You all know PETA, right? For those of you who don’t know PETA stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, an activist group that, ironically, killed more than 10,000 animals from 1998 to 2003 under the “Better off dead than fed” mantra. Well, it seems they have an issue with President Obama killing a fly… You read that right.
PETA has a few words for President Obama: Brush, don’t kill.
After the President very publically swatted and then killed a fly during an interview with CNBC yesterday, the outspoken animal rights group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) said they wished Obama had served a better example.
“We support compassion for the even the smallest animals,” says Bruce Friedrich, VP for Policy at PETA. “We support giving insects the benefit of the doubt.”
Friedrich says PETA supports “brushing flies away rather than killing them” and was disappointed that the President had gone ahead and squashed the pesky fly.
A Vatican official is lamenting that many faithful no longer confess their sins, and says some confuse a psychologist’s couch for a confessional booth.Archbishop Mauro Piacenza has told Vatican Radio the sacrament of penance has been experiencing a “deep crisis” for decades. Piacenza, an official for the Vatican office on clergy, says fewer people distinguish between good and evil, and as a result don’t go to confession.
The archbishop said in the interview Tuesday that if faithful don’t have a sense of sin, they might “confuse” confession with “the couch of a psychologist or a psychiatrist.”
This story, while all of three paragraphs, raises so many questions I am having a hard time even starting. Let me try but please hang with me was I get to my ultimate point.
Point #1 – How does the Vatican know confession is down?
Your first reaction may be “Well, the priests say they spend less time doing confession…” But that doesn’t mean confessions are down, maybe the priests who perform confession have become exceedingly efficient in doing so? What is they are seeing *more* people in less time?
Working under the assumption that confession is down, however; does that imply the Church is auditing/counting each individual who goes to confession? Are the masses being tracked, and if so, to what end? Better yet, do they even know they are being tracked?
Point #2 – Why is it a bad thing?
What if people are going less because the time commitments in life mean they have to bunch up all the thoughts for one confession a week, not three?
The Archbishop makes this sound like a lack of confession is a bad thing – what if it is not? What if confession is down because Catholics, or those in the Catholic Church that would seek Confession, have become better people because of their faith?
Less sin would require less confession, no?
Point #3 – Does the church want people to be sinners?
Assuming point number two – the “better people” part – is not that case and people are not becoming “better” people, does that mean the Church would not want them to improve who they are?
Would it make sense that a group that espouses God’s love would wish for other to grow become of that love? If they are not growing – emotionally or spiritually – wouldn’t it be safe to say the Church isn’t doing something right in their teachings or simply trying to limit their teachings so that people never find true enlightenment, thereby creating a cyclical “sinning class”
Point #4 – Confession and Therapy are not the same!!
I, personally, know of no one who goes to confession to address mental health issues, nor do I know of anyone who sees their psychologist to ask forgiveness from god for their sins.
Again, there is no evidence that people are making this leap, rather it appears as if the Archbishop is making an unsubstantiated claim based… well… on nothing – hence unsubstantiated.
Point #5 – The church is now, vaguely, suggesting people do not seek help for mental health issues OR that a lack of confession causes mental health issues.
If you and have individual who is desperately seeking assistance for their actions/thoughts/feelings, who in God’s name cares if they go to a Psychologist first before going to confession?
It’s about the mental health and well being of that person, not about a process or tradition for an organization dating back to the Roman Empire. The Church, the one all about God’s love, should be supporting the person first.
Furthermore, the Church needs to remember without the support, without that person, there is no Church. If a sinner who didn’t seek help – in one form or another – ended up committing suicide the Church would only chastise their actions, disavowing any previous association, and claim that person is now in hell.
So, in the end…
You have a member of the leadership chastising people for not going to Confession but, he assumes it’s a negative. In the same breath, this individual links sinning to mental heath and provides no basis for the statement.
It’s irresponsible. It’s dangerous.
Picture this – you have a devoted believer of the Catholic faith who a mental health concern and goes to a Psychologist but, after hearing this, feels guilty for doings so and then, as a result, they go to confession but stop their therapy. Now, the issues that was being addressed with a trained therapist, is suddenly left needed some form of attention.
They think “oh, but the confession will take care of that” but the emotions and feelings continue to grow, not understanding simply saying “I swore today” isn’t helping the person address the fact that there very well may be a dangerous medical condition at play. Confusion and frustration sets in. Now this individual who was addressing the root cause (or attempting to) is worse off and, possibly, a risk to themselves or the world around them.
How does this help anyone? Really?
This has nothing to do with Religion, Faith, God… it has to do with how of touch, and how unrealistic, the Catholic Church has become.
The Southern California woman who gave birth to the world’s longest-surviving set of octuplets has signed a deal to star in areality television series, her lawyer said Sunday.
