Stats

Comments Posted By choicelady

Displaying 1,561 To 1,590 Of 5,146 Comments

Time Out for O/T – Vol. 18

And it’s Gaelic, right? Man – kowtowing to those radical Irish! What’s next?

» Posted By choicelady On March 24, 2012 @ 5:09 pm

Sally – fantastic source and one I’d never heard of. Bet he was not welcome in many places of pseudo piety!

Yes – a nation founded for human beings, not supernatural ones. One created not “delivered” (none is, but how’d you justify the divine right of kings without that?)and based on science and logic in its creation.

Lovely source, and thank you for it!

» Posted By choicelady On March 24, 2012 @ 5:02 pm

If we lived c. 1900, I think we’d be appalled at the tenor of the nation. Yes – there was a huge wave of support for Eugene Debs. There was also no union movement left since it was destroyed after the Battle of Homestead 1892. Individual local unions, yes. No national movement. The progressives were making incremental steps with the initiative, recall, and referendum in SOME states, but this all within a context of massive US imperialism and deeply rooted racism and xenophobia. This was the time of the RISE of Jim Crow, lynchings, racial immigration exclusion acts, the extension of the US into Cuba, the Caribbean, the Philippines and the sudden upsurge of the original MIC and secret expansion of cartels (later made illegal but not put out of operation in fact).

I love the energies of the Progressive Era and the successes we got – but as an historian of that era, I am much happier with now. The sheer grinding poverty, of gut-wrenching racisim, and drumbeat of paranoia against immigrants was vastly greater than it now is – if you can believe it.

I once worked over a year going through every single issue of Harper’s Illustrated Weekly, Leslie’s, and McClure’s and several other weekly periodicals. It was an eye-opening experience. There were many very positive elements about reform – Hull House and Henry Street and the rise of adult public education, fights against child labor, Mother Jones and many good fights for working people – and mostly not. While the nation did some things very well, it did many things wrong far more often.

I came out of that experience thanking my lucky stars I’m a boomer living in a nation where the expectation of fairness and equity exist even when so many times the experience of those things fails. That was not even true a century ago. The presumption of inequality and unfairness, of dirt and danger for those who worked in mills and factories, of tenements and segregation of ALL the poor but especially those who were Black – all of that was the EXPECTATION of those days. We now fight against that immiseration, and that is a huge, huge change.

And I do NOT wish to go back!

» Posted By choicelady On March 24, 2012 @ 2:43 pm

He obviously has not read a shred of colonial MA law. Theses founders of our first settlements outlawed both torture and “cruel and unusual punishment”. They were highly intolerant of others – and Pastor Weiland would have been one of them. Baptists were the source of the laws on separation of church and state AND the first amendment rights of tolerance of all religious views. He is a descendant of that original view, so he ought to like it.

I find people who hate the Constitution but wish to live here without a scrap of justification for having it both ways. I never thought I’d be in the camp of “love it or leave it”, but if you hate our nation’s heritage, purposes, and morality – then move elsewhere. It is not yours to change or even challenge the fundamental principles that have given hope and refuge to so many. We did not need to be a “Christian nation” under Weiland’s precepts until after the 1970s when a handful of wingnuts decided for themselves a new theological view that the world was ending and that they had the Great Commission to “save” us all for Jesus. From Christian points of view it’s heretical. From democratic points of view, it’s tyranny and possibly treason. If he makes a single move to overthrow the Constitution by force or violence, he’s committing a crime. We, Americans, in the vast majority, do not embrace his view and sorry, majority rules. So – love it or leave it. No other choice by law, by morality, by the judgement of your peers, Mr. Weiland.

» Posted By choicelady On March 24, 2012 @ 10:22 am

No KT – we do not come from theocratic views but from teachings that often incorporate Ghandi, eastern religions in general, Native American reverence for the integration of nature with human existence, with yes the teachings of Jesus about peace, justice, equality, etc.

Only time I use Bible verses in advocacy is to tweak the religious right. And to remind them there’s more to Christianity than the icky parts of Leviticus they hang their entire hat collection upon.

