Two words:

Mary Winkler.

UPDATE:  I’m asked what the connection is.

I will apologize for Darren Mack when Women demanding that apology apologize in turn for Mary Winkler.

Abso-freaking-lutely BONZER!!!!

Blonde much, ladies?

How ideed, I am asked, can I be morally outraged by something, and not believe it should be given legal protection, but also not believe it should be a crime?

Okay - I find homosexuality to be against my religious beliefs.  I do not believe that special protection should exist for sexual behavior.  This does not end with homosexuals, but includes S&M, potty sex, and a host of other fetishes and deviances.  But criminalize behind closed doors behavior of consenting adults?  No.

I don’t believe in drug use.  I don’t believe it is a “civil right” to be a crack head.   I don’t believe that you should be free to be not tested for drugs (But I believe that an employer who wants such testing is obligated to pay for it).  HOWEVER - if you can truly keep your shooting up in your house, and not out on the street, or costing the public - go for it.

I don’t believe in abortion as birth control.  But I mistrust the government’s ability to regulate it.  For instance - a woman miscarries, naturally.  The placenta is not ejected.  It must be removed in a procedure.  3 guesses what that procedure is, and what fanatics would regulate?  No thank you - where government is the answer, a stupid question has been asked.

Do I believe in racism?  Let’s see - I’m part American Indian.  So - that would be … No.  Do I believe a racistr assbag has a right to be both wrong and stupid, even publicly so?  Absolutely.  I want him as visible as possible so I can see him.

Shouldn’t do, and shouldn’t be allowed to do, are manifestly different things.  An ye harm none, and all that.  I am all about free will.  And as long as you’re not asking me to buy your ticket, by all means, hop on the Handbasket Express.

Re: Darren Mack

I hope the father’s rights movement en masse adopt Sacks’ hard line — not the soft line of “I don’t condone his actions BUT I understand them.” 

Sorry.  No can do.

I no only do not condone, but condemn his actions.  Would that I could say I don’t understand the despair and agony he experienced.  Sadly, though, I do.  I do understand having your children taken away from you, assigned visitation “privileges” that are routinely ignored.  We all know the litany, and far too many of us have lived it.

Your kids are forever, Wendy.  You miss their 13th Birthday because your rights to visitation were pissed on - it’s gone forever.  You can’t just go get hired as dad to some Random 13 year old and get a second chance.  Some sexist creep stares at your tits you can end it.  Get sexually harassed at a job - you can find a different one, unless you’re emotionally attached to your cubicle.  Fail to get a promotion because you’re a woman?  Other doors are open - all just as good. Become 0 at best - a mere vistor, and an unwelcome one at that, in your own flesh and blood’s lives?  YOU get over it.  I will happily trade you, and my nightmare is over, and I won in the end.

Here a couple years later - I absolutely hate my ex-wives, I hate the judges that presided, their attorneys - the only thing that would make my heaven more complete is a direct video feed to their places in Hell.  Were I to stand with an ironclad alibi for any one of them or they would get a needle, I would remain silent.  They are no longer my concern, and no longer my problem, and my indifference to them in that respect could not be more complete.  They robbed me of years - years - which all the King’s Horses and All the King’s Men canot get back for me, and for which I shall never forgive them.
What Darren Mack did was wrong, and he should face justice because of it, and be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, for the sake of society.  If, however, his victims were as he described, do not ask me to pity them.

Yeah, you probably guessed I didn’t care for it.

Peeve #1: Writers write.  Screenplay writers adapt.  Directors and producers direct and produce.  A confusion of these rolls always results in a turd, and this is no exception.  Call me a purist, but I don’t ever recall Supes knocking Lois Lane up out of wedlock, Lois trying to find another daddy for the super-spawn, or her being such an unconscionable bitch.

The lesson I think one needs to learn is to write - direct - and act the characters as written and envisioned by the creators of the characters.  This is why they work.  And this is why movies bomb, because people who have no business writing them, and play fast and lose with the conceptions, always cock-up the end product.

