be in the global marketplace, you have to adapt and that means embracing capitalism, unfettered trade, and free markets. If not, you are going to be on the outside and much less prosperous. This is why I chuckle and shake my head when I hear the Right blow bowel after bowel about the looming threat of communism. It failed. And even a country like China, with all its military might and government control, can't stop it.
Mao would be outraged and likely confounded, as the article notes, to see how terribly wrong he was in his vision for China. What would he say?
He would be speechless.
Yang Youwei owns a slaughterhouse, holds a big chunk of shares in a nearby coal mine, sits on the coal mine board, and runs the company that sells the mine's production. He drives a black Rolls-Royce. He walks like a capitalist; he talks like a capitalist. He is easily the richest man in this small village 300 miles south of Beijing. And he is also Yangjiaxiang's top communist, secretary of the local party.
Welcome to the paradoxical world of today's Chinese Communist Party.
Modern day China is an excellent illustration of why there is virtually no chance of the world ever seeing a truly totalitarian government ever again. Sure, we still have our stragglers like North Korea and Iran as well as failed states in Africa and the Middle East but these are obvious outliers. If want to be in the global marketplace, you have to adapt and that means embracing capitalism, unfettered trade, and free markets. If not, you are going to be on the outside and much less prosperous. This is why I chuckle and shake my head when I hear the Right blow bowel after bowel about the looming threat of communism. It failed. And even a country like China, with all its military might and government control, can't stop it.
Mao would be outraged and likely confounded, as the article notes, to see how terribly wrong he was in his vision for China. What would he say?
He would be speechless.
Monday, April 01, 2013
Hallelujah!
I was very heartened to see this recent piece in the Atlantic about how our culture has finally shifted away from the "bumbling dad" stereotype. In many ways, we had become like the sex kittens and brain dead secretaries of the 1960s and 1970s.
I remember the old days, when the only media dad was a bumbling dad, flummoxed by diapers, mystified by breakfast cereals, as incompetent at managing a household as his wife was hyper-efficient. In sitcoms, and in the commercials that aired during sitcoms, Dad was comic relief; everyone knew that power in the home (economic power, especially) resided with Mom.
I have been lamenting this for years. It's such a stereotype, not simply of dads, but of all men that feeds the malaise that is the Michael Jordan Generation.
Now, though, it seems like things have changed.
Now, however, the marketers have realized their error, and dads—involved, caring, competent dads like me—are coming to the foreground. We see them with their daughters in car commercials, and with their daughters in other car commercials, and sometimes they even use Google! And not just to, you know, Google stuff. At last, we fathers have been recognized as an important demographic deserving of the attention of America's most creative capitalists.
The car commercial that comes to my mind is the one where the dad is telling his daughter, who is shown at age 6 or so, not to text while she drives. Suddenly, she is no longer 6 but 16. That's how dads really are...like Cliff Huxtable....not Benny Hill.
I really hope things stay this way. Men are not baboons who exist only to eat, watch sports and sleep on the couch while the wife does everything that requires competence.
I remember the old days, when the only media dad was a bumbling dad, flummoxed by diapers, mystified by breakfast cereals, as incompetent at managing a household as his wife was hyper-efficient. In sitcoms, and in the commercials that aired during sitcoms, Dad was comic relief; everyone knew that power in the home (economic power, especially) resided with Mom.
I have been lamenting this for years. It's such a stereotype, not simply of dads, but of all men that feeds the malaise that is the Michael Jordan Generation.
Now, though, it seems like things have changed.
Now, however, the marketers have realized their error, and dads—involved, caring, competent dads like me—are coming to the foreground. We see them with their daughters in car commercials, and with their daughters in other car commercials, and sometimes they even use Google! And not just to, you know, Google stuff. At last, we fathers have been recognized as an important demographic deserving of the attention of America's most creative capitalists.
The car commercial that comes to my mind is the one where the dad is telling his daughter, who is shown at age 6 or so, not to text while she drives. Suddenly, she is no longer 6 but 16. That's how dads really are...like Cliff Huxtable....not Benny Hill.
I really hope things stay this way. Men are not baboons who exist only to eat, watch sports and sleep on the couch while the wife does everything that requires competence.
Sunday, March 31, 2013
An Easter Reflection
Of all of the holidays we celebrate in this country, I find Easter to be the most disconcerting. I think the main reason for this is the lead up, particularly Good Friday. Far too many Christians seem obsessed with the brutal death of Jesus. They seem a little too much like modern day snuff film devotees and that disturbs me.
I find His death to be completely disgusting and horrible. I don't need to relive it over and over again. Nor do I feel the need to be reminded of His resurrection. I've accepted his death into my heart and believe that he died for our sins. Anything after that strikes me as repetitive and insecure. I guess I'd much rather focus on the amazing way He lived His life and how we can expand His message of peace around the world. I suppose that makes me a lousy Christian in the eyes of many but I don't care.
Being a believer doesn't carry with it the requirement that other people approve of your faith.
I find His death to be completely disgusting and horrible. I don't need to relive it over and over again. Nor do I feel the need to be reminded of His resurrection. I've accepted his death into my heart and believe that he died for our sins. Anything after that strikes me as repetitive and insecure. I guess I'd much rather focus on the amazing way He lived His life and how we can expand His message of peace around the world. I suppose that makes me a lousy Christian in the eyes of many but I don't care.
Being a believer doesn't carry with it the requirement that other people approve of your faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)