The Orlando Nightclub Shooting

The Real Issues Here, not Fear Mongering

My thoughts are with the survivors of the Orlando Pulse shooting, the families and friends of the deceases, and the souls of the murdered. There is nothing that can be said, no comfort that can be given after such a horrific event, and all I can say is that I am so sorry for their losses.

I am once again sickened and horrified by the latest shooting event in the US. This has become an every week thing, if not more often. 2 shootings in 2 days. One was a rising talented youtube singer at a concert shot by a supposed unbalanced fan. The other was the largest mass shooting event in the history of the US resulting in the deaths of 50 people with another 50 or so injured, some still in surgery and in critical condition.

All day yesterday and today all that has been reported on the radio is the connection of the shooter in Orlando to ISIS, Trump's insinuation that Obama is in some way to blame for the shooting, the constant obsession over the ethnicity and religion of the shooter, etc... The internet is full of forums of people talking about how the shooter was an immigrant and we need to close our borders, how our decreased military presence worldwide is why this tragedy happened. People are liking posts about how it's Obama's government that has led us to this point and allowed such a thing to happen, people are retweeting disgusting comments about how the shooter is the hero for killing gay people. This is reminiscent of the shooting that occurred several months ago at a Planned Parenthood, where people were applauding the nutjob who shot up a waiting room, claiming he was a hero saving babies lives. I wrote a blog post about that as well when it occurred, disgusted by the so called "Good Christians" outpouring of hatred against dead people, and how they somehow deserved to die for aborting helpless freaking babies.

Now, instead of focusing on what the real issues here are, the media is completely ignoring the real reasons why this horrible tragedy happened. Homophobia and a lack of gun control. That's the real root of this shooting. I am the first to usually look at religious extremism as a motive, and yes, that may be the reasoning behind the homophobia, but it's the homophobia that resulted in the shooter choosing this particular target. A club that is frequented mainly by the  LGBTQ community and it's allies was the target, and if this is not put down as a hate crime then i'm not sure what the hell the media is doing anymore. It was a hate crime committed by a domestic terrorist. Not an international terrorist working for ISIS, not a muslim immigrant, but a U.S. citizen born in the U.S., raised in the U.S., who didn't like gay people. That is domestic terrorism - the same cause of the Planned Parenthood shooting - and homophobia.

What I want to know is when is enough going to be enough? There have been 998 mass shootings (where 4+ people died) in the 912 days since the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting on December 14th, 2012. In 912 days 1,105 people have been murdered by guns in mass shootings, and another 3,929 people have been physically injured - not even counting the emotional damage from being in this situation, the PTSD that some survivors must have, the impacts on the family members and friends of those killed. In just over 2 years since the first "wake-up-call" shooting we have done nothing to prevent this from happening. We blame it on mental health issues, which undeniably have had a hand in these shootings in some cases. We blame it on immigrants and Islam - which also have played a role in some of the cases. But when have we ever blamed it on christian-based motives and "morals"? When has anything actually changed to make the acquisition of a gun more difficult? When have we had the nerve to call it what it really is: Domestic Terrorism? When have we looked at the perpetrator and said the words that really show the underlying motives? Pro-life, Homophobic, Christian, Islamic, Pro-gun, white supremacist, racist. 

First, people manage to somehow confuse hate crimes with mental illness. Sandy Hook can be attributed to a combination of mental illness and developmental/behavioural issues and was probably not a "hate crime". On the other hand, the shooting at a Charleston Church with a predominantly black congregation can probably be classified as a hate crime brought on by racism and the perpetrator there seemed obsessed with white supremacy. And therein lies the difference. On one hand you have a person with actual mental and psychological deficits, and on the other you have a person with an intense hatred of a specific group of people. Once again, after the Orlando shooting, republicans are calling for more mental health awareness but saying that there is no need for gun control. Because obviously every person who uses a gun inappropriately must have some mental illness. It can't be for any other reason. The mass shooting in Orlando was not a crime committed due to mental illness, rather a crime committed due to homophobia and hatred against the gay community.

Second, there is the discussion of the shooter at the Orlando nightclub and how he has connections to ISIS and international terrorism, rather than domestic terrorist and his homophobia. The man's own father says he showed his disgust and hatred of men who liked other men. There has been no link found between the individual and ISIS. ISIS put out a statement congratulating the shooter and saying how wonderful it was that so many had died. ISIS exists to monger fear, to sow distrust, and to turn us against one another to make it easier for them to cause havoc. The media says that this statement shows the terror group "claiming responsibility" - which it does not actually claim - and this just gives more weight to ISIS's campaign to terrify everyone. But, it has nothing to do with the shooting event itself. NOTHING has been found to indicate any connection between the shooter and ISIS other than his religion. As far as the information shows, this was purely a crime against the LGBTQ community and was a hate crime. Discussing connections to international terror groups distracts from the real horror of what happened and diminishes the suffering of those injured, the families and friends of those who have died, and those who survived the traumatic attack.

Third, there is a ridiculous amount of emphasis being put on the fact that this man was a Muslim and followed the religion of Islam. People seem to think that his religion dictated that he must go and kill gay people. This could have easily been a white Christian man, and no one would dare insinuate in that scenario that he would have been following the orders of his god and Jesus by killing gay people, even if he chanted that very thing as he shot people. While the shooter was probably motivated by the belief that his religion taught against homosexuality, it doesn't actually matter what his religion actually was. All of the major world religions teach against homosexuality; Christianity, Islam, Catholicism, even some sects of Judaism and Hinduism. The fact that he was religious and was taught that homosexuality is wrong by his religion is of note because it was a religiously motivated hate-crime but the individual religion is completely unimportant here.