Superman in this movie is a whiney little twerp who frankly needs Batman to come slap him up side his head and tell him to grow the hell up.  Clark Kent is even worse - you don’t get the sense Clark is an alter ego and facade Superman adopts to hide in the world, but an even more snivelling little bitch that Superman turns into when he’s not free to be Superman.  Lois Lane is a walking advertisment for why men should live in their parents basements and play video games.  The Daily Planet at times resembles Dilbert, and frankly the only really sympathetic character in the movie is Lex Luthor.  This is worse than Superman IV.  Hell, I found myself rooting for Lex Luthor.

Peeve #2: Superman wasn’t written as a dummy.  Why then is he played like one?  When you have one weakness - Kryptonite - you would think you wouldn’t lead with your chin against someone who knows that weakness, and has demonstrated an ability to obtain it, and a willingness to use it against you.

Jesus.  What a waste of an hour and forty five minutes.  Do yourself a favor, and wait for the DVD to come out.  On the bargain rack.

Dumb as a sack of hammers.

Next time you see some asshat trying to burn the flag … hehehehe … a story.

No Shit, there I was.  Early 1990s.  Slick Willie was president, and I was an post-grad - and some buttmunch had announced he was going to burn a flag in protest on the quad.

So, we uns of the Campus Conservatives grabbed our flags and headed down there - then we had the brilliant idea to do a little shopping.  Off to the leftist bodega, and we had an ANC flag, a UN flag, and a Rainbow Coalition flag.  Plus our own US flags.

Well we got there, and we were all ready to hoist the flags and start burning our own purchases - after, of course, El Assbago lit his so if campus police made an issue they’d have to target us.  The pinko bastard pulled out his zippo, and applied it to the flag - and it darkened.  Little puff of smoke.  Some shrivelling.  Nothing.

He kept at it.

One of my pals ambled over and picked up the box.  He grinned.  He walked over and handed it to me.  I grinned.  I handed it back.  And then old Wyatt said, “Hey - uh - genius!  If you want to burn a flag, you might not want to buy one made of fire retardant fabric!”

WHOOPSIE!

Well, we felt so bad for him, we offered one our our sturdy cotton ones and some lighter fluid - and then we sat around, and pulled out our own flags.

He looked at us in horror.  “What ..  what are you doing?”

We smiled.  “We’s having us a flag-burning!  Thought we’d make a party of it!”

Well, there were some jeers and some cheers from the crowd, and there started a discussion about how his protest was different.  It was amusing to watch him try to condemn us for the exact same thing he was doing, and he started getting more and more red in the face.  At first Campus Police started to look uneasy, but later started rolling their eyes.  People started drifting away.

Finally the guy stood up, tossed our flag back at us, and screamed “You fucking Republicans ruin EVERYTHING!” and just stomped off.

Make it a teaching moment.

So well, in fact, that I find it really hard to be pissed off at even the most abject stupidities.  I look at it, and I say, “Ya know, Gonz - this knucklehead is such a hopeless asshat that their life is already in the crapper, even if they don’t know it yet.  And here you are, living well.”

I mean, what is a curmudgeon to do, if he can’t find something to be curmudgeonly about?

I dunno - it’s starting to piss me off.

Hey……

….Going on by Trish Wilson?  Her “Send me money, I’m poor and broke.”  Her husband lost his job, and of course, strong, successful, independent woman that she is, getting a job herself is out of the question.  But.  She sells soap!

Could it be?  Naaaaaaah, couldn’t be! 

Puh-lease.  I make soap myself, good old take the hide off a bear lye soap.  And I couldn’t support myself making it without a factory.  Talk about mental masturbation.
Anyway - looks like a “Rest of The Story” moment.  It seems her son (Who she lovingly calls “The Royal Spawn” - I guess “Meal Ticket” is too honest) has just left to go to college in Maryland - to live with his Father - so it looks like the Child Support checks have petered out.  So part of her problem is living within her means rather than on free money.

