British TV: CURE ME! I'm Gay!

The British are well known for their dry sense of humor, but the latest "joke" is no laughing matter.  British TV Doctor/personality Christian Jesson is taking the serious matter of sexuality and exploring whether or not it really is possible to take a gay individual and turn them strait though gay conversion therapy methods.

Jenson, whom is gay himself and in a relationship will be undergoing a number of the treatments  while being filmed,  and then take a "sexuality test" which involves use of a device that measures sexual arousal.  The purpose of this series?  To test their legitimacy.

This could be both a good and a bad move.  On the one hand the show will interview a number of people that have undergone reparative therapy.  A negative result from that is they will interview someone that swears that they went though it and it worked well and they are living happy normal lives.  The problem with that is it gives an unrealistic and a non factual view of homosexuality, which has been proven over and over again though medical science from many different branches of medicine that homosexuality is natural and cannot be changed.  The below is probably one of the best explanations of how the genetics work where homosexuality is concerned.

The science has been well documented in the field and yet the religious zealots of the world seem to want to continue to throw their beliefs in our faces as if theirs is the only proper conclusion forgetting that science has never been a friend of religion and that more and more people whom are part of the gay community don't believe in biblical religion at all.  And that's the sad part.  The stance or belief that homosexuality is not natural is purely a religious one.  So basically they want to shove their beliefs in the face of others when they themselves freak out at anyone else presenting anything that might be different or contradiction of their own beliefs.

Now the positive that I see that could come from this is, its proven in public view that homosexuality completely natural and that reparative therapy doesn't work.  The claims of the church completely debunked perhaps more than enough people will open their eyes and start allowing things to get moving and make it possible for gay men and women to be able to live a normal accepted life rather than having to hide who they are for fear of the wrath of a god they done necessarily even believe in.  That's a day certainly to look forward too.

GOProud Founder Is Not So Proud Anymore...

I obviously follow politics very closely, as the tone of this blog clearly shows.  I also think its super clear that I'm a liberal.  Every once in a while a story comes up that makes me think...what? and this didn't happen sooner?  One such story, that I picked up from The Young Turks, gave me one of those moments tonight.

Jimmy LaSalvia Co-founded a group called "GOProud", which was to be a safe haven for Gay and Lesbian men and women...who also happened to be Republican.  This happened in 2009.  Its the beginning of 2014, five years later...hows it working?  Apparently, not as well as LaSalvia had intended.

LaSalvia announced that he's officially left GOProud AND the Republican party and is no longer Republican!  Why?  LaSalvia states that he " but I just can't bring myself to carry the Republican label any longer" and that he can not support the "tolerance of bigotry" any longer...just 5 years later after he co-founded GOProud. 

This is not a surprise to me.  Quite frankly I'm surprised he made it as long as he did.  But it looks like LaSalvia finally realized what the larger gay community realized a long time ago about the Republican party.  Guess what everyone...the Republican party hates gays.  They always have.  The proof is in the pudding.  Now you might say that not all of them do, and you may be right... but as a whole you cant tell me that the Republican party accepts us just because GoProud exists.  Thats not how it works!

Dont believe me?  Lets take a quick look at key people from the Republican party that has either gotten into office or tried to get in an office of some kind have said about the people in the gay community.

Sarah Pailin:  believes homosexuality is a perversion that can be “cured” through the power of prayer and most recently she has defended Duck Dynasty.  Back in August 2013, she even recommended that Washington should emulate the Duck Dynasty family!

Mitt Romney:  There's so much to say about Mitt here I just couldn't cover it all.  here's a few glaring problems with Mitts beliefs on Gay rights. First after his term as Massachusetts governor, he changed his views on nondiscrimination laws for gays and lesbians at the federal level, not supporting them at the federal level, but only on the state level.  He later signed the same pledge Michelle Bachman and Rick Perry from the National Organization for Marriage that says he will support a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, defend the Defense Of Marriage act in court and nominate anti-LGBT judges.  When Chris Matthews of MSNBC asked about what Romney thinks the difference between marriage and civil unions is, Romney said, "Well, I would rather have neither, to tell you the truth."  Romney opposes sexual orientation and transgender-inclusive hate crimes laws.  Now he seems to have toned down a bit, claiming he is still opposed to gay marriage, but does support some gay rights, like equal rights in employment.