Fourth, hate crimes in this country have been increasing since extremist views about race, religion, and sexual and gender orientation have come to the forefront of our countries politics. Donald Trump is a political figure running for the highest office in the U.S. who is openly homophobic, racist, sexist, and who feeds the rabid masses foaming at the mouth for vindication that their hatred against certain groups of people is justified. He eggs on his supporters to violently assault people that don't agree with him. He promotes the illegal barring of an entire race from entering the U.S. on the basis of "they might be terrorists". And he regularly slanders people based on race, religion, and gender. All of the extremists out there now have someone to rally behind and they are becoming more and more comfortable expressing their views in physically violent ways. With a person like Donald Trump running for President, it's no wonder that we have a racist kid shooting up a black church, a radical pro-lifer shooting up a planned parenthood clinic, and a homophobic man shooting up a LGBTQ community gathering place. 

Fifth, we once again have a discussion on our hands about gun control. All the things that have been pandered about different communities; "good guy with a gun" nonsense, the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument, "the liberals are trying to take away our guns" diatribe... What we "liberals" want is for more people with sketchy backgrounds not to be able to get ahold of dangerous weapons that can cause this amount of damage to other humans. We want the system to be improved so that people with histories of narcotic convictions or domestic abuse or mental disturbances that could lead to psychotic breaks or extremist viewpoints about sexual identity, race, religion, women's choice, etc... won't get ahold of deadly weapons. If you are a sane person who has no history of violence or drug related charges and who shows no inclination to violently attack someone because of their race, gender or sexual orientation, religion, or life choices, then by all means go ahead and buy a gun. But something needs to change in the system now, not in 10 years when even more people are dead. 

And Finally, can we please acknowledge the insanity of people CONGRATULATING the shooter on killing people. It doesn't matter if these people were gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer, other, or even straight... they were living breathing human beings. For people out there to celebrate their deaths is disgusting and horrifying. Sure, it might be a small group of people out there that feel this way, but the fact that they exist proves that we have a broken society. They wouldn't have this intense hatred if people didn't tell them that it's okay to hate gay people, that it's okay to believe they should "burn in hell" or "die for their sins". If prominent individuals (pastors, priests, ministers, preachers, rabbis, reverends, imams, politicians, government workers, parents, groups like WBC, etc...) did not actively promote homosexuality as evil and abnormal and sinful and wrong, then these extreme viewpoints would not exist and we wouldn't have evil little fuckers making comments like the ones below. Just read them and let it sink in that the things that you might think most important in your world (god, religion, holy texts, preachers, etc..) can cause people to actively celebrate the deaths of 50+ people and congratulate mass murderers.

  

 

 

 

 

Boys will be boys...

How we raise boys to be sexist
assholes...

Recently, the news feed on my Facebook has blown up with articles and posts about Brock Turner, the Standford student who sexually assaulted a young woman behind a dumpster. The only reason he wasn't convicted as a full-blown rapist is that he was interrupted before he could stick his penis inside an unconscious young woman. Now, people have been saying that it's reprehensible that even though a jury found him guilty of 3 felonies of sexual assault, a judge decided to give him just a 6 month jail sentence, and that this has now been reduced to 3 months is just shy of criminal behaviour in itself... 

All of this I agree with whole-heartedly, but not much more can be said that I have not already read or heard or said myself. The brave young woman he attacked wrote an amazing letter to him which she read in court, detailing the many ways in which his assault has affected her life. She said it better than anyone else could, because she lived through the experience. Anyone who disregards her feelings on the matter does not deserve to breathe the same air as her. 

However, I want this blog post to focus more on an article I read today about how we are taught from a young age the the way boys and men treat us is okay and just part of what makes them boys, something they cannot help and something that is pointless and unnecessary to discourage when they are young.

The author talks about her experiences growing up with her male family members and with strangers and how her parents unknowingly indoctrinated her into a world where women are actively supposed to protect themselves against men and unwanted advances, but boys are not taught to treat women with respect as basic human beings. The article "3 ways my parents unintentionally taught me that my consent didn't matter" discusses three different lessons learned in early childhood that set the stage for how she was supposed to view the world as a woman, and what she should expect from the men and boys around her.

1. 'You're Not Allowed to Say No' - Girls are supposed to be gracious and sweet and acquiescent. We're not supposed to raise our voices, or argue and talk back, or really stand up for ourselves in situations where we feel uncomfortable.
2. 'Boys Will Be Boys' - Boys can pick on girls, force them to play in a certain way, or be cruel little jerks and we just push it aside as exuberance and "the way boys play" without teaching them not to be oversexed monsters.
3. 'This Is What It Means to Be a Girl' - Sexism is just part of the system and we're supposed to get used to it because that's the way it's always been and it's not going to change...

These 3 lessons come into play with how children are raised in the modern world. Boys play exuberantly, like toys that make a lot of noise, destroy stuff, run around crazily ignoring their parents, and mercilessly tease girls (often cruelly). Often times, parents do nothing to curtail this behaviour and teach their male children control, manners, and basic human decency toward one another and the young girls around them. If another parent even suggests that they should discipline or control their male offspring, the parents are likely to get offended, shout about "how dare you tell me how to teach my child", or mutter something about how "boys will be boys" as though there is nothing they can do about their children and/or no need for anything to be done. 

When a girl comes home crying from school telling her parents about how a boy was teasing her, or pinching her, or pulling her hair her parents are likely to tell her that if a boy is mean to her that means he likes her. This sets the stage for years of putting up with abusive and manipulative males in her life because somewhere in her subconscious she thinks that the men in her life just don't know how to express them and that they're not trying to be assholes, just merely shy about telling her how they really feel. The other side of the coin though is that if the parents take the appropriate action and call the boy's parents to talk about how their child hurt or upset the girl. The response is usually "well that's just how boys play", or "he doesn't know how to express himself". This is not an acceptable response form a parent... its a cop out, a lack of responsibility for one's own teachings to their offspring, and does nothing to fix a problem rearing it's head. Instead of making excuses for "that's just how he plays", wouldn't it be nice if they sat their child down and explained to him how his actions affected other people, and that being mean to girls (and boys) wasn't an acceptable way to behave? Might that not solve problems down the line, if he learned how to treat other people in his life with respect?

