Last week, Speaker of the House John Boehner appointed Robert George to the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom, an organization dedicated to addressing “the challenges of religious extremism, intolerance and repression throughout the world”.
what eye thynk: Robert George is not a household name so his appointment to what, admittedly, is a minor post was not a major news story and has gone mostly unnoticed; but Speaker Boehner's choice of Mr. George speaks volumes about the Republican party and their disregard for those who are not “like them”.
Robert George is the co-founder and chairman emeritus of the National Organization for Marriage, a group that identifies itself as a social welfare organization though the state of Maine identifies it more accurately as a political activist group and has decided it must follow disclosure laws pertaining to that true identity.
The day before Speaker Boehner appointed Mr. George to his new post, a Federal judge in Maine unsealed memos and e-mails written by the NOM. The details of these memos show that the National Organization for Marriage is nothing more than a front for a conservative political hate group whose main focus appears to be to deny gay men and women the right to marry.
Some of the memos brag about their “crucial” role in the passage of California’s Proposition 8. One memo talks about how the NOM made robo calls to residents in other states that were designed to scare residents away from supporting marriage equality; another details a plan where “the strategic goal of the project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks--two key Democratic constituencies”. Hispanic voters also earned the attention of the NOM. One of their programs calls for the manipulation of Hispanic voters in order to exclude gay people from marriage calling it “a key badge of Latino identity”.
Mr. George’s campaign against equal marriage rights did not stop with his founding of the NOM. In 2001 he co-authored the Federal Marriage Amendment which attempted to add an amendment to the US Constitution that would ban any state from legalizing same-sex marriage. In 2009 he helped to write the 4700 word Manhattan Declaration, a document that denounces not just same-sex marriage but also civil unions of any kind.
It should be noted that both Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum have signed a pledge in support of the Manhattan Declaration. (Is it just me who finds it really scary when elected officials--or those who hope to become elected officials--sign pledges promising to support private hate groups?)
What possible justification can Speaker Boehner have for appointing this intolerant extremist to an international commission supposedly dedicated to fighting intolerance and extremism? Mr. George would appear to any sensible person to be so uniquely unqualified for this post that his appointment would seem a joke…that is, if you find hatred funny.
Showing posts with label santorum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label santorum. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Rick Santorum and Global Warming - Part 2, The Faith Based Argument
This is my second essay on the subject of Rick Santorum saying he has never believed in global warming. (See my post of April 3, Rick Santorum and Global Warming - Part 1, The Factual Argument)
To quote him exactly: “We’re put on earth to use it wisely and steward it wisely, but for our benefit, not for earth’s benefit”.
what eye thynk: Some conservative Christians like Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann, (remember her?), believe that global warming does not exist, that what we are experiencing is just part of the ebb and flow of earth as God created it. Other conservative Christian groups agree that global warming is true, but think we should do nothing about it. “It is entirely the hand of God bringing the world to an end and therefore we cannot and should not resist it” (Quote taken from “Understanding What the Bible Really Says About the Future” on the Biblical Thinking Resources website.)
From everything I’ve read about conservative and evangelical Christians, they believe that we should take the Bible literally and follow it as the true word of God telling us how to live. My question to them is: exactly where are the Bible verses telling us to ignore global warming? Where are the parables teaching us that ignoring melting polar ice and rising temperatures is a holy and just act? There aren’t any. There are no lessons because this problem was unimaginable two thousand years ago. There were no coal burning hydroelectric plants and Jesus didn’t drive an SUV!
There are, however, lots of biblical verses telling us that God created a wonderful earth and only when that earth was complete did He add human life. When God created man, He included a brain with the expectation that we would use it to improve and develop what was around us. Errors were expected, but He designed us with the ability to recognize mistakes and the capacity to fix them.
If Jesus were to appear in Cleveland tomorrow, I believe He would be riding a bicycle on His way to a Greenpeace meeting. After all, earth is a gift from His Father and therefore to be cherished.
I find it appalling that those who would impose their rigid interpretation of godliness on the rest of us are using their God-given brain to rationalize the destruction of His precious gift of earth, the planet He designed to sustain us. What ingratitude. What twisted piety.
