Men Really Do Hate Women

Posted in Uncategorized on February 20, 2011 by americanexile

This morning the following list, all vetted with credible sources, was published on the Huffington Post.
Read them please. Just these 10 statements are slam dunk evidence of the degree to which male culture hates, disrespects and fears women. And who is to blame for these outrageous conditions? As much as I hate to say it, by and large women are …. and the reason why? Women have fully cooperated with their own demise as represented in the below 10 reasons.
I will start with 1:
1) Republicans not only want to reduce women’s access to abortion care, they’re actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven’t.

AmericanExile: Now let me just shoot right off the top here! If men were the victims of rape the “accused” would be executed forth with in the absence of a trial. There may be a period of torture first. And further if men got pregnant abortion would be held as a religious offering where the products of conception would be laid upon and rock, as often was done with sheep and lambs and sometimes children in the old testament.
I am convinced of this. There would be special gold “rocks” upon which to place the tissue mass and rare and fragrant oils would be poured upon it and ignited with some sort of eternal flame. There would be days, nay weeks, of fasting and drinking of rare wines until it ran out and the “hooch” bottles would be distributed. At some point women for hire would be brought in and the act of conception would be performed over and over in the hopes that more sacrament material could be provided at a later date.
And let us not forget that the guys would keep score and who ever had the most abortions would win!!

The only real explanation here is that we have a massive return of the old testament guys, all fools, who hate females so much that they disrespect them to such an extent. These guys actually see no occasion where abortion is a medical procedure to save a woman’s life or preserve the mind, soul and sanctity of a rape victim even if that victim is their own wife, mother, sister or daughter.

2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to “accuser.” But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain “victims.”

AmericanExile: Maybe, as long as all convicted rapists, (including the guy who just admitted raping his 3 girls -The 5 Browns-is executed without trial before dawn tomorrow) are executed by hanging within a week of revelation.
This statement just further proves my point. How can any rational person unless they have a hate agenda toward a person or group support such toning down of retoric dealing with one of the most violent crimes ever perpetrated against another human being, unless of course you, as a male, consider females as less than human. As Jeanne Kilpatrick has so exquisitely demonstrated for the last 30 years in her “Killing Us Softly” work, once a group, whether it be racial, perceived enemy, gender is dehumanized in the mindset of another group, it makes committing violence against them easy and justifiable. That is what we all do, everyday, including me, to dehumanize those we do not like or trust or hate. This why we call or enemies terrorists, women chicks, peaches, etc and why blacks were once legally defined as only 3/5 human by the legislators, for many decades, in the good old USA, land of the free. It is also why men are often referred to as pigs. Only in this last case is the label justified!! As for the good guys out there, and I believe you are there, you are just as guilty of the crime of misogyny because when women are rhetorically put down whether in a dumb blond joke told by a buddy or a casual reference to a woman as a “nice piece”, or “fucking bitch” most always you stand in silence, without any hint of blow back. You are just as guilty as the true pigs in the ring!!

3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.)

2 points here! One:go ahead and violate “innocent until proven guilty”. That will open the flood gate of random accusations and executions for justifiable homicide and taken to its fullest extent, justifiable anything.
Secondly: In the real world there is no proof that in the case of abortion that a crime has been committed. I know you bible beaters out there say that human life begins at conception because you claim the soul enters the undifferentiated tissue mass at that point..nice try but truth is you do not know. I don’t know either. That being the case no one knows when products of conception actually are a full fledged human being subject to the laws of our land. I certainly have an opinion about that. But using the yard stick of the uber right fundamental conservative I know you have not one hint of credible evidence to prove your point.
And I will make a third point that if you use the word of God (bible) One of the sacred commandments is “Thou shalt not kill”. Period!!!! God made no exceptions. So if you are a soldier or former soldier and have killed in war you have committed murder and should be prosecuted, tried and punished if found guilty. Preposterous? I’d say so but not so according to the logic of those who would support the legislation sited above. Better be care for what you hope for, or what you legislate for, because your wishes may come true and then it will be your d**k caught in the wringer!

4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.

AmericaExile: I actually think this is a good idea! It is my opinion that this very entitlement is a root cause of so much right wing discontent. It is the reality of the welfare mom. And to those who wish I feel concern about the culture of child bearing females who become pregnant multiple times by multiple men bearing children they are unable and perhaps in some cases, unwilling, to support on their own, I do not!!!!
Birth control is so easy! It blows my mind that women other than forced rape victims, would have an unwanted pregnancy! Seriously????!!!
For those who are responsible adults, parents who work for and take care of their own and plan families in a responsible way, the actions of these welfare moms is such an outright slap in the face. The responsible folks, which are the majority, feel violated every first of the month when they bear witness in WalMart to the flood of welfare moms pushing their, 2 maybe 3 overflowing grocery carts with their noisy, poorly behaving children running all over, taking along for assistance their current deadbeat boyfriend/dad who often is a convicted felon out on parole. He is likely unemployed, living off her welfare income which is enhanced with each pregnancy and baby. This s**t pisses me off also. My opinion is that this is a justifiable grievance. Because this is witnessed on a daily basis by hard working Americans, black and white, who know that it is their own money that is supporting this shameful culture.