When a parent ignores a negative action that their child displays early on, that is the same as giving permission to the child to behave in that way. When you teach your child table manners and to say 'please' and 'thank-you', you consistently make sure that they follow the established rules you have set forth. You teach your child to be polite, to chew with their mouths closed, and to show proper respect to adults. What if - and I know this is a crazy idea here - we approached teaching our children to be kind to each other (and for little boys not to be crazy lunatic assholes) the same way, instead of letting them run wild and figure out social interactions with no guidebook. 

In schools, you often hear about how teachers spend a disproportionate amount of time helping boys with their studies, or how boys are more likely to have ADHD, a short attention span, and an inability to focus. Are boys really more likely to have ADHD than girls? I don't know the real answer to this, but I think it is very unlikely that only boys can have ADHD. The difference is that girls are taught early on not to run around crazily, to sit down and pay attention, and to be polite. More time is spent teaching girls to have good manners because that indicates good breeding and will make her attractive later in life. Boys on the other hand are supposed to be "macho" and "manly" and "authoritative", so they are allowed to act like little hooligans rather than be taught self control and manners and to sit still and pay attention in class. So it is likely that just as many little girls have ADHD, but were taught manners and self control, and therefore pay attention in class. If teachers didn't spend so much time trying to control their male pupils, maybe they would have more time to teach the girls too, and the boys would learn like normal people and not take extra attention. 

Teaching boys and girls different sets of manners does no good in the long run. Girls are supposed to be maleable, soft, polite, quiet, intelligent, unobtrusive, and above all things not provoke aggression from boys and not display herself to 'tempt them'. Boys are supposed to be strong, authoritative, manly, unemotional, protective, assertive, and be the 'man of the household' the 'provider', the loudest voice in the room. 

Pictures like this do so much unintended damage, reinforcing that little girls and women are supposed to be happy and pretty all the time, are supposed to make the people around them feel good about themselves. While boys are not supposed to cry, and if they do then it must be something really serious and important and everyone needs to pay attention immediately. If a girl cries it's no big deal because they must do it all the time anyway, they must be super emotional and unable to control themselves... But if a boy does it we must call the fire brigade immediately. 

This is supposed to be sweet and touching and make girls feel special, but it does so much more harm than good, teaching them that boys expressed feelings are more important than those of girls. Why are the boy's tears more valid and important than the girl's?

These types of quotes are meant to show how much a girl means to a boy if she willingly expressed feelings, but just diminish the validity of a girl's feelings and physical demonstration of emotions. They add colours and cutsie fonts and hearts that are supposed to give us warm and fuzzy feelings inside, but are really just part of a culture teaching girls from a young age that it's okay for boys to be mean to them, and that if a boy cries its time to drop everything and treat him as though he's made of gold, and that when she cries it isn't nearly as important and doesn't mean as much.

And even things like this, sweet in theory but harmful in practice. Teaching your boys to beat someone up (although it is good to teach your son to look after his little sister) is less effective than teaching your daughter to stand up for herself and do the beating on her own. If a boy hurts her feelings, she shouldn't have to wait around for her brother or her father to come to her rescue. She should be taught that she has self-worth and that if someone if mean to her, she can stand up for herself and give them a piece of her mind. Instead of dissolving into tears as her only option, why not teach her that she is allowed to get mad?

What is it in our culture that reviles strong women who can take care of themselves? Now don't get me wrong, it is important to show our emotions, to cry (therapeutic even). But that's not our only option as females. However, so often when we do stand up for ourselves, shout, throw things - act the way men do when they get angry - we are called "crazy", "bitch", and told we must be "on our periods", as though it's unthinkable that we might have real human emotions and express them violently too, just the way boys and men do. 

We women need to stand up for our daughters, sisters, friends, and even strangers we do not know. We need to move beyond the age where girls are pretty little flowers and can't do anything for themselves. We need to teach girls to stand up to the men in their lives. We need to teach boys from an early age to respect women and girls, and change the way we raise our boys so that they grow up to be decent, patient, kind men. Things need to change and that starts with parenting. 

And more than that, men need to learn to stand up for us too. Feminism isn't just for women, and it's not about only giving rights to women, or putting men down. It's about giving women the same rights as men around them and equaling the sexes. Its about equal pay for equal work, and it's about teaching your boys that they're allowed to cry when they're upset. It's about deciding who gets child custody based on the good of the child, not the gender of the parent. Its about believing women when they say they were raped and letting them decide if they want to bring an unplanned for child into the world. It's about supporting men who decide to pursue typically female career paths like nursing and standing up for them when others laugh. Feminism isn't some dirty word to be pushed around and hidden from. It just means treating people with fairness and human decency, regardless of gender. How is that a bad thing?

Who Really Owns the Media?

Bernie's Revolution... A new age of politics

We live in a country that prides itself on having freedom of speech and press, but how free is it really? Can we say what we like in the media? Yes, legally we can, but what does freedom of press really mean in this country? To me, it means that whoever has the most money and will give newspapers the biggest headlines can buy the attention of the media. That sounds like having a significant other with incredibly loose morals who will spend time with anyone who can pay for it... You can see where I'm going with this I hope.