Ah, schaedenfreude!  I know.  It’s petty.  But, being in the position her ex is, and watching my exes struggle now that the Gravy Train has ended… Pass me the humidor and cognac.  How sweet it is.

What is really so amusing is the bogus claim these Momonazis make about “Child support is for the child - even that isn’t enough to cover the real expense…”  Really?  Well now that Meal Ticket is gone, you should be rolling in dough, Trishykins… All that money you were spending that Child Support doesn’t even begin to cover…

Yep - articulate hypothesis - construct test - apply - NOPE!  Doesn’t even pass the sniff test!

Yeah, I’m a mean bastard.  But, I never claimed not to be, and if you ever read some of the tripe that comes out - her and Liz! Richards are twins seperated at birth - well, payback is a bitch.  What goes around comes around.

This time with a preist, sad to say.

Victims reported ages 12, 12, and 15.  This isn’t pedophelia.  This isn’t a fascination with pre-pubesent children.  These kids are past puberty, physically sexually mature, and this Oocha is gay.  And the gay lobby wants you to belive that there is such a thing as “hebephilia” but it isn’t - it’s just a gay guy who likes that young stuff, a damn chickenhawk.

First, the preist needs to be excommunicated, and if not defrocked, suspended from preistly function.  And if I were his confessor, the conditional absolution and penance I would give him would be terrible to behold.
Second, he needs to be extradited.  By special forces if need be, since our oh-so-wonderful neighbors down south like to hide criminals who flee from US jurisdiction.  Then once here, he needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  And locked up.  In general population.
His bishop, then, for waiting 3 days needs to report this, needs to be arrested and prosecuted for accessory after the fact.  Minimum.  And then if he had any decency he’d resign.

And if either of these two rat bastards ever work in the church again, it needs to be someplace cloistered.  Pushing papers for commissions on abuse.  And I am willing to bet this is another pederast bishop, and member of the Lavender Mafia. Oh - And they should probably cloister them in convents, not monastaries.  The nuns, I am sure, will be safe from them.

And HH Benedict XVI needs to put his housecleaning of seminaries and such into high gear.

Long time readers will know that one of the surest ways of upping the sneer quotient from me is to behave in an unprincipled manner; in a manner that is hypocritical, and which holds a double standard.  It’s a hot button issue with me, and such things generally leave me opening up a can of rhetorical whoopass in as nasty a fashion as I can find, or of dismissing the culprit altogther as a worthless sack of shit and argument in the affirmative for retroactive abortion.

I talk about principle a lot.  In fact, most people do, but I think in many cases it becomes a buzzword.  Many times it is used to excuse nd shallowly dismiss immoral behavior , much like “Political Ethics” is used.

I differentiate between legality, ethics, and morals.  Legality is what you can get away with out in the open.  Ethics is how you behave if you think someone might check up on you.  And morality is how you behave when you are sure you can get away with it.  Morals, then, is the highest of these, and for a truly moral person the three are indistinguishable.  Your principles, however, are things you will not violate even if you can get away with it, or even if sticking to them costs you.

I’ve nothing but contempt for situational ethics and moral relativism, and I think most principled people hold the same viewpoint, though liberals might still see it as not their job to “judge” even a patently immoral, unethical, and unprincipled son of a bitch.  I have no such consideration in my morals, ethics, or principles.  As anyone knows, if I see assbaggery, I call assbaggery.  If someone is offended - oh well.

When you have aguiding principle - or set thereof - they cannot but inform your decisions.  And if you measure your beliefs and opinions by them, you will have a clear, coherent, and easily discernable philosophy to your life; without having to flail around for rationalizations.

Let’s move past the theology. It’s a given - I’m a traditionalist, and I find soi disant progressive theology to be heterodox cherry picking. It’s bad, and ne’er the twain shall meet.