To quote him exactly: “We’re put on earth to use it wisely and steward it wisely, but for our benefit, not for earth’s benefit”.
what eye thynk: Some conservative Christians like Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann, (remember her?), believe that global warming does not exist, that what we are experiencing is just part of the ebb and flow of earth as God created it. Other conservative Christian groups agree that global warming is true, but think we should do nothing about it. “It is entirely the hand of God bringing the world to an end and therefore we cannot and should not resist it” (Quote taken from “Understanding What the Bible Really Says About the Future” on the Biblical Thinking Resources website.)
From everything I’ve read about conservative and evangelical Christians, they believe that we should take the Bible literally and follow it as the true word of God telling us how to live. My question to them is: exactly where are the Bible verses telling us to ignore global warming? Where are the parables teaching us that ignoring melting polar ice and rising temperatures is a holy and just act? There aren’t any. There are no lessons because this problem was unimaginable two thousand years ago. There were no coal burning hydroelectric plants and Jesus didn’t drive an SUV!
There are, however, lots of biblical verses telling us that God created a wonderful earth and only when that earth was complete did He add human life. When God created man, He included a brain with the expectation that we would use it to improve and develop what was around us. Errors were expected, but He designed us with the ability to recognize mistakes and the capacity to fix them.
If Jesus were to appear in Cleveland tomorrow, I believe He would be riding a bicycle on His way to a Greenpeace meeting. After all, earth is a gift from His Father and therefore to be cherished.
I find it appalling that those who would impose their rigid interpretation of godliness on the rest of us are using their God-given brain to rationalize the destruction of His precious gift of earth, the planet He designed to sustain us. What ingratitude. What twisted piety.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Rick Santorum and Global Warming - Part 1, The Factual Argument
Rick Santorum says he has never believed in global warming. To quote him exactly: “We’re put on earth to use it wisely and steward it wisely, but for our benefit, not for earth’s benefit”.
what eye thynk: To begin with the last part of his statement, “our benefit” and “earth’s benefit” are not mutually exclusive. We live here. Anything we do that effects the earth, in turn effects us and vice versa. If we continue to destroy our planet, then we are destroying ourselves; protect the planet and we protect ourselves. You can’t have one without the other.
His use of the word “steward” as it appears in the beginning of his sentence is defined by Merriam-Webster as “one who actively directs affairs”. Either Mr. Santorum doesn’t know what the word “steward” means or he thinks that ignoring the science of global warming is a wise and active response. And what is “wise” about ignoring what scientists all over the world have acknowledged as fact--the earth is warming and the acceleration of that warming can be attributed in large part to the proliferation of man made carbon emissions?
The proof of global warming can be seen in the melting of our polar ice, the rising of our ocean levels, the dying off of our coral reefs, the rising of our average temperatures, the disruption of our weather patterns and the severity of our storms. Did you know that in 1910 Montana’s Glacier National Park boasted 150 glaciers? Today there are 27.
The United States should be leading the fight to correct global warming, instead we have allowed a narrow-minded segment of our populace to disseminate their anti-science ideology and to amplify it with their own brand of political rhetoric--rhetoric financed in part by those most likely to profit by our incognizance and designed to leave us isolated from the rest of the world in our selective ignorance. Turning our back on the problem has earned us the disdain of Europe and is allowing us to fall behind China in green technology.
Peter Raven, one of the world‘s most respected senior scientists was recently quoted as saying “…the world was hoping for US leadership on this question, global climate change, and now it has pretty well given up with us as the only hold-out nation on this science….There is a frustration and anger at America”.
In 1997, 160 countries met in Japan and signed the Kyoto Protocol, an agreement calling for the decrease of greenhouse gas emissions and yet, here we are fifteen years later still separate and apart, waiting patiently for those who have their heads buried in their personal pile of oil company cash to come up for air and realize that the rest of the world has left us behind.