Nadya Suleman, who gave birth to the six boys and two girls in January and also has six other children, agreed to be filmed for a proposed television show by 3Ball Productions, attorney Jeff Czech said.
Boy, you don’t think this was part of her master plan, do you?
I mean… she:
was too busy to date because of here kids
was too busy to manage a meaningful income so she needed to live off of her student loans
couldn’t give enough time to her kids so had a large number of people help her… but most of them quit
All the while:
she had publicist
appeared in high profile interviews
stated that she intended to PROFIT from her disabled child
So, she was too busy for life (except for gestating a few kids) but she isn’t too busy to have every aspect of her life documented for a TV. Seriously this just pisses me off beyond belief.
Why does the U.S. Government feel the need to spend money on studying and educating prostitutes in Asia? (Remember, I prefer the professional term whore). It all started with the U.S. paying $2.6 Million to train Chinese Prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job.
Researchers plan to interview 60 sex workers — 36 women and 24 kathoey — to understand the factors that make the prostitutes susceptible to HIV, including economic pressure, sex-change operations, their heavy use of drugs and a Buddhist fatalism that keeps them feeling resigned to their fate.
The NIH funds many studies that focus on HIV risk and prevention in hopes that it can lay the vital groundwork for developing treatment and intervention plans to thwart the deadly AIDS virus.
“and a Buddhist fatalism that keeps them feeling resigned to their fate”
Oh, maybe that is why they get HIV. They just accept that it will happen, therefor it does.
Not having any exposure to the whole whore lifestyle, I’m going to go out on a small limb and say there are two huge factors – UNPROTECTED SEX and drug use. Ya know that whole dirty needle thing… What about these two things need to be student?
Anyway, it finally sounds like someone is questioning why the money is being spent… on such things… outside of the U.S.
But government watchdogs are having a hard time understanding why American tax dollars should go to study the sexual habits of prostitutes halfway around the world.
“This really is a complete waste of money and should not be funded by the taxpayer,” said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste, which tracks wasteful spending in the federal budget.
Now, this is my type of place. Not because of the “nurses” but because this guy is pushing the limit and isn’t afraid to offend. If you even *think* these women are nurses you have other problems you should address.
What I really find enjoyable about this is that I know 3 nurses – professional nurses – that have “naughty nurse” outfits they’ve used with the husbands.
There seems to be a self-imposed sense of respect towards other writers within the blogging world; however, as bloggers we open ourselves up to a wide range of possibilities, including the possibility that others will lack respect. An e-friend of mine, Clementine @ Invincible Summers, recently had the misfortune of such an experience.
Jim Edwards, a writer for CBS Interactive’s bnet, recently penned a quick overview to Kim’s interview with a Pharma sales person and called her “insane”
Mr. Edwards is not offering an opinion but rather making a statement about Kim, a statement that he did not substantiate. Does that not sound like libel to you? (Slander being the spoken version)
Maybe the comment was meant to be sarcastic but if that was the case why would he title this comment “The Crap that sales reps have to put up with”? That, to me, is evidence Mr. Edwards is not employing sarcasm but rather making a statement bordering on a personal attack. Seeing the site Jim writes for is owned by CBS Interactive, I would like to know if that company also believes Kim is insane and how do they arrive at that conclusion?
Yes, we place ourselves in a position where the world can criticize our views, our beliefs and our experiences, which is fair, but when false and defamatory information is published – especially by a large media organization – the line of acceptability is crossed.
This behavior is unacceptable by any blogger, let alone large media organizations. Any and all credibility bnet ever had with me is now lost unless actions are taken on their part to correct the situation.
I understand people have passion for subjects close to their heart. When a subject is criticized, some form of personal identification takes place with those close to the subject. This makes it seem as if the supporter of the subject is being criticized or attacked, which elicits a response on behalf of the supporter.
It’s the whole “transitive property” aspect – You criticize a topic, I believe and support said topic, ergo you criticize me.
I get it; I understand.
Roughly a week ago I raised the same question with Big Love. Some members of the Mormon community raised concerns about a sacred ceremony, saying a line had been crossed. With input from a blog reader, and with more thought on the subject, I can understand how one could, potentially, be offended.
Do I think that means the topic should be avoided? No.
What I have a problem understanding; however, is why some people get so upset with pure fiction – enter Dan Brown.
It was described as a “phantasmagorical cocktail of inventions”, a “masonic plot” and a “pot pourri of lies”. Now a nervous Vatican is braced for the sequel to The Da Vinci Code and the return of its nemesis, Dan Brown.
