Misogyny Gone Mental: Rape As A Divine Plan

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
It fairly boggles the mind, but when it comes to the Republicans, it has sadly become duckspeak:

GOP Sen. Mourdock: 'God Intended' Pregnancies From Rape

Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said pregnancies resulting from rape are part of God's plan, tearfully explaining that he only supports abortions when a mother's life is in danger.

"I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen," Mourdock said during Tuesday's Senate debate, choking up. Mourdock's opponent, Democratic Rep. Joe Donnelly, opposes abortion except in cases of rape and incest.

And of course, this idiot went on to explain how he said no such thing (regardless of the fact that he did):

After the debate, Mourdock further explained his comment.

"Are you trying to suggest somehow that God preordained rape, no I don't think that," said Mourdock, according to The Associated Press. "Anyone who would suggest that is just sick and twisted. No, that's not even close to what I said."

Talk about talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Democrats wasted no time linking GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney to Mourdock. Earlier this week, Romney personally appeared in a TV ad for the Indiana state treasurer, offering his endorsement.

That suggests a link, does it not?

"Richard Mourdock's rape comments are outrageous and demeaning to women. Unfortunately, they've become part and parcel of the modern Republican Party's platform toward women's health, as Congressional Republicans like Paul Ryan have worked to outlaw all abortions and even narrow the definition of rape," Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a statement released to press.

It’s a common sign of cognitive dissonance: re-explain reality in a way that you can rationalize your ridiculousness.

Par for the course, Romney deserted the guy he made a commercial for:

"Gov. Romney disagrees with Richard Mourdock's comments, and they do not reflect his views," campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said.

Abortion has become a more prominent issue in the presidential campaign in recent weeks, as Mitt Romney told the Des Moines Register that he would not pursue any specific abortion legislation as president and began airing a new TV ad in which a woman touts Romney's support for abortions in cases of rape and incest-a difference of opinion between Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan.

As they’re both morons, this ‘difference of opinion’ matters not at all.

The Obama campaign hit Romney on abortion soon after, releasing a TV ad of its own that features footage from a 2007 GOP presidential primary debate in which Romney said he would be "delighted" to sign a bill banning all abortions in the U.S.

What do rethuglickans call that, when Dems do it? Oh yeah – flip-flopping.

Missouri Senate candidate Rep. Todd Akin said during an interview in August that women's bodies have ways of preventing pregnancy in cases of what he called "legitimate rape." Akin apologized for the comment, but refused to leave the race despite pressure from his own party.

Mistaken Akin – one more fool for the GOP.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Tex., the chairman of the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee has issued a statement defending Mourdock and pointing out that his Democratic opponent, Joe Donnelly, is also firmly pro-life:

"Richard and I, along with millions of Americans - including even Joe Donnelly - believe that life is a gift from God. To try and construe his words as anything other than a restatement of that belief is irresponsible and ridiculous. In fact, rather than condemning him for his position, as some in his party have when it's come to Republicans, I commend Congressman Donnelly for his support of life."But this election is about big ideas and the reality that our country is going in the wrong direction. If you support Obamacare, government bailouts, reckless spending and higher taxes than you should vote for Joe Donnelly. But if you believe, as I do, that our government is too big, our taxes are too high, and we are passing an irresponsible debt onto future generations, than Richard Mourdock is your candidate to help get our country back on track."

I really don’t know where to begin with this fairy tale. There is no god – regardless of how many people believe there is. We are stripping this planet of resources because people think that there’s some ‘divine plan’, meanwhile ignoring all the evidence that there is no such thing. This election is just another bunch of crazies trying to legislate their own private madnesses. As to irresponsible debt? That accusation coming from the GOP is akin to the pot calling the kettle black. There is ample proof that all the GOP has ever done is wreck this country. It’s a historical fact: we do better under a Democratic president than under a Republican.

