draggonlaady: (Teddy)

Except, well, I've seen at least 1 young earth creationist source that claims the continental break-ups and movements did occur, all within the supposed 6000 years of earth history, so they might argue that the sloths didn't have far to carry those tree frogs. I might argue in return that the speed of movement and change in land in that scenario would NOT have gone unnoticed by the people living on those land masses.

It is...

Jul. 28th, 2013 11:47 am
draggonlaady: (Teddy)
It is, I suppose, possible that I have posted this before, but I can't recall having done so, so here you are.

From The Reason Stick:
The Venn Diagram of Irrational Nonsense
draggonlaady: (Teddy)
This article is a bit old, but I'd never read it before, and I love it. So I'm linking it so you can love it too.

Whatever you “believe,” this is not as effective as medicine. Again
you can say, “It works for me,” but so do placebos. My point being, I’m
saying God doesn’t exist. I’m not saying faith doesn’t exist. I know
faith exists. I see it all the time. But believing in something doesn’t
make it true. Hoping that something is true doesn’t make it true. The
existence of God is not subjective. He either exists or he doesn’t. It’s
not a matter of opinion. You can have your own opinions. But you can’t
have your own facts.

Why don’t I believe in God? No, no no, why do YOU believe in God?
Surely the burden of proof is on the believer. You started all this. If I
came up to you and said, “Why don’t you believe I can fly?” You’d say,
“Why would I?” I’d reply, “Because it’s a matter of faith.” If I then
said, “Prove I can’t fly. Prove I can’t fly see, see, you can’t prove it
can you?” You’d probably either walk away, call security or throw me
out of the window and shout, ‘’F—ing fly then you lunatic.”


Since the beginning of recorded history, which is defined by the
invention of writing by the Sumerians around 6,000 years ago, historians
have cataloged over 3700 supernatural beings, of which 2870 can be
considered deities.

So next time someone tells me they believe in God, I’ll say “Oh which
one? Zeus? Hades? Jupiter? Mars? Odin? Thor? Krishna? Vishnu? Ra?…” If
they say “Just God. I only believe in the one God,” I’ll point out that
they are nearly as atheistic as me. I don’t believe in 2,870 gods, and
they don’t believe in 2,869.

draggonlaady: (Grinding Bones)
I cringe and fume every time I hear/read "we shouldn't allow gay marriage/adoption/anti-discrimination policies/whatever because homosexuality isn't natural." HUMANS are not natural. It is not natural to drive cars, or receive dental care, or use soap, or keep pets, or have jobs, or go to school, or read, or any of a nearly infinite list of things. So the entire basis for this argument is fatally flawed from a logical standpoint, and yet it WILL NOT DIE.
There are 2 ways to respond to this stupid statement (well, 3 I guess, if you count looking disgusted and refusing to speak to the perpetrator of such inanity) - 1: yes it is and 2: so what? have you ever met nature? she's a bitch.

Response 1:
"A 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1,500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

My long-term favorite example: Whiptail lizards, aka lesbian lizards - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teiidae "These lizards reproduce by parthenogenesis, and research has shown that simulated mating behavior increases fertility."

Specific familiar examples: Rams with attraction only to other rams, cows mount each other when they come into heat (useful in heat detection on farms, so an argument can be made that humans have selectively bred for this trait, but it did have to exist to start with), pet birds often pair off in same-sex couples or form cross-species bonds to other birds or even humans.

So anybody who claims that homosexual behavior is an unnatural human deviancy is either brutally under-informed, or intentionally disregarding fact.

Response 2:
If we should do what is "natural" then should we....
engage in infanticide? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_(zoology)
enjoy a little cannibalism? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism_(zoology)
chalk rape up to "natural behavior"? how about incest? necrophilia? polygamy/polyandry? cross species intercourse? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexual_behaviour


Jun. 15th, 2012 12:24 pm
draggonlaady: (Default)
Stolen from Camels with Hammers:

The theory of natural selection shows that gene variation, including mutations, combined with environmental competition for resources over millions of years can generate all the different species we observe. That process looks like it has chance involved in it since mutations seem to be random, i.e., they do not always or even usually generate anything particularly special and can sometimes be harmful. The process looks like it depended on truly random variations over time that were then selected not randomly but not intelligently but “naturally” by the environment.