5) In Congress, Republicans have proposed a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.

AmericanExile: WOW!! and women actually support this???!!! Fools! Just remember, as a woman this legislation can come right around and bite you in the buttocks. It is always okay to support something like this if you, as a woman, are so literally stupid as to believe you will never be subjected to this law, or your child or loved one. For a woman or even a man who claims to love his wife and family (including daughters), there may come a day when your life or the life of someone you love will be lost to the enforcement of such a law.
And I guess that also opens the door to other judgments for doctors to refuse care to others including me for some ginned up political reason. As I pointed out, you cannot call abortion murder if you can kill at will in a war, according to one of the sacred ten commandments, and when no one knows when the soul enters the body when the fetus is in utero, or even after birth. I think we all can agree there are plenty of souless indivduals out there

6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids’ preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.

AmericanExile: No! No! Maryland Republicans. They should commit to having sex with men only when they wish and can afford on their own to become pregnant, have a baby and support it on their own. You see, it is like Gloria Steinem said years ago, and I paraphrase here: male and female relationships are like eggs and bacon: the chicken is involved but the pig is committed.
(I am shaking my head right now because if the past is predictive of the future then there is a glut of you out there who won’t get this comparison.)
But as technology advances and in vitro pregnancies become more and more common, and epithelial cell DNA can be used to fertilized the female ovum, which has already been done in animal models, there can be less and less involvement of the live male in conception to the point that it can be completely eliminated altogether. Then women can create the “boy toy” movement where the males are simply objects of female sexual satisfaction. And then there is the idea of the droid boys!!
I actually do not like the above scenario but if men don’t get with the program for full equality for women I could be convinced to support it. So there are two lessons here: 1. Yes, women should not be freeloading off the taxpayers by having children they cannot provide for and 2. no man is ever going to take care of you if you piss him off. So stop with the baby mill mentality. If you do then there will be no need as they say for a poor family preschool program. This is not rocket science!

7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.

AmericanExile: I use the same points as stated above.

8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.

Americanexile: Since we all may be subjected to the fallout of cutting benefits for the elderly I simply suggest the Republicans back off on this one because it may be you, your parents and further down the road your children who will be hurt by this. There is no shame in helping people in their declining years. This is vastly different from welfare for the young and able bodied who want a free ride off the backs of their often unwanted children and the rest of us tax payers.

9) Congress voted yesterday on a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.
Ho-Hum! Planning a family is easy for women to manage without the help of a large government program which in many cases support the welfare culture. I say this from the spirit of realizing that women must break out of the idea that they have to be taken care of. I remember once my father saying he hoped I’d marry a good man who would take care of me! I was highly insulted, knowing full well I could take care of myself and in the long run not be beholding to some jerk I may grow over time to dispise. And I have lived such a life! I am 67 years old, never been married and have two beautiful adopted daughters. I am a professional health care provider with my own private practice. I own 2 homes and 4 automobiles. It can be done!!!!

10) And if that wasn’t enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can’t make this stuff up).

AmericanExile: I stand on the single issue: Women must understand from all the evidence that abounds in the world (the Taliban being the current extreme), past and present, that only you can take care of yourself and your offspring and deciding to have offspring is 100% controlable in non violent acts of copulation. The best contraception is no intercourse unless the man is sterile, either by biology or choice. You women must get off your butts and stand firm at home and at raising your children. If you spouse fails to support your control over your own body then he will not support you at all.

Another quote from a campaign to discourage teen pregnancy: “Having sex with him will not make him love you and having his baby will not make him stay”.

The ball has always been in the court of women! Strategize with it and win this war on women.


Prop 8, Abortion and Separation of Church and State

Posted in Abortion, Prop 8, Separation of Church and State, Tax Exempt Status of Churches on November 23, 2008 by americanexile

A few days ago I posted a response to a discussion taking place on another blog. The topic was California’s Proposition 8, an amendment to the CA state constitution which bans gay marriage. As we all know the CA electorate passed this amendment at the Nov 4th election. I am presenting a version of a conversation that ensued after my comments were posted regarding Prop 8, edited for clarity except where I couldn’t figure out what the commentors actually meant.

Proposition 8, California
Early on in this discussion there were mixed remarks, some supporting the ban some decrying it and a large number who hung out in the middle on this issue saying they want gays to have equal rights but not via contractual marriage…something like equal, but separate. .sort of like what was proposed back in the 50’s and 60’s when school segregation was the issue. I’ll start with my somewhat novel response/idea for settling this dilemma in a way that doesn’t require legislation but rather removes an existing legally sanctioned practice in the US and elsewhere (applicable only in the US in this discussion).

