Thursday, February 16, 2012

Red State=Welfare State, Blue State=Backbone of America

US Entitlement Map

Hey urban, educated blue states! Ever wonder where all your money goes?? Republicans would have you believe that it goes to fat black welfare Mom's in the projects of Chicago who had too many kids they couldn't afford in order to rev Chicago's "machine" style politics and get black, Muslim, Kenyans elected President. Well, it doesn't. It goes towards oil and mining and agriculture companies and to the the rest of the people in the bible belt and Appalachia...And also to some very poor Native American areas. And building roads, sewers and providing other services on a road with 8 people on it ( you know, the real America that isn't elitists who go to college, live in high rises and take subways to work) costs a lot more than providing these services on a road with 800 people like you have in larger population areas...AKA, the fake America that doesn't cling to their guns and bibles when screaming at gay people.

Everyone has heard the term "Welfare States" which are states like IN, SC, AL, MS, KY, AR, AK, etc. who all get more in federal funding than they pay in federal taxes unlike CA, IL, NY, NJ, MA, CT, WA etc. who pay more into the system than they get out so they can fund faith based programs for fat kids with Diabetes in places like MS, AL and AR where they pay much lower tax rates than we do in the more urban blue states. For instance, for every dollar paid in federal taxes, MS gets back $1.84, AK $1.82, WV $1.74, AL $1.61 etc. Where as NJ only gets $.62 back in federal spending, CT $.64, IL $.77, MA $.79 and CA and NY $.81.

Note Sarah Palin's (Ms. Small Government) home of Alaska!

That's all, I just wanted you to know that you are being lied to!

And You Thought Catholics and Muslims Were Crazy...

From CNN:
Mormons apologize for posthumous baptisms of Weisenthal's Parents.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has apologized for "a serious breach of protocol" in which the parents of the late Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal were posthumously baptized as Mormons.

The church also acknowledged that three relatives of Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel were entered into the genealogy database, though not referred for baptism.

Asher Wiesenthal and Rosa Rapp were baptised in proxy ceremonies in temples in Utah and Arizona, according to the database records discovered by researcher Helen Radkey in Salt Lake City.

The Wiesenthal baptisms violated a 1995 pact in which the church agreed to stop baptizing Jewish Holocaust victims.

"We sincerely regret that the actions of an individual member of the church led to the inappropriate submission of these names," said church spokesman Michael Purdy.

"These submissions were clearly against the policy of the church. We consider this a serious breach of our protocol and we have suspended indefinitely this person's ability to access our genealogy records."

Mormons believe that they may be baptized by proxy for deceased ancestors who never had that opportunity.

Church members, however, are supposed to request such baptisms only for their own relatives, Purdy said.

The agreement over Holocaust victims came about after it was discovered that hundreds and thousands of names had been entered into Mormon records.

Jewish leaders said it was sacrilegious for Mormons to suggest Jews on their own were not worthy enough to receive God's eternal blessing. Radkey, who has been tracking Mormon genealogy records for a while for people who ought not to be there, said she inadvertently stumbled upon the Wiesenthal name a few weeks ago. Among others people she discovered had been baptized by proxy is President Barack Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center denounced the baptisms.

Wiesenthal's father died in combat in World War I. His mother perished at the Belzec concentration camp in 1942. Holocaust survivor Simon Wiesenthal died in 2005 after spending years hunting down Nazis.

"We are outraged that such insensitive actions continue in the Mormon Temples," said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, who participated in many of the high-level meetings between Jews and Mormon officials.

"Such actions make a mockery of the many meetings with the top leadership of the Mormon Church dating back to 1995 that focused on the unwanted and unwarranted posthumous baptisms of Jewish Victims of the Nazi Holocaust," he said in a written statement.

He expressed gratitude to Radkey for "exposing the latest outrage."

Radkey also found the names of relatives of Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor, author and Nobel Peace Prize laureate.

"In this case, the Wiesel family names were not submitted for baptisms but simply entered into a genealogical database," Purdy said. "Our system would have rejected those names had they been submitted."

