Attempting to re-activate...

Hello! (I know at least one person occasionally reads t his, hehe, so I won't say "hello, all!" ;-) I've been horribly remiss in maintaining this blog. But now that I've finished my master's (yay!) and have sliiiightly more free time I'll get I'm home working for the summer so I'm going to try and re-activate it. Right now my facebook page is much more interesting and this blog, sadly, suffers by comparison. Hopefully, though, that situation will change in the coming days and weeks.

Love!

Wow, how time flies.

I need to get better at this blogging thing! Any tips? I just haven't been good at budgeting the time for this lately... bad John!

Anyway, I wanted to reproduce this facebook exchange between myself and another in response to an angry note I wrote in response to an article I read about how the "Christian" right was spreading lies in an effort to get Californians to vote "yes" on Proposition 8. I would venture to guess that anyone who reads this has access to my facebook profile; however, no reason not to post it in another forum! I'd love to hear thoughts. The person's name has been changed for privacy. I'd like to point out also that this person was not even tagged in the initial note.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27369927/
James Dobson -- lower than low. Since when does Christianity involve lying, fear-mongering, and spreading hatred and discord? You have a lot to answer for, you evil person. You RAPE Jesus Christ with your hateful lies and bigotry, and you hijack the teachings of the source of ALL love and the Supreme lover of ALL creation. (Yeah, that's right, the love same-sex couples have for each other comes from GOD, despite what your warped misreadings of Biblical texts might suggest.) I am so sick of the love that my husband and I have for each other (and the love between millions of same-sex couples like ourselves) being used as a political weapon to scare people. It's people like this that give Christians a bad name. It's people and organizations like this that drive thousands away from Christianity, and often from religion in general. It's people and organizations like this that make me so sick of and disillusioned with this country. Liberty and justice for all? My ass. We'll talk about liberty and about justice when gays and lesbians can excercise their fundamental human right to marry the person they love. Don't you DARE use our love as a scare tactic for your own political gain, you horrid wretch.
Speaking of the fundamental right of gays and lesbians to marry, I am SO ashamed of the various church organizations that are behind the fight to pass Proposition 8 in California and write discrimination and bigotry into that state's constitution. Shame on you, Focus on the Family. (That's right. James Dobson's group of self-righteous, holier-than-thou, phony "Christians" who believe that Jesus only loves you if you pray like them, vote like them, and believe like them has its fingers in THIS one too.) Shame on you, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon Church). Shame on you, Knights of Columbus (a Catholic fraternal organization). Shame on all of you hateful, bigoted, narrow-minded Neanderthals who would stand so squarely in the way of my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. I DARE you to tell me that you've got God on your side. I DARE you to tell me that you're doing "what Jesus would do." The joke's going to be on you in the end, when you are (mercifully) gone from this earth and go to be judged as you have judged others.
I didn't intend to write such a vitriolic diatribe, and I fully understand that it might very well cause some of you to de-friend me. I do not apologize for it, however. I hope that none of you ever have to know what it's like to be discriminated against by the very country, the very government, the very church/es, and the very people that you are supposed to care about and love, and that are supposed to ensure that your basic and fundamental human rights and dignity are upheld. I would encourage those of you who might want to de-friend me on the basis of this note to give that some thought and leave a comment or two. Let's discuss. After all, despite this venomous note, I really am a lover, but I guess I'm a bit of a fighter too. See what this has turned me into? Sheesh... Europe's looking real good....


And here is the partial thread of comments from the anonymous individual (Person A).

Person A: I am repulsed by how you lump everyone into a category according to your own personal views. How can you condemn someone for holding a different viewpoint? Just because someone opposes a political proposition doesn't mean they deserve to be damned and name-called. Not every [gay] person feels the way you do about same-sex marriage; that doesn't mean they are stripping you of your God-given rights.
Also, did you ever stop to think that maybe it's people like YOU who deter so many from Christianity or the gay community? To be Christian is not only to accept that Christ was our savior, but also to live/love as he did. Is this note the way Christ would speak of the people you've written about? I see more hatred and putrescence in your note than I've EVER heard come out of someone like James Dobson.