The simple answer to this dilemma (traditional marriage and Prop 8 is to abolish all marriage contracts and eliminate contractual marriage … a legal entity that has never made one scintilla of sense to me in the 65 years of my life. There is no reasonable argument to be made that sufficiently explains why anyone would want to join their life through a legal contract with another person!! If love and committment prevail then the relationship will last, held together by the power of that love. If, as occurs in 50% or more of all legal marriages, the relationship fails then the two parties can work out their demise in private without the expense and display of a legal divorce to undo the contract. Custody of children can be worked out ahead of time with a prebirth contract, or not. Children in the current system are simply used as weapons in a divorce, so a private resolution couldn’t be any worse. Or, my personal favorite solution is that the person leaving the relationship always gets the children unless otherwise mutually agreed to. In divorce, no one wins. If settlement is done privately without the curse of divorce proceedings the outcome, while perhaps not perfect, will be better than the notoriously failed outcomes of the current system. Also this eliminates the need for constitutional amendments to grant marriage to some (with its attending legal benefits, tax, social security survivorship, etc.), while refusing it to others thereby violating the equal protection clause of the US Constitution. Folks can still marry in the eyes of God, have big church weddings and all that stuff. There just will not be that nasty little legal document called the marriage license/certificate. Being fairly familiar with the Bible I am quite sure neither God nor Jesus say that marriage must be attended by a legal contract with the state. And all you good Christians out there can walk your talk about traditional marriage and the queers can do their thing. A good solution I’d say.

Here are some of the responses:
Comment by foobar – November 19, 2008 @
Except that contractual marriage (or civil unions, which the gay folks in CA already have) is good for society in that it establishes things like inheritance and property laws. In the case of heterosexual couples it also establishes paternity and custody laws as regards children.

Comment by Brent – November 19, 2008 @
In my opinion, one of the main reasons these people want their marriages to be recognized is to enjoy (?) the same benefits that traditional couples receive. If this is really the case, how would we keep track of who is really married and who isn’t with your “good solution” to receive these so-called benefits?

Response by Americanexile:
I guess I didn’t make myself clear. Without contractual marriage there would be no special benefits for anyone. The playing field would be level. So there is no need to “keep track” of anything. In my solution inheritance would go to the beneficiary in ones will .. pure and simple. No will, then all assets would go to the state. Property would be governed by a partnership agreement, like the ones which currently exist when two or more people purchase a piece of property together. They form a partnership at the time of purchase, the share distribution is established in the document and the purchasing shareholders sign the agreement if they choose and the partnership document then governs or rules all aspects of the property. I own several pieces of real estate in partnership with various individuals and we drew up such arrangements, agreed to the terms, signed the documents and the property is held by the partnership not any one shareholder. Very simple and effective.
A word about paternity: DNA establishes biological paternity. A simple and direct response to the concerns about paternity and custody… you certainly do not need a contract of marriage to be a parent and have custody. Just look around you! I bet you can name more than one parent you know who has one or more children, with full custody who has NEVER been married. In my opinion, proof that contractual marriage is not necessary and thus laws governing paternity and custody not necessary. Children are conceived every day among folks who never intend to marry each other. Raising children and maintaining families are acts of the heart founded on the power and grace of love. There is no law which can over-ride this basic reality. Marriage certificates and custody documents are otherwise useless except as weapons. I am certain this solution will never be considered but I firmly believe it is the best answer. I am single and have been in a monogomus relationship for 27 years. We have two children. We own two homes held in partnerships. We simply work together as a family. It hasn’t always been easy but very rewarding. I am very proud of us! We don’t have the opportunity to whack each other over the head with threats and documents. We are forced by design to make it work or cut our losses and leave. We both are equally affected.

Comment by dsgawrsh — November 19, 2008
….. as you know these gay activists make me sick. They only serve to uphold the biases that people have towards gays. Gay marriage sure looks like a great thing to give to people who have absolutely no respect for other people’s beliefs. I agree with the other commentors about contractual marriage. It may be the best thing for the society we now live in. As a gay person, I have no problem with Christian people wanting to define marraige in a legal way, I just don’t believe it should be an amendment to a constitution. Perhaps a proclamation?

Comment from dsgawrsh, again:
“Gay marriage sure looks like a great thing to give to people who have absolutely no respect for other people’s beliefs”.
I guess I am lost on this one. Maybe this comment is tongue in cheek… I’ll assume he/she is talking about gays disrespecting the heterosexual beliefs? Huh??? If that is what the message is.. I must protest! When the beliefs of others in the USA serve to shape public policy and enact laws which oppress other tax paying members of the USA then there is a big problem with beliefs as exercised in this manner. I surely do not object to their beliefs but when their beliefs serve to oppress others and especially when couched in religious beliefs then we have a theocracy (like Iran and Afghanistan) which we (USA) decry as evil.

Unidentified blogger:
“I agree with the other commentors (not americanexile) about contractual marriage. It may be the best thing for the society we now live in”.
This comment also has me puzzled!! Given what I proposed above just how is contractual marriage the best thing for the society we live in?? Please explain.

Comment by lindyborer — November 19, 2008
I really don’t have the answers (well, duh, right?) I’m mainly more interested in the story from the whole double standards in media/bias perspective. I definitely think this would be above-the-fold news on every paper across America if conservatives were the ones doing the bashing. I most defintely realize that all gays cannot and should not be tarred by the same brush; the haters in San Fran are a fringe minority and not representative of gays in general.
Part of me is wanting to say, Yeah, what’s the point of a marriage contract if people abuse it so much, and respect it so little? Again, I really don’t know.

