Sleepycatz

Mainstream Hatred

I have been extremely busy with work and personal issues, so I haven’t had time to post here for a bit. However, there arise such ideas in our day and age that immediate outrage and condemnation is so necessary that to hold one’s tongue, even in moments of personal entanglement, is to ignore our responsibilities as Americans and human beings.

This week, conservative commentator, Debbie Schlussel penned an essay which in times of reason and compassion would have appalled even the most cynical American. Ms. Schlussel believes that as Senator Obama’s father was Muslim, and that as his middle name is Hussein, he is not only unfit for public office, but should be suspected as an enemy of the state:

So, even if he [Obama] identifies strongly as a Christian, and even if he despised the behavior of his father (as Obama said on Oprah); is a man who Muslims think is a Muslim, who feels some sort of psychological need to prove himself to his absent Muslim father, and who is now moving in the direction of his father’s heritage, a man we want as President when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?

Schlussel’s updated application of the Nuremberg Laws is about as un-American and offensive as one can imagine. Within her logic of hatred is the notion that our enemies may be judged not by actions but by religion and then by bloodline. A premise which violates the very founding principles of our republic — let us not forget Hamilton — who was the bastard child of a woman imprisoned for her adultery — who was instrumental in the passage of our constitution and the founding of the our treasury system, and is a favorite of conservatives.

Whenever conservatives make such outrages claims as this they inevitably claim that they were were joking or tweeking the nose of political correctness. But make no mistake what Schlussel — and others — are doing is equating racism and bigotry with patriotism. For it the the contention of the Schlussels, the Becks, the Pragers that all those who practice Islam are America’s enemies as are all those who share their heratige. At best, these commentators are the same as those heard on Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines whose hatred and fear mongering led to death of 1,000,000 people in 100 days in Rawanda. At worst, there little difference in their logic and that of those who built the death chambers of Auschwitz or Buchenwald.

It has been said over and over that September 11th changed everything. Apparently is has. When racism and hatred become a symbol of patriotism, any compassion or morality which this country may have stood for has been lost for all times.

Suffer-age

Amanda, at Pandagon, has been spreading the word about a feminist blogger (BB), who being denied prompt access to emergency contraception (EC) has found herself pregnant and now is seeking an abortion. I have worked in and around the EC access movement for years, and fortunately, here in Illinois, we have an enlightened governor who has mandated that pharmacists fill any EC prescription.

Many women are denied access to EC on a daily basis. What has made BB’s case so extraordinary is that it finally brings into the open the hatred and vitriol many of these women are subjected to. Unfortunately, BB’s experience is not rare. Women seeking EC are often denigrated by physicians and pharmacists, and even themselves, for engaging in the act of sex, and then seeking to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. BB has had to endure taunts and vicious name calling, and even physical threats, for simply seeking quick access to legal contraception. Because she wasn’t able to access the medication quickly enough, she now is undergoing further degradation due to her decision to terminate the pregnancy. BB has summarized her feelings and experience in a very powerful post.

BB’s experience, like that of so many other women, should appall and anger all of us. For centuries women’s sexuality has been framed as the moral barometer of society. And women, who God forbid, acknowledged that they had sex — or worse, that they enjoyed it — have been beaten, burned, scalded, and shamed into submission. As we march backwards towards the middle ages in this country, there is a growing movement to reduce women, and their bodies, to property once again — either as physical property of a man, or as the symbolic property of society. This is nothing short slavery.

Even as a teenager, I found it ironic that men and boys who seem so preoccupied in their desire for sex are usually the first ones to scold women who engage in the activity. Those who condemn BB do not view her as a human being, but as an object to which some moral certitude can be applied. We can scarcely comprehend what anguish, rage, and uncertainty BB has had to contend with throughout this tragedy, but we should all be grateful that she, unlike many others, has been able to share parts of it with us. I urge you read the links in this post, and offer BB your well wishes.

The Irony

A few days ago an orthodox Jewish man was forced off an Air Canada flight for praying before take off. Yves Faguy, a passenger on the flight noted:

He wasn’t exactly praying out loud but he was lurching back and forth . . . The attendant actually recognized out loud that he wasn’t a Muslim and that she was sorry for the situation but they had to ask him to leave

Most of the news coverage seems to focus on the fact that the man was not Muslim, and therefore should have been left alone. I guess if he had been Muslim, it would have been Ok to get him off the plane, and there would have been no charges of violating his religious freedom, or some pathological hatred of his race or religion.

