Just got back from watching "Twilight: New Moon" (don't blame me, Gilly wanted to watch it!). Worst. Movie. Ever! The highlight was watching Ryan making woodchuck faces at the screen (he thinks Bella looks like a chipmunk). *shakes head* Totally not worth the $6 matinee.

You may have heard the recent news about a Belgian man who was diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state after an accident, but who has been discovered to have been conscious, trapped in a paralyzed body for 23 years, but is now communicating with doctors. How horrible, right?

Well, no. Because the way that doctor's 'know' he's conscious is through something called 'facilitated communication' (some of you may remember this from the Terri Schaivo debacle). Basically, someone holds his hands and types on a computer, and then attributes the fully-formed, grammatically correct sentences to him. You can watch this video to see. It's obscene. Someone is quite obviously using this drooling husk of a human being to...what? Make money? Garner fame? I don't know how anyone can fall for this charlatan's trick. Probably the same way the fall for Sylvia Brown and other hucksters--people who are grieving the loss of a loved one want so badly to believe.

Maybe what the doctor's say is true and this man is really conscious (I'm not a brain doctor, so I don't know that) but the doctors have failed to show any evidence and have only referenced a brain scan, which doesn't show consciousness, so I have no idea how they are gauging it. The best I've heard is that he is 'minimally conscious', which sounds far different from the "lock-in" state that the newspapers are describing. So, maybe he's conscious. But I do not believe that he is communicating through this "speech therapist" at all. And I'm not the only one--Randi, Orac, and Novella have all come out and said the same thing, with some bioethicists jumping on the skeptical bandwagon.

So--I say, prove it. If this guy is really communicating, lets test it. Let's have an English-speaking speech therapist go in and 'facilitate' (he's Flemish). Or, let's blindfold the therapist and see if his hand is *really* guiding hers. Until them, I'm calling foul on this thing.

Some of you may have heard about former-Idol star Lambert's performance at the AMAs already. Apparently, a lot of the "shocking" stuff was cut from the west coast show but it call all be seen on You Tube. Basically, while performing his single "For Your Entertainment", Adam Lambert simulated oral sex with a (male) backup dancer and kissed a (male) keyboardist.
news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091123/music_nm/us_lambert

So what?

I have to say that I don't think people would be nearly as shocked over it if it wasn't male/male. After all, Madonna has been simulating sex in award shows for nearly twenty years. Just this year, teen star Miley Cyrus danced with a pole at the Teen Choice Awards. And who can forget Madonna and Britney's kiss at the VMAs?

But hey, because it's guy on guy instead of cute girls doing cute sex things, it's more shocking, ammirite?

I agree that the face-in-crotch was a tad gross. But the m/m kiss? Beautiful. And WTF is wrong with people that they should find two men kissing so shocking? I'm sorry but this is 2009 and it's fucking time these haters weren't catered to. Newsflash: GAY PEOPLE EXIST. They enjoy kissing each other. And they don't need your permission to do it!

I have been a fan of Adam Lambert's for a long time and this only cements it. Way to go!

ChurchOuting.org is a clearinghouse for reports of priests who are openly gay men in social settings yet professionally closeted in their parishes. The campaign will also accept reports of heterosexual priests who are involved in romantic or sexual relationships, yet support the Archbishop’s efforts to harm lesbian and gay families.


What do you guys think of this? I'm not for public outings as a general rule, but is there a case to be made for hypocrites who preach intolerance to their flocks and have gay (or straight) affairs on the side?

Stolen from lady_drace , who took it from fannish5 : Name the 5 most annoying characters ever.

( Under the cut )

Okay, for the record I hate Twilight. Like, hate it with the passion of a thousand suns. As a feminist, as a mother, as a person...I just can't support these books and their message of failed, dependent womanhood and love-men-who-stalk-you. But the movie adaptations are like B movie gold--hilariously and unintentionally funny. And apparently Roger Ebert is just as much a mocker as I am: rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article This review is EPICALLY funny.

I HATE that conservatives say that liberals who hate Palin hate her because she's pretty. No, I don't hate her because she's pretty, you sexist fuck. I hate her because her ideas are ugly.

Today, I was reading John Locke, who advocates a people's right to revolt and thinking, "Will this ever happen?" It's disheartening that the people who seem to want to overthrow our government (the Tea Partiers) are the very ones that want to enforce the hegemony of the rich over the poor and espouse the 'bootstrap' mentality that feeds right back into runaway capitalism's back pocket.

So, coincidentally, Ryan finds a cam of 'Capitalism: A Love Story' and we watch it tonight. And now I've been crying for about an hour. In the film, Moore heartrendingly documents the cost of the financial collapse on families and ties it to the degregulation of industry and unfettered capitalism. One thing he brings up in the film is a leaked memo from Citigroup, detailing how democracy in America is dead and a plutocracy has taken it's place. The memo crows about the power of the 1% of the wealthiest America's (ie, their customers) and warns against a revolt of the people. It concludes that, as long as the 99% of us not at the top can be placated with the myth that we might someday get there, the Plutocracy can rule America, unchallenged. You can read it here: www.scribd.com/doc/6674234/Citigroup-Oct-16-2005-Plutonomy-Report-Part-1 It is appalling and unsurprising.

So, what is it going to take? What is the spark that will set off the revolution in this country? I thought that Obama was part of it, that our voting him in sent a wake up call to these big corporations that they aren't our rulers, but now I'm not sure...Obama has been a disappointment and Congress is worse (aside from my lovely Dennis Kucinich, who rocks the house down). They have extended the bail outs to the auto industry and only pay lipservice to holding these companies accountable for the billions they have stolen from the US taxpayer.

What will it take before we throw off the shackles of debt? Before we stop trying to scrape and claw to keep ourselves afloat (at least until we have a medical crisis or lose our jobs)? Before we are finally tired of being slaves to corporate tyrants that make obscene profits while they cut wages, rape pensions and roll the dice with the American economy? What is it going to take for us to stop believing the lie that they tell us, that we can all get rich too if we only work hard enough, try hard enough, give them more power, lower their taxes? What will finally spark the revolution?

I don't know. But I think it has to happen. I don't think that we can go on sucking the marrow out of the husk of the capitalist behemoth any longer. Something is going to give.

OMG, this Big Bang Theory was all Penny/Sheldon shippy goodness!!!!

Answer in Genesis' Bodgie Hodge has positited a "moral" answer to the hypothetical question:

You know the whereabouts of a family of Jews hiding from the Nazis. A Nazi patrol comes up to you and asks where they are; you, a good God-fearing Christian, can either lie and say you don't know (which would be bad, because, like, lying is a sin), or you could tell the truth, and the Nazis would zip off and search for and presumably execute the family. What do you do?

If we love God, we should obey Him (John 14:15). To love God first means to obey Him first--before looking at our neighbor. So, is the greater good trusting God when He says not to lie or trusting in our fallible, sinful minds about the uncertain future?
Consider this carefully. In the situation of a Nazi beating on the door, we have assumed a lie would save a life, but really we don't know. So, one would be opting to lie and disobey God without the certainty of saving a life--keeping in mind that all are ultimately condemned to die physically. Besides, whether one lied or not may not have stopped the Nazi solders from searching the house anyway.

As Christians, we need to keep in mind that Jesus Christ reigns. All authority has been given to Him (Matthew 28:18), and He sits on the throne of God at the right hand of the Father (Acts 2:33; Hebrews 8:1). Nothing can happen without His say. Even Satan could not touch Peter without Christ's approval (Luke 22:31). Regardless, if one were to lie or not, Jesus Christ is in control of timing every person's life and able to discern our motives. It is not for us to worry over what might become, but rather to place our faith and obedience in Christ and to let Him do the reigning. For we do not know the future, whereas God has been telling the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10).
www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/11/13/feedback-righteous-lie


Wow--so, we should totally give up the Jews to the Nazis because Jesus will save them. Silly me, I thought the slaughter of 6 million people was NOT god's fault, but the fault if a Godless atheist, according to these ppl. O_O

  One of my friends on Facebook posted a poll about whether we were suffering God's wrath for daring to approve gay marriage in some states (he thinks yes). And then an old boyfriend of mine posted this gem:

"In NYC there are over 2 million more women then men. So if every man were married there would still be over 2 million single women. Then you put the homosexual male population into the mix, which takes more men out of the pool of available husbands..... Women have needs and since they can't find a man to satisfy them (and I'm not just talking about sexual needs) they'll go to homosexuality because its being marketed to the public as acceptable behavior. It's always been the case that there have been more women then men, and many prophets we know had several wives. Even during the times of the prophets. The examples we should be following. Its sad that people of faith will choose disobedience to God over the examples he revealed to us."

 
  Rofl at the utter fail.

I object, I object, I object.

  So, after like a billion recs, I am finally watching 'Battlestar Gallactica'. And it is AWESOME, y'all. I'm only on episode 8 of the first season SO NO ONE SPOIL ME but it's a very well-written show and the characters are compelling. So...yeah. I'll let you all know what I think when I'm a bit more into it.

  Looks like Referendum 71 passed, which means that gays now have domestic partner rights in Washington state. YAY!

  Wow, this is the most ridiculous and inaccurate ad I've ever seen. *shakes head*  LOL, Scandinavia isn't even a country...WTF? And also, LOL at "Proud to Be an America" slowed down to a snail crawl. And the whole THINK OF THE CHILDREN hysteria. Wow. I will laugh so hard when this referendum is passed.