Americanexile responds:
I agree gay activists go over the top sometimes. But I also recall from the sixties the many times blacks were asking for and sometimes simply acting on the rights they were entitled to under our constitution .. (Rosa Parks). I remember sitting in the front of the bus, my white little face puzzled as to why there was a line across the floor in front of the rear seats labeled (colored only). When I asked my mom or dad I was immediately hushed up. Harsh stares were shot my way and clearly my parents were embarrassed and uncomfortable. I never was given a credible answer. As time passed I noticed a fuming rage forming among the black people in our community. And I understood their anger for I had been witness to their oppression up close and personal. Excuses ranged from they are not really human to God didn’t intend them to have the same rights as whites because if He did we’d all be the same color. SO today the same is true for gays. They have been marginalized and shamed for centuries. And leading the charge has always been religious zealots, Catholic, Protestant, Jews and Muslims. Religious beliefs are just that, beliefs, subject to a plethora of interpretation! And as such have no place in shaping laws and public policy of the land, anywhere .. hence the separation of church and state…a tenet in the constitution the current supreme court and courts of the past seem to have excised from that document. There is also “equal protection”. Once we stray from it, “open season” on all groups could follow. I am certain a reason can be found to exclude just about anyone who is not a white christian in good standing. So if the activists go over the top and make you sick, I can appreciate that BUT on the other hand I understand why they are so pissed off. AND their wrath is justly directed at the Mormon church and other religious organizations who spend money to support amendments to state constitutions which deny an entire group of full tax paying citizens of our country’s “equal protection” clause. This is particularly galling when you take into account that these churches (Mormons and many others) are tax exempt. In other words a strong argument can be made that the money not paid in taxes by the church is used by the church to promote denying equal protection under the law to those who do pay taxes. The gay citizens are in effect supporting their own opression via tax laws. Which leads me to say for any church actively engaging in shaping public policy or contributing to any political campaign or even speaking politics (including abortion and gay marriage) from the pulpit should be be denied their tax exempt status. Period! If they pay taxes like any other corporation and are subject to the same rules as business corporations then they can speak and act politically all they want to. But no tax exemptions!!!! Again I am sure I am way ahead of my time with these remarks but I have been an out of the box critical thinker all my life. But at the end of the day I believe in equal rights for everyone .. no exceptions. I want fairness for everyone, even those I disagree with. I soundly reject special entitlements for anyone or any group. AND BTW I am not a liberal. I support capital punishment, reject welfare, support fiscal conservatism (personally and institutionally), reject regulation (though I see why it is necessary). So there…Just my ideas. Thanks for your attention.

Another unidentified blogger:
Americanexile, I understand what you are saying about activism and I understand why gay people are so enraged, but there is a big difference between Rosa Parks not getting up from her seat or blacks sitting at meal counters and refusing to get up and what these gay activists are doing. You don’t win respect by being as disrespectful as possible. I live my life in such a way that people question their core beliefs because I don’t fill a pre-conceived mold. A pastor at a church I wanted to attend found himself in this dilemma. He couldn’t believe that he had baptized a woman who was co-habitating and not a very good person and yet he is told by his church that I cannot become a member because I’m gay and living the “lifestyle”. If more gay people did that, possibly we would see some laws change. But if you scare the masses by acting like idiots, you aren’t going to get anywhere.
Americanexile comments:
Rosa Parks .. You miss the point here. I cited Rosa Parks case because she was in fact violating no laws .. religious, moral or political and yet was jailed because she pressed against her oppressor. In effect that is what the San Fran extremist are doing. I agree it is not a good plan in many ways but their cause is just and as the history of civilization proves people engage in extreme behaviors when oppressed as gays have been throughout history. Your point, (You don’t win respect by being as disrespectful as possible) however, is a good one. As an aside, just what kind of pastor would admonish himself/herself for baptizing a woman they deemed somehow unfit and you for being gay?? I find it incredulous that a church would stray so far from the teachings of Christ to be so judgemental. Further, please understand that it is egregious judgmental acts such as this by an institution (tax exempt) which drives oppressed people to behave in such disrespectful ways.
This same blogger goes on to say:
And I disagree with churches losing their tax exempt status over talking about gay marriage or abortion. Those have become political issues, but in and of themselves are not political. Americanexile –
I’ll add here that it has been the churches who have politicized these issues.
This same blogger:
There is a difference between telling people who to vote for or what to vote for and preaching that you believe gay marriage and abortion is wrong.
– I can concede this point only if you mean they are unacceptable practices for members/ practitioners of a certain religion. BUT if the religion/church goes outside the congregation and uses their money to influence public policy and laws which affect the rights of other members of the larger population which do not accept those creeds then that is stepping over the line because the great ruling institutional governor of all Americans is the US Constitution…. I repeat, the US Constitution, which guarantees “equal protection under the law” to all people of this nation. So the tax exempt status is by act and deed waived for those churches/religions who violate this article of the constitution. Personally, I have mixed feelings on both these issues, especially abortion, yet the clarity of this argument is not difficult for me to understand. As I stated earlier if a church/religion wants to go into the politics of these issues then they are free to do so, it’s just that if/when they do they are no longer tax exempt because tax exempt organizations must not promote political agendas which violate the US Constitution. No one is saying a church/ religion can’t express their beliefs, in a big way, if they desire .. in other words what I am saying is in no way a effort to silence religious people, zealots or otherwise. It’s just that the church/religion will have to pay taxes just like any other business … such as a political action committee or WalMart. This is not a freedom of thought or speech issue.
Americanexile comments further:
When a church and/or a religion is tax exempt they are limited in their mission and cannot act as a political action group. This is all part of the definition of being tax exempt. When they use funds/money retained in their coffers because they did not pay taxes, to promote a political agenda (no matter how that agenda emerged) then they have crossed over a legal line. They then are acting as a PAC . political action group. There is no splitting hairs on this, in my opinion. I must concede your point about preaching their views of gay marriage and abortion. It is not appropriate, however, in the iconic nation of freedom to whack people over the head with this and is clearly illegal in terms of tax exemption to promote laws that rob select groups of their constitutional rights. If that is the case and I am wrong then hello TALIBAN.