Rick Santorum: that the GOP must maintain its opposition to marriage equality to avert political suicide.

Ron Paul:  Paul spoke in support of the Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996.

Michele Bachmann: Has equated teaching about homosexuality to child abuse, has called it a sexual dysfunction and a disorder

John McCain:  McCain does not support same-sex marriage.  While in the Senate, McCain voted against extending the definition of hate crimes to include sexual orientation. He campaigned in his home state of Arizona to amend the state's constitution to forbid same sex marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships.

These are the people that the Republican Party tries to get voted into office.  You know, the offices that vote on important issues such as...whether members of the gay community have the same rights as the rest of the country? Yes there are other issues that they stand for that are just as dangerous, but dont pertain to this subject, granted, but these are strong issues that the GOP support and obviously go out of their way to attack. They are voted in by the voters of the party...which means which means that non politician members of the republican party support those same values.

These kinds of things make me wonder, why do people within the gay community, small group as it is, continue to align themselves with a party?  Jimmy LaSalvia finally got it.  The GOP hates the gay community!  They dont like you!  They would be happier if you didn't exist at all.  Being fiscally conservative is fine, but why give yourself the same label as a people that consider you to be sub-human, and abomination, sick and not worthy of equal rights?  The GOP doesnt want something like GOProud around...they just dont want the gay community to exist at all.  They would love the country to be set back 50+ years where gay rights are concerned, and return to the time where being gay was indeed a crime and one you could be imprisoned for.  Good luck with that.

Origional story by The Young Turks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPfzlolPdfc

Money and Poltics

The big question today:  Why is it so many pieces of good legislation that would greatly benefit our country and the American people get shot down?  Are these bills honestly thought to be bad bills?  Whats the deal?  Why is almost everything in near gridlock when it comes to taking any given problem that effects the American people and solving it, or at least working toward solving it?

Corporate person-ship is a huge problem in the political realm these days.  Over the last century or so Corporations have been able to wiggle legislation in that allows them to be able to play a major role in the decision making of our elected officials?  How?  Money!  Under the current law corporations are viewed as people, protected under the constitution as individuals with many of the rights extended to them as a result?

What does this mean?  It means that corporations have a say in how things are run in this country.  The huge problem with this is that not only do they have that huge say, they can also use their substantial profits to effect policy making. 

Now would they really do something like that, I mean really?  They are just a small group of people for each corporation, the top decision makers.  Well unfortunately is yes on both counts.  Not only can they but they use it all the time to increase their profits at the expense of the rest of the country.  How?

Money is unfortunately a huge motivator in the political world right now.  Campaign donations and donations of other types are heavily relied on for re-election interests as well as lining pockets.  This is why you see things like anti gun control groups, anti environmental groups, religious groups and so forth, adversely effecting politics and gumming up the things that need to be done.  Worse yet these same groups will introduce legislation that not only dead stop good forward movement to correcting serious problems, but will often introduce legislation that would make problems worse!

the answer?  Get money out of politics and stop elevating corporations, businesses, to the level of being recognized as people .  Right now with money involved politicians are able to be bought.  That old saying "every man has a price" certainly applies here.  The politicians we are voting in to represent the American people's will are naming their price and corporations are paying it gleefully.

The result? You see the will of the people not being followed on many subjects.  If the peoples will were being followed you would see things like stiffer gun control laws being passed, pot being legalized across the board.  Gay marriage would have been legalized a long time ago, and we would have no where near the problems we have with environmental legislation, or even the attempted hindering of the Affordable Healthcare Act.  Its all corporations that are holding these things back in one way or another.

The sooner money is ejected from politics the sooner we can get things on the right track. I will take work but It can be done.

Pot Legalization

Legalization of Marijuana. We have come a long way haven't we?  We've gone from being totally illegal across the board in every state in the union and overpopulated prisons, to now states dropping one by one, so to speak, legalizing it in one fashion or another.  Some states for medical use and of course most recently Colorado Legalizing it for recreational use.