Purdy said it was "distressing" that church members had violated policy and regretted that "an offering based on love and respect becomes a source of contention."

Radkey said the church makes such breaches possible because any member can submit a name not connected to their own family.

"There are way too many entries slipping through the cracks, including Jewish Holocaust victims," she said. "It's (the Mormons') belief to save the dead that is causing the problem."

Wiesel, meanwhile, told the Huffington Post that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who is Mormon, should speak to his own church and tell them to stop the practice of proxy baptisms on Jews.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

The Romney family even posthumously baptized Ann Romney's atheist Father.

I mean, wow! How fucking crazy can you get?

Aside from the mere craziness of this and the belief that you can "baptize" someone after they die and they can choose accept it when they get to heaven (and that there is a heaven), let's examine the word baptize...I understand Catholics have a different interpretation of what baptize means and apparently Mormons are just making it up as they go but I was always under the impression that it meant you had to take an actual person (living presumably) and dunk them under water to spiritually cleanse them. And if spirits leave the body upon dying...How were the Mormons able to retrieve those spirits/souls??

And my question to any Mormon would be, HOW DO YOU KNOW?? Who was it that came up with this insane idea and why would you believe such nonsense?? And if you can baptize the dead, can I unbaptize dead Mormons? Or even unbaptize the dead people you baptized...And if you say "no"...Well, how do you know God didn't tell me I could in some gold tablets he gave me at the beach the other day??

And the other side of this is, WHO GIVES A SHIT!! Why would anyone care that Mormons and their phony religion are somehow changing the destiny of dead Jews or whomever...Jews don't believe this nonsense so why would they care any more than if a Wiccan somewhere was cursing the dead? And let's pretend it's all real; like any life long Jew is going to get to heaven and decide at the pearly gates that he is going to convert to Mormonism?? Apparently Mormons haven't met many Jews. But then again on the flip side, what if as it turns out, Mormonism IS the only way to get to heaven...Wouldn't these dead Jews (who invented this god in the first place) want to at least have that option on the table when it came down to their judgment day? I mean, why not...It's like an atheist doubling down on his death bed and accepting Christ or whatever...What harm could it do just in case?

Wow, look at me trying to make sense out of religion....I feel like a dog chasing it's tail.

Friday, February 10, 2012

The Immacualte Contraception

Ok, it looks like Obama, as always, is going to pussy out and bow down to the conservatives from the 13th Century and relax his mandate on religious organizations (not Churches since they were always exempt) to provide health coverage which will include contraception.

Here is why he is wrong:

The Catholic (or any) Church is NOT required to provide contraception. Only when they enter the business world and open hospitals which employ people of other faiths and in many cases with doctors(the ones who aren't Jewish, Muslim and Hindu), of no faith. So basically it's not the government intruding, it's the government FORBIDDING the church from forcing their positions on the employees of these other entities such as hospitals and Catholic Charities who aren't Catholic. The constitution is clear that the government can't respect an establishment of religion and by allowing them to discriminate against others and enforce their views unto other, they are empowering the Vatican...Which is kind of what we were getting away from when we founded America. The Pilgrims left England because all people were forced to attend the Church of England and were fined when they didn't...They didn't want someone elses view forced down their throats so they left. Do we really want all our nurses and doctors to leave because a religion is forcing their views upon them??

The Vatican doesn't have to run hospitals or even have the monopoly on hospitals in many communities and can decide to get out of the hospital business and stay in the church business. And there are many secular charities and hospitals in the world...We don't need them!

And my main problem behind this "religious belief" is that Jesus never prohibited contraception...So to try to say their religious freedom is being infringed upon is a stretch since there is no real source for this belief... There is no real Biblical precedent for this tenant of their faith. If you were wondering, here is where they get it (note that it isn't from Jesus or the New Testament) here it is:

Genisis 38:9And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

Note the phrase, "slew him ALSO".

So, to put it into context, this these are the verses just before that:

Genesis38: 7 And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.

8And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

So yes, God killed a dude after he spurted on the ground but he also killed the woman's husband because he LOOKED wicked...So if that is the precedent, then Rick Santorum now has the right to kill anyone who "looks wicked".