One CAN come from those values or any values to argue FOR democracy. Faith values are not different from yours. That is a hugely different meme from saying “God said, therefore you shall do (because I SAID so)”. Especially when God said no such thing as they claim (whatever it may be) and one certainly questions how the HELL anyone KNOWS what “God said” since we don’t have notarized memos from God.Or even IF there’s a sentient and intervening God and if there is a God at all, one who speaks English. Only.*

My point was the dismissive “mean well” – we do a damned sight more than wring our hands, and it has cost some of us dearly in terms of safety. Remember – MLK, Jr., Ralph Abernathy, even Al Sharpton are/were all MINISTERS first for whom their faith values were the prime movers for justice. Would you have had them silenced in the political arena? They were a lot more Biblically grounded than we are today – we reach into a wide variety of teachings to direct our choices.

“Going to the mountaintop to see the Promised Land” is from the Bible. Is that a bad visual reference for the civil rights movement and the policies that emerged from it?

Religion can be pernicious when it’s totalitarian and exclusionary, anti-constitutional and anti-democratic. It can be a powerful force for good ALONG with secular humanism that shares its root values.

John Dewey and others who brought forth the conception of secular humanism did it to pull out the threads from ALL religions, views, moral values that were shared by everyone. Religion was PART of its foundation. Secular Humanism can be shared by all – and is – because it stands upon some pretty powerful universal precepts.

Only the fundies cannot abide it because they don’t even stand on shared CHRISTIAN values! Followers of cults rarely fit in well with society. That’s why they create little empires all their own. Today it’s different – the cult leaders want to take us over, and the first to be eradicated? Other Christians who won’t bow to absolutism and denounce those around them who are not Christians. Then Jews who won’t convert or kowtow to fundie principles. Then everyone else. I’m sure they have a list.

So we cannot be drummed out – our voices are the same as yours and equal to yours even if we begin in a different place. It’s where we get TO that matters. If we are uniform in the principles of democracy, then we are all working in pursuit of the common good. That’s all that matters.

*If someone is a Biblical literalist, why don’t they advocate Aramaic as the only language? Never could figure that out.

» Posted By choicelady On March 23, 2012 @ 6:36 pm

Can’t reply below, so we’ll do it this way.

I know it was not personal, but what I’ve said since I joined PPOV is precisely what YOU said – morality is not the province of religion.

But the mainline denominations – shunned by the media – are in line with this view as well. When you say, “I know you and your oranization mean well and fight against the whackos” the further implication of keeping religion out of governing bodies reads – keep our VOICES out as well. Maybe not what you meant, but it is a tad patronizing. We don’t just “mean well” we have put our lives on the line to DO what we say and carry out our faith in democracy and full inclusion of everyone with equal rights.

It is not agnostics and atheists being gunned down – it’s people who are coming from their faith-grounded morality who are dying at the hands of the extremists.

They are not challenged by you or even Sam Harris – they wrote YOU off long ago – they are deeply and fearfully challenged by Gene Robinson and Dr. Tiller and Bart Slepian, and Mikey Weinstein and their faithful allies who put lie to the RW claim to owning Christianity and a kind of Judaism that is forever in service to Dominionism. They are challenged by Muslims who show they are equally good Americans. They are challenged by nuns who stand for justice, and by those of us in faith worlds who seek to end the Dominionism of tyrannical faux religious absolutism.

So yeah = we don’t just “mean well”. We walk the walk and pay the freaking price for doing so.

» Posted By choicelady On March 23, 2012 @ 3:25 pm

KT – you don’t need religion to have values. Think I’ve said that before. AdLib put his finger on it – it’s where our members come from and know it’s hardly the only source or even a necessary one. But what YOU are saying is that we cannot do what you do as a non-believer who seems to believe in the same moral precepts we do. We are NOT imposing religion on democracy. We do have exactly the same right to come from our values as you. We are in agreement that religion as a cudgel is wrong, and that imposing one’s view on others is wrong. We have a Constitution that shows us the way, and we, like you, adhere to that as the prime mover of our government.

Neither religion nor science nor secular humanism is a guarantee you or anyone will have morality. Morality seems to come from its own “place” within the human consciousness. No one can look at the nasty televangelists and Islamic wahabbists or at the progressive lefties who hate everyone, or scientists who dropped the Big One or did the Tuskegee experiments without noting that somewhere, somehow they ALL have the common ground of being perfectly horrible people.

We are among the first people to wish to rid government of religion so it may function as democracy. That does not mean we need to stay silent any more than you do.