For instance, Oregon had it's primaries this week, and as we drew closer to the 17th, the media was pushing more and more heavily the idea that Hillary Clinton actually is the favored candidate in this incredibly liberal state. All I saw on the politics pages of every major news network was how Bernie didn't really have a chance here, how his following was really just a very small (if loud) group of radical democrats, and how Clinton was obviously going to win by a landslide. But that didn't actually happen. Bernie won the primary 55% to Clinton's 44%, which is a pretty big margin. By contrast, Kentucky had such a close primary that Clinton's reported win margin so far is 0.5%. The more the media continues to claim that Bernie doesn't have a shot at this, that Bernie supporters should get with the program and switch to Clinton Camp, the less likely we are to want to compromise.

There's something about being lied to by the media that just pisses me off. I hate how impossible they find it to be impartial, or at least give due credit to the other democratic candidate running for president. They focus in on Clinton and barely even give mention to Bernie, despite the fact that for the first time in what is probably several decades, people between the ages of 18-30 actually give a fuck about primaries and are showing up in huge numbers to vote. That's a big deal, and it's not because of Clinton. The fact that mainstream media gives almost no credence to Bernie's campaign, that they reluctantly even mention it, and that even popular shows like Trevor Noah's Tonight Show fail to even mention that Bernie is running against Hillary is a problem. Bernie is running a social media campaign because the real media won't give him the coverage he needs to reach people, and they don't give him the time because they know he's not going to give them anything for it. He doesn't have the funding to buy them, so we are instead given an unequal view of the candidates. And We Don't Want Clinton. 

She does not appeal to the younger age group in this country. She doesn't show any interest in supporting our issues, or even listening to our concerns. The younger generation is increasingly concerned about developing a less toxic energy source, with harnessing the power of wind, water, and sun instead of catering to big oil companies. The younger generation wants someone to recognize that the system of continually rising education costs, the devaluation of a college degree, and the never-ending student debt that will follow us around forever doesn't work. Clinton has been in the system so long and gotten so used to dealing with the "real adults" in the world... the baby boomers, our parents generation, the immovable people who were more concerned about lowering taxes and getting out of the recession than in improving on the political system, and in looking forward towards the future.

It's not Clinton's turn. I know she's waited a long time. She thought she had it in the bag in the 2004 election, but then Obama won. Then he had a second term. How in 2016 people claim that it's her turn, that it's time to have a woman president, that she has the political experience and knows how to work the system... That's exactly what we (the millennial generation) don't want. We don't want a conformist who's going to follow the system that we consider broken. We don't want someone who is comfortable caving into and being supported by big oil companies. We don't want Hillary Clinton to be our first female president. We want someone like Elizabeth Warren someday. Someone who stands for the things we believe in, someone who is moving with the times and who is not beholden to any one corrupt entity. We want someone who remembers what it's like to be with the little people, who argues for us and our issues. We want someone we can trust, and unfortunately that person is just not Hillary Clinton. There's too much uncertainty and mistrust associated with her. She lies through her teeth almost incessantly, and that's not a quality we want in the person making our decisions for us. 

Now I don't discount the many contributions that Hillary has made to the cause of gender equality in this country. She has a place in history that cannot and should not be disputed. She is an iconic figure in the rise of women from homemakers and wives to strong people with high-powered careers just as valid as their husband's jobs. But I'm sorry to say its still not her turn and likely never will be. 

Hillary may have the media in her back pocket paving the way for her to the presidency, or at least to the presidential candidacy, but if she thought it would be an easy time of it, we've shown her that she has another thing coming. Bernie's movement is not something that will just go away if she wins the primaries. We're here to stay and if she wants our support she's going to need to change up some things, and definitely improve on her lack of interest in the younger generations. We've been woken up to our political reality and we're going to fight tooth and nail to make sure our issues and concerns are addressed. The time when college students and young adults didn't pay attention to politics is over, and if Clinton does win and doesn't change her attitude towards us, and show some interest in hearing our voice, then she'll lose herself the presidency.

Of course, I myself will vote for her if she wins the primaries, but I know plenty of democrats and Bernie supporters so disgusted by the media's lack of coverage and the DNC's lack of support for Bernie that they refuse to support Clinton in any way. They will not vote at all if it means voting between her and Trump, and that's a problem. The party is so heavily divided right now that if she is the candidate, she's going to have to put herself out there to bring in the Bernie supporters. We're not just going to concede gracefully and join her side. She's going to need to extend the proverbial olive branch or she'll go down in history as the candidate who willingly lost to Donald Trump. Unfortunately, I can really only see a few choices for Clinton here... choose Bernie as her VP running mate, choose Elizabeth Warren as her VP running mate, or some other senator that appeals to the younger generation. Unfortunately, Warren is probably out because there will be the need to balance Clinton's womanhood with a man or people will get pissy. But if Clinton rejects Bernie out of hand, then she's going to have a democratic revolution on her hands that she probably won't survive.

The Trump Campaign

The Rise of Fascism in the US

The Mirriam-Webster Dictionary defines fascism as " a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government". Wikipedia defines it as "a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-centruy Europe and is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left-right spectrum". 

FascismUS.com quotes from Mussolini - "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power"; Lenin - "Fascism is capitalism in decay"; and Sen. Huey Long's warning - "Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism. I'm afraid, based on my own long experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security." 

This website also lists 14 characteristics of fascism:

1. Powerful and continuing nationalism
2. Distain for the recognition of human rights
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as unifying cause
4. Supremacy of the military
5. Rampant sexism
6. Controlled mass media
7. Obsession with National Security
8. Religion and government are intertwined
9. Corporate power is protected
10. Labor power is suppressed
11. Distain for intellectuals and the arts
12. Obsession with crime and punishment
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption
14. Fraudulent elections

The scary thing is, I recognize all of these points and characteristics as things that have become commonplace in the current US political system. Bertrand Russell warned us of the current political plight we now find ourselves in, either under Cruz or Trump:

"The next step in a fascist government is the combination under an energetic leader of a number of men who possess more than the average share of leisure, brutality, and stupidity. The next step is to fascinate fools and muzzle the intelligent, by emotional excitement on the one hand, and terrorism on the other." ~Bertrand Russell

Links:

http://www.fascismusa.com/

When the Nazi's rose to power in Germany, they began as a small group of radical extremists. They were a small and minor "official" police group in the German SA (Sturmabteilung or "storm troopers") commonly known as "Brown shirts" similar to the Italian Dictator Mussolini's "Black shirts". Both Mussolini and Hitler started out their political careers in their respective National Socialist parties, appealing initially to young, nationalistic, working class men. Both had an air of legitimacy to their bid for power, climbing the political chain more or less legitimately.