Comment by dsgawrsh — November 20, 2008 @
Thank you for saying so well what is a very valid point regarding abortion and gay marriage becoming political issues, although they are not political in and of themselves. And to Americanexile: I think that you are one of a large number of people who have totally butchered the meaning of “separation of church and state.” (Respectfully, of course.) I will not go into it here, because people have written entire books on the subject.
Butchered? Really! Well here it is from the horse’s mouth. I get my information by going directly to the source, the US Constitution. Please read it for yourself. As for interpretation I offer a portion of the contents of a letter written by a founding father, Thomas Jefferson.
“The phrase separation of church and state is generally traced to the letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists, in which he referred to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as creating a “wall of separation” between church and state. The phrase was then quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1948.
Separation of church and state is a political and legal doctrine that government and religious institutions are to be kept separate and independent from each other. The term most often refers to the combination of two principles: secularity of government and freedom of religious exercise.

Unidentified blogger comments:
Since the birth of our country we have depended upon religion–all kinds, but mainly Christianity-to uphold morality and goodness in our land.

Americanexile responds:
Two comments: 1. to uphold morality and goodness?? Well if that is the case religion has been a colossal failure!!! 2. Also I must beg to differ here on the heart of your statement.. speaking for myself I find people divorced from organized religion to be far more moral, tolerant and good than I do most religious folks who seem to always have beneath their good acts the idea they are making points with God and further and seek to convert the infidels. Moving closer to the TALIBAN. They are judgmental and intolerant in the extreme. This of course does not apply to all people of religious conviction but these are the squeeky wheels and those (Christians) who are not aligned with them seem to sit back in silence. And silence is death!!!
More from Americanexile:
A recently published book called “Society Without God” by Phil Zuckerman presents a very convincing case that the idea that faith in God is the foundation of civil society is nothing more that a well-subscribed and strangely American delusion. Having said that I believe a relationship with God is the greatest gift one can have. But it is personal .. It is grounded in ones experience with God which is unique to the individual. So we don’t need the cookie cutter, organized religion, to tell us about our relationship with God. I see no need for some puffed up potentate to tell me the meaning of God in my life nor how I am to be with God and God in me. And I am not whacking anyone over the head with this idea. I respect the spiritual journey of all. But just as I stay out of religious beliefs in the political life of this nation (Thank you, but no thank you) I expect the same from everyone else in the USA.

From another blogger who wishes to remain anonymous:
To totally divorce govt. and religion (as is incrementally happening) I believe has led to an overall deterioration of our country’s moral fiber.
I cite the above publication“Society Without God” by Phil Zuckerman . In addition I invite you to present your credible evidence to support this statement. Your statement implies this is merely a personal observation or opinion.
More from the same blogger:
It is and should always be wrong and illegal to force people, for example, to fund abortion through their tax dollars if they believe that it is the murder of an entirely innocent human being, even if people like you deem them “religious zealots.”
I agree with this statement!!! Wholeheartedly!!! I feel the same about using my tax money (and I pay a lot) to support the killing of Iraqi’s –civilian and otherwise – who are innocent of the false accusations which brought the USA to kill 30 to 50K of them, many of which were children and babies. I am assuming the religious zealot reference is out of context here. I have used that term but your use of it here doesn’t seem to fit. I am sure you will explain. As for tax dollars paying for abortions..I agree with that but the anti -abortionist want the entire practice criminalzed. That is my objection. The law should not reach into the private sector and criminalize abortion among those who use their own money to obtain an abortion. Fair enough?
You also said:

Americanexile note: This quote was clipped from a statement I made earlier (see above). The blogger responds … sorta sideways … maybe??
“AND their wrath is justly directed at the Mormon church and other religious organizations who spend money to support amendments to state constitutions which deny an entire group of full tax paying citizens of our country’s ‘equal protection’ clause.”
I really don’t know where your beliefs lay regarding abortion, but if you happen to be pro-abortion, this statement becomes almost laughable, for obvious reasons.
Actually I was talking mainly about gay marriage. But since you mention abortion I’ll respond to that in this context. I have very mixed feelings about abortion. At this point I am on the fence about it. I strongly object to the government having any control over a persons body. If in fact abortion violates God’s law then the abortionist and ex-pregnant woman will have to answer to that higher power. It is no skin off my hide. To cast abortion in the broad context you have done here is simply unrealistic and bears no meaning in the life of America today. I cite as example that abortion has been legal for several decades and I see no evidence to support your claim that we are in moral decay any more than we have always been.. for 200 plus years of this country. Far more immoral acts and laws have been before us, in America, in the past .. I cite legally sanctioned slavery for starters.
Again, if the church is suddenly not even allowed to direct the morality of its people, who is? Americanexile :
The church is free to direct whatever, but when what they direct violates articles/amendments to the US Constitution well then it is the WalMart tax code for them.
The government? That hasn’t worked yet.
And neither has religion!
When the government begins to decide that tax money will be spent unscrupulously (see Obama, Hyde Amendment), it is currently fine for anyone to disagree with it BUT the church (the “white Christians in good standing”)
No one says you can’t disagree with it! Of course you can!!! By all means you can!!!! I think you miss my point. Its just that when ones(or a group) views promote and support legislation such as amendments to the US Constitution, especially when that legislation will deny other members of the governed (who pay taxes just as anyone else) then that tax exempt entity has stepped beyond the bounds of tax exempt status. It is not ridiculous. If however you wish waive taxes of all kinds for gay people then maybe they will be willing to consider forfitting some of their constitutional rights for your gay marriage amendment.
That’s ridiculous, and taking “separation of church and state” to ludicrous extremes. It leads to moral relativism, and that is where our country is headed at this point.
Read the above entry about what Thomas Jefferson had to say about separation of church and state and get back to me on the “ludicrous extremes” statement.
Honestly, do you believe you are being unbiased and fair with these statements? Do you truly think many people will be influenced to come to your side with such narrow ideas for ruling our country?? I think not!!! Where is the compassion of Jesus in all this?? I am truly nonplussed at your attitude. And I’ll add our system of government is NOT a theocracy. That is what muslims embrace in Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. Remember Shia vs. Sunni law??? And then there are the Turks. Frankly, I don’t believe anyone or any institution can or even should take on directing morality, here or anywhere else.
Same blogger:
Aside from that caveat, it is interesting to me that very little people (both reporting about this and protesting it) have directed any attention to the 70% of African American voters and churches who supported Proposition 8 (who also comprised over 90% Obama voters.)
What you say is true but has no relevance in this discussion. Slavery was supported by the founding fathers but clearly was wrongheaded, immoral and in fact I think you will agree, violates the teachings of Jesus Christ, your lord. I rest my case!
It is surprising, however, how short sighted some folks can be (blacks). I grew up in the south and recall vividly the screams of black on white rape fears, whites being murdered in their sleep by “niggers”, economic ruin, and on and on, that morality would greatly suffer if blacks and whites attended school together. These are similar to the statements you make with regard to morality. Many blacks simply fail to see their own past or choose to turn a blind eye to this. I suspect many will oppose gay marriage for fear if they support it they will be labeled “queer”, just like whites who supported desegregation were called “nigger lovers”, and every other derogatory name in the book.
Another blogger jumps in:
I commend your very open mind and outside-the-box thinking, but would graciously caution you with the age-old axiom of being “so open-minded your brains fall out.” I’m not mocking you; Americanexile:
Yes you are, but its okay, I find the humor in it as well.
Same blogger:
I truly believe that the current goal of “open-mindedness” at any and all costs is the reason people can’t hug anymore for fear of being arrested or some such nonsense. Someone, after all, might get offended.
Tell that to one or all of the thousands of children who were hugged inappropriately by their Catholic priests – supposedly “men of God”. Being offended is not the issue. The issue is grounded in the fact that many men have turned a gesture of love, support and caring into an excuse to sexually fondle and grope others (boys, girls and women)who are down on the power scale or somehow subordinate to them. You know this is true so please do not characterize the acts as simply offenses. They are crimes against everyone molested and humanity in general. It is indeed unfortunate that these molesters have compromised well intended displays of love and caring. You should be dealing with these guys instead of complaining here.
Same blogger:
At some point, carried to the extreme, open-mindedness eradicates “right” and “wrong”.
Americanexile: What?

Comment by lindyborer — November 20, 2008
I’d like to comment on Americanexile’s comment #4. I believe you just made the case that this issue is much to do about nothing. After all, if as you state, we can abolish marriage and those who would like to join can do so and enjoy the same legal protections such as property rights etc., then gays can also have those same legal protections now without the union being called marriage.
Please reread my comments. I did not say anything about “those who would like to join, etc…” I simply said all legal contractual marriage should be abolished. Period!! If I led you astray let me clarify. The entire institution of legal marriage should be abolished. No contracts between the two parties should exist with the state. Celebratory weddings can still be had but no signing of contracts (marriage certificates which creates a legal bond with the parties).