» Posted By choicelady On March 23, 2012 @ 9:20 am

Worst thing we ever did as a nation was admit them back in in “reconstruction”. Should have had a massive refugee movement for unionists and ALL slaves, but they could have kept their damned “homeland” of the Confederacy and all it meant.

» Posted By choicelady On March 23, 2012 @ 8:48 am

The colonies WERE founded as Christian enclaves, and that’s largely the reason we have the various passages about no religious test for public office, the inability of Congress (or any aspect of government) lending support to one over another view. My forebears were anything but tolerant of ideas other than their own Congregationalist ones. Baptists, now Dominionists, who decry the separation of church and state owe their own existence to that fact. Before the Constitutional separation, they were forbidden to erect their own churches in New England save Rhode Island, and those who lived in the other colonies had to pay for the upkeep of the Congregational churches in their towns. Were they to go back to this, original intent as they claim, they’d logically have to go out of business and let the Congregationalists take over in New England, Anglicans in mid Atlantic, Catholics in MD and so on. Immediately prior to the Revolution the Crown sought to impose Anglican priests on every colony as well. So no – the NATION was not a “Christian” entity because no freedom of worship or belief could exist for anyone who stood outside the established church. But the colonies were sectarian to a fare-thee-well, and with some pretty disastrous consequences for those advocating that this separation is not true.

One big smacking question – if this is a “Christian nation” then WHOSE version of Christianity will prevail? I don’t quite see the Dominionists praying the rosary and carrying around the Virgin Mother, and to this day, Catholics outnumber those in other denominations. Beware of your wishes…

» Posted By choicelady On March 22, 2012 @ 8:40 pm

I agree. It sort of boils down to “saying so doesn’t make it so.” The fulminations from the Bishops, the religious right overall, and propped up by Rush et al. do NOT reflect the real feelings of real people.

Cher – I think the failures of 2010 were that so many people did NOT vote, not that mods embraced the Tea Party. I’ve noticed people such as Ed Schultz no longer bad mouth the prez – I think we got enough people telling him – hey YOU contributed to this! Now he’s pumping everyone to vote for the president. Well thanks, Ed. Too little, too late.

But the nation as a whole is sick of the divisiveness, and the interviews people do with the hard right in the primaries is ridiculous. The vote in Iowa – the whole GOP turn out – would not fill a smallish city in that state. And yet they are given the weight as if they were representative. They aren’t. None of the states have good turnout, so what that means is a disaffected GOP this time. Not voting or mods and indies heading Obama’s way and possibly Dems overall.

» Posted By choicelady On March 22, 2012 @ 5:30 pm

Hey! MY organization is deeply involved in the political process. BIG difference – we encourage people to come FROM their values to advocate on democracy not impose a strict agenda ON it.

Nothing wrong under the sun with that, but there IS a huge problem with people deciding to rule over all of us with their values paramount. Everyone has values, and people of faith are no different from those in the League of Women Voters. It’s how you proceed (legally) and for what you argue (democracy or your absolutes) that makes the difference. I’m fine with people being in the public arena reflecting their moral perspectives, but we can’t and won’t tell everyone else how to live.

Of course if we did, we’d be very nice about it, totally inclusive and non-threatening to everyone. And would serve coffee and cookies as we talked.

» Posted By choicelady On March 22, 2012 @ 5:22 pm

Khirad – wouldn’t that be Tweedledum and Tweedledumber?

» Posted By choicelady On March 22, 2012 @ 5:17 pm

Hi Murph – I was thinking more along the lines of demonstrations outside AMA, state MAs, ACOG offices, NOT an individual woman taking on her physician. She would, Lord knows, already be under stress over her personal problems.

Doctors HAVE to start speaking out against medical procedures via legislature. I think every doc turns a blind eye if he/she is not in reproductive care especially abortion provision, because they THINK it does not pertain to them and, oh well.

They have an absolute imperative to defend their fellow doctors from legal impositions made by lay people. If they do not, then their entire practice is in danger. This really will not stop at abortion or contraception provisions if they do not.

WE, their patients, need to remind them of their dedication to medicine, not politics.

It was interesting to me that the MD in the TN legislature spoke out against putting the name of doctors providing abortions on a state web site. – he may well be anti-abortion, but he realizes FULL well what putting doctors’ names on lists DOES lead to. Lost two friends that way – gunned down from being on a private list. Let’s not make the state the intermediary for assassins. Good doc. Raises my estimation of his ilk. And good for him putting his dedication to medicine ahead of stupid ass policy!