The paranoia of the people who seem to fly is becoming a bit scary. Just a few weeks ago passengers on a Monarch flight refused to allow the plane to take off until two Arabic speaking men were removed. At the time many right-wing commentators cheered for the passengers, and suggested that they had every right to determine who their fellow passengers should or shouldn’t be.

As I’ve written in the past, one of the great problems with practicing religious bigotry is that it’s hard to tell who you hate — no doubt this orthodox Jewish man was mistaken for a Muslim, or of an indeterminate religion, by the complaining passenger - better safe then sorry, after all.

Old Time Republicans

Give me that old time religion
Give me that old time religion
Give me that old time religion
It’s good enough for me

We will worship Aphrodite
You can see her in her nightie
Some folks say she’s kinda flighty
But she’s good enough for me.

(refrain)

We will all worship Apollo
We will all worship Apollo
When he drinks, his legs are hollow
But he’s good enough for me

(refrain)

etc. . . . — with remembrance of college drinking friends past. . . .

Kaye Grogan of Renew America has penned an essay so absurd in it’s presumptions that it deserves a special place on the toilet paper roll of right-wing political parchment.

Grogan’s argument is that the Republican party has abandoned Christians. She doesn’t cite any examples of this exodus, but instead riles about NAFTA and makes snide racist comments like: “. . . since churches don’t pay taxes it wouldn’t surprise me in the least to hear about church worshipers being bulldozed down with church buildings to make way for Pedro’s governmental subsidized Mexican Taco Bell.” She suggests that Christians need to form their own third party, because the Republicans have abandoned them and

since most of the Democrats consider Christians as right-wing co-conspirators and fanatics, it would be unwise and hopeless for them to try and woo the followers of Christ into their liberal camps. Most Christians won’t compromise and vote for who they view as the lesser of two evils just for the sake of voting — so don’t hold your breath Dems.

I particularly like how she defines Christians as right-wing evangelical fundamentalists - after all if you don’t believe in the same Jesus as Grogan, you’re not a Christian. If I were a Christian, I would be greatly offended by Grogan’s exclusive definition of my faith. On a side note, this is the same reasoning which has allowed Muslim extremists to bypass the Koran’s prohibition against killing other Muslims.

I wish Ms. Grogan well in forming her third party - and I really hope she succeeds. If she does, we may yet return to a genuinely enlightened political discourse in this country.

h/t: Sadly No

Little Bit of Hate

I was listening to the BBC coverage of the foiled terrorist plot today at work, and I was struck by one American women’s reaction. The woman (whose name unfortunately I didn’t note) kept pushing her point that the problem was Muslims and their drive towards the “islamicization of the world”. I immediately began sensing that there is a rising tide of bigotry and hatred in America. A quick poking around some of the more right-wing websites revealed my observation to be more accurate then I first thought (note: I will not, for my own reasons, provide direct links):

There has never been anything in the history of the human race as vile as Islam. Nazism was not as vile as Islam. Islam is the most vile, and degenerate social construction ever devised by the human race. It is as close to Satanic evil, as it is possible to be. . . Islam is the manifestation of hatred of G-d, so it first seeks to destroy the human soul, G-d’s most noble creation. - LGF

Granted, the more time goes on and the more I see, the more I am convinced that “islamic fascism” is redundant, as I think the number of truly moderate muslims can usually be counted on one’s fingers (assuming muslims haven’t already chopped them off for some perceived offense). - HotAir

There are more, but I was feeling a bit ill.

Additionally, in a recent Gallop poll 51% believe that Muslims living in the America are not loyal. 41% believe Muslims should undergo greater security scrutiny, and 39% believe that Muslims should be required to carry special papers.

The demonisation of large groups in America is nothing new. Americans prefer their narratives simple and clean: blackhat/whitehat, redman/whiteman, terrorists/christians, us/them. Americans want be able to easily identify the enemy by accent, skin color, or facial characteristics. We love consistency, but enjoy the occasional plot twist (the clean cut double agent, the the bribed loyal assistant, etc). The world view, however, always tries to remain black and white. Of course, this simple dichotomy leaves us with about as much understanding and depth as your average Bruce Willis movie.