We have allowed ourselves to be held back by the monied, the venal and the narrow minded. We should be ashamed.
what eye thynk: To begin with the last part of his statement, “our benefit” and “earth’s benefit” are not mutually exclusive. We live here. Anything we do that effects the earth, in turn effects us and vice versa. If we continue to destroy our planet, then we are destroying ourselves; protect the planet and we protect ourselves. You can’t have one without the other.
His use of the word “steward” as it appears in the beginning of his sentence is defined by Merriam-Webster as “one who actively directs affairs”. Either Mr. Santorum doesn’t know what the word “steward” means or he thinks that ignoring the science of global warming is a wise and active response. And what is “wise” about ignoring what scientists all over the world have acknowledged as fact--the earth is warming and the acceleration of that warming can be attributed in large part to the proliferation of man made carbon emissions?
The proof of global warming can be seen in the melting of our polar ice, the rising of our ocean levels, the dying off of our coral reefs, the rising of our average temperatures, the disruption of our weather patterns and the severity of our storms. Did you know that in 1910 Montana’s Glacier National Park boasted 150 glaciers? Today there are 27.
The United States should be leading the fight to correct global warming, instead we have allowed a narrow-minded segment of our populace to disseminate their anti-science ideology and to amplify it with their own brand of political rhetoric--rhetoric financed in part by those most likely to profit by our incognizance and designed to leave us isolated from the rest of the world in our selective ignorance. Turning our back on the problem has earned us the disdain of Europe and is allowing us to fall behind China in green technology.
Peter Raven, one of the world‘s most respected senior scientists was recently quoted as saying “…the world was hoping for US leadership on this question, global climate change, and now it has pretty well given up with us as the only hold-out nation on this science….There is a frustration and anger at America”.
In 1997, 160 countries met in Japan and signed the Kyoto Protocol, an agreement calling for the decrease of greenhouse gas emissions and yet, here we are fifteen years later still separate and apart, waiting patiently for those who have their heads buried in their personal pile of oil company cash to come up for air and realize that the rest of the world has left us behind.
We have allowed ourselves to be held back by the monied, the venal and the narrow minded. We should be ashamed.
Monday, April 2, 2012
April 2 - Monday Quote
I would like to dedicate this week's quote to Rick Santorum.
Monday Quote: I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. (Gandhi 1869-1948)
Monday Quote: I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. (Gandhi 1869-1948)
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Is Unemployment a Joke? Who Cares!?
The two front running candidates for the Republican presidential nomination have both been credited with memorable and telling quotes regarding unemployment. Mitt Romney -- "I'm unemployed too. Hahaha". Rick Santorum -- "I don't care about unemployment".
what eye thynk: This is the best the Republicans can do?
Mr. Romney, unemployment is not funny. A family struggling to survive on a couple hundred dollars a week in unemployment does not get the joke, especially coming from a man so wealthy he can buy a third world country and get change back.
We need answers, and "I know how to run a business" is not an answer. You can't run a country like you run a corporation. When part of your citizenry asks for decent health care, you can't fire them because you don't like their attitude. When the budget doesn't balance, you can't sell off a couple of states to raise capital. Think about it.
Oh, and Mitt, you're running for President, not BFF. Wear a suit and tie. The $300 designer jeans and the $200 hand tailored shirts aren't fooling anyone.
As for you, Mr. Santorum, you may not care about unemployment, but millions of unemployed Americans do. To put it in terms you may understand: Leviticus 19:18 ...thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
Rick, many of your neighbors are unemployed and a big part of the job of President of the United States is to care for the welfare of the citizens of this country--not just the faithful, not just the well to do, but ALL the citizens, even the uninsured, even the unemployed.
If you want the job, you're going to have to do more for me than pray. You're going to have to care.
what eye thynk: This is the best the Republicans can do?
Mr. Romney, unemployment is not funny. A family struggling to survive on a couple hundred dollars a week in unemployment does not get the joke, especially coming from a man so wealthy he can buy a third world country and get change back.
We need answers, and "I know how to run a business" is not an answer. You can't run a country like you run a corporation. When part of your citizenry asks for decent health care, you can't fire them because you don't like their attitude. When the budget doesn't balance, you can't sell off a couple of states to raise capital. Think about it.