Another blogger:
I really do not understand what protections or rights a married couple has that any other two individuals wouldn’t be able to create through legal documentation.
Oh dear!!! I’ll cite social security benefits for starters, because it is huge. If a gay person dies their partner is ineligible to collect on the deceased person’s social security as is granted to couples who are legally married. If, in a married couples situation, the husband dies his widow can collect a portion of his social security benefits until her death. Legal marriage grants her that benefit. By eliminating marriage as a legal entity the benefits from her dead husband would not exist. She would be ineligible to collect on his benefits along with her own. This is how it currently is for gay couples who are not allowed to marry .. when their partner passes away the surviving partner cannot make claim to any portion of the deceased partners social security benefits. I think you’d have to agree this cannot simply be fixed through creative legal documentation. Further, check out the new state laws in Virginia and see how awful it really gets.
Same blogger:
I think this is purely a way for those who hate the religious right to stick it to them.
The only reason the religious right enters the picture at all is because they chose to walk into it. I do not want to stick it to the religious right. I do, however, wish they would focus on taking care of ALL the unwanted children in this country .. black and white. While there are a few white Christian families who will give a black baby/child a good home most of them will take only a white child and stand by a black child making snarky remarks about the birthmother being a black crack-head and ho. I’ve heard this enough to know it is true. Black families also reject white babies for adoption. Recalling the words of my favorite childhood hymn “Jesus Loves the Little Children”…. “red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in his sight….” Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
With all the tax exempt money going into churches I’d like them a lot more if they’d try to help these innocent born children as much as they claim to want to protect the unborn… and stay out of other peoples lives, those not of their religious persuasion.

It’s Our Consciouness, Stupid!!!

Posted in Uncategorized on June 21, 2010 by americanexile

The “God Game” according to Edgar Cayce is replete with moral reminders about the potential outcomes of selfish and parochial thinking. He reminded his followers to apply the principles of the “God Game” which was about expressing love for God in the form of unselfishly creating justice, equality and true respect for all the differences between races and classes. The idea was and is that by using these principles a new driving force for the world economy would be set into motion. This force would be couched in doing what was right for all people equally and this alone would, in the long term, set the economy on a correct course to prosperity for all. This has been referred to as a great “leveling” of opportunity and income.

Cayce warned over and over again that the only obstacles to peace and prosperity were imperialism, racism, religious zealotry and the greed of self serving elites.

Paraphrased from “The Coming Economic Collapse of 2006”, by Michael Wells Mandeville.
p. 37-38

The Toyota recall and US government regulation in America.

Posted in Uncategorized on February 1, 2010 by americanexile

SO here we are in the era of screeching far right wing republican throwbacks exclaiming over and over that liberal demands to regulate any industry in the US is an interference in freedom, capitalism and consequently harms business. It wasn’t enough that our children were put at risk by products purchased from mostly unregulated China. Or that a flaw in gas tank position on certain model trucks or the faulty tires made in the US caused a number of deaths and maiming of US citizens. Their idea is that these industries can regulate themselves adequately. Duh!!!!!
So now we have the Toyota accelerator sticking problem. This is how it went! The accelerator mechanisms employed in the 8 models recalled were manufactured by two different companies. One is Japanese and the other American. Seems that only the ones manufactured in the US are defective. Those made in Japan are operating properly. What happened here?
My guess is that during the Bush/Republican years the US Highway and Transportation Board got a bit laxed knowing there would be no pressure from their leaders to do their job. So a lot of flawed equipment was not stopped from being placed into use because it would cost the industry more money to assure safety. Good business right?
Ah No-o-o-o-oo-o! So now we have a recall which has shut down numerous Toyota plants in the US leaving the plant workers without work and an income and numerous Toyota dealerships with cars they cannot sell thus requiring layoffs of many more US auto industry personnel.
You right wingers, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, Anne Coulter, Sean Hannity, are so smart. If you had brains you’d be even more dangerous.

Notes: The announcement came nearly a week after Toyota suspended sales and production of eight models, including the top-selling sedans in the United States, the Camry and Corolla.
The problem has left dealers unable to sell many of the vehicles on their lots and millions of past customers unsure whether their vehicles are safe to drive. Several rival carmakers have been offering $1,000 discounts to consumers who trade in their Toyotas.
Sales figures being released Tuesday are expected to show that Toyota’s market share in the United States fell in January to the lowest level in four years as a result of the sales suspension and recalls, according to a forecast from


Posted in Uncategorized on January 11, 2010 by americanexile

11 Jan 2010 _ I am taking a break from the usual political entries of the past. The landscape is such an abortion and speaks for itself that it is a waste of time and energy to comment on it. So I will do a movie review instead.
AVATAR – The new James Cameron film, in 3D no less! Saw it yesterday at a theater (non-IMAX) lightly outfitted for 3D. First, the 3D was so-so. I saw my first 3D film in the late fifties (The House of Wax) and “Avatar” by comparison is paltry at best. The story line is also weak. Same ole, same ole! Special effects were as usual. The rendered vs. real images can best be appreciated by the techno geeks but for the general audience, which I represent, there is scant spectacle. Having said that, the story line though weak was well developed, so well developed that my interest was firmly held for the entire 2 hours and 40 minutes. The unremarkable 3D did not detract, and the special effects (minus 3D) helped maintain the flow of the story without being just another overdone showcase for special effects.