» Posted By choicelady On March 22, 2012 @ 10:11 am

I think every woman in America should note to her physician that if she does not get medical care subject to the standards of practice of whatever specialty it is, she will sue. The doctor. Now.

ACOG and the AMA have been conspicuously silent on these issues. Maybe we should picket THEM?

» Posted By choicelady On March 21, 2012 @ 2:58 pm

This makes all of us just pre-dead.

» Posted By choicelady On March 19, 2012 @ 6:01 pm

They sport T-shirts with Pepsi-style symbols saying “Jesus”. Wow. Christ a commodity. Progress? I think NOT.

» Posted By choicelady On March 19, 2012 @ 6:01 pm

But not a Roach Motel – they check in, but unfortunately they DO check out again. Damn.

» Posted By choicelady On March 19, 2012 @ 8:48 am

Hi bito!

No – Rick’s mission (not impossible) is to infiltrate the Catholic Church and infuse it with New Apostolic Reformation zeal and principles. It’s the Pope who ought to take a second look at the Church’s embrace of people such as Santorum. They wish the demise of Roman Catholic principles and the rise of End Times Dominionism. And Catholics, short sighted in their hyperventillating over contraception, do not see who their allies REALLY are.

Little Red Riding Hood got in bed with the Wolf, and the Wolf is licking its chops.

» Posted By choicelady On March 18, 2012 @ 8:21 am

The kid is highly INTO nutrition – as he perceives it. The hope is to get him enlisted in better choices. Man does not live by oranges alone – not even at 19. I want him to come to think of this as keeping the healthy cells healthy while the chemo works on the cancerous ones. We shall see. But you’re NOT late – this will be an ongoing conversation, of that I’m sure. He’s the nicest and most responsible teen I know, but he’s scared and now suddenly defiant in the hope I suspect that this will just go away.

Sigh.

» Posted By choicelady On March 16, 2012 @ 2:32 pm

Yes – and time IS of the essence. Today is not good – his father was to be here to pick me up, not a sign of him. That makes me think something urgent has arisen – they already have battled ONE infection from low white counts and his indifference to them – so I’m not talking today, but now I’m worrying instead.

» Posted By choicelady On March 16, 2012 @ 2:30 pm

Great idea – and I am actually interested. Once we get through that, if he can begin to trust that the doc is not on “piece rates” meaning the kid is a cash cow, we can move toward balancing the alternative meds with the chemo.

This comes out of one of the most profound acts of denial I think. What 19-year-old wants to think he’s mortal?

» Posted By choicelady On March 16, 2012 @ 2:28 pm

Yes – he is losing his hair, and yes, I do think his appearance matters to him. He’s very cute, and he actually doesn’t look bad at ALL with no hair, but…he’s 19.

I, as an older woman, will NOT tell him he looks cute. It’s kinda up there with Great Aunt Fanny pinching your cheeks when you’re 8 and telling you you’re sooooooo Kee-UTE. It comes better from women his own age.

I do think the major nausea etc. are scaring him, too, and damn I’d like to suggest weed, but I’ll have that conversation with his father, NOT with him!

Thanks, kes. You’ve probably seen every experience in the book, and I deeply value your advice.

Love and thanks to you for taking time to walk me through this!

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 10:55 pm

Oh bito! It’s so wonderful to hear from you! And this is absolutely great info – I WILL appeal to his being a hero to others in his situation. He is a wonderful young man, and I KNOW he’s scared (who would not be?) to think at 19 he’s facing God only knows what in the future.

So yes – this might be just the ticket. The doctor he has told him and his family that he has a 90% recovery chance. He got in very early – I don’t want to see him blow that. If it turns into a kind of chronic condition, as some with leukemia have had happen in my experience, then so be it. We take what life hands us – do we really have an alternative?

I LOVE what you said about how many Mexican trial survivors are there? I would appeal to what is really very good sense in him – how many people are “out there” hawking “lithia water cured me” or “laetrile is my best friend” ? If they were there, you’d know it.

There are teens throughout the area who have had this – no one knows where it comes from or why, but there have been features in our paper of kids in long term remission, so he NEEDS to set the standard and be one of them! They are not well again from peach pits, that’s for damn sure.

