The American Family Association is boycotting McDonald’s. Why would they boycott such a fine dining establishment? Well, first let’s have a look at what it’s not about:
- This boycott is not about hiring homosexuals.
- It is not about homosexuals eating at McDonald’s.
- It is not about how homosexual employees are treated.
According to their website, the boycott is about:
It is about McDonald’s, as a corporation, refusing to remain neutral in the culture wars. McDonald’s has chosen not to remain neutral but to give the full weight of their corporation to promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage.
PZ Myers responds thusly:
I don’t usually talk about this, but I think it’s time.
I survived more than three decades of abuse at the hands of several different abusers.
Warning: The contents of this post may be disturbing and/or triggering to some readers.
[…] McCain has said he wants to push for a Bush Administration proposal to allow faith-based organizations to make employment decisions based on religion even when using federal funding.
TIME In Partnership With CNN
On the one hand, Christian Conservatives want to deny Federal funding to organizations like Planned Parenthood or have the government forbid them to perform perfectly legal procedures if they receive Federal funding, simply because said procedures violate their religious principles. In other words, because they don’t like what Planned Parenthood does.
On the other hand, Christian Conservatives want the government to allow faith-based organizations to violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of l964 by practicing religious discrimination, even when said organizations also receive Federal funding. You know, because they like what these folks do.
We all pay Federal taxes, so we all contribute to anything that is Federally funded. That’s precisely why these wingnuts don’t want places like Planned Parenthood to receive any Federal funding – they don’t want their tax dollars being used to support something that violates their principles. But they’re perfectly fine with using my tax dollars to support something that violates my principles.
Talk about wanting to eat your cake and have it. Good grief! It seems “inconsistency” is the watchword of the modern American right.
These people want to rule the world with their Bibles. And they don’t even have the good sense to know they ought to be ashamed of that.
I admit that I am somewhat fixated on George Carlin at the moment. I was a huge fan, and I feel a deep and genuine sense of loss over his death.
George taught people to think outside the box and not take things at face value; to wonder and question and think for ourselves. He challenged us and taught us how to challenge ourselves. And he did all this while also teaching us not to take ourselves, or even him, too fucking seriously.
In light of George Carlin’s recent death, his name is popping up all over the internet. This is to be expected. One thing that is being wrongly attributed to him, however, is a piece entitled The Paradox of Our Time. Since George did not want to be associated with this and, in fact, called it “a sappy load of shit”, it is in his honor that I write this post.
More inside the crack:
In Fighting Ableist Language, Jill of Feministe makes the following statement:
I often use words like “crazy,” “insane,” and “nutbag” to describe people whose views I think I bizarre, illogical or bigoted. But as Tekanji points out, words mean things. And while words like “crazy” are pretty steeped in my vocabulary, it really isn’t all that hard to make an effort to purge them. Consider this Step 1.
Well, that’s just crazy! But I don’t mean Jill. I’m talking about the notion that we can’t say “crazy” anymore without offending someone we weren’t even talking about. It’s insane!
Look, I don’t usually set out to offend people, but my life does not revolve around avoiding it either. Sure, there are certain sensitive situations, “a time and a place”, etc. I care about other people’s feelings and take them into account whenever possible. But when I look at the Bush Administration, for instance, I think “crazy”, and that’s what I’m going to call it. When I heard McCain say that he would keep troops in Iraq for a hundred years, I thought “insane”. And it is. And that’s what I’m going to call it.
In response to someone who suggested that not being offended by the use of these words is possibly a result of privilege (i.e. never having been affected by mental illness) I posted the following comment on Feministe. It sums up my thoughts on the subject quite nicely.