Me: Hey xxxxx. Okay, first of all, did you read the article that this post referred to? All of those claims made by James Dobson and Tony Perkins are verifiably false. Put another way, they are LIES. (I will be glad to either refute them point-by-point myself or direct you to a source that will.) I will assume that if Dobson and Perkins are not themselves educated on the proposition (which is highly unlikely), then their underlings are. So since they have read the language of the proposition and informed themselves on the issue but persist in spreading untruths, they are lying. This is in direct violation of the ninth commandment and, therefore, evil. So I do not regret calling Dobson evil. And in the case of homosexuality, Dobson has a history of demonizing and marginalizing gays and lesbians. Believe me, I know -- my parents used to subscribe to his newsletters, and I read them every month while I was growing up. I am very well acquainted with James Dobson, his rhetoric, and his political and religious views, and I completely stand behind my comments about him.
Additionally, I find it interesting that you criticize my Christianity. I definitely do not need to defend my faith to you, but I WOULD like to call your attention to the many places in the Bible where Jesus loses his temper. Jesus was physically violent in the temple in Jerusalem (found in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John) when he cast out the moneylenders. He overturned the moneylenders' tables, and John goes so far as to say that he "made a whip out of cords and drove them all out of the temple area." (John 2:15). Can you believe it? Our Lord and savior being violent! I certainly don't feel bad, then, for getting worked up and writing an angry facebook note. Matthew 23 is full of examples of Jesus getting angry at the Pharisees and calling them hypocrites (interesting -- so wouldn't I be following his example by challenging the idiocy of a religious leader???) He even cursed a fig tree in Matthew 21. Clearly, if Jesus' anger didn't deter "so many" from Christianity, mine will not either. Feel free also to do some research on the Christian teaching of righteous anger before you criticize me or anyone else for becoming angry at people's misunderstanding and perversion of religion and/or issues of social justice.
I never referred to marriage as a "God-given right." I DID say that the love in a committed homosexual relationship comes from God, the source of all love, but I did not refer to marriage as a right granted by God. Come to think of it, there are precious few rights that God "grants" in the Bible. Just ask women, slaves, "Gentiles," members of non-Jewish/Israeli tribes, prostitutes, tax collectors...and on and on and on. Society, morality, science, and common sense have evolved a great deal since Biblical times, so just because something isn't specifically listed in the Bible as a "God-given right" does not mean that it is in any way less basic or fundamental. Proposition 8 is not your everyday political proposition. It proposes to write discrimination into the California constitution and strip an entire group of people of their rights.
Finally, I find it most hypocritical when certain people benefit from the advances in LGBT rights and then turn around and bash those who are fighting for them. Whether or not you admit it, xxxx, your human rights are up for a vote in California, too. What a strange world we live in.

Person A: It is true. Jesus got angry and violent, and I understand why you are. We must remember, though, that Jesus was the Son of God and we are not. I never once criticized your Christianity, John. I stated that the words of your note are filled with nothing but hatred and self-righteousness.
I don't disagree with WHAT you stand for, John, so stop attempting to make my stance seem hypocritical and trivial. I disagree with HOW you stand for it; the way in which you conduct yourself - and rightfully so. When it comes down to it, you're fighting fire with fire. You are name-calling, condemning, damning, defaming, and even (how outrageous) DARING people.
Your words are hateful and antagonistic... NOTHING like Jesus'. It is not hypocritical of me to mention my disgust with your verbal diarrhea.

Me: If we're discussing what was said and what wasn't said, I never once expressed hatred for James Dobson. Disgust? Yes. Incredible anger? You bet. Outrage? Certainly. Hatred? Nope. That just simply was not said.
And xxxx, this note was an isolated incident, a burst of anger. Don't forget that I lead my life every day as a flawed but (I hope) pretty nice person, making lots of mistakes but in general just trying to be the best person I can be -- the best husband I can to xxxxx, the best singer and classmate and ensemble-member and co-worker and friend and family member that I can. I try every day to change people's misconception of homosexuality and homosexuals not overtly, through words or otherwise shoving it in their faces, but through my actions, i.e. kindness, openness, and sincerity. Because Jon (a friend who left a comment) is also right in that when push comes to shove, we can (and should) change laws, but it's changing hearts that is the most important. When someone who styles himself a religious leader and a Christian public figure uses lies, slander, and divisive, misinformed, bigoted, hateful rhetoric to demonize me, my husband, and hundreds of thousands of others like us just because of who we were created to be and who God ordained us to love, I will occasionally get angry. You should know that we in this community are used to being misunderstood and demonized. Sometimes, though, it's tough and/or impossible to swallow. And that was my whole point in citing both the Biblical examples of Jesus' anger and the teaching of righteous anger: that sometimes (in this case, for example, when grave injustices are perpetrated upon a minority group in the name of religion) anger can be righteous and godly and necessary. It is especially necessary when fighting against grave injustice. This anger is not hateful because it does not spring from hatred. You should know me well enough to know that I'm not a hateful person at heart, xxxx. Incidentally, I think it's too bad that you also had to attack my thoughts as "verbal diarrhea." Yes, my initial note was rather rancorous, but it was at the very least well-thought-out and well-defended, as the record of this conversation clearly shows.