And wouldn’t you know, it turns out that James Cameron is a romantic softie. The avatars while distorted and unattractive display a desirable loveliness. Figure that! Combining these two aspects (as done in the final scenes of the film) voila! a new creature is born! the whole greater than the sum of its parts, imbued with the grandeur of pure love.

But Mr. Cameron does not stray too far from the familiar. There are the usual boy-girl dynamics . such as the taming of the independent female by the gentle but dominant male, the male vs. male competition for the female and most obvious feature, the plight of the greedy, soulless bad guys ….. which BTW bear a striking resemblance to America today.

Lastly, and my personal favorite, is the spiritual message of this film. There is a God and the spiritual forces are seen as an interconnected energy among all that exists on Pandora. Soul is everywhere and all that counts. It is about karma and reincarnation. Survival is innocence maintained. It is the razor’s edge!

Final grade A+!

Kindly and reverently submitted by AmericanExile!

Religous Right and Abortion

Posted in Abortion, Personal Commentary, Religion/Politics, Social commentary on June 6, 2009 by americanexile

I discovered this comment on another blog. I read it with vigor thrilled someone else embraced my views to closely. …alas to realize it was a comment by me in response to the abortion issue being hawked on another blog. I put it here because 1. it is my view and 2. it fits nicely into the context of my blog.

I just wish the American voting population would get unstuck from this abortion stuff. We need to focus on what can save our country from ruin..but you so called religious fools just cannot let that one go. So no matter how the election goes we still have to contend with the background chatter of you guys and remain stuck in the mud we’ve been sloshing around in for the past 7 years. As for abortion it is inconceivable to me how anyone can speak in the same breath about abolishing abortion and turning right around and supporting the murders of war which we train our military to do, The military is one big killing machine. And no one knows when the soul enters the body!!! No one!!! So please get over yourself and stop screeching that line. And if you desire to not have an abortion as Sarah Palin did then have at it. But you will not whack me or any woman who disagrees with you over the head with your views!! If you criminalize it, we will do it anyway, illegally!!! No law has ever stopped it and a law will not stop it now. And we won’t be prosecuted for it either.. Ever heard of the good ole gals club!!!??? Please! Who do you think you are dealing with!?? So lets couch this campaign in the substantive issues which truly mar our nation!!!

The American Idea

Posted in Uncategorized on May 7, 2009 by americanexile

In June of 2007 The Atlantic Monthly ran a feature, “The Future of the American Idea” in celebration of 150 years of the The Atlantic Monthly publication. The introduction was lofty citing famous intellectual and literary names of the past. The writers of this intro hail the Atlantic’s deep understanding of change as a prime reason for its longevity and endurance!
John Updike kicks off the ego trip with a salute to the rise of the individual. That only in this vast open, untainted land mass could the human bring forth and develop those traits, talents and creative attributes and allow for a the tolerance of a critical mass to create a culture free from “terrorism from above rather than consent by of the governed”. He extols the creation of this new entity as populated by people who “know their own minds and act in their own enlighten self interest, with necessary respect for others”. Now let’s stop right there!!!
First of all I find it very hard to go on and on about the virtues Mr. Updike lauds when really, it was out of extreme disrespect for the indigenous people of the North and South American continents that allowed the white foreign (European) invaders to exploit and run over these native people out of a well defined sense of superiority and greed, traits which we hold true to this very moment. So the truth is that no, there was no intellectual prowess at play among the early invaders or those born thereafter. Self interest? Oh yeah, in spades and more. Enlightenment? Hardly!!!
In conclusion, Mr.U cautions against the world’s poor, saying they have nothing to loose (does that mean they will invade us?), a ruinous depletion of of the worlds’ natural assets, global warming with world geopolitical change as a result. (Never mind that we’ll all be toasting!)
So here are my comments to Mr. U: you act as if these are problems of the “other” when in fact we (Americans)have depleted more of the world’s natural resources/assets than the rest of the world ( all countries combined). And global warming! Oh, Mr. U don’t get me started!!!!! If ever there was an effort to stoke the fires of hell then Americans have surely led the charge with un-wanton expulsion of greenhouse gasses. Its all junk science anyway. And what’s this scat “promulgated in a land of plenty”??? The American idea is grounded in the unscripted notion that we can do what ever we like, good or bad, as long as we do it off the backs of others!!! Such rubbish!!!! More later!

A Twitter Moment

Posted in Life in America on April 20, 2009 by americanexile

I am sitting in my office, holding my head, considering changing my blog name to “PLANET EARTH EXILE”!
We have come off (pardon the pun) a week of Republican party “Tea Bagging”. It is so difficult to respond to all of this in any serious way. If these people are actually in ernest then I am clearly on the wrong planet and maybe even the wrong universe!!!!! Oh well, let us all see what madness is left to come.