If you look around today the inroads that progressives - and I don’t say progressive Christians, because over and over you have them downplaying the core of the Nicene Creed , the mystery of salvation, and turning their expressions of religion into mere suggestions for living, with eyes on the world instead of on the World to Come - are making in several denominations are nothing less than alarming; and those who love freedom - EVEN IF YOU ARE AN ATHEIST - should have klaxons going off in your head. This is a bad thing, and this is a great evil and threat to liberty because the track record of the secular world and religion walking hand in hand has ever led to tyranny. It has done so even in cases where the official religion was no religion. Witness Communist China, where approved religion is a puppet for the government. Witness any theocracy, from modern Muslim states on back to John Calvin. Witness how corrupt the Catholic Church became whenever it and the secular power were intertwined. And so on. And so forth.

Witness now that progressive anti-theists, not merely atheists but anti-religious people - are nodding approvingly at the liberal plague which is infecting churches. When your enemies are grinning smugly, friends, it is time to stop dead in your tracks and back away slowly from your course. And I’m not speaking of the asses in the pews. I’m speaking of the ringleaders. Joe Average Liberal who makes church a couple times a month and just follows the parish council isn’t your enemy - it’s the omnipresent secularists who seek to use religion as a vehicle to power who are, and who cheerfully claim such titles as “Pastor” or “Bishop” or “Rabbi” while firmly planted in the secular world who are your enemy.

No?

Consider this, then. I will ask you point blank - do progressive “Christians” value seperation of church and state?

Rightly may it be said that the extreme Religious Right does not. They wish to keep blue laws, and a host of other things. But I submit to you that progressives are nothing more than the same thing, only different; a mere reflection of their twins in principle. Birkenstock-wearing Jerry Falwells, and nothing less.

The oft spoken extra-Constitutional “Wall of Seperation” is supposed to be a two way wall. Despite its constant misapplication and twisting by the anti-religious left, it is as it’s core a good thing. One the one side, it keeps any single religion from molding a free society into their own image, and denying freedom to live contrary to societal expectations. But it also prevents the government and society from imposing secular values on people who wish to live according to the dictates of their copnscience, and of denying them voice in the society they must live in. Under such a system, in the ideal, the practice of religion - or not - is voluntary. If you do not want the church to crap on you, if that is how you feel, you have but to leave, and go elsewhere. Likewise, and yu don’t harm persons or property, you may practice your faith as you wish, but you must allow exit at any time for someone who is over you.

So - how have progressive “Christians” been doing? What is their track record?

People of faith are speaking according to the dictates of their conscience against gay marriage in the EU - and the EU government is jailing them, fining them, and closing their churches - or giving them to progressives. What are the Progressives doing? They claim to be “Brothers in Christ,” but are they speaking out against this violation of conscience? No. They are applauding it.

Traditionalist Churches in Los Angeles wish to exit their communion, because they no longer feel in communion. So what is the reaction of Progressives? They are sueing them, and trying to take the common property of the congregations - and not the property owned by the diocese, but the property privately owned by the congregation.

When Catholic Charities refused to extend coverage for Birth control - against their doctrines - progressives sued them. Kind of like forcing a Jew to eat bacon.

Conservative Christians are being fired from public office for their private expressions affirming their church’s teaching. Progressive Christians nod approvingly, and applaud.

In Canada, ministers are being charged under specious “hate crime” laws for speaking out against gay marriage and calling homosexuality a sin. Where are the progressive Christians? Are they defending their brother’s and sister’s freedom of worship, or conscience? No - in fact they are among those leading the charge against them.

Feminists and the gay lobby long ago gave the “We will Bury You” speech regarding churches. and it looks like they are making inroads.

