Michelle Dugger Treats Her Vagina As A Pez Dispenser

Posted by BGH

~
The uber religious Michelle Dugger and her husband (no kidding) Jim Bob feel it is their personal godly responsibility to populate America as if we were trying to catch up with China.

Duggar Family Expecting 18th Child

Personally, I think this type of selfish behavior under the guise of 'divine inspiration' is all the more disgusting.

Resources on this planet are being stretched very thin and though 18 children may just seem like 'a few too many' right now, in 20 years when those children have children (2.6 is average) there will be approximately 46.8 kids and when those kids have kids, the number will be 121.68 more offspring.

Total number of Duggers in 40yrs? 2 (Parents)+18 (kids)+46.8 (grandkids) + 121.68 (great grandkids) = 188.48 Duggers from this gene pool. And, that is only if the children follow national averages, if any of them trace the footsteps of mom and dad it could potentially be much worse.

Thanks, Jim Bob and Michelle for personally doing your part to hasten starvation, famine and death for the less fortunate. I am sure your kids will be able to fix the overpopulation problem when they grow up and realize their parents didn't rely on reason for family planning, only good ol' biblical fornication.
----
"These things I'll carry on
And when you're gone I'll honor you
Each day, however long"

Colbert Dissects Oil Companies 'Gas Dollar' Ads

Posted by BGH

~
Who knew the oil companies were non-profits? Now I feel bad for railing against their billion dollar quarterly statements, it seems they really make "no money" on crude oil like many people assert.

We have made posts here regarding the skyrocketing gas prices and the effect on the economy and we have heard many rationalizations, the weakening dollar, small profit margins for the oil companies and market demand. In regards to the small margins, I had no idea just how small they were until I saw this last night. The profits, according to the ads placed in newspapers around the country, are literally non-existent.



----
"These things I'll carry on
And when you're gone I'll honor you
Each day, however long"

Renew The Separation Of Faith And Politics

Posted by BGH

~
After decades of using the electorate base of the flock to apply pressure to the conservative wing of the Republican Party, evangelical leaders are backing off. Though they have used the party in efforts to push their doctrinal beliefs upon the rest of the nation, the evangelicals now feel "used" by the politicos. It appears the Christian conservatives have realized exactly why the ‘Wall Of Separation’ Jefferson spoke of was included in the First amendment of the United States Constitution.

See: Evangelical leaders say their faith is too politicized

This ‘Wall’, that many fundamentalists dispute even exists, was put in place by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment in order to keep separate religion and government. When these two entities become overly intertwined, religions can lose their independence and governments can lose their autonomy. The Founding Fathers were very aware of this fact when crafting the Constitution, as illustrated in the Federalist Papers.

Over the last two decades, the ‘Moral Majority’ (Evangelical Christians) has become so intermingled with conservative republicans that the line that separates the two has been blurred to the point of being completely non-existent. Most outsiders to the movement view these two terms, ‘evangelical Christian’ and ‘conservative republican’, as interchangeable and without distinction.

The evangelical leaders have slowly come to realize that many Americans associate their movement with terms like “too political” and “single issue” voters, often resulting in the Christians being labeled intolerant or judgmental.

The wall of separation that Thomas Jefferson so distinctly clarified to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, was set in place to protect all of America’s citizens and it is about time the Evangelical Leaders have acknowledged this fact after trying very hard to refute it for so long.

I hope the trend continues and more of the faithful begin promoting a renewed separation of politics and religion.
----
"These things I'll carry on
And when you're gone I'll honor you
Each day, however long"

The Idiocy of Banning Books

Posted by Pariahjane

Books have probably been banned since the first one was written - and it's something that is still done today in some countries. According to this article, Tango Makes Three has once again been awarded the top slot for objectionable books. The story is about a penguin who has two fathers and some parents feel this book might give kids the idea that a homosexual lifestyle is acceptable. Forget about promoting the idea of understanding with children that what makes up a family may be different from what they know. Just ban it because the content conflicts with their beliefs or they are too scared to face their own homophobia, not to mention complete ignorance. On a side note, having two fathers does not necessarily mean the parents are homosexual…but, again, understanding is not at the top of the agenda for these people.