The real problem - outside of the immorality of it all - is that this view creates a condition of constant war with an endgame of genocide. For if an entire inhuman group is out to destroy you what other choices do you have? This overly simplified attitude means that we can never engage, in any meaningful way, the larger Islamic world. For how can you seriously conduct diplomacy with a group you have decided is sub-human? You can’t.

Terrorists, in today’s world, use religious extremism to fuel their ranks. Any religious extremism is dangerous and cannot be easily defeated. This is because, like bigotry, it cannot be reasoned with. For the believer it is an issue of faith. Extremist faith cannot be discerned by security screenings, sir names, or nose shape. All major religions have extremist adherents, but extremism is always a minority point of view - regardless of how loud they are, how much media coverage they get, or how much violence they perpetrate. If Americans continue down the path of the simple growing narrative of Islamic=bad then we will drive more moderate religious elements into the extreme. If you have any doubt look at how other religious groups call attention to their ‘persecution’ to bring forth new members - in some cases those groups are not even being bombed. This narrative has only on ending, a simple one, which requires us to start building camps and digging graves now.

Hate Spam

This morning I received an unusual spam e-mail from the company I purchase my gardening supplies from. The e-mail was not urging me to seed my lawn, but to spread a type of fertilizer; to wit, it was requesting that I contact CBS to complain about its promotion of homosexuality. I immediately responded to the owner of outsidepride.com*, and informed him that I didn’t agree with his position and would not be doing anymore business with them.

So I wondered all day if I should post about this or not. The more I thought about it though, the more annoyed I became. Why was I annoyed though?

Was I upset that he had mixed his politics with his business? No. Our coffeehouse is makes no bones about its political leanings - we hold left wing meetings, show films, and our front window sports an “Impeach Bush” sign. Our business, unlike outsidepride, however, does not pretend to be neutral. Yet, their president was obviously driven to make his views known — though I would have suggested a blog, rather then the advertising list of his company, I cannot fault him for his desire to speak out.

Was it simply because Mr. Hake held a view diametrically opposed to my own? Yes, partially. I am well aware of my own desire to share opinions with people whom I agree with, then not. But that’s not the bulk of it.

The reason Mr Hake’s e-mail annoyed me was its tone and content. The fertilizer salesman issued an edict declaring that “homosexuality is morally wrong” and that we “can bring back the Christian heritage this country was founded on because it is, “In God We Trust.”" Aside from his poor knowledge of history (In God We Trust did not become the national motto until 1956 when it replaced E Pluribus Unum), Mr Hake’s makes use of the the same old, tired, bigoted, rhetoric: “There was Adam and then there was Eve, not Adam and Steve.” If this man is to be believed, he has tens of thousands of people subscribed to his mailing list — hard to believe, but possible — who he has called upon to spread intolerance and ignorance.

Mr Hake states he was prompted to call upon his cadre of lawn care commandos while watching television with his children when he was assaulted by two prime-time dramas featuring main characters who were homosexual. His children, of course, must be protected from the knowledge that gays and lesbians exist — lest they run off to become one or the other. Mr Hake states, “I am NOT trying to bash homosexuals and I am not a bigot”; he simply doesn’t want their existence acknowledged as anything other than as social deviants. When I here comments like this, I often believe that people like Mr Hake simply don’t like anyone unlike themselves being portrayed on television. And I wonder if this man would would have issued the same clarion call about an inter-racial couple 20 years ago. . . .

Nonetheless, I will no longer be doing business with Mr. Hake or his company.

\* This e-mail was sent to a bulk mailing list with a nulled return address. I find this very cowardly of the author. He made inflammatory statements which he refused to hear replies to. It was, however, easy enough to find his e-mail address (troyh@outsidepride.com) in order to send my response. But I doubt others went to the trouble. If you are a customer - please contact Mr. Hake and let him know how you feel — He expressed his feelings to you, you should return the favor

Update: Pam at Pandagon has also blogged on this, and a number of readers have commented on the Gay friendly name presented by outsidepride.com. BTW Pandagon is one of my frequent reads — always interesting stuff.

Moral Clarity

Unbelievable. An Anti-gay church plans to protest at soldier funerals. Though the soldiers are not gay the group contends:

“God’s wrath is rightfully killing soldiers who are fighting to defend a nation that defies the Bible” and “They turned America over to fags; they’re coming home in body bags.”

The number of ways this disgusts and infuriates are too numerous to go into.