So, given all these facts, to hypothesize an intelligent designer also being involved in the a process that looks like it has randomness + mathematically explicable natural selection patterns to it is as superfluous as saying “lightning is caused by an electrical discharge. And Thor.”
draggonlaady: (Nice Girl)
This is so many layers of bullshit that I can't even be bothered to form a coherent list. If you want coherency, go read Blag Hag's thoughts on the matter. I'm too busy swearing at the computer screen.


Jan. 20th, 2012 10:34 am
draggonlaady: (Default)
Check this out for more details, but apparently the administration has decided that even religious non-profit employers will be required to provide coverage of contraceptives in their employee insurance benes. They get longer than anyone else to make that happen, of course, because religion is still a privileged category somehow (whatwhat? separation of church and state? what's that?) but no more "here, you can have insurance, but you can't get THAT done" exclusions.
draggonlaady: (Default)
I read with thanks your promotion of donations to Planned Parenthood of Indiana in this week's "Savage Love." A friend and I have been promoting a similar idea, only we added an extra twist. At the Planned Parenthood of Indiana (PPIN) donation page, you can donate in honor of someone and have a notification sent to their snail mail address. Our idea was to suggest that people do the following:

1) Go to PPIN's donation page and fill out the donation form.

2) Answer "This gift is in honor of:" with "Mitch Daniels."

3) Answer "Please send acknowledgment of my gift to:" with "Governor Mitch Daniels, 200 W. Washington St., Rm. 206, Indianapolis, IN 46204"

4) Finish filling out the form so your donation is recorded.

Would you mind suggesting this to your readers? We've gotten a few dozen people to donate in honor of ol' Mitch, but it would be nice to have lots more.

draggonlaady: (Default)
Don't fall if you're preggers. You may get arrested for attempted feticide, despite promptly requesting medical care and stating that you intend to keep the baby.
draggonlaady: (Default)
For those of you who already got this in your email, sorry for the duplication.

Hey everybody. I don't mass-mail very often, and even less about political stuff, but this is something I actually give a rip about. I don't know how many of you have used Planned Parenthood in the past, but they were my primary source of medical care for years during college. (And that's a lot of years!) This bill is absolute trash, and I'm disgusted that the House passed it.
I sign "open letters" and petitions about as often as I email you all political stuff, but for whatever good it'll do, I signed this one.
The people behind this farce claim it's supposed to be targeted at abortions, but that's crap. So whatever your feelings on abortion, please take a minute to ponder your feelings on cervical cancer, breast cancer, base-line health care, read the following and consider clicking the link at the end to sign the letter:

By law, federal funds haven’t paid for abortions since the 1970s, so the House hasn’t voted to cut abortion funding. They’re cutting funding for the entire Title X program — funding for contraception, cancer screening, STI tests, sex education, mammograms, HIV testing and diagnosis, and pregnancy screening and counseling. Title X is the only federal program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and preventive health services, particularly low-income families. Last year, 5 million people benefited from the services funded by Title X.

Planned Parenthood is the target of this legislation, and American women the primary victims. This isn’t about abortion — it’s about cutting access to health care for women. One in five American women has used Planned Parenthood’s services. The vast majority of care — more than 90% — offered at Planned Parenthood health centers is preventative. Every year, Planned Parenthood carries out nearly one million screenings for cervical cancer — screenings which save lives. Every year, Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses give more than 830,000 breast exams — exams which save lives. Every year, nearly 2.5 million patients receive contraception from Planned Parenthood — a service which prevents enormous numbers of unintended pregnancies and, by extension, an enormous number of abortions. Every year, Planned Parenthood administers nearly 4 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV — tests and treatments which save lives, extend lives, preserve fertility, and maintain reproductive health.



Jan. 14th, 2011 07:40 pm
draggonlaady: (Nice Girl)
This whole situation is bullshit.

Idaho Board of Pharmacy received a complaint alleging that on Nov. 6 a Walgreens pharmacist refused to fill a prescription ordered by one of Planned Parenthood's Boise-based nurse practitioners. The prescription was for a Planned Parenthood patient for Methergine, a medicine used to prevent or control bleeding of the uterus following childbirth or an abortion.