Oh, and Mitt, you're running for President, not BFF. Wear a suit and tie. The $300 designer jeans and the $200 hand tailored shirts aren't fooling anyone.
As for you, Mr. Santorum, you may not care about unemployment, but millions of unemployed Americans do. To put it in terms you may understand: Leviticus 19:18 ...thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
Rick, many of your neighbors are unemployed and a big part of the job of President of the United States is to care for the welfare of the citizens of this country--not just the faithful, not just the well to do, but ALL the citizens, even the uninsured, even the unemployed.
If you want the job, you're going to have to do more for me than pray. You're going to have to care.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Rick Santorum re: Pedophile Priests. The Liberals Did It!
In a book written by Mr. Santorum in which he discusses the Catholic priest child abuse scandal as it broke in Boston in 2002, he says "It is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies in the center of the storm".
what eye thynk: So it is all the fault of liberalism; pedophile priests bear no blame at all? No Hail Marys or Our Fathers needed; just blame it on the liberals and keep on walking?
I was raised to think that men (and women) of God, no matter the sect, were people to look up to; people who were morally stronger than myself, people I could trust to sort through life's detritus and point me in the right direction.
If exposure to liberal thought can send a priest so far off the rail of human decency that he can abuse a child, then maybe we need to rethink who we teach our children to emulate.
And I would not want them to emulate a man like Mr. Santorum who is unable to look beyond blind loyalty to recognize true evil when it exists--even in the most conservative places.
what eye thynk: So it is all the fault of liberalism; pedophile priests bear no blame at all? No Hail Marys or Our Fathers needed; just blame it on the liberals and keep on walking?
I was raised to think that men (and women) of God, no matter the sect, were people to look up to; people who were morally stronger than myself, people I could trust to sort through life's detritus and point me in the right direction.
If exposure to liberal thought can send a priest so far off the rail of human decency that he can abuse a child, then maybe we need to rethink who we teach our children to emulate.
And I would not want them to emulate a man like Mr. Santorum who is unable to look beyond blind loyalty to recognize true evil when it exists--even in the most conservative places.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Is Santorum Running for President or Pope?
On Monday, March 12, the New York Times quoted Khairat el-Shater, a leader in Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, as saying that religion "regulates in its entirety, politically, economically and socially; we don't have this separation between religion and government The Muslim Brotherhood is a value-based organization that expresses itself using different politcal, economic, sportive, health-related and social means. You can't take one part from another in this. It isn't how it's done."
what eye thynk: Rick Santorum said recently that reading JFK's speech on the separation of church and state made him want to "throw up". Not the most elegant way of making a point, but it does bring Mr. el-Shater's quote down to the lowest common denominator. Really, substitute Rick Santorum and his Christian faith for Khairat el-Shater and the Muslim Brotherhood in the above paragraph and who could tell the difference?
What seems to be overlooked here is that you can't legislate faith. No law, no matter how well intentioned, is going to turn everyone into a believer. We either believe or we don't. Mr. Santorum's apparent wish to force every US citizen to believe as he does is anethema to everything that makes this country great. And what makes this country great is what gives Mr. Santorum the right to believe as he does.
what eye thynk: Rick Santorum said recently that reading JFK's speech on the separation of church and state made him want to "throw up". Not the most elegant way of making a point, but it does bring Mr. el-Shater's quote down to the lowest common denominator. Really, substitute Rick Santorum and his Christian faith for Khairat el-Shater and the Muslim Brotherhood in the above paragraph and who could tell the difference?
What seems to be overlooked here is that you can't legislate faith. No law, no matter how well intentioned, is going to turn everyone into a believer. We either believe or we don't. Mr. Santorum's apparent wish to force every US citizen to believe as he does is anethema to everything that makes this country great. And what makes this country great is what gives Mr. Santorum the right to believe as he does.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Romney, Santorum, Gingrich - Bailout Experts?