The time for traditionalists and conservatives to act is now. Not to win - not to eliminate, or crush, or silenmce liberal religious folks, but to draw the line, to declare their ground, and to push for their rights to be as they are and settle it once and for all. Now. Not later, when some sheriff is showing up at Sunday worship with a piece of paper declaring them to be an illegal assembley, which is, if the progressives have their way, exactly where they wish to go with it. It doesn’t matter your theology - Catholic should work with Protestant, Christian with Jew, and some congregations even with their own splinter sects.

If you are a traditionalist, it is time to stop trying to speak in a church which drowns you out, and leave. Find another traditionalist church in your same denomination. Switch denominations. If you are a minority, stop being crapped on, stop tossing money in the plate of your church, and go and gather together with others of like mind. If your church is a traditionalist one, it is time to weed out the heretics. Your church can acomplish nothing if it infights constantly by tolerating not mere doubt, or dissent, but outright opposition from within. The Words of Christ are important that “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” Let them go peacefully - let them have their toys - pray for them - meet after church in your respective houses of worship for Sunday Brunch - but go they must. You are working at cross purposes, you are treading water and spinning wheels. Their mission is different from yours, and it is much for their good as yours that they must go their own way. You are no longer bretheren, or in communion. Just face up to it, and move on.

Reading progressive blogs I am struck with the tone of “It’s settled and we’re weary of fighting; traditionalists should suck it up and obey or leave.” It’s not an invalid position for them to take, mind you. And first out the door should hold it lest it hit their fellows in the tush on the way out. The same invitation should likewise be extended - sauce for the goose - despite the rhetoric of “Isn’t there room for both schools of thought…” the answer is no. If you honestly think the progressives will accept the matter that you all have decided, you are living in a dream world, they will continue to nag and pick at things like a cancer - and like they have always done.

It is time to be done with it, draw the line, stake your position out and claim it, lest you be undermined in it later. And the progressives will oppose you going your own way, because they know if you stake it out, they will find it a much harder road to disenfranchise you of your right to conscience; they would rather keep it internal, a civil war, because once you have staked out your own seperate space, they must make it a Holy War, and must attack you openly.

Progressives will also decry this because by heading your own way, you force any negotiations with you to be from a position of you having power. If you are a minority conservative in a liberal church, you must approach as a supplicant. They will use honeyed words, weaselspeak, but in the end nothing will change, and they will plead plaintively about “community” and “unity” - but will ignore you. If you have your own place to go, if they then wish unity, if they refuse to give in, you have lost nothing. If they “want you back” they must make concessions. Without this power for you, all negotiations will not be in good faith on their part.

And I say this because in all honesty, negotiations with dissedents in your own traditionalist, conservative conmgregations should not be in good faith. Compromising truth in the name of unity and communion is bad policy, bad theology, and bad strategy - and bad religion. Your only “good faith” should be the good of your faith, and the good works of your faith.

Time is a wasting, and it is time to part the ways. There is work to do; and not just the work of God, but the work of freedom.

Beheaded, bodies left in an area rigged with IEDs, and the bodies themselves booby-trapped. To call this “barbaric” is an insult to barbarians everywhere.

I can think of only one set of words which captures my emotions at this time:

“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, ‘What should be the reward of such sacrifices?’ Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship, and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsul, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget ye were our countrymen.”

F.E.T.E.

…of picking on the ‘Piskies, the Presbyterians have also adopted a chowderheaded little piece of Heterodoxy their own selves, where the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost will now be referred to as “Mother, Child and Womb” or “Rock, Redeemer and Friend.”

*longsuffering sigh*

Honest to God - or, I guess “Holy Boulders, Batman!” - words at times just fail me. Utterly flabbergasted. I swear, sometimes I think there is a little office in N.O.W. HQ somewhere churning out this nonsense.
Sometimes I wonder why Progressives Christians just don’t become fucking Druids or something, you know?

UPDATE: Damn. I forgot the link. Here. 