His father is one of the most salt of the earth people – you know, like YOU – who is just being torn up by his son’s stubborn belief the doc is ripping them off and that orange juice will cure his lymphoma. I am supposed to go talk with the kid tomorrow, so yes, yes, yes, thank you I will bring this up, that modern medicine does produce its own kinds of miracles, and that he needs to be part of the cure, not someone over whom we cry in memory.

Thank you for such GREAT guidance. I’m delighted to hear from you and kes about such good sense ideas. And I’m just plain delighted to hear from YOU, bito. Lovely to “see” you again after way too long. Love and hugs and thanks!

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 10:50 pm

You’re welcome, dear friend – you matter SO much to us all, and you and your family have been deeply in our thoughts and in our hearts. We send our love!

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 8:33 pm

Oh thank you, kes! That IS my approach – both/and, the holistic approach.

I want to say to him – have you seen the hundreds of thousands who walk for life (our own ad upper right)??? Now – have you seen the same numbers who walk as survivors of JUST alternative meds? Why not?

I want you to be in the Walk. A real survivor, alive, whole, cured. I don’t want to cry at your grave. I’ve lost way too many friends to cancer – people who put off finding out until it was too late. People whose cancer had a very low survival rate. People older than you whose prognosis was never very good. But i also have friends who are alive and perfect decades later – and whom I saw suffer through the awfulness of treatment but who live whole and complete and cancer free lives today. THAT is what I want for you! Do it ALL – eat right to protect the healthy cells and take the chemo to kill the bad ones. And come out better than you started.

Do it ALL, not just the alternative stuff that is the real money gouge. Take vitamins, keep active, eat really, really well. AND LIVE!!!!

His father is a wreck from the worry because Brandon is just scared and defiant. He blew off a chemo treatment – and then got too sick from his lousy diet for the next one. I want to say to him – you do not get a second chance at this! I’m really scared for him. Youthful bullheaded actions could kill him!

I hope I can say the right things – he’s a great kid. I do NOT want him to die!!! Thank you so much for reminding me to be positive and affirm how much we all care about him! I will take your advice to heart, and thank you!!!

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 8:31 pm

Calling my friends – I need some sound advice quickly.

I have a young friend, 19 years old, who has lymphoma. I’m not sure whether it’s Hodgkins or non-Hodgkins. He has convinced himself the doctors are all ripping him off and that stuff he’s found online will cure him up to and including a diet of nothing but oranges.

Can anyone give me leads to give to him tomorrow – Friday March 16 – that will help me convince him that he needs chemo, however disgusting the experience – and that this is a linear process, no “do overs” in case the “alternatives” do not work? I believe in holistic medicine. I do NOT believe in laetrile, special “waters”, vegan diets alone – none of that will allow him to live. His prognosis is excellent with chemo, a 90% chance of cure. But he thinks he knows the medical establishment is bogus, even as he’s willing to put out of pocket (his Dad’s pocket) for weird stuff that costs the earth to buy.

Any info, especially sites for teens, would be much appreciated. Thanks!

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 7:36 pm

Let me also add that for Alexie, the choice of going to the “white school” meant big alienation from his peers. BIG time. AND he was not accepted at the school. So there was a huge sacrifice in cultural safety and friendships he made for asserting his right to be educated. His family proved to be a key to his persistence. Not everyone would have such support. That said, yes, it IS different from voting. But that may be why the turnout was SO low.

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 2:34 pm

Whoa, Nelly!

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 2:30 pm

Sally – that IS a very good point I wasn’t thinking about. What you do in the voting booth is indeed secret. Though a Black ally found it was not QUITE secret – he had moved as virtually the only Black person into a very posh almost entirely white community where he had a church to which he’d been assigned as pastor. When he went to vote in the primary, the poll watcher, shocked out of his socks, LOUDLY announced to another poll worker, “He’s a DEMOCRAT!” Apparently they hadn’t had one in many a year. So much for the ‘secret ballot’!!! But all other things being equal – yeah. Voting is secret, and you can always lie. That IS a very fine point!

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 2:29 pm

For me the defining moment of her phony Christianity came when he referred to the death of his son, and she said NOTHING. She just looked pissed she did not have a sad story to “play”. She had not an ounce of compassion for what the Bidens had experienced, and that said everything about who she was. The entire nation reacted negatively to her crass indifference.

» Posted By choicelady On March 15, 2012 @ 7:57 am