The result has been a split down the middle between those who are for and those who are against the use of marijuana.  This is really not a surprise as the battle between the two factions has been intense for years.  We've seen the result of that over the last week pretty clearly.  Not so much from the pro side, but definitely from the anti side.

two major stories broke.  The first one earlier last week involved the supposed deaths of of 37 people in Colorado that had died of a marijuana overdose shortly after the 1st, after the recreational use laws had gone into effect.  Did this really happen?  Short answer...no.

So where did this story begin?  Apparently on a website called Daily Current, a website that is similar to The Onion website, and like The Onion, its a satirical website dedicated to creating spoof stories based on current events.   Unfortunately, it seems, just like Onion, Daily Current suffers the same problem of uneducated readers stumbling on them and taking them seriously without checking sources or validating the story as being real.  The story was taken from satirical and elevated to a hoax story spread though the internet by the anti pot supporters, and presented as real and factual...seems they've taken a cue from Fox News.

Thankfully there are still smart people out there that verify their sources before opening their mouths.  Unfortunately politicians are not one of them...as usual. 

Which brings us to the second story that broke this past Thursday, January 2nd.  The state of Kentucky held a hearing of the Kentucky House Health and Welfare Committee, which in part discussed the idea of legalizing the medicinal use of pot.  and of course State Rep. Robert Benvenuti (R-Lexington) had to open his mouth.  Benvenuti said that he believes that the availability of medical marijuana in Kentucky could be "a Trojan horse" for legalizing recreational weed in the state and could lead to the deaths of children, also stating that he could fill the room with different municipalities such as police and first responders who could report on all the deaths of children based on the effects of marijuana.

Oh really now?  And can Mr. Benvenuti, provide documented proof of his statements showing in absolute terms and not is speculative ones, that use of pot was what resulted in these children's deaths?  Well of course he cant!  Republicans that speak out on issues like this rarely are able to provide proof of anything and the "proof" they do provide is always easily debunked with actual facts. 

So here are some facts for you:
      Death caused by tobacco (cigarette) use:  more than 440,000
      Death caused by alcohol use:                    more than   88,000
      Death caused by Marijuana use:                               0

That's right!  there are no known cases on record of anyone losing their lives by overdosing on marijuana! But that's what these people want you to believe, is that all kinds of death tolls are in our future if this goes though.  There's no truth to it.  There is a study out and about that states that a marijuana smoker would have to consume 20,000 to 40,000 the amount of THC to even be close to being at risk of dying from an overdose.

The reason for this resistance from the GOP and their supporters, even though there are no solid verifiable facts to back up their claims?  Is it because they are genuinely concerned about a persons well being while using pot?  Well of course not! for decades they've been fighting on the losing side of this "war on drugs".  They are very well aware of the real data.  But like most things, they ignore real data, unless it supports their argument of course.

The basic idea:  Lets control everything we can while at the same time claiming we want small government. We see it every time they open their mouths, and of course when that happens we get set back in our countries progress...and that's their ultimate goal, to make things the way they used to be so they can claim they are honoring their sky god, when really they probably have some plan in mind that will line their pockets.  It seems for them when you peel back the layers that's what it always comes down too...you just have to sit back and wait until it manifests itself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/03/marijuana-overdose_n_4538580.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/daily-extras/hoax-story-claiming-marijuana-overdoses-kill-37-in-colorado-fools-some-not-all

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/10/fill-a-room-killed-by-marijuana-kentucky-politician-says_n_4576996.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003


           

Dear God, Please Bless This Public Classroom

Recently in South Carolina, Lawmakers began to push for new legislation that would mandate...ready for this?...Prayer sessions in public schools.  According to the article printed on the website "The Raw Story"

The bill in question? H. 3526 which directly states:

"All schools shall provide for a minute of mandatory silence at the beginning of each school day, during which time the teacher may deliver a prayer, provided the school allows a student to leave the classroom if the student does not want to listen to or participate in the prayer."

Now whenever the public school system started here in the United states, one truth holds true:  the Public School system is a governmental institution.  It's run by the government, funded by the government and the government sets the academic standard for students to strive for.  But the key here is that its a government, not a private, institution.

