Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 11:12 AM
Sun Nov 22
23 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Jenna Sauers
Email
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/20/09
11/20/09
Unless we can tax your ass and treat you like another fucking focus group, PAC, lobbying group, etc. (we should--they've made it clear who they support clear, come hell, highwater, or warmongering, social-service cutting Republicans), GO AWAY.
For the record, I don't give a shit what the church thinks about issues that put them in line with the very liberal, either. Their organization is based on an unprovable, malleable story and is a distraction from rational policymaking. I don't care if their ARE priests or nuns who are consistently "pro-life" and against choice AND the death penalty, I don't fucking religious doctrine swaying policy, period.
This stuff makes me livid. How is there even an entryway for their influence? I don't care if anti-choice Democrats and Republicans agree with them, how are they not sent reeling away from the table of discussion? Aren't there some rules they're breaking here, couldn't the legislators that oppose this amendment tell them (and anyone benefiting from their funding or talking points) where to shove it?
11/20/09
11/20/09
Guess what, people who believe in religion: YOU DON'T GET A SAY IN MY LEGISLATION. And all you people (yes, on Jezebel) who identify yourselves with any of the religions who are trying to sway this bill yet try to claim that you are against it, maybe now's the time to reconsider your alignment, no?
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/21/09
I know what's important to me. I can negotiate morality and the concepts of empathy, personal accountability, and human dignity without another f*cking Gospel that ends with "wailing and gnashing of teeth," another story that seems even more meaningless and irrelevant the third, fourth, fiftieth time I hear it (my respect for some of the priests at my family parish notwithstanding).
The Church opposes policies that would help women and children in desperately poor countries (and here, of course, where we seem both on the cusp of sensible progress and, and then, marching backwards with our eyes wide open) where childbirth is a matter of life or death and family size--in addition to corruption, policies of richer nations, environmental stress, etc.---IS relevant to collective suffering. I think that's fucking criminal--wielding an unknowable God, and the concept of an afterlife, over human progress.
The Church's moral legitimacy as an institution is undermined by the bishops' abuse of power...settling in court, then shuffling abusive priests from parish to parish so they could molest more children. That's unspeakable for a secular, "worldly," predictably flawed seat of power....but from an institution that purportedly calls faithful and non-believers alike to a less violent, more generous, more enlightened version of humanity? An institution that demands special respect because it exists as a beacon and a respite from an immoral world?
The most distasteful thing is that this isn't solely about religious doctrine. I'm guessing half the people who identify as "Christian" in this country and root for dicks like Stupak couldn't give you three Commandments or describe one Gospel that isn't typically trotted out in popular culture. It seems we as a "Christian" nation are Christian to the extent that it allows voters--and worse, policymakers--to be morally or intellectually unaccountable when convenient. It provides a legitimate excuse where others--loyalty to a corporate interest, indefensible busybody chauvinism, whatever--would fall flat, or be more easily unearthed.
I wish I could put the story of Mike Huckabee, Wayne DuMond, and his victims on billboards...that typifies the grotesque, unapologetic arrogance and complacency that religion provides.
Is it a source, or just one mask for assholery that might emerge in another form in the absence of organized religion? I don't know. And I don't care.
I feel so helpless, and so angry. I am am sputtering with rage. Why, why can't the Democrats tell them what we've said here? Doctrine should NOT be a primary source informing policy!! And if this asshole says it isn't, how else can he defend it? Why the FUCK aren't people tearing down his stupid arguments? My tax dollars paid for a three trillion dollar war that sure as fuck offends my conscience, and it will for the next couple of decades while this generation keeps footing the bill. I pay for initiatives spearheaded by religious charities (if not churches themselves).
So what is Stupak's excuse? What other defense is there? You don't like abortion? Don't get one! We already have the Hyde Amendment! If it's no more invasive, why do we need something new?
How can anyone oppose family planning and sex ed unless you support fattening the budgets for social services, TANF, Medicaid, HeadStart, or anything else that children poor to parents who can't afford them, never wanted them, don't know how to care for them, CAN'T care for them because they're on drugs?
What's the matter, what the fuck is wrong with the media that they aren't eviscerating these pieces of shit for weak reasoning or bald-faced lies?!!
#tips
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
What the Church has chosen to do with its massive global influence is so, so disappointing.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
I mean, under the proposed plans, we are not only facing the loss of access to reproductive health care, but I am also facing the degradation of my kick-ass health insurance. And at what cost? So the Democrats could say they tackled health care reform when 2010 rolls around, as if we weren't all there to see what a clusterfuck it's been?
I have a headache. Is it too early to drink?
11/20/09
@FrabjousDay: I'm so utterly disappointed by Congressional Democrats at this point.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
You are not good Christians. You are so concerned with YOUR view of life that you are willing to not pass health care bills to help others. THATS NOT CHRISTIAN.
Dear GOPers and Asshole Democrats,
You are not good people. Your role is to go what your constituents want, not what you find morally abhorrent. You are not God , thats not your job. Your job is to do the best you can for your country. The people that need the abortions the most, are probably the ones that need their health care bill. Help them too.
Not sincerly,
Dutchess
11/20/09
11/20/09
Fixed that for you.
11/20/09
I'm more worried about things coming out of right field. Ba-dum-ching.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
1. remarkable; horrifying
2. wonderful; excellent
WTF? Based on the context in the article, I guess it means remarkable. But still. How can one word mean so many drastically different things?
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
Mad props to Latoya for cutting through the bullshit and pandering to make this revolting cauldron of crap stew somewhat digestable and coherent.
11/19/09
Don't make me have to go back for every appointment until she's 50. I only have the one sister, and I am lucky to have such a sweet one. She, on the other hand, is happy that I am a loud bitch when it comes to our health.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
It's not as simple as "better safe than sorry;" more medicine isn't always better. I don't have the expertise to dig into their methodology completely, but they seem to have been pretty specific in their findings about who this applies to and who it doesn't.