Hitler made a grab for power early on in his leadership of the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazi for short), and was imprisoned for it. At his trial, he was so passionate in his speech about returning Germany to the world as the great nation it once was, that the judges felt sorry for him and reduced his sentence to 5 years. He was released after 9 months in part due to public sympathy and appreciation for his frankness and national pride. From there, he drew a lot of german youth who were dissatisfied with the options available to them, particularly difficulty getting work, feeling that foreigners were taking their jobs, feeling as though they were owed more and resenting anyone who wasn't as German as they were. Jews have always faced a lot of persecution, in part because they tend to have good jobs, are well respected, and have a strong community that helps them succeed in life. The working class youth saw these things that they wanted and decided they could take them from others because they "deserved" it for being more german than others were.

Fear is an amazing motivator. As Russia had a revolution in which the Communist Party took over, Germany became worried by the rising interest in Marxist ideas and communism. The Nazi party used the Reichstag Fire (some believe Hitler himself engineered the fire) to "fan the flames" of anti-communist fear and solidify his position in politics by promising to rout the group of "dutch communists" that had started a fire to burn down the parliament building. From 3,000 members in 1920, the Nazi party rose to 108,000 strong in 1929, pulling in extremists from the right wing conservative faction of german government and lower-middle class workers who wanted better pay and more jobs.

Hitler used the SA brownshirts as street thugs to enforce his ideas and destroy anyone who didn't agree with or support him. The brownshirts began as a movement of public thugs, but soon became legitimate as first the police supported their marches and vandalism, and then many police became brownshirts themselves. If a newspaper printed anti-Nazi articles, made fun of Nazi leaders, or disagreed with Nazi propaganda, the brownshirts would march in and throw typewriters out of windows, beat people up, smash windows and doors down, and steal personal items without the police lifting a finger to stop them. As the brownshirts gained followers and people joined, they began to disrupt other political parties meetings, breaking them up and even roughing up the people attending. They transformed from a small group of violent and unorganized extremists into a well-organized gang of political thugs, were given weapons and legitimate government positions and the authority not only to beat people up, but to take them away for questioning. Few returned in condition in which they were taken away, if they were ever seen again.

This all happened fairly slowly at first. From the historical records I can find, various interviews with people who survived the Nazi's regime, and Hitler's own books, it seems as though the initial stages of Nazi control were fairly subtle and unthreatening. People ignored the preliminary warning signs, thinking that there was no way sensible people in their country would ever vote someone like Hitler into power. It was all just smoke with no flame to be concerned about. Until it wasn't. Until it became real. Until Hitler did get voted into office, became a dictator, and began to slaughter millions of people from Jews to the mentally/physically handicapped.

The reign of fear and anti-semitism and thuggery in those times is mirrored in our own history today. In the US, we are constantly told to fear terrorist attacks. Ever since 9-11, even the hint of a bomb or a plane crash immediately sets people looking for a terrorist. It's like the "where's waldo" of America now. We are all so terrified of foreign terrorism, not only do we not afford domestic terrorism the concern it is due, but we overlook it entirely and claim it to be "just stuff that happens". Mass shootings are a form of domestic terrorism. Blowing up Planned Parenthood facilities is domestic terrorism. Shooting up a black church because the people there happen to have a different coloured skin is racist domestic terrorism. And yet we are all more concerned about ensuring that the TSA airport security confiscates an old ladies short sewing scissors and throwing away shampoo.

Donald Trump inspires a zeal of hatred against people of different colours, religions other than christianity, women, the LGBTQ community, and pretty much every other group apart from fat, white, middle-aged gun-happy morons and their gun-happy bible-thumping sons. He literally tells people in his rallies to go and beat up anyone who disagrees with them. He promotes violence as a way to achieve goals. He stereotypes muslims and hispanics, he is a sexist pig when it comes to women, pretty much categorizing us as a pair of breasts and a piece of meat to have sex with. He preys on the weak-minded people's fears, telling us we need to get rid of the Mexicans because they are taking all our jobs, we need to bomb the middle east because that's where all the terrorists are, we need to piss off every other major country in the world, just to show everyone how big our collective nationalist dick is.

Trump supporters are obsessed with nationalism, just as the Nazi's were. Everything is about "Making America Great Again" and "'Merica" nonsense. Wearing red/white/blue clothing, waving a flag (often the confederate flag) for no good reason, and singing patriotic songs while ganging up and  beating the crap out of someone smaller than they are while outnumbering them 10:1. Yea, really fair odds there.

And as a quick note, illegal immigrants in the US find it extremely difficult to get a job. They are not "stealing american's jobs", because you need a valid Social Security Number in order to get a legitimate job. As illegal immigrants do not have a SSN, they cannot be employed and paid legally. So instead of saying that the "Mexicans are stealing our jobs", you should really be pissed off at the American business men who are too cheap to pay a fair wage to you americans and instead pay meager pittance under the table to illegal immigrants.