Now when I look at what South Carolina lawmakers are trying to do, there seems to be a glaring defect in their plan that they seem to have glossed over as they try and stomp though all this.  The first amendment, instructing future lawmakers that there would be NO LAW that would establish any kind of state religion.  Over the years that amendment has been scrutinized by courts and, in part, has been found to include the use of religion in the public school system.  As we've seen this evolve in the public education venue, we've also seen it reduced to not being an official part of the academic curriculum.

Now is it really wise to make such a move?  After all many of the GOP and some Democratic lawmakers firmly believe that the reason things have gone so astray in this country is because there is a tragic gaping hole left by leaving out religion in that venue.  So the question is should it be filled by governmental decree?

Absolutely...NOT!  The public school system has evolved to be a place for secular education, to prepare students for the workforce and give them a taste of different areas of expertise so they can A: get basic reasoning and living skills and B: narrow down what they want to do to make a living in their lives.  Its not there to provide a religious education.  There are plenty of religious based schools out there now, that are private, that have been instituted for those who want their children to have an education that include a religious environment. 

The implications are disturbing, as South Carolina lawmakers contemplate this change in policy.  Its a direct attack on what the Supreme Court has ruled on over and over again first of all.  Second of all, what kind of prayer are we talking about?  Hindu, Buddhist, Shamanistic, Wiccan, Taoism, Shintoism, Christian?  And what about the growing number of students that dont believe in a god, Atheists and Agnostics?  We need to remember that the America that exists now is not the same one that existed two hundred years ago!  This is no longer a Christian country now, if it ever was at all. The public School system has become a diverse hodgepodge of different religious belief systems.  Simply stating that a student can pray to the God of their specific belief system or even leave the room during a time of silence is a simple whitewash of whats really going on.

This is a very cloak and dagger way of trying to establish a state religion that's more comfortable for the religious right and for the so called democrats that are like them.  It cant be allowed.

Original Story on "The Raw Story":

The Young Turk Story

The Question Of Minimum Wage

How is it we live in a world where people who are in to parent homes where both parents are working, full time, still cant make ends meet?  There is this thing called minimum wage that exists.  Its the lowest base hourly wage that the federal law allows businesses to pay their employees for their services, and as it stands right now its not enough to allow a family to lift themselves out of poverty, even with both able adults are working.

Now in 13 states the minimum wage was raised on the first of the year.  This is certainly a good thing.  The families that were working at $7.78 will now see a slight raise in the money that they have to work with on a monthly basis.  But is it really enough?

Not really.  Here's why.  Lets take Colorado for instance.  Colorado, for instance saw a $0.22 raise on the first of the year bringing the states minimum wage to $8.00 an hour.  If an employee working at minimum wage worked 40 hours a week 4 weeks a month they would only see overall monthly wage increase of $35.20.  That's really not a lot.   If you think about it that's really not much to do anything with.  and more disturbing is that amount is added onto gross earnings, not net.  That means that Colorado households wont actually be getting an extra $35.20.  out of that will be taxes taken out.  Now its a good possibility that those families might get those taxes back at the end of the year, but again that's not much added on to that either.

Its pretty well agreed that raising the minimum wage across the board is a very important step to pulling Americans out of poverty and help them thrive.  If they have more they can spend more on things they need, get bills caught up so they arent working for those bills and maybe even develop a savings account that will help them not fall into such kinds of debt so easily again.

So the question becomes, how much?  How much is a satisfactory amount to raise the minimum wage.  Law makers are looking at raising it across the board to $10.10 an hour.  Now that's a significant raise!  Back to Colorado for instance that would be an increase of $336 per month at an average of 40 hours a week, a far cry from the double digit increase that was just enacted. This would allow savings accounts to be built, debt to be paid and increased spending.  That latter, increased spending, may not happen immediately...but it would increase as people lifted themselves out of debt.

A second question comes into view.  That of reaction by businesses to such a drastic increase.  Many say that increasing the minimum wage, especially that drastically would cost jobs, not help people.  Unfortunately, when it comes to the legendary greed of big business, nothing should be put past them.  What they would probably do is try and cut jobs, and short of that, try and cut hours, negating the wage increase.