…
The film is to be released in Italy on May 13 and in Britain a day later, as Pope Benedict XVI finishes his tour of the Holy Land. A strong reaction is more likely because the antiDa Vinci campaign was led by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, then Archbishop of Genoa and now the Vatican’s Secretary of State – and as such the Pope’s right-hand man. Gianni Gennari, a leading theologian and a columnist for Avvenire, the newspaper of the Italian bishops, called on Catholics to boycott Angels & Demons, accusing the film-makers of “exploiting the Church to swell takings at the box office”. He said the film was part of a plot to undermine the credibility of the Church.
No, this is fiction… not an attempt to undermine the credibility of the Church. This is an expert weaving of fictional stories into a modern setting purely for the entertainment value.
Any credibility the Church had was long lost when the individuals who head the Church decided to cover up the years of child abuse by priests. If one has to spend time defending a work of fiction from another work of fiction, while ignoring the evils within his or her own belief system, I think that person’s priorities are a bit off.
Posted (Van Santos) in Bullshit! on February-25-2009
The whole “artificially inseminated woman who gave birth to 8 children but already has 6 kids because of artificial insemination” situation continues to get more and more… and more… bizarre.
Take three minutes and four seconds out of your life, three minutes and four seconds that you will never get back – just giving you advanced warning, and watch this interview between Nadya and her mother.
Ok, what things do you notice from this interview? Assuming this is the entire situation, here is what I pick up…
She is a liar OR she knew her actions were wrong and felt the need to hide them from her own family
There is obvious some conflict between her and her mother – at times it comes off as friendly and other times it appears true feelings come out
Nadya had always intended on profiting off of her disabled children (notice the comment about writing a book), and if that is the case, is it that hard to jump to the conclusion that she expected to profit from having more children
She believes a masters in counseling (LPC) will allow her to provide a life for all of her children. I’d like to know how she will provide for 14 children on a profession that only pays $34K to $44K
Faith, and her god, will allow her to manage to care for the children
Is it me or does it appear that Nadya has false beliefs that continue to persist even when provide proof to the contrary – also known as delusional. Apparently, I am not the only one who questions her mental status as her father told Oprah ““Now I’m no psychiatrist, but I question her mental situation.”
The Southern California mother of octuplets has been offered $1 million to star in hardcore porn. Vivid Entertainment spokeswoman Jackie Martin said the offer also promises a year of health insurance for Nadya Suleman and her 14 children….Vivid said the offer was sent Tuesday via overnight mail and there has been no immediate response.
All joking aside for a moment, this is where I call bullshit! on the entire situation.
I think all of this was planned out. Frankly, I think the only true bit of information that came from the interview was that she intended to profit off of her children, and it seems like the media are more than happy to help her do so.
Think about this…
She has a publicist
She admitted the intent profit from her disabled child
She and her mother have appeared in a number of high profile interviews, mainly after it came out she already had 6 children
Her father is on Oprah
Dr. Phil will be interviewing the family shortly
Offers, regardless of their origin, are starting to come in
Aside from the “fame” or attention, why would Nadya or her family, want to be involved in such a situation? Maybe the driver is the fact that Nadya has no money and the Suleman family has already declared bankruptcy?
And last week, some eager reporter discovered that Nadya’s mother, Angela Suleman, is 10 months behind in mortgage payments on a home she purchased in 2006 for $450,000. Her mother has also filed for bankruptcy, listing $1 million in debts.
Financial hardship can happen to anyone, bankruptcy shouldn’t lead to an individual becoming a pariah, but events surrounding the entire Suleman situation looks mighty suspect to me. If you can’t sell organs for profit, nor can you sell children into adoption, why would it be legal to plan to have an obscene number of children for a profit? If this whole situation does turn out to be a scam by the entire family, I would be the first to push for an investigation into whether any laws were broken.
There is a great line – “How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage? President Obama are you listening? How about we all stop paying our mortgage! It’s a moral hazard.”
Yes, something needs to be done – and there is no such thing as a perfect plan – but what was suggested yesterday is NOT the solution.
Posted (Van Santos) in Bullshit! on February-17-2009
My intent was to spend a significant amount of time on this post, do a bunch of research and publish it tomorrow after President Obama releases his plan to assist people with troubled mortgages. Yea, I can’t wait.. basically my mind is occupied, and very annoyed with, what is going on in the government at this point. This includes both parties. With all the money is being thrown around, with all the waste going on, I want to know where our F&#!ing bailout is!
The Trouble Assets Relief Program (TARP) enacted by the Federal Government last year has turned out to be a huge waste of money – $700 Billion dollars to exact. The whole idea of the program was that good old Uncle Sam would provide the money, either by direct investment in a corporation or insuring of troubled assets, in order to stabilize financial institutions. The execution of the TARP, however, was an unmitigated failure at most, very problematic at least.