An inquiry to Walgreens' Corporate office seeking comment was not immediately addressed.

Planned Parenthood officials said the complaint states that the pharmacist inquired if the patient needed the drug for post-abortion care. The nurse refused to answer the question based on confidentiality of health information.

According to Planned Parenthood, the pharmacist then stated that if the nurse practitioner did not disclose that information, she would not fill the prescription. The nurse alleged that the pharmacist hung up when asked for a referral to another pharmacy that would fill the prescription.

Because the whole "separation of Church and State" thing is, in reality, tenuous at best, there is a (stupid!) legal loophole that allows pharmacists to decide they have moral objections to dispensing a medication, but they are required to refer the caller to a pharmacy that will dispense. Specifically, this is typically used by pharmacists who have decided that birth control is evil. In this case, however, this pharmacist (allegedly) decided that their moral judgment was more important than the risk of this patient bleeding to death, AND they refused to give a referral to a different pharmacy.

So, since I'm opinionated and this is my blog, you all get a big dose of my opinion tonight.

1: You're a pharmacist. Your fucking job is to dispense pharmaceuticals as prescribed by doctors and/or practitioners, not to pass judgment on whether the person deserves said medications. If you cannot or will not, for whatever reason, actually DO THIS JOB, then fucking get a different damned job. I really don't give a shit if that means you BUY the whole damned pharmacy and then decline to stock certain medications, but do NOT for FUCK'S SAKE have the medication in stock and then refuse to dispense it just because you have some "holier than thou" bullshit attitude. Read the damned bible again, paying particular attention to the calls for humility and refraining from judgment, you hypocritical fuckhead. (Yes, I'm assuming Christianity here, because odds are really high that only a Christian will pull this stunt.)

2: You can have whatever religious, ethical, and moral beliefs you want, I don't give a rat's ass. You want to picket the Planned Parenthood on weekends, whatever. I think you're wrong, but you're entitled to be wrong. Just don't bring it to work and inflict it on unsuspecting people there.

3: Your moral judgment DOES FUCKING NOT outweigh the risk of a patient DYING. You wanna whine about how teenagers shouldn't take birth control because they shouldn't be having sex anyway, whatever. This was someone with a potentially life-threatening, immediate condition. If they die, you have ZERO chance of ever converting them to your mighty moral standing, so what do you win by being a fucknut? Nada, except, in my mind anyway, a manslaughter charge on your soul when you check out. Go on, explain how that makes you more deserving of entry to Heaven than the poor woman you refused to help. Better make it good though, I hear God's a tough judge and doesn't care much for lying and dissembling.

4: So all the above is just my opinion on why pharmacists pulling these stunts are fucking fuckheads, but refusing the referral to another pharmacy is not only an asshole beyond fuckhead move, it's ILLEGAL. Since I'm not a proponent of putting non-violent offenders in jail, and it's a dubious claim for violence here, I hope that either there was really a phone-failure/disconnect and this pharmacist isn't actually this much of an asshole, or that they get fined like bloody hell. Or fired. I'd accept fired.

Ok. I think I'm done ranting. and no, I'm not going back and proofreading that, so if there are errors, repetitions, or inconsistencies, sorry. You're all big kids, you'll find a way to cope, I'm sure. :D
draggonlaady: (Nice Girl)
In many states, there are laws on the books allowing them to disregard homosexual marriages performed elsewhere. I'm sure nobody's surprised by that. But in Wisconsin, the law states that you can be fined and sent to jail for claiming as valid your homosexual marriage performed elsewhere.

under 765.30(1)(a) of the Wisconsin code, "Any person residing and intending to continue to reside in this state who goes outside the state and there contracts a marriage prohibited or declared void under the laws of this state" -- and that means, you, gay couple who just got married -- can be fined up to $10,000 or imprisoned for up to 9 months, or both.
draggonlaady: (Default)
Probably much more worth reading than anything I've ever written on the topic of homosexuality. Reposted from JohnShore.com, a comment by FreeFox:

Are you really trying to define love? Trying to claim THIS is love and THAT isn’t? Come on. Love is a big word. It has zillions of meanings. Centuries and centuries and centuries peeps have written about love. You can fill books with what love means. At the lowest level love means intense affection. Everything beyond that depends on the culture, the context, the circumstances, the person who uses the word.