So what needs to happen to make sure that big business doesn't negate the wage increase?  First as the increase happens they need to be made to keep their prices for whatever service or good they are offering static so it doesn't effect their consumer base.  Second, businesses need to not be allowed to cut employee hours or let them go...maybe perhaps put a limitation on how long an employer must wait to take such a drastic direction.  Instead of firing or cutting hours, these employees, perhaps these business should look at their own business practices to see what they can do to lower their overall operation costs, without effecting their employees adversely.  Firing employees or cutting their hours should always be a last resort.

Employer and business reaction not withstanding, a significant minimum wage raise would be extremely beneficial to American hourly wage workers.  It may be slow going to get a wage increase that drastic, but depending on how such a wage increase is approached, it would be a move in the right direction!

Climate Realities More Serious Than Predicted!

In a recent article from the Huffington Post, it was revealed that the effects of Climate Change may be far worse, by a long shot, than what Climate Scientists originally thought.

For many years Scientists studying Climate Change and its affects said that global warming would warm the globe by about 2 degrees in the next hundred years or so. It seems that prediction has changed. Now they are looking at a number that doubles the originally perceived rise to about 4 degrees Celsius, or 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit, by 2100. Many governments agree that the original belief that the prior estimate of 2 degrees Celsius was the absolute maximum comfortable threshold our planet could permanently warm by before problems we already face would be drastically aggravated.

2C would be a bad enough problem, but according to lead Researcher Steven Sherwood, a 4C rise would be catastrophic! Examples he specifically sited were “making life difficult if not impossible in much of the tropics, and would guarantee the eventual melting of the Greenland ice sheet and some of the Antarctic ice sheet” All three events would of course change the face of the inhabitable planet as we know it.

Why the sharp temperature increase? As the globe warms its been found that the amount of cloud cover decreases. Clouds are kind of a natural shield against the suns rays, preventing the sun from heating the earth too quickly and unabated. The less the cloud cover the faster the rise and the worse the problem.

The article finished up by stating a second report that stated that “we should be concerned about caused by rapid warming” or a cause of concern as Huff reported. “many of the biggest threats that climate change presents to are are ones we are not ready for”

Well why not? Why aren’t we ready for it? The answer is simple: Its because, where there is no real argument as to whats going on in the part of the science community about whats going on and what its cause is, there is a chasm that splits the rest of the world, especially politics, between people who live in reality and the people who fight against the change that’s needed to fight climate change and what now looks to be the catastrophic consequences of sitting and doing nothing.

What needs to happen? We've been saying it all the long. On a consumer level we need to shop smarter and greener. No nothing extreme as vegetarianism needs to be adopted by all. We're talking about all the little things that add up to something much bigger. CFL bulbs, using less damaging products in our homes, decreasing the amount of garbage we produce as a household and so on.

On a larger more industrial scale, we need to start developing practices less harsh to our environment. Develop new technologies that will get the job we need done, even jobs as simple as getting us from point A to point B.

Whats the reality as it stands now? This new information is going to be fought over, people will attempt to dismantle it. I don’t know about other countries, but here in the US this new information will be locked up in politics, and any governmental action, which since the world runs on politics these days, is a frightening notion! Those on the Liberal side ( real liberals mind you) will try and draft bills that will address the problem, and good from brilliant them, they are the ones I vote for, and gridlock will happen because those bills aren’t something that career Republicans want passed...because that affects their pockets and they might get a little less in funding from their lobbyist friends. What a horrifying notion for them.

This all goes to show two things: 1: We need to deal with this problem and not keep sweeping it under the carpet like we have been because 2: We desperately need to get money out of politics. Much of the gridlock is not because people don’t know that the problem is very real and very dangerous and needs to dealt with. Its more the money thrown at politicians by corporate entities and their lobbyists that stand to gain more money for themselves by preventing any kind of change from happening.

Can it be stopped, or even slowed? Of course it can. When humans stop abusing the world around us it has an amazing ability to heal itself...but it cant do that if we continue the way we're going now-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/31/climate-change-worse_n_4523828.html?ir=Politics&ref=topbar 

Nature Article: Spread in model climate sensitivity traced to atmospheric convective mixing