Well, I note that at least one youth delegate there has well articulated concerns.  Maybe there’s hope for them once the aging hippies all die off, that is, if they don’t chase everyone else out of the denomination as they seem to be doing everywhere else, or cause them to splint and schism further.

And a good read.

One thing from this:

 

 The majority leader is quoted as saying, “I think it was amazingly rude to use a human being as an example of his personal politics.”

Um-hmm.  But when Liberals trot out their usual collection of people to demonstrate the “mean-spiritedness” of conservatives, that’s different.

For the cries of outrage from the left that the Iraqi/Taliban?Al Qaeda insurgents mudered in cold blood two American Soldiers the had in their custody.

Hang on …quiet….

(chirp, chirp, chirp…)

Nope.  Just the crickets chirping.

Still waiting…

Well, this is mature: (RE: My post on ECUSA’s new High Preistess)
Anonymous Coward - good bye to you and good riddance. I have long held that it is long past due to have a housecleaning of you and your kind. The Holy Spirit is leading Her church in the direction She would have it go, and if you don’t want to go there, then stay behind but it is you who will have a big suprise in store for you when your life is over and you stand before Her for Judgement. 

Yeah.  Okay.  I think this pretty much sums it up.

Far too many on the progressive side view this as being an in-your-face political statement for me to be comfortable with the pretense that is was prayerfully arrived at, with the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.  That should give any of the faithful pause, even if they agree with Miss Sarah here.

From Alternet comes this tale of woe, one Darnellia Russell, a High School Basketball player, found herself p0regnant, took time off, and when she returned she had too few credits to qualify to play.  Since High Schools don’t Red Shirt, this “Denied” her a basketball scholarship and a career in the WNBA.

Well, heck, why didn’t she get an abortion, then?  That’s her choice.  It’s an option open to her.  She chose motherhood.

Well - go through one door, and you can’t go through the other.

Feminists are all upset that the same rules apply to her, of course, that apply to everyone else; another example of them wanting special privilege.  It’s right and good to plead that women should have the final decision to have an abortion or not because of biological reality.  But live with the consequences?

Oh, the Horror!

Remaining pregnant is voluntary.  All other moral considerations aside, the reality of the world is that if a woman doesn’t want to be pregnant - she does not have to be.  It’s not a “hardship.”  It’s not something that just happens and she is helpless to prevent or get rid of.  Cancer is a hardship.  Natural Disasters are hardships.

Pregnancy can be both prevented - and cured.

If I had a son who chose some kind of elective surgery - say the eye surgery to cure nearsightedness, where you can’t engage in physical activity for months - there would be nio “hardship” because it was elective and voluntary.  He has alternatives.  Well - she does too.  Abortion.  If she doesn’t believe in it - so what?  Maybe my hypothetical son didn’t “believe in” glasses.  Gonna extend that to him?

One more example of feminists wanting women to be protected from the consequences of their actions and choices.

Just plain pathetic.

Well, there were warnings that this would happen years ago.  Maybe now the Orthodox Episcopalian/Anglicans will distance themselves from this progressive but secular religious club - if not cult - that part of the Episcopals seem hell-bent on creating.

Just did a review of the Blogroll from a Major feminist site.  Two of the Feminist Sites listed theron even mentioned Father’s Day; Ginmar, predictably, came unhinged about being a dad is a job men don’t deserve thanks for, brcause women do all the work, and Amandagon had a “Father’s Day is a crock of shit” post up.

Uh…..hunh.

I’m not suprised.  And that is a sad fucking thing when the femherroids live down to being below what I thought were abysmally low expectations.

Go look for yourself, and pay heed: Never believe what the feminazis tell you; you can always tell they are lying because their lips are moving.  Always watch what they actually do instead.

And this speaks volumes.

And especially to you all for whom this day is painful thanks to the fucked up, man-hating family court system and your @&#%$! ex-wives.  Her’s to the day when we don’t have to include that.  You matter, because the Best Man for the Job of “Daddy”….

…is a man.