Other books on the ALA's top 10 list include Maya Angelou's memoir "I Know
Why the Caged Bird Sings," in which the author writes of being raped as a young
girl; Mark Twain's "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn," long attacked for
alleged racism; and Philip Pullman's "The Golden Compass," an anti-religious
work in which a former nun says: "The Christian religion is a very powerful and
convincing mistake."

I don't see anything wrong with parents objecting to books but I do think some people go too far when they call for a book to be banned. If you don't feel a book is acceptable to your children that's your opinion and you have a right not to allow your child to read the book. Calling for a ban of the book so no one can read it goes beyond that.

There is nothing wrong with parents monitoring what their OWN children read, in fact, I think it is the responsibility of a parent to be educated and aware of what their child is up to, including which books they are reading. Objecting to books because their content is violent, such as 'I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings' is just plain ridiculous in my opinion. I understand that parents want their children to be protected from darker aspects of life; unfortunately that isn't going to change the fact that violence, such as rape, happens. Use novels like these to teach your children about life. Let them learn from it.

Same goes for 'Huckleberry Finn'. This novel is set in an American era where racism was still rampant. Rather than try to bury a dark part of American history, use this book to explain to your children that at one time racism was acceptable and then show them why that kind of thinking is wrong and leads to ignorance and hatred.

The literature that is chosen for schools is chosen because it provides a learning experience for your kid. Books are a safe way to introduce children to ideas, different cultures, different lifestyles... even different worlds. Schools have more pressing issues to deal with than whether or not the context of a novel is deemed violent of offensive.

Five Names

Posted by BGH

~
Five names that should be stricken from current news media headlines and reports.

1. Amy Winehouse - I am sure there are many drug plagued, strung out addicts out there with some minuscule amount of talent, why must we hear about this one?


2. Pete Dougherty - Same description as above.


3. Britney Spears - I am sure there are many manic depressive, schizophrenic, strung out parents out there with nearly non-existent talent out there fighting custody battles, who fucking cares about hers?


4. Roger Clemens - I don't think throwing a baseball while 'roided out warrants extensive coverage of sexual liasons or a congressional investigation into 'performance enhancing drugs' while a seemingly endless war is wasting trillions of dollars and the U.S. economy is collapsing.


5. George W. Bush - Because nearly every mention of his name is tied to something failing, recession, war, death, ineptitude, deceit, corruption, illiteracy, ignorance, incompetence and all around failure.

Just a little rant after reading my news feeds for the day.
----
"These things I'll carry on
And when you're gone I'll honor you
Each day, however long"

Faith, Or A Child's Life?

Posted by BGH

~
For many this choice is very easy to make, though the easy choice is different. For those who subscribe to tenets of faith that purportedly prohibit the use of blood, the choice to allow their child to die before letting them receive life-saving blood, almost appears to be easy for them.

Why I would let my daughter die before allowing her to have a blood transfusion

For Jehovah's Witness, there is a portion of Christian scripture that is interpreted as prohibiting blood transfusions, I am not going to argue whether this is a mis-interpretation of their holy book, but I will argue that a faith which causes one to choose belief in the unseen and unverified over the life of a child is an evil and twisted doctrine that is more of a brainwashing, than innocent 'faith'.

All faith in one manner or another can be characterized as brainwashing, but this particular dogma that endangers the life of the ill who had the unfortunate circumstance of being born into this cult, is neither harmless nor benign to the innocent who labor under it's guises.

I am a parent and the choice is easy for me also, but my preferred option is quite the opposite of the woman's in the article. My choice is in favor of the life of my child at almost any expense, even the loss my own existence. Modern medical procedures to cure him of his ills are to be heralded, not fought against with first century myth and legend.

Maybe we can convince the Jehovah's Witnesses that these medical emergencies are tests of faith, but not in the way they interpret them. No, in these tests of faith, the correct choice is the life of the child.