An email to my husband's mother

I sent this email to my husband's mother after she tried telling him why John McCain was the better choice for America, and to one of my brothers after I was told that he thought I was voting for Obama solely on LGBT issues. Bear with me -- it's a long one, but I think it's a pretty decent one. I've cut the introductory small talk and gone straight for the substance. (Just to clarify, my brother-in-law Will, who I refer to in the email, is serving overseas in Iraq. Additionally, some of the uncited sources include the candidates' official campaign websites and the AFT website.)

Here goes:


I love you very much, and Michael and I miss you tons! You have every right to be angry at me for what I will say in this email, but I really hope you don't get angry at me and that we, instead, can have a good dialogue about things! The only reason I'm writing this to you today is because I and we love you, and both of us feel very passionately about the upcoming election. Please take some time to read this.

First, you should know that Michael and I are two very politically savvy, news-conscious, well-informed people. We get our news on a daily basis from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, New York Times, BBC World News, and (for a conservative perspective) the Drudge Report. Among our friends, we are usually the first, or one of the first, to know about any particular news item. We really pride ourselves on digging deep into news stories and examining them from many different angles. Consequently, it really hurts Michael's feelings when you tell him, over and over again, to "pay attention," implying that his opinions are based on faulty information or otherwise flawed.

Second, I understand your instinct to vote for McCain because of Will, especially since McCain carefully cultivates the perception that he's somehow better for the military than Barack Obama. Believe me, Michael and I worry every day about Will and pray always for his safe return in November. However, voting for McCain based on that one single issue makes no more sense in my mind than Catholics voting for McCain solely because he is against abortion! There are a lot of other issues to consider. And unless things have changed drastically since the time that Will and Michael or I last spoke, Will is feeling pretty disillusioned by the military and the war himself.

I myself watched Colin Powell testify before the United Nations in February of 2003, when he laid out the American case for going to war in Iraq. I remember all the charges -- mobile chemical and biological weapons laboratories, the revival of their nuclear bomb project, etc. -- and the visual aids (diagrams/charts, photographs, etc.) that he used. Every one of his allegations, which were used to justify our war in Iraq and connect Saddam Hussein to the events of 9/11/2001, turned out to be baseless. Powell himself has come to regret giving that speech before the UN (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200509/s1456650.htm).

Michael and I support the troops. However, we draw a very clear distinction between supporting the troops and supporting the war. We are vehemently against the war, but this does not mean that we are in any way not behind Will and his mission overseas. In fact, the majority of Americans share our views. According to http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm, the most recent data available suggests that 64% of Americans oppose the Iraq war, 58% believe that we made a mistake sending our boys over there in the first place, 59% support setting a timetable for troop withdrawal, 61% believe that considering the costs versus benefits of the war, it was "not worth" fighting, and on and on. I believe that my brother-in-law would be best served by being allowed to come home and not being required to fight in an unjust war. I believe that the best way to support him is to advocate strongly for the end of the war so he can come back to the USA and pursue life, liberty, and happiness -- higher education, a relationship, etc. That's how I support Will, and I cannot and will not believe it makes me any less of a patriot, any worse of an American, or any less "behind the troops."

And while I appreciate very much your thinking of Will as you decide who to vote for, I urge you to think of Michael as well. A Barack Obama presidency would bring our country closer to recognition of Michael and I as a couple. This nation has deprived us of basic and fundamental human rights for the entire duration of our relationship and marriage. While Obama is weaker on gay rights than Hillary Clinton, he is INFINITELY better for our community than John McCain would be. All you need to do is look at Barack Obama's profile on the issue (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Civil_Rights.htm#Gay_Rights) and compare it with John McCain's (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/John_McCain_Civil_Rights.htm). Barack Obama supports civil unions for gay couples (and while this is NOT enough and I will NOT rest until Michael and I are given FULL marriage rights, in name and in substance, by this country, civil unions are a step in the right direction!), supports health benefits for gay civil partners, supports the Matthew Shepard Act (which would make a crime motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender orientation, or disability a hate crime), supports ENDA, the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (a proposed federal law which would prohibit discrimination against employees based on sexual orientation -- can you believe that this isn't law already? Better believe it.), and supports repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the discriminatory military policy that prevented Michael from joining the Marines and serving his country, as he wanted to do after high school.

John McCain is against ALL of these things. I repeat: John McCain is AGAINST the Matthew Shepard Act. So if Michael or I would ever, God forbid, be beaten up for holding hands, speaking out on gay issues, or kissing on the cheek in public, it could not be prosecuted as a hate crime. John McCain believes that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is working and would not change the policy. John McCain does NOT want it to be a crime to discriminate against gays and lesbians in the hiring process and in the workplace. And he has come out on record in support of efforts in California to enact Proposition 8, which if passed, would define marriage as being between one man and one woman. These issues affect Michael and I very directly. There is NO doubt where McCain stands on gay rights and what McCain would do if he became president. Michael and I are seriously considering moving out of the country if John McCain is elected for these reasons, among many others. Quite honestly, the social climate surrounding gay issues in this country makes me sick, and the fact that Michael and I cannot be legally recognized in our love for and commitment to each other makes me incredibly ashamed of and angry at my country. If I were asked to say the Pledge of Allegiance right now, I would not be able to do so. Michael and I are proof positive that this country does not practice what it preaches, does not provide "liberty and justice for all" and certainly does NOT allow Michael and I the "pursuit of happiness." But I digress... back to John McCain.

John McCain is TERRIBLE on education. As you know, Michael would not be able to attend college were it not for government-subsidized grants and loans. I would probably not be able to attend college myself were it not for very similar assistance from the government. However, John McCain voted against efforts to improve access to college and opposed lower interest rates for student loans (S. 1932, Vote 363, Dec. 21, 2005). He also opposed increasing Pell Grants (Michael has received Pell Grants for every year of his college career) and supported raising interest rates on some student loans for the benefit of private lenders (H.Con.Res. 94, Vote 114, April 28, 2005).

As you may or may not know, Michael and I are not recognized by the state of Wisconsin or the American federal government and as such, I cannot cover Michael under my insurance that I receive from the State of Wisconsin as a University of Wisconsin employee. We scrape by each and every month and pay over $100 for SKELETAL health coverage for Michael. He can't even go to the dentist once a year for routine teeth cleaning without us having to pay several hundred dollars, that's how little insurance coverage he has. Anyone who does not recognize that the American health care system is broken is living in complete denial, and Barack Obama's health care plan would ensure that all Americans have access to affordable health care and that all children would be covered. John McCain, on the other hand, voted against reauthorizing the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and extending benefits to an additional 3.2 million children. (H.R. 976, Vote 307, Aug. 2, 2007) His health care plan would count employer-provided healthcare premiums as taxable income, creating yet ANOTHER tax on workers (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, April 5, 2006; Los Angeles Times, Nov. 20, 2007; Commonwealth Fund, June 2005). His solution to the exorbitant cost of healthcare in this country is to create "health savings accounts" for every American. What makes him think that in a country where most people do not have savings to cover even three months of expenses (http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/sav/20060621a1.asp), savings accounts would work for health care? It would seem that John McCain, who paints himself as the maverick candidate of the common man, is wrong on this issue as well.

For further analysis of McCain's disastrous health care plan, see http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/mccain-health-plan-millions-lose-coverage-health-costs-worsen-and-insurance-and-drug-indu.

Now let's talk economics. John McCain is alarmingly out of touch on the issue, damned by his own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUAaNwG3aSs, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng1yXgyY8Uo). We are currently in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, one that has shaken the foundations of American market capitalism to the core (http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,578944,00.html), yet the "fundamentals of the economy are sound"? Give me a break. Perhaps Mr. McCain can sell off one of his seven (?) houses if the economic crisis puts him in a pinch, but what do those of us who don't even own ONE house do?? His answer to Social Security is privatization, yet how much money would my hypothetical "retirement savings account," another McCain proposal, have left after the financial woes of the past week? Not much, I fear. Yet in the midst of all this financial turmoil, McCain supports massive corporate tax cuts (Washington Post, 4/16/08). His tax plan calls for two major tax cuts for corporations, with 58 percent of the benefits going to the top 1 percent of taxpayers. (Reuters, March 10, 2008; Center for American Progress Action Fund, March 21, 2008) And he also voted AGAINST increasing the federal minimum wage! This is an insult to anyone who's ever worked for minimum wage; I worked on jobs that started me at minimum wage during summers to save money for college, but there's no way I would have been able to completely support myself on such little income! Barack Obama, by contrast, has voted to increase the federal minimum wage, supports incentives for companies that create jobs in the United States, and opposes tax breaks for corporations that send jobs overseas. (Mr. Free Market McCain would not likely interfere with corporate job outsourcing.) Additionally, Obama supports tax relief for working families and proposes establishing a Foreclosure Prevention Fund to protect responsible homeowners from foreclosures. It would seem that Barack is looking out for the "little guy," AKA you and I, and McCain has the interests of corporate America at heart.

Additionally, McCain boasts to have voted with President George W. Bush "over 90% of the time" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xukbiS8q9s), which is corroborated by the Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html). With President Bush receiving some of the lowest public approval ratings since the advent of modern polling (his approval rating currently stands at 27%, with 68% disapproving of his performance, http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm), I'm surprised that McCain is so open about his support for Bush's failed policies. But it's clear to me that if John McCain is elected in November, we'll be in for more of the same in this country -- another term filled with the same failures.

He's currently running an incredibly dirty campaign and has been caught in lies several times, yet stands behind the lies nonetheless (http://payingattn.blogspot.com/, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/15/AR2008091502406.html). Hardly the "straight talker" he wants you to think he is.

These are just a few issues that Michael and I have taken into account when we decided to vote for Barack Obama. I'm not even going to bother going into detail about Sarah Palin, a woman who believes in abstinence-only sex education (even though her daughter Bristol is Exhibit A for the failure of such a policy), rejects evolution and climate change despite overwhelming scientific consensus (http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/evolution.htm, http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686), sued the Bush administration when it listed polar bears as an endangered species because she claimed it would hinder economic development in Alaska (http://www.adn.com/polarbears/story/413710.html), advocates aerial hunting of wolves (watch this, the video will make you cry it's so cruel: http://www.grizzlybay.org/SarahPalinInfoPage.htm), and believes that the Iraq war is a "task from God" (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080903/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_palin_iraq_war). How alarming!!! And she is shockingly unprepared to be vice president or president by almost any standard of readiness.

I just wanted you to know a few of the reasons we're voting for Barack Obama in November and why we fervently believe that he's the better choice to lead America. John McCain has cleverly convinced people that he's the maverick, the straight talker, the candidate for the little guy, the candidate for the military, and the candidate of "values." It's only when we dig deeper and pay attention that we realize the opposite is true.

Love,
John
__________
Thoughts??

John McCain

The first of what promises to be many posts about John McCain and/or that running mate of his. Before I knew any better, John McCain was someone I could respect -- someone willing to stand up for his convictions even when it meant going against those in his own party with whom he disagreed, someone willing to take a politically unpopular stance for something he believed in (ex. campaign finance reform). He always appeared transparent -- what you saw looked like what you got.

Of course, this isn't the case now, nor was it really ever. But what really took away the last shred of respect I had for John McCain as a politician was his appearance on "The View" last Friday. Joy Behar called out the self-proclaimed "straight talker" for spreading malicious lies about his opponent. Anyone who can navigate the Internet well enough to perform a simple Google search (which I'm not sure applies to McCain, but I digress...) can verify that the claims in question (Obama advocated teaching sex ed to kindergarteners, Obama's lipstick-on-a-pig remark was a sexist jab at Sarah Palin) were and are patently false.

And yet McCain had the nerve to defend the lies, to deny that they were even lies at all. Unbelievable. He's like a kid caught with melted chocolate smeared on his hands trying to tell mommy that he hasn't been in the cookie jar. Ridiculous!!

Richard Cohen from the Washington Post has perhaps said it best:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/15/AR2008091502406.html

Inaugural post

I'm not even sure I should be doing this. There's always something more pressing to be done -- practicing, getting caught up on email, homework, practicing, cleaning, work, practicing -- and I swore I'd never have a blog myself, never be one of those people. But here I am. In my youth I attempted to keep a diary but that didn't last. We'll see if this experiment fares any better.

Right now I'm so deeply hurt, offended, and shocked by this country that I was raised to love that I need an outlet for my frustrations. If you're upset with frank political, social, and cultural talk, read at your own risk. If you agree, let me know! If I piss you off, let me know! Anything is better than apathy.