And just like Lot's wife, he smote them NOT because of the thing they did (looking at Sodom and Gomorrah in of itself isn't a sin) but because they disobeyed a direct command from god. That is why Lot's wife and the dude who spooged on the ground were killed, not for contraception or looking at a city.

And let's not forget that Christians follow Christ, Jews follow the first 5 books of the Old Testament...Christians don't remember the Sabbath and cease to do work on Saturday's, they shave their beards and eat shellfish and pork...All things prohibited in the Old Testament as well...Why pick and chose?? Who says which one should be followed and which one shouldn't?? I think it's convenient to chose this one and the gay thing because both of them = no babies which = no future parishioners to add to the collection plate (and or children for them to fuck) and both allow the church to exert control over others.

So their theology behind the issue is completely flawed and is precisely the reason most other religions don't have a problem with contraception...And might I add, that another form of preventing conception and birth control would be jizzing on an altar boys face so let's talk about the pot and kettle here for a minute. So to even try to get away with this under the banner of a religious belief is a stretch to begin with since it is never actually condemned in the Bible...But then again, neither is taxing the rich, abortion or gay marriage...

And you could even take it a step further can say they want to discriminate against women in general if they provide Men in their organizations full health coverage and Women only partial coverage...After all, child birth can still be a life and death situation...Women still die from child birth so to say contraception doesn't fall under health care is ridiculous. Not to mention all the physical changes that happens to a Woman's body after giving birth...They are typically never the same. So by not providing Women with full coverage as you would a Man, that is a clear violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So this can be challenged on many different levels.

And if the government IS to allow them to discriminate against women then they must then allow any Muslim owned business to force women to cover their heads at work, allow Rastafarians to smoke marijuana, Stanists to kill goats or even allow Mormons to practice polygamy...That is if the freedom or religion is absolute...And if it is, why do Quakers and other pacifists have to have their tax dollars go to pay for wars? But as will all amendments, nothing is absolute all the time. 5 year olds cant walk into a gun store and buy Uzis, I can't yell fire in a crowded theater, nor can someone publish complete lies about me in a news paper.

So, the question is, should Muslim businesses be allowed to force their employees to wear the bee keepers outfits?? If no, the no has to be the answer with regards to Catholics withholding birth control...Not that the Catholic organization themselves would actually have to hand out condoms and morning after pills, but merely allow their health insurance companies provide such coverage.

Irony time:
A. A lot of orphanages and foster programs are run by the Catholic church

B. Contraception prevents abortion!

If you are against contraception, you are FOR abortion...And from the 13th Century...And an idiot.

And Africa listened to the Vatican with regards to Condoms and look where it got them...1.3 Million deaths from AIDS every year, 5% of the population infected...Yes, let's listen to the folks that brought us The Spanish Inquisition, AIDS in Africa, Genocide in South America, The Crusades and child fucking!

Friday, February 03, 2012

Numbers Don't Lie...Republicans Do!


And as I laid out in a previous post:

-The stock market is up over 40% from it's lows the year Obama took office (from 8776 at the end of 08 to 12834 today) and up over 15% from the day Bush took office.

-Housing starts in December of 2008 were at 549,000, in November 2011 they were at 685,000. Not great, but a 24% increase and better than where Bush and the Republicans got us.

-So far, Obama has increased the debt 26% from his first budget. Bush increased the debt 110% and Reagan increased it 180%

-After saving the auto industry, something Romney wanted to see fail, GM is once again the #1 auto maker in the world.

And let's not forget about his strong leadership skills with regards to foreign policy and getting Bin Laden, getting American hostages rescued in Somalia without the loss of American life and his defiance to Iran by sending the Navy through the Straights of Hormuz when Iran specifically told him not to and finally ending the Iraq war. And of course the fact that there have been many thwarted but no successful terrorist attacks on American soil under his administration.

Can we really afford to go back to the cut tax and spend, shoot first ask questions later policies of the Republicans who want to take their cues from Communist Dictators and Communistic policies of forcing women to become baby dispensers?