Of course I expect too much: it’s always been a failing of mine. I would expect people to vote in their own best interests, but no; the gobshites are too damn lazy to simply take the time out of their TV-infested lives to actually do some homework, check the facts, and weigh the alternatives. They would rather take their cues from some dipshit like Glenn Beck or Limbaugh or some other talking-fuckhead who’s too stupid to breathe, than to actually act in their own best interests.

Or, as Voltaire once put it so well: “I do not know why they call it common sense, as it is not very common.”

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

‘Heterophobia’–Can Anyone Please Get A Little Stupider?

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
The raging ignorance of the fellow members of my species exhibit, gives me a splitting headache:

Nick Griffin's ridiculous cry of 'heterophobia'

Just when you hoped you'd seen the last of him, up he pops again. Users of Twitter can hardly have failed to notice that yesterday, Nick Griffin took to the social networking site to express his anger over a judge's decision to award damages to a gay couple denied a room at a bed and breakfast.

In a series of increasingly irate tweets, the leader of the BNP called on his supporters to take action against "the 2 bullying 'gay' activists who won the case v Christian B&B owners." He demanded to know why leftwing and gay activists didn't "confront Muslims instead of picking on meek and forgiving Christians", claiming that "bullies are always cowards". He also publicly shared the home address of the gay couple in question and encouraged people to demonstrate outside their house – what he called a "bit of drama by way of reminding you that an English couple's home is their castle". He ended with the battle cry, "Say No to heterophobia!".

[I think the biggest reason for not confronting Muslims, is that they tend towards hyperactive violence when even slightly criticized.]

And no – bullies are not always cowards. Sometimes they’re just bored sociopaths. Either way we look at it, this sort of discrimination is disgraceful. But if the B&B owners refused to rent to the couple because they thought gay sex was icky-oogy, well, their asses would be on a plate. But as Hitchens so aptly puts it: ‘a man who proves every day that you can get away with anything in this country if you can shove the word "Reverend" in front of your name.’ The main point being, that hide under the umbrella of religion, and it (used to) provide a shield for both ignorance and discrimination.

And  what does the ‘upright’ Mrs. Wilkinson say?

Speaking after the ruling, Susanne Wilkinson said, "Equality laws have gone too far when they start to intrude into a family home." But a bed and breakfast is not a family home. It's a family business – and like any business, it falls under the provisions of the Equality Act. Wilkinson also added, "People's beliefs about marriage are coming under increasing attack and I am concerned about people's freedom to speak and act upon these beliefs."

Oh boo-fucking hoo. I get tired of all these plodders whining about their ‘beliefs’ being held to account – as if the mere act of ‘believing’ has any impact on reality itself.

And then we get idiotic gaffs like the following:

Whenever "beliefs about marriage" are mentioned, some people have a peculiar habit of confusing genuine discrimination with the right to discriminate against others. The former archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, demonstrated this last week when he compared opponents of equal marriage in Britain to Jews living in Nazi Germany. Clearly the Archbishop has a selective sense of history, or he'd remember that gay people were also rounded up and murdered by the Nazis. And Nick Griffin adopts a similar tactic now when he talks about people being the victims of "heterophobia". What we're seeing is the oppressor claiming the language and status of the oppressed.

And in my personal experience, in both real-time and blogging, is that the hugest portion of humanity that leans towards raging stupidity, is when they’re religious. It’s like they think they’d been absolved of all responsibility for having an informed opinion.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Right Wing Is All A-flutter–Because Nobody Praised Their Imaginary Friend?

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

The Elephants Who Hear Nothing are about the business of bullshit yet again. They prove yet again that they pay no attention to the facts nor to the world around them, but are insistent that they can impinge their fantasies on reality by mere dint of will power and repetition.

Paul Ryan Hits ‘God’ Absence From DNC Platform

ADEL, Iowa–Paul Ryan weighed in Wednesday on the Democrats’ 2012 platform, which makes no reference to “God,” calling the omission “rather peculiar.”

“It’s not in keeping with our founding documents, our founding vision, but I guess you would have to ask the Obama administration why they purged all this language from their platform,” Ryan said on Fox News.

The word God is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. The word “Nature’s God” appears once in the Declaration of Independence, alongside mention of the word “Creator.”

The new platform refers to faith, saying it “has always been a central part of the American story.”  It also says the US was founded on the principle of religious freedom and the ability of people to worship as they please. It praises the work of faith-based organizations.

As if it’s not enough that some idiotic afterbirth of the Republicans (the ‘Tea Party’) even exists, we have one of these assclowns actually running for VP, and adding insult to injury, he has to regurgitate the party line about ‘the founders’ and America being in debt to some non-existent superstition.

Regardless if Mitt wins or not (and it doesn’t look good for Mr. Underwear), somebody somewhere has to get on the boob tube, and start actually taking these ignoramuses to school. I may sound like a broken record here, but no opinion is worth shit unless it’s backed up by something we in the real world call evidence.

I sincerely wish we could abolish the Republican party – it’s done nothing but damage this country since the Demos and the Repubs switched faces at the start of the 20th century.

We’re better off without them. Any of them.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Worst Name For A Holiday Ever

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
This Monday marks the worst excuse for an American holiday ever.

I’m talking about one of the major racist assholes the 14th century, that clown who missed his objective by thousands of miles, claimed land for Spain based on skin color and religion, and was an all around douchebag in every sense of the word.

I’m speaking, of course, of Cristoforo Colombo.

Let’s just whip out a few snippets from the wiki, just to fuel the outrage:

Though Columbus was not the first European explorer to reach the Americas (having been preceded by the Norse expedition led by Leif Ericson in the 11th century), Columbus's voyages led to the first lasting European contact with the Americas, inaugurating a period of European exploration, conquest, and colonization that lasted for several centuries. They had, therefore, an enormous impact in the historical development of the modern Western world. Columbus himself saw his accomplishments primarily in the light of the spreading of the Christian religion.

But for a ‘Christian’, he certainly had some terrible ideas about how to treat others:

Columbus called the island (in what is now The Bahamas) San Salvador; the natives called it Guanahani. Exactly which island in the Bahamas this corresponds to is an unresolved topic; prime candidates are Samana Cay, Plana Cays, or San Salvador Island (so named in 1925 in the belief that it was Columbus's San Salvador). The indigenous people he encountered, the Lucayan, Taíno or Arawak, were peaceful and friendly. From the 12 October 1492 entry in his journal he wrote of them, "Many of the men I have seen have scars on their bodies, and when I made signs to them to find out how this happened, they indicated that people from other nearby islands come to San Salvador to capture them; they defend themselves the best they can. I believe that people from the mainland come here to take them as slaves. They ought to make good and skilled servants, for they repeat very quickly whatever we say to them. I think they can very easily be made Christians, for they seem to have no religion. If it pleases our Lord, I will take six of them to Your Highnesses when I depart, in order that they may learn our language." He remarked that their lack of modern weaponry and even metal-forged swords or pikes was a tactical vulnerability, writing, "I could conquer the whole of them with 50 men, and govern them as I pleased."

Columbus also explored the northeast coast of Cuba, where he landed on 28 October. On 22 November, Martín Alonso Pinzón took the Pinta on an unauthorized expedition in search of an island called "Babeque" or "Baneque", which the natives had told him was rich in gold. Columbus, for his part, continued to the northern coast of Hispaniola, where he landed on 5 December.

There, the Santa María ran aground on Christmas Day 1492 and had to be abandoned. Columbus was received by the native cacique Guacanagari, who gave him permission to leave some of his men behind. Columbus left 39 men, including Luis de Torres, the Converso interpreter, who spoke Hebrew and Arabic, and founded the settlement of La Navidad at the site of present-day Môle-Saint-Nicolas, Haiti. He kept sailing along the northern coast of Hispaniola with a single ship, until he encountered Pinzón and the Pinta on 6 January.

On 13 January 1493 Columbus made his last stop in the New World. He landed on the Samaná Peninsula where he met the hostile Ciguayos who presented him with his only violent resistance during his first voyage to the Americas. Because of this, and the Ciguayos' use of arrows, he called the inlet where he met them the Bay of Arrows (or Gulf of Arrows). Today the place is called the Bay of Rincón, in Samaná, the Dominican Republic. Columbus kidnapped about 10 to 25 natives and took them back with him (only seven or eight of the native Indians arrived in Spain alive, but they made quite an impression on Seville).

And it is said that a person can be measured by the company they keep:

Michele da Cuneo, Columbus's childhood friend from Savona, sailed with Columbus during the second voyage and wrote: "In my opinion, since Genoa was Genoa, there was never born a man so well equipped and expert in the art of navigation as the said lord Admiral." Columbus named the small island of "Saona ... to honor Michele da Cuneo, his friend from Savona." The same childhood friend reported in a letter that Columbus had provided one of the captured indigenous women to him. He wrote, "While I was in the boat, I captured a very beautiful Carib woman, whom the said Lord Admiral gave to me. When I had taken her to my cabin she was naked - as was their custom. I was filled with a desire to take my pleasure with her and attempted to satisfy my desire. She was unwilling, and so treated me with her nails that I wished I had never begun. But - to cut a long story short - I then took a piece of rope and whipped her soundly, and she let forth such incredible screams that you would not have believed your ears. Eventually we came to such terms, I assure you, that you would have thought that she had been brought up in a school for whores." This letter has been interpreted by some as providing evidence that Columbus knowingly aided the rape of captured indigenous people.

There is a word for such men – rapist. And yes, Columbo was famous for his penchant of giving native girls to his crew to do as they wished.

And of course, skipping to the more scumbagworthy of his exploits, his governorship and arrest:

Under the terms of the Capitulations of Santa Fe, after his first voyage Columbus was appointed Viceroy and Governor of the Indies, which in practice entailed primarily the administration of the colonies in the island of Hispaniola, whose capital was established in Santo Domingo. By the end of his third voyage, Columbus was physically and mentally exhausted: his body was wracked by arthritis and his eyes by ophthalmia. In October 1499, he sent two ships to Spain, asking the Court of Spain to appoint a royal commissioner to help him govern. By then, accusations of tyranny and incompetence on the part of Columbus had also reached the Court.

The Court appointed Francisco de Bobadilla, a member of the Order of Calatrava, but not as the aide that Columbus had requested. Instead, Bobadilla was given complete control as governor from 1500 until his death in 1502. Arriving in Santo Domingo while Columbus was away, Bobadilla was immediately peppered with complaints about all three Columbus brothers: Christopher, Bartolomé, and Diego. Consuelo Varela, a Spanish historian, states: "Even those who loved him [Columbus] had to admit the atrocities that had taken place."

As a result of these testimonies and without being allowed a word in his own defense, Columbus, upon his return, had manacles placed on his arms and chains on his feet and was cast into prison to await return to Spain. He was 48 years old.

[Snip]

According to an uncatalogued document supposedly discovered very late in history purporting to be a record of Columbus's trial which contained the alleged testimony of 23 witnesses, Columbus regularly used barbaric acts of torture to govern Hispaniola.

[End snip]

His own incompetence and savagery was so vast, that it angered even the Christians of his day (a sorry lot they were, too), and was brought back in chains without the ability to defend himself? This might have provoked outrage in the most sympathetic, excepting that he was one of the hugest bastards in history.

It’s a sorry state of affairs, when any country honors a savage like this. In fact – sign this petition. This monster deserves a footnote at best in the annals of history, but most certainly NOT a day in his alleged ‘honor’.

In fact, I’m somewhat in mind to seek out his grave, and piss on it.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...