SO hard.
 

..only two more hours and I can go home and sleep. But I've been listening to this on constant repeat.

  I am such a sap but this song literally brings me to tears, just as reading 'Cosmos' does. I love how full of hope Sagan is that humanity will become better. This is the same reason I watch Star Trek. Because I too believe that we can outgrow our silly superstitions and our violence and reach towards the stars.

From PZ Myers' blog: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/
..........................................................................................................................

A couple of Republican district chairmen took it upon themselves to defend Senator Jim DeMint (R, Crazytown). Uh, maybe.

There is a saying that the Jews who are wealthy got that way not by watching dollars, but instead by taking care of the pennies and the dollars taking care of themselves. By not using earmarks to fund projects for South Carolina and instead using actual bills, DeMint is watching our nation's pennies and trying to preserve our country's wealth and our economy's viability to give all an opportunity to succeed.

I bet that if you sat those two down and asked them if they knew what was wrong with that first sentence, they'd just look at you all wide-eyed and innocent and tell you they can't see a bit of bigotry or stereotyping there at all.

And their next sentence would be, "Some of my best friends are Jews!"

And after that, they'd defend their argument…"We're saying Jim is going to make us all as rich as Jews! That's a good thing!"

********************************************************************************

  This reminds me of the article I posted about the Justice of the Peace who won't marry bi-racial couples but claimed that he had "lots of black friends" and even let them USE HIS BATHROOM (no doubt getting their n*gger cooties all over everything). 

  But what is truly fail about this is that the above is a letter to the editor...which was published in the newspaper. *facepalm*

 Cross posted to atheism

A few years ago at an Atheist Alliance International Conference, Sam Harris (author of "Letter to a Christian Nation)  “atheist is a term we do not need, in the same way that we don’t need a word for someone who rejects astrology” and said that using it runs the risk of “squander[ing] the trust of people who would otherwise agree with us on specific issues.”

  “We should not call ourselves anything”, he continued, “we should go under the radar - for the rest of our lives. And while there, we should be decent, responsible people who destroy bad ideas wherever we find them.”

  This is something I've heard before. "I don't like being called an atheist" some people say. Sometimes they say this from an adolescent need not be labeled. More often it approaches Harris' special brand of naivete; "Don't call me an atheist because there's no reason proclaim it. After all, there's no word for a-fairyist. There shouldn't be a need for a-theism either."

  What this view does is completely ignore reality. Ignoring theists will not make them go away. Millions of people around the world believe in God and this informs their actions. We may not believe in God but we must believe in theists. Because these people hold high office. They legislate from their beliefs and sometimes (even in America) mandate them. Because they knock on doors, attempting to indoctrinate others, especially children. Because their erroneous beliefs are often times dangerous and ludicrous. We cannot ignore them, hoping they will go away. They have not and they will not. We must stand up to them, let them know that we will not tolerate our rights being trampled on, nor allow them to spout dangerous nonsense with impunity.

  Perhaps, in the future, when faith is on the wane and unbelievers are in the majority, there will be no need for a term like "atheist". But that is not the case right now. And I think that it's a rose-color glasses view of the world to think that we should go "under the radar" and still expect atheism to be effective. In this country, as in most, effectiveness is gauged in political power and in the ability to persuade people to your cause. As an Atheist Movement we have some pull in this country--some ability to effect change. As individuals, we have none. That is the reality that we live in.

  Harris seems to be saying that we can somehow go underground, live by example, and somehow, that is going to change the zeitgeist. But what does he think atheists have been doing for the last several hundred years? They have been forced, mainly through fear and intimidation, to go underground, as Harris suggests, and they have tried to effect change by being good people and IT HASN'T WORKED. Why? Because they could not proclaim, "I am an atheist." Their voices were effectively silenced because they silenced themselves. I am not condemning them. They had to live in their times, with constant fear of prosecution or death by an over-zealous church. But we don't have to live with that fear. We have the freedom that Payne and Voltaire and Hume lacked. We can say, "I'm an atheist" by and large without fear of reprisal.

  The time has come for an Atheist Movement. We should not go back into the closet, back underground, and hope for change. We should take our place on the political stage and demand it, just as women and minorities and gays have done before us. They paved the way. We only have to follow in their footsteps and proudly declare: I am an atheist. And I will not be silenced.

NEW ORLEANS – A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091015/ap_on_re_us/us_interracial_rebuff


  WUT? I cannot believe that this is happening in 2009. And I love how the guy is like, "I have black friends" in the age-old 'I swear I'm not a racist' gambit. Yeah--can't see a problem there at all!

  Meanwhile, in good news, George Takai and his husband were the first married gay couple to appear on The Newlywed Game. Here is them talking about their anniversary and their wedding. AWWWWWW!