$250 billion pledged for purchases of senior preferred shares and warrants in banks and thrifts (direct investment)
$20 billion pledged for Bank of America in addition to $25 billion pledged under the direct investment program listed above
$20 billion investment in Citigroup
$40 billion investment in troubled insurer American International Group
$20.9 billion to prop up the U.S. auto industry (GM, GMAC, Chrysler, Chrysler Financial)
$20 billion pledged to cover potential losses for a Federal Reserve program aimed at improving consumer access to credit.
Guess what? TARP has done very little in terms of changing… well… anything. Had the program followed the original plan – the formation of a bank to take troubled assets – the financial institutions in the U.S. would look significantly different at this very moment. The problem is that those overseeing the original TARP program realized they did not have the funding to support such a bank after the got approval to put their plan in motion.
The credit markets are still basically frozen as banks continue to crank down on available credit. As a matter of fact, lending by the top banks in the U.S. actually fell 1% over the last 4 months. Losses at Bank of America and Citigroup were so large that they needed to go back to the federal government for more money. GM needs an additional $16.6 Billion, a good $17 Billion more than they originally stated they needed to fund operations, if they have any hope of staying alive.
So much for that plan.
Seeing the government has had so much success with the TARP, why would the general public expect the execution of a stimulus plan to make a significant impact on the economy? Who cares if it will or will not, right? Let’s pass a $787 Billion dollar stimulus plan anyway…. a plan that has… a lot of money for a whole lot of nothing.
I don’t have the time to break out all the spending, but you can read the bill here and here.
Based off of what I’ve seen there is very little “new spending” in the bill. For the sake of argument let’s say the “new spending” included in the bill is divided up between the states that need the funding. These states then distribute the money on infrastructure projects. How many IT professionals, finance majors, office workers and the like, who lost their jobs, are going to be building bridges and rebuilding road? How many corporate procurement managers will be able to install those solar panels? Really, how many people will this impact?
My guess is very few. But, let’s take it a bit further.
There will be an $800 tax credit for couples (married couples that file jointly, making under $150K a year) or a $400 tax credit for individuals (making under 75K a year). Oh, by the way, that credit includes people who DO NOT PAY TAXES. The IRS will mail checks to individuals who do not pay income tax due to low/no income? Kinda hard to give someone a “tax cut” if they don’t pay taxes, isn’t it?
So where does this leave me?
I’m decidedly middle class which means I fall outside of the eligibility limit set by the government… so I will not be getting a tax credit. Obviously I am not a giant bank, so I am not getting anything there….But let me get this straight. The financial institutions have money thrown at them, they continue to fail, and the government continues to support them. Here, I am paying my taxes – which end up supporting those financial institutions – and I cannot get any type of consideration?
Ok….
The government is providing a “tax credit” to people who DO NOT even pay taxes AND I GET nothing!?!
How is this fair? Let me get past the anger, no rage… I don’t like that idea. It’s socialism, plain and simple, but for the greater good (and I only say in such an extreme case) I can get on board with the idea. As much as it goes against my principles, I can still get on board as I would much rather see the survival of the United States than total anarchy in the name of a personal view.
So far my tax dollars are supporting major corporations and the nations poor but the government and I get nothing. Where is my help on what I need – my property value.
My condo value has fallen so much that I am now roughly anywhere from 60K to 90K “in the red” on my mortgage. While President Obama is expected to announce a mortgage relief program tomorrow, to help those who face foreclosure due to the inability to pay on their mortgage, it appears that there will be very little to assist families that are significantly “in the red” due to property value declines.
Just to recap…
Money goes to companies that continues to fail
Money goes to people that do not pay taxes
Assistance is provided to those who are facing foreclosure but not those in the red due to property value decline
[NOTE: 2/18 - The news coming out today is saying the Govn't will help people underwater by using cash to refi their mortgages. Depending on the info point #3 may change... and my frustration may be defused]
[NOTE #2: 2/18 - Read the impact of the bill, no... didn't defuse my frustration.]
How is this fair to me? How is this fair to the countless other middle class families and individuals facing the same situation, the countless households in this nation that have continued to pay their bills and taxes, even in the hardest of times?
It’s not.
Where is our F&#!ing bailout?
I understand the economy is facing more and more difficulty and that there is no plan that can address everything, but the segment of society that is actually footing the bill – and that is hurting as well – is the group eventually facing pain. The fact no relief or consideration for the individuals actually paying for everything will come back to haunt the government when this segment of society faces large layoffs (more so they they are now), which will trigger an even large wave of bankruptcies and foreclosures.
The shortsighted call to “help the poor” and “the corporations” will create a pressure on the middle class who will be unable to sustain funding the rest of the nation. If we are a lucky nation, and I fear that we are not, the United States will be able to get past this economic event on shoulders of the middle class. If not, the nation will face a depression longer and deeper than anyone had expected. Once the back of the middle class is broken, and there is no where else for the government to find the tax revenue, will the economy face capitulation and a true bottom to the recession will be called.
Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better…