Jesus Be Damned

Tags

, ,

Raiders quarterback Derek Carr ended the Oakland Raiders 368 day losing streak in a surprise victory against the Kansas City Chiefs Thursday night.

Here is how ESPN, the AP  and the Oakland Tribune quoted him.

Screen shot 2014-11-22 at 9.50.52 PM

Screen shot 2014-11-22 at 9.52.07 PMhttp://seattletimes.com/html/seahawks/2025067548_nfl21xml.html

http://www.mercurynews.com/raiders/ci_26982310/raiders-stun-chiefs-first-win-season?source=rss

http://http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=400554293

And here is what he really said…..

Just another whining Feminazi

Tags

,

In any juvenile bullying situation, you will see a bully, a target and many, many bystanders. These bystanders are kids who know better, feel awful but do not speak out. If one would, think about it. The impact it would have on the entire situation would be awe-inspiring. Other children would immediately speak out; the bully would hear this, as would those who identify with the aggressor and those who feel sympathy as well as the victim.

One voice has the power to make another voice speak up, or silence the laughter of another. It can make another shut up or make yet another realize he or she isn’t alone and this isn’t ok, but I will be someday.

The laws of the jungle carry forth to the means streets of social media and life. Women put up with rude comments online and cat calling in public and are now ridiculed for asking for legislation to outlaw this boorish behavior.

Don’t get me wrong, I am always happy to dump on these Shiite feministas, however my own experiences make me at least understand why they might be asking for such laws, society never sticks up for them. They didn’t as children and they don’t as adults. As a whole, we are teaching our children not to bully, but we aren’t teaching them what to do when they see it in action.

Everyone has either been catcalled or witnessed the same. But has anyone ever witnessed a male bystander just standing up and telling the All talk no action bigmouth to just shut up? I haven’t either. Men say whatever they want, at any time to whomever they want all the time with positive results. When a woman tries this the outcome is not quite the same.

I recently took down a picture I loved from a collection for which I paid several hundred dollars because I got tired of the following strangers’ comments:

“What Can I say? Your Header pic won me over”

“Mostly the uncropped version, which reminds me, I’ve got a Jacuzzi that’s been acting up. “ 

“well….are you going to come fix it or not?”

One week later….

“so about that tub…”

Teachable moment for those of you who may need one, when your “compliments” are met with silence, they are not compliments they are creepy. And for those of you who did see it and said nothing, well next time you see me, slap me for not knowing my place. Because of creepsters and crapweasels, I can’t have nice things.

What Happened To Jennifer Lawrence Was Sexual Assault

lidsamy:

Tell ya what. Let’s ask any rape victim if she’d like to go back in time and have her phone stolen instead.
See the Belle Jar jump the shark and trivialize rape in one nasty blog post.

Originally posted on The Belle Jar:

TW for talk of sexual assault, victim blaming, misogyny

You’ve probably heard about the nude photographs of Jennifer Lawrence that were leaked online yesterday. The leak also included nude pictures of Kirsten Dunst, Ariana Grande, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and several other women, but, naturally, it’s Lawrence who’s drawing most of the heat because she’s super-famous right now. She’s also known for being charmingly awkward and honestly if I had to place any bets I would guess that most people were hoping that she would respond to this with some kind of hilariously crass Real Talk about sex and her body and being naked. I keep seeing comments by people who want her to provide the punchline to this joke; what they don’t seem to understand is that this is not a joke, this is a form of sexual assault.

Jennifer Lawrence and the other women involved in this leak were photographed…

View original 626 more words

A gay man’s perspective on Arizona’s pending SB1062

Tags

, ,

Image

So in response to the above on Facebook, this brilliant, openly gay son of one of my friends had this to say. In advance, may I just add….? Ann Coulter? Watch your back. Andrew Stephens is about to school you..

Image

I’ve held off on putting my thoughts out there about this, because when I tried to, it turned into this crazy long, winding essay.

The heart of the issue for me is this: I believe that a natural, inalienable right to liberty is the foundation of a person’s right to be gay, free from government coercion, just as it’s the foundation of a persons right to choose who they associate with based on their personal beliefs.

What happens when the people’s natural right to their liberty collides with the desire to mandate “equality” for a subgroup of the population? Although it may not have been the case in the past, I’d say it would be easier to allow people the right to “discriminate” today because, largely, there are so many other options for people beyond needing to associate with “discriminating” parties.

Of course, a political faction that takes no time to emphasize the consequence of choices and culture, but rather blames any and all bad outcomes in life on “discrimination,” wouldn’t feel the same way. But, this situation raises so many questions about the role of the state in preventing “discrimination,” empowered by a political majority, when in the past the state has, via a political majority, MANDATED discrimination (I assure you, I didn’t use the term “mandate” just because I’ve dated men).

Where does the role of the state begin and where does it end? There is not, and never will be, equality in life. No two people will be equal by all measures, nor do they need to be. Happiness and success are subjective human concepts. But the Left has this obsession with “business.” I assume no mainstream Leftists would suggest that people don’t have the right to refuse entry into their home, even for the most “bigoted” and idiotic reasons. But what makes a business different from a home? The fact that money changes hands there? Well, if that’s the case, I guess a home becomes a business if someone runs a small business out of it or the parents pay the children an allowance.