But reading all this made me think. Maybe it ISN’T really about who you fall in love with and who you get your loving from. I mean… fuck… how to say this…

“Loving’s pretty easy. It’s letting someone love you that’s hard.”
- Rita Mae Brown (Riding Shotgun, 1997)

The worst thing about being queer and told that you are an abomination isn’t that you aren’t allowed to be loved by others. That IS bad enough. But the worst is that your aren’t allowed to love yourself!

There is another thing that many think is supposed to go with love, and that is that it is supposed to be unconditional. BUT when you’re queer, it NEVER is unconditional. Yeah, God loves you, BUT he wants you to be different. Your 'rents love you, BUT they want you to be different. If your lover loves you, it really is a perversion. If you love a woman (or a man, for a dyke), you know that some part of your love is a lie, if only a lie of omission. As a queer bloke, even if you like a child, your own, or your baby brother, or your nephew, even then you know that those who know always have this little, held back fear in mind: He’s a perv, so, who knows if his affection for the kiddo is all that innocent.

When you’re queer, you can never be innocent. You can never be accepted. Not the real you. You can never really let go, let yourself fall into the arms of love. You always have to be on the look-out, against yourself, against those around you. A part of you has to fight love all the time. It is SO FUCKING EXHAUSTING. After a while you get so tired you just want it to stop, even when it means you have to stop breathing to get there.

So, all you good “Christians” who think that picking that one prohibition from the Good Book of a Zillion Prohibitions, there really are only three options for queers: Say “screw you all” to you bigots and ignore you and shag whosoever you want and feel good about it, or give up and die, or FIGHT till you are gone and we have won. And when that day is here, and there are queer boys happily snogging on all the school grounds in the world, and you can’t go through a town without having to retch all the time for seeing all those hand-holding dykes and happy faggots, just remember, we didn’t bring that fight to you. You brought it to us. And I hope you choke on it.
draggonlaady: (Vampire Cat)
This is probably the most entertaining essay ever on the "ground zero mosque" issue. Read it, I loved it.


Perhaps spatial reality functions differently on the other side of the Atlantic, but here in London, something that is "two minutes' walk and round a corner" from something else isn't actually "in" the same place at all. I once had a poo in a pub about two minutes' walk from Buckingham Palace. I was not subsequently arrested and charged with crapping directly onto the Queen's pillow. That's how "distance" works in Britain. It's also how distance works in America, of course, but some people are currently pretending it doesn't, for daft political ends.

A few days bac, I got bored, and prompted by a comic, looked some stuff up. Thought I posted it, but apparently didn't. So I'll tack it on here:

The proposed mosque site is 2 1/2 blocks from "ground zero", not at the actual site of destruction.

It also is not actually a mosque. The proposed Cordoba House is an Islamic Community Center, similar to a Jewish Community Center. It will contain a mosque/prayer area, just like a Christian Life Center would be expected to contain a chapel, or a Jewish Community Center to hold a synagogue. Besides the prayer space, the Initiative's plan includes a 500-seat auditorium, theater, performing arts center, fitness center, swimming pool, basketball court, childcare services, art exhibitions, bookstore, culinary school, and a food court.

There is already a mosque 3 blocks away, which has been there since the 70's. So far, nobody's burned it, or demanded it be moved.

There is also a strip club within 2 blocks of GZ, and nobody's up in arms about THAT.

There is a Catholic St. Peter's Church about a block away from GZ, the priest there is in favor of building this center.

Tangentially, did you know that Christian groups came in and put up a couple hundred crosses at Auschwitz? (most have since been removed.) I had no idea until I started following links from some of these articles. Seems rather ... hypocritical ... to me, to put a Catholic chapel actually inside the SS admin building at Birkenau, despite the protestations of hundreds of Jewish survivors and relatives of the massacred, and then turn around and have a fit about a community center 2 blocks away from a terrorist attack site.


draggonlaady: (Default)

April 2017

91011 12131415
1617181920 2122


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 26th, 2017 06:12 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios