Today has sucked for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was having to take my GRE this morning with a fucking awful migraine. Then, I get to work and read all of this lovely shit:
Via Broadsheet
Thought you could snark away recent efforts to establish the “personhood” of a fertilized egg with a couple of North Dakota jokes? Think again. The “personhood” movement is gaining quasi-hip grass-roots momentum. Legislators in five states have introduced bills that would grant constitutional rights to the “pre-born” from the moment of fertilization; bills have already passed not just the North Dakota assembly but also the Montana Senate (and petition drives are reportedly under way, or close to it, in Oregon and Mississippi). (Colorado: FAIL.) “We won’t rest until every state recognizes that pre-born babies are persons, just like you and me,” says one activist in the introductory video on Personhood USA’s pre-spell-checked Web site. (In a sloppy/sly sleight of rights, the video also passes off the Declaration of Independence as the U.S. Constitution.)
We all know that establishing the “personhood” of microscopic Americans is a means of characterizing abortion — legally, and even culturally — as murder. Though the Supreme Court decision making abortion legal turns largely on the right to privacy, it also notes — in an aside that has become anything but — that if fetuses were “people,” they would be entitled to protection under the 14th Amendment, ergo entitled to “life.” The Center for Women Policy Studies has stated that “legislative efforts to establish fetal patienthood, victimhood and, therefore, personhood represent the primary threat to Roe v. Wade.”
More backwards Oklahoma shit via Okie Funk
When Richard Dawkins, a former Oxford University professor and famous evolutionist, recently came to Oklahoma to give an academic presentation, it created a spectacle that continues to embarrass the state.
State Rep. Todd Thomsen (R-Ada) introduced a House resolution criticizing Dawkins’ visit to the University of Oklahoma. The resolution claims Dawkins’ views “are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma.” Dawkins, an atheist who often criticizes creationism, responded by mocking the resolution during his speech and posted a video about it on his popular Web site. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist. His speech was a part of activities examining Charles Darwin’s ideas and research. (Darwin is pictured to the right.) [...]
State leaders also need to understand that reports of the local anti-evolution movement make their way through scientific and other intellectual communities throughout the country and world. These reports make the state seem backwards, isolated and unwelcoming among groups of people that could help move the state forward. This has the potential to hinder efforts recruiting top scientists and faculty to work in the state. This, in turn, hurts our students.
It also sends the wrong message to Oklahoma scientists, science faculty members and other faculty members. It tells them to avoid discourses, theories and research that might offend certain politicians or be labeled controversial. This applies to virtually all disciplines, and it could ultimately have a major dumbing-down effect on our students.
The maddening trolls over at Feministe: (Although I love the way they deal with them)
Troll #1
Let’s face it, the primary cause of single motherhood is fornication. Fornication is a sin, whether Liberals want to admit it or not. People like the Rev Al Sharpton, who are supposed to be preachers of the Gospel, would do more good for their people if they would preach the Biblical Gospel: repentance toward God and faith in Jesus Christ. As it now stands they preach the gospel of big government and entitlement. This is seductive to their followers but continues to create the misery that generally follows sinful behavior.
Troll #2
Maybe Obama will legalize prostitution. Think of the money the hookers will make and the money the baby killers will make! It could turn our economy around.
I mean we might as well start breeding as soon as they can so we can kill the babies and call it “choice” or (my personal favorite) “a women’s choice”. And the teenagers are how old? Here’s a choice, keep your legs together. Or in the case of rape, kill the rapist. Oh… I’m sorry, the baby’s not innocent are they. They are the guilty ones, how dare them to try to be born! YOU LIBERALS ARE SENDING AMERICA TO HELL! Honestly! Please move!
I don’t want you ungodliness (and please don’t tell me you are a believer like Obama does and murder babies) or your ignorance to rub off.
I guess we will turn the war on terror back on the babies of the women who can’t “Just say NO”. And my tax money will be spent on teaching young girls to sleep with every guy the meet and call it “Planned Parenthood”. REALLY? We are teaching them to be Parents? Let’s see. Kill your child, don’t get married and go get pregnant again and do the same thing. And YOU PEOPLE think the abstinence believers are wrong? UNBELIEVABLE.
Via ThinkProgress
Yesterday, as President Obama was delivering his second press conference, Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) spoke at the NRCC’s largest fundraiser of the year to an audience of more than 1,200 Republicans — including prominent luminaries like House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH).
In his speech, Jindal turned to one of the major issues facing the GOP: whether it agrees with Rush Limbaugh’s statement that he wants Obama to fail. Without mentioning Limbaugh, Jindal criticized the recent focus on the remarks, claiming that anyone who disagrees with President Obama is treated as committing “treason.” On whether he personally wants Obama to fail, Jindal simply said, “it depends“:
Make no mistake, anything other than an immediate and compliant – “why no sir, I don’t want the President to fail” is treated as some sort of act of treason, civil disobedience, or political obstructionism. This is political correctness run amok. […]
I will not be brow beaten on this, and I will not kow-tow to their political correctness. We will be the loyal opposition. So… my answer to the question is very simple — “Do you want the President to fail?” It depends on what he is trying to do.
To which I can only scream… I mean, the Republicans bitch and moan about liberals being unpatriotic and anti-American if they criticized Bush (remember the Dixie Chicks?) and yet they’re complaining about the same treatment? Not that I really care if they criticize Obama… they’re perfectly entitled to say ‘I hope he fails’ cuz damnit, I wish Bush had failed too. And I am unpatriotic and anti-American and don’t care who calls me that. But people, really. Stop being so hypocritical.