The point of this blog post however, is just to illustrate how shockingly similar Trump supporters are to the "brownshirts" of the Nazi party that nearly took over Europe and destroyed the world as we know it. History is repeating itself here. The Germans were so sure that Hitler couldn't possibly be elected in a fair election, but he did. I was sure in the beginning that people couldn't really be stupid enough to believe Trump's lies and bullshit. But I guess I was wrong, because it's happening right before our eyes. If he is elected, how long do you think it will be before his supporters start setting fires to jewish and muslim owned businesses and houses. How long before they attack LGBTQ bars and meeting places because they are homophobic little creeps. How long before they set fire to women's health organizations like Planned Parenthood. How long before "free speech" is only free if it follows the appropriate mantra of America is the greatest, Trump is wonderful. How long before we go from being a slightly dysfunctional democracy to a dictatorship where the people who are supposed to keep us safe (police) turn into a fascist enforcer group who beat up anyone who doesn't hold to the status quo.

Nazi's, Stasi, KGB, Trump supporters... they're all the same in the end and they're coming for America. That's what we should be afraid of and working to prevent. Not building a wall between the US and Mexico, not waving our metaphorical penises in the air to see who has the biggest balls, and not being so obsessed with "terrorism" that we loose site of domestic terrorism.

There's more at stake here than who gets to live in the white house. I for one do not see a bright future for the US unless we really say no to the Trump supporters and start some proactive actions to ensure that they cannot turn into the new "brownshirts" pushing the Nazi regime. But the US has never been good about being proactive. We're a reactive nation that waits until the very last moment, that waits until nearly all hope is lost before actually getting up off our asses and doing something for the world, not just for ourselves. We're cowards, and probably always will be. It might just be the end of us.

Satanic Dinosaurs & Athiots

Is belief in Dinosaurs the result of Satan's influence on humanity???

Today I had the wonderful experience of coming across this webpage "Christians Against Dinosaurs" @ http://www.christiansagainstdinosaurs.com/ ...

I've known for a year or so that there are some crazy Christians out there who believe that humans lived among dinosaurs, that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs even... I've also met one person in my life who believed that dinosaurs (and any fossils or archeological sites) were a hoax, planted by the scientists to fool people into believing that the world is older than 5,000 years. I've always thought it somewhat laughable that these people are even taken seriously, but today I found this lovely webpage full of disgusting hate rhetoric, mainly aimed at "satan worshipping atheists". Of course, that is a paradoxical statement on it's own, since atheism is the lack of belief in any higher power, and satan is a construct of a "higher power", so how could an atheist worship satan if they don't believe such a thing exists? But i'll leave that conversation for another time.

I find it astonishing that things like a bouquet of dinosaur toys for valentines day causes so much outrage and fear, that having a dinosaur day at a museum is "indoctrinating children into the lies of Satan". And I find it personally offensive that most of their posts have something to do with how atheists are just stupid, slow creatures who were tempted by satan and must now be led back into the light. Apparently, we are soulless, cold, unfeeling and without much brainpower. And they wonder why we Atheists don't like Christians very much.

 

                   

I cannot fathom how they are so threatened and terrified by the very idea of dinosaurs having walked this earth that they feel the need to call everyone they don't agree with stupid, that they seem to take such intense pleasure from their freaky posts.
As far as I am aware, there is nothing in the bible saying "thou shalt not believe in dinosaurs" or that dinos are Satan's creation. And as for that second cartoon, I'm not sure that anyone has found a dinosaur skeleton hidden inside cement, since it wasn't really around back then anyways...

             

I am always impressed by the logic of how atheists are angry all the time, filled with shame and despair, and want nothing more than to persecute good christian people. And I just love the depiction of how atheist people are all depraved sexual deviants and addicted to pornography. Yea, that's me folks, a sexual deviant filled with self-loathing and despair, longing to be saved even if I don't realize it yet... Not.

And lastly (because i'm too disgusted to go on with this post), I am disturbed by this last image from their page that depicts a crusader raising his sword ready to behead someone and the type says "Say hello to the sword of god. Atheist scum." According to the website, its supposed to make every good Christian feel all warm and fuzzy inside, as the brave knight murders atheists. Yea, because that is exactly what "loving thy neighbor as thyself" meant.

  

A final message from me, an atheist, to all those christians out there that wonder why we are so blinded to "the lord's truth" and stubbornly resist the message of Jesus, even when you try to shove it down our throats and then threaten to behead us if we don't convert, all while telling us just how much you love us...

Iran and the Released Sailors

Scaredy-cats

Today in my school's newspaper I read about the US sailors who were taken into custody and detained by the government of Iran when they sailed into Iranian waters. They were released within 18 hours, and were fed, given blankets, and not beaten or tortured in any way. They did make them apologize for trespassing and film it, then broadcasting it around the country, but honestly... that didn't hurt anything more than their pride.

And yet republican senators are taking this opportunity to tell us all how the Iran Deal has failed, how we must immediately start a war with them to show them who's boss.

What i'd like to know is what the US republicans would have done if the situation were reversed? Or what they think the Iranian government should have done instead? Should they have let a foreign nation's military vessel just sail on through their waters, should they have scooted over in a boat and offered them danish pastries and coffee and provided a welcome committee? Of course not. Now, I'm not saying they handled it properly, but what do I know about foreign politics...

All I can say is that I don't understand why everyone is so surprised. It's not like the US and Iran have been on the best terms for the last 10 years or so... You can't expect a nation that has been virtually threatened with being obliterated with nuclear bombs if they try to construct their own to suddenly trust that the USA has their best interests at heart. 

There are decades of bad will and history between the two nations and they are not about to become best buds just because they've agreed to try and work together for the first time. The fact that they detained military personnel is not a crime, especially as they were treated well and were returned promptly and without harm.

I'm just disgusted by the way the republican party constantly tries to not only demonize everything that Obama does internationally, but also continues to incite fear and hatred of foreign people and nations. 