Anyway, moving on from that, I have to say: in a discussion on it earlier today with a liberal friend, the topic somehow pivoted from “a photographer/baker not wanting to provide services for a gay wedding, while not refusing to serve gays in a more general sense” to “GAYS CAN’T GET ANY SERVICES IN ARIZONA, THEY’RE DYING!!!!!”

When I pointed out the problem with that argument, I was told I had a point. The real issue here isn’t whether or not this bill is “anti-gay,” it’s whether or not the state has a legitimate role in forcing people to deal with other people, and for what, if any, reasons the presence of “business” changes the equation. The fact that this debate hasn’t even dealt with the difference between, say, denying someone a cake for their wedding and, say, denying someone life-saving medical treatment speaks volumes, I think. In a general way freedom of association is a fundamental right that separates us from a more communistic sort of arrangement.

If we’re generally free in our lives to pursue a living on our terms, rather than terms dictated to us by the state (collectivism), well, we’re pretty free. If we aren’t, we’re slaves to the prevailing political and moral order.

Some would say that’s fine. As long as it meshes with THEIR preferred concept of morality. But that brings us back to the problem, doesn’t it? Is the only difference between the legitimate legal expression of morality and the illegitimate legal expression of morality simply who is in power at the time and can make the laws? That’s not consistent with a belief in a natural right to individual liberty, which again, I believe is the foundation of a human’s right to be gay.

Anyway, this turned into a long, winding thing once again! The point is, I think the shrillest of “gay rights” complainers are no longer seeking the freedom to be who they are.they’re trying to force people to like them, to accept them, on THEIR terms and no one else’s. And, speaking as a gay man, that’s not the right way to go. Especially when we’re talking about photos and cake.

Andrew Stephens, NYC

Faith and the GOP: Keeping God out of politics

lidsamy:

This is more important now than it was 18 months ago.

Originally posted on More Patton, less patent leather:

69204_10103185991444421_1286887756_n

As the dust begins to settle and our emotions start to wane, it’s important that we begin to try and find out why this has happened. Not only did we lose a presidency we should have won by a landslide, but we lost many of the state races that let in some of the most radically left politicians our country has ever seen.

 After sifting through the great emotional impact this loss has had on all of us, I have realized that it can only be attributed to one thing: We have lost our ability to connect with the people. Several of the GOP’s issues need to reworked in a major way. We have to keep God out of politics.

Listen, I love God. I may not be the holiest person, as many of you know, but I have accepted Christ as my Lord and Savior. However, I do not…

View original 646 more words

The Politics of Party Purity

Tags

, , , , ,

Recently, I’ve been lamenting Mitt Romney’s loss and have been pretty frustrated with people who simply didn’t vote or voted for Gary Johnson, a great guy and obviously far more qualified than Barack Obama to be sure, but it begs the question…  Are you still happy with how you voted? 

But I began thinking about it in terms of John McCain, Jeff Flake and the democrat majority now on the hill representing Arizona made possible both by gerrymandering and “politics of party purity” in Arizona. And thinking how I will NEVER, EVER cast another vote for McCain for Flake, (or McFlake as I like to think of him)

And that makes me one big fat hypocrite.

I can’t turn back the clock and try and reason with other Libertarians on how Mitt would have run a pro free enterprise White House. But I can sure learn from them and support primary runs against entrenched incumbents that forget what party they are in and who they represent. But if they retain their place on the ballot, I would be voting against myself to vote for the democrat to run them off.

In order to stop this downward trajectory of our country as it is being dragged towards progressivism with the help of a complicit media, I am going to have to adopt some of that diversity and flexibility that I keep talking about. 

It may be extremely painful for me to get behind an ill qualified GOP candidate to unseat Kristin Sinema this fall, but perhaps I will be better served if I act as an agent of change instead of staying home in utter defiance.  Either way, pain will be involved, it’s just a matter of picking your poison. 

‘Duck Dynasty’ Scramble Leaves A&E With Egg On Its Face

Tags

lidsamy:

Ironic how the writer marginalizes christian conservatives when in fact they are the ones buttering A&E’s bread here. High viewership is what puts a show on the map and dollars in the wallet. The comments on this blog are as intersting as the article and many are more factual.

Originally posted on Variety:

A&E put itself between a “Duck” and a hard place. And having backtracked from its temporary lack of quack, let the public-relations scrambling begin.

The network might have acted precipitously in suspending Phil Robertson for his inflammatory remarks regarding gays (and equally insensitive ones about African-Americans in the Jim Crow-era South), but it clearly didn’t have an end game in mind. And once the network demonstrated that it was displeased with Robertson’s statements, unless it was truly willing to strangle its golden goose, there was really nowhere to go from there.

So the network issued a mealy-mouthed statement Friday, promising to run a public-service campaign about tolerance and inclusiveness. One suspects the network will also be less eager to arrange interview opportunities for Robertson, which of course won’t prevent him from going out and speaking his mind, especially now that he’s a hero to many conservatives.

SEE ALSO: A+E…

View original 380 more words

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,691 other followers