Romney would have left the auto industry go through a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Santorum doesn't think the government should be involved in bailouts of any kind. Gingrich refers to the auto industry bailout as "a violation of 200 years of bankruptcy law".
what eye thynk: The one who really gets me is Romney. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy needs private capital to keep the business running while it re-organizes. Essentially, a private company or bank purchases a failing company's assets, (in this case GM and Chrysler), allowing the failing company to use that capital to run their business while they reorganize. He seems to have conveniently forgotten that there wasn't anyone interested in buying GM or Chrysler's assets--and that included Bain, the company Romney started in 1984.
Santorum would have left GM and Chrysler go it alone. I doubt there would be very many customers willing to buy a car being made by a business in bankruptcy and no sales equals no possible return to profitability. (Remember Braniff Airways? No one would fly on their planes after they filed an independent bankruptcy, their cash flow fell to zero and they threw in the towel after six weeks.)
Gingrich loves to promote himself as this great historian, but I have to think that the panel of Federal District Court judges who determined that no private capital was available, thus paving the way for a government bailout, and who also oversaw GM's bankruptcy process and oversaw their emergence from bankruptcy knows more about bankruptcy law than he does.
And just in general, all three of you need to stop "blaming" President Obama for the auto industry bailout. That happened under President Bush's watch...just like the housing collapse, the banking collapse and our head first dive into economic recession. However, you might want to think about giving President Obama a little credit for our slow but steady rise from the depths. That would be nice.
what eye thynk: The one who really gets me is Romney. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy needs private capital to keep the business running while it re-organizes. Essentially, a private company or bank purchases a failing company's assets, (in this case GM and Chrysler), allowing the failing company to use that capital to run their business while they reorganize. He seems to have conveniently forgotten that there wasn't anyone interested in buying GM or Chrysler's assets--and that included Bain, the company Romney started in 1984.
Santorum would have left GM and Chrysler go it alone. I doubt there would be very many customers willing to buy a car being made by a business in bankruptcy and no sales equals no possible return to profitability. (Remember Braniff Airways? No one would fly on their planes after they filed an independent bankruptcy, their cash flow fell to zero and they threw in the towel after six weeks.)
Gingrich loves to promote himself as this great historian, but I have to think that the panel of Federal District Court judges who determined that no private capital was available, thus paving the way for a government bailout, and who also oversaw GM's bankruptcy process and oversaw their emergence from bankruptcy knows more about bankruptcy law than he does.
And just in general, all three of you need to stop "blaming" President Obama for the auto industry bailout. That happened under President Bush's watch...just like the housing collapse, the banking collapse and our head first dive into economic recession. However, you might want to think about giving President Obama a little credit for our slow but steady rise from the depths. That would be nice.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Needed: Warmongers Anonymous
Mitch McConnell and Senator McCain want Congress to authorize force against Syria. Romney and Santorum talk to Aipac, (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), apparently ready to start a war with Iran.
what eye thynk: Yeah, we see how well that worked in Iraq.
For the most part, the Middle East countries are ruled by a tribal mentality, ie. tribal loyalty trumps national unity every time. Our Western style rules don't work there. Witness the deterioration of the phony democracy we set up in Iraq. Witness the increased violence in Afghanistan as our withdrawal approaches. Witness how anti-US sentiment multiplies in the entire region every time we attempt to stick our nose into their business.
I'm not saying we should ignore social atrocities and allow nuclear weapons to proliferate; but we are not the boss of the world.
President Obama's measured approach of coalition building, encouraging other nations to take the lead and the pursuit of economic sanctions seems destined to reap better results with less loss of American lives and less stress on our fragile economy.
what eye thynk: Yeah, we see how well that worked in Iraq.
For the most part, the Middle East countries are ruled by a tribal mentality, ie. tribal loyalty trumps national unity every time. Our Western style rules don't work there. Witness the deterioration of the phony democracy we set up in Iraq. Witness the increased violence in Afghanistan as our withdrawal approaches. Witness how anti-US sentiment multiplies in the entire region every time we attempt to stick our nose into their business.
I'm not saying we should ignore social atrocities and allow nuclear weapons to proliferate; but we are not the boss of the world.
President Obama's measured approach of coalition building, encouraging other nations to take the lead and the pursuit of economic sanctions seems destined to reap better results with less loss of American lives and less stress on our fragile economy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)