The Republican Lineup of Candidates for Presidency

The terrifyingly insane people that might just become president...

So this country is facing a big change in 2016... A new president. Now this isn't like the usual race by each party to get a member of their side elected as leader of the USA. No, this race has transcended sanity and is now becoming a bloodbath for the people of this country. In the past whichever party won the election would change some policies and make things cushy for their party, but they wouldn't alter the very structure of the country and throw us all into war. But all that changed when the republicans elected George Bush instead of Al Gore in 2001.

Republican Candidates for 2016 Election

1. Jeb Bush, Former Governor of Florida 
2. Ben Carson, Former Neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital
3. Chris Christie, Governor of New Jersey
4. Ted Cruz, United States Senator from Texas
5. Carly Fiorina, Former CEO of Hewlett-Packard
6. Jim Gilmore, Former Governor of Virginia
7. Lindsey Graham, United States Senator from South Carolina
8. Mike Huckabee, Former Governor of Arkansas
9. Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana
10. John Kasich, Governor of Ohio
11. George Pataki, Former Governor of New York
12. Rand Paul, United States Senator from Kentucky
13. Marco Rubio, United States Senator from Florida
14. Rick Santorum, Former United States Senator from Pennsylvania
15. Donald Trump, CEO of The Trump Organization

Now I'm not going to go into what each candidate stands for, because that would take forever and be fairly repetitive. I may do a later post about that for the frontrunners, however this time I want to talk about the grand picture of what these people represent...

The Republican Platform in 2016

The main things that seem to be the foot this party is standing on is as follows (in no particular order of importance):

• Religious "freedoms"
• allowing homophobia in the workplace and elsewhere
• Islamaphobic policies and preaching
• Seeding fear of immigrants, particularly hispanics from Mexico
• Demonizing Planned Parenthood and repealing the right to abortions
• Cutting taxes for the top 1% even more
• Destroying public healthcare
• Cutting public funding for infrastructure like roads, bridges, damns etc...
• Halting trade relations with other countries
• Destroying cooperation btw the US and Iran, possibly starting another war
• Defunding and cutting budgets for education
• Bring back big oil and forget about climate change because it's not real
• Lower the minimum wage

Just to name a few...

Now, let us discuss these issues because they scare the hell out of any sane american, scare the world because if one of these people gets into power we're likely to start WWIII with nukes, scare women because they're going to become objects and property again, scare anyone who is not a white, heterosexual man...

Religious "freedoms" & Homophobia

What is a religious freedom? Well, to most people it would be the definition in the constitution of this country which specifies a separation of church and state. 

The exact wording of the First Amendment is:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This gives people the right to believe in whatever religion (or lack thereof) they wish, and it allows them to practice their religion providing it does not harm another person. This last bit is what seems to be forgotten by the religious right in this country. They are allowed to pray wherever and whenever they please, they can wear crosses, they can carry their bible around with them, they can converse about their religion, they can do whatever they want to show their beliefs as long as it does not harm another person. But they do harm other people. There is rampant homophobia in this country. They don't want to employ a person if they happen to like people of the same sex, they don't want to provide services or speak or have anything to do with them. They are outraged that same-sex marriage is legal now, they are outraged that they have to hand out marriage licenses and "participate" in such a sinful celebration, even though they really don't have to. The term "religious freedom" is now used to persecute same-sex couples, homosexual people, LGBTQ groups and people, and more... 

I don't quite understand where these people get off thinking they can push their religion down our throats. I don't understand how they think it's okay to be rude, say cruel and unkind things, deny basic services, and treat them as lesser human or even animals simply because they choose to like people of the same sex as themselves. I cannot understand how they justify their vicious behaviour saying that it's the "will of god". Are they god? Do they know exactly what god thinks about these people? Are they themselves the omniscient creator of the world they worship so stridently? No. Their book of "morals" tells them first and foremost to "love thy neighbor as thyself", and "let he who is without sin throw the first stone", and yet this is forgotten in the storm of hatred hurled at anyone who is different to them. They feel so entitled to "practice their religion" that they don't see why it is wrong to use their religion to persecute and profile and attack other people. 

This is what we are in for if a republican wins this election. We are in for blatant homophobia and that whole "separation of  church and state" will go right out the window faster than you can blink. Anyone who isn't a blessed christian is going to be fodder for all sorts of hatred and hate crimes and no one will do a thing about it. 

Islamaphobic Policies and Preaching

Ever since 9/11 there has beed an outpouring of hate and mistrust against anyone who even looks a little bit middle-eastern. If they are muslim and practice islam, it seems to be generally accepted in this country that they are definitely a terrorist in the making. Doesn't matter if they are actually a greek catholic, to the uninformed and overly-suspicious republican, they are a bomber waiting to happen. 

There are entire rallies specifically to sow distrust and hatred towards muslim people that practice the religion of Islam. The truth is that there is a very small portion of muslims that make up the dangerous group of extremists, and sadly those few give the entire religion a bad reputation. It would be like looking at just the Popes and Cardinals of olden-times and claiming that every single catholic was a child molester. Happily, that is not the case with either catholics or muslims. Most of them are wonderful people who live simple lives and just want to be left in peace and safety to raise children and live out their lives doing jobs that they love. 

But ever since 9/11 people, and republicans in particular, have been claiming that Islam is a dangerous religion and condones mass murder and terrorist attacks when it does no such thing. Christianity condoned mass murder when it came to the crusades. Catholicism condoned mass murder and genocide when their explorers "found" the New World and "claimed" the uncivilized continent for their rulers, killing all the native people as they spread across the land like a plague of locusts. These are religions that have condoned such violence and actions as being "the will of god". Not by fringe-groups of extremists, but by the leaders of those nations, the Kings and Queens that ruled them, the Pope's that were their religious leaders, their priests and missionaries and preachers. No religions have inflicted such widespread harm and murder as Christianity and Catholicism, and yet those same people choose to spend most of their time telling everyone how Islam is the most potent danger to the future of this country and the world. 