Nah, they are too deluded for that....
----
"These things I'll carry on
And when you're gone I'll honor you
Each day, however long"

The Arrogance And Ignorance In The Catholic Church

Posted by BGH

~
I swear, this will be the last post about this for a while, as some of you may know my dad passed away recently. I had to mention something interesting I noticed at my Father's funeral last week.

He was a catholic man his whole life, he came from a catholic family and still went to church regularly until his final weekend. He was not a 'devout' follower, he believed some of the doctrine and also disagreed with some of the tenets, but mainly remained catholic because that is how he was raised and it was comfortable.

As a by-product of being raised in catholicism myself I have attended many catholic funerals for family members. I know how the sermons usually are approached, the priest will relate a few memories of the deceased, mostly incidents of seeing them at church or discussions that were had, and then they will tie it into the gospel being read that day. This IS NOT how my fathers mass was officiated.

When the sermon began, the priest took a different tact shall we say. I will paraphrase how it went but, being fresh in my memory it should be fairly accurate, especially an exceptionally odd part.

He began:
"I like to ask a question quite often. Who here believes in Jesus? I do not mean that he was a good man who walked everywhere in sandals and did some good things, I mean who REALLY believes in Jesus? Who honestly in their heart of hearts can say that they believe without a doubt that Jesus was the son of god and sacrificed himself for us? I say to anyone here who does not fully believe in the Jesus that I speak of, you should get up from the pew and walk out of here right now. You should go out and buy things, and live your life anyway you want because if you really don't believe in Jesus your life means nothing anyway and you have nothing to look forward to without salvation."

That is a fairly accurate account of his sermon. There weren't remembrances of my father, no eulogizing of the deceased, just out and out prostylization.

I will admit that at first my initial offense at his words was because I am an atheist and I am sure my father would argue my life is worth something, but it goes beyond that. I started thinking about this the day after the services, if I removed my personal beliefs from the equation, what is the harm with what he said? Is there any other reason his sermon was out of place?

Of course there is, you see, my Dad may have had Jewish friends in attendance. Or Muslim. Or Wiccan, or Buddhist, or Hindu... or any other faith that is not Christian. What an inappropriate tact to use at a funeral with mixed faith company.

A funeral service should be about eulogizing the dead in a respectful and honorable manner, not trying to win souls for the Vatican. Maybe the church thinks this is a good idea, but I certainly think it is a severely flawed method.

I will remember the day with the military burial and the nice lunch afterward, but I will expunge the accusatory and irrelevant sermon from my memory.

Love ya Dad!!
----
"These things I'll carry on
And when you're gone I'll honor you
Each day, however long"

Go Granny - Part II

Posted by Susan

Bernie Garcia, 83, talks on the phone with one of her grandchildren the
day after three thugs tried to take her purse at Smith's gas station.

Once again a senior citizen stands up and fights back!

Bernie Garcia, 83, was approached by a man at a gas station and he asked her for money. When she told 20-year-old Angelo Trujillo she had spent all her spare change on gas (these days we all have!), he tried to grab her purse. "But I had it wrapped around my wrist twice," Garcia said, and he was unable to pull it away.

They struggled for the purse and the great-grandmother sprayed him with gasoline. The attacker pulled her to the ground and dragged her until another man confronted him.

Trujillo took off, but a witness had gotten the license plate. Trujillo and two others were apprehended minutes later.

Bernie declined medical attention, but said she felt faint and went to bed when she got home.

Her son, a former firefighter, checked her out and found no broken bones. She had a big bruise on her hip and a few scrapes on her hands but otherwise, she's fine.

Bernie was quoted as saying,"My son said, `Why didn't you just give (the purse) up?"' Garcia said. "`Hell no,' I told him. That was my purse. I was fighting for what was mine."

While fighting back is not always the smartest thing to do (muggers might have any variety of weapons), I just love it when a would-be attacker thinks someone is helpless and an easy target, but the intended victim gets the best of them.