The republican candidates are no exception. Claiming to be all virtuous and perfect, they push all the evils in the world on Muslims and the religion of Islam and have a hate and smear campaign that is specifically designed to make people fearful of foreigners, fearful of non-white people, fearful or people who talk in a different language or practice a different religion, or wear different clothes. And these are the people who might one day lead this country... 

I ask you, what is more scary than that?

The Fear of Immigration

Something that I find very interesting about this election and what the republicans seem to be running on is the fear of illegal immigrants. Now we've heard for years about how terrible the Mexicans are, how they constantly just hop over the border with no problem and spread diseases that we US citizens are just not equipped to handle.

It's like they are trying to re-invent history and make themselves the Native Americans dealing with the Spanish Conquests... Not only is that offensive to the peoples that actually did have to suffer through that, but it's also highly inaccurate. Whatever diseases we have here in Texas, they probably have down in Mexico too, and vice versa. Why that is even mentioned in the debate to restrict illegal immigration is a mystery to me.

What I really don't understand is how, the moment Donald Trump said that all Mexican immigrants are rapists and thieves, the whole republican party jumped on board and started saying we need to build a wall. Then, smart guy that he is, Scott Walker (republican Senator of New Hampshire) suggested that what we really need is a wall (a really big one) dividing us from Canada, and protecting us from all the terrorists that come into the US from there. Now, I think a wall between the US and Mexico is insane enough in itself. But blocking out Canada because of "terrorists" is not just stupid and irrational, I personally do not understand how this guy hasn't been committed to a secure insane asylum yet. Not only that, but he actually has a place in government and the rules that we must all live by. If you don't find that scary then I have nothing more to say to you.

The fear of immigrants to the US was ramped up the minute the attacks in Paris happened in late 2015. Before that people were scared, and talked about how we'd be letting in all the terrorists, but it wasn't until the Paris attacks that the situation really exploded (no pun intended). Suddenly people were saying how every single muslim was a terrorist and how even letting in orphaned children was a risk, because they would obviously grow up to be terrorists too...

The amount of hatred you must feel towards a culture in order to condemn orphaned children to death is pretty huge. There are so many people out there who are facing horrific circumstances, whose houses have been bombed, who have watched their loved ones - parents, life partners, children - be blown to bits, who have abandoned every worldly possession they own to escape real terror and find a safe place to live. That's what really baffles me. They are the ones who truly experience Terroism. Here in our safe little country bad things do sometimes happen. The Boston bombings were no small matter, and 9/11 was a pretty tragic event, but we know nothing of living in constant fear. Of seeing a stranger outside your house and wondering if your parents are going to dragged away and tortured, of nearly starving to death every day because there's not enough food... That is THEIR reality, what they have to face every single day. And here we sit in our nice and cozy homes, with our TV's and cars, and safety and the surety that we are not going to have our house explode around us.

And yet we are the ones talking about how we DESERVE to keep out people in need. Our government OWES it to us to close the borders and look out for itself. The whole Iraq War began because our government "supposedly" wanted to help the Iraqi people escape tyranny by their government and local terrorist groups... And yet when a group of people are ACTUALLY in danger and dying by the thousands every day, we decide to hide and leave them to their own devices...  That to me is so disgusting. And yet, that is happening right now. The combination of misinformation and hate speech by the republican party has got the conservative right of this country in fits of the vapors and demanding that we "test" the religion of anyone who wants to enter this country. If that doesn't violate the freedom of religion clause in the Constitution they supposedly hold so dear then I don't know what does...

Demonizing Planned Parenthood

I've already talked about this one in so many other blog posts, it might be a bit of a waste of time to reiterate everything i've already said, so I'll simply say this...

Planned Parenthood helps millions of women across the US remain safe and healthy. It provides a multitude of services:

• pre-natal vitamins to ensure babies are born healthy
• breast cancer exams
• STD testing
• colon cancer screenings
• ultrasounds for pregnant women
• birth control consultations and prescriptions
• condoms
• urinary tract infection treatments
• adoption agency referrals
• safe sex education
• HPV vaccines
• female & male sterilization
• abortion services.

In fact, 41% of all services provided to people in 2015 were related to Sexually Transmitted Disease screenings and treatments, 34% was contraception advice and prescriptions, and <3% were abortion related... <3%, and yet their facilities are heckled, bombed, and defaced because of uneducated, despicable domestic terrorists that hide behind the idea that they are "Good Christians" and pro-life...

A quote that stuck with me was this: "I do not believe that just because you're opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think that in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-live. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is." ~Sister Joan Chittister

That is exactly how I feel about it. These people don't even deserve the term "Pro-life" because they couldn't care less what happens to that tiny human after it's born. If it is so addicted to heroin because it's mother was a drug addict, even if it is adopted by a loving family, its going to have severe developmental and health defects, and even physical deformities, for the rest of it's life. How do I know this? Because my mother is a labour and delivery nurse, and she sees children born every single day to people who have so abused their bodies and their fetus that even when it is born it struggles to live beyond a few moments. She has to nurse preemies who die within hours of birth, or are sent off to a foster care home with little chance of a good life. She sees the horrific side of childbirth every day. You would think that as a nurse who delivers babies she would be pro-life too, but she knows the reality of these children's lives. She knows the struggle they face and she has to be the one to watch them die. She says that it is crueler to subject these poor little beings to hours of pain and suffering when they'll die shortly afterwards, or struggle their entire lives to find a place in society. Those people out there holding pickets outside abortion clinics have no idea what the reality is like, and yet they think they stand on the moral high-ground simply because they want to force women to give birth to lots of babies.