Twisted Rights

OK so this morning it was reported on the news that New York has outlawed formula in hospitals. In an effort to force mothers to breast-feed because it’s 'best for the baby', hospitals can no linger serve babies formula while they’re there. I hope the people in New York understand that they’ve just lost another one of their rights. Don’t get me wrong, I’m pro breast-feeding--in fact I’m just plain pro breast. There’s no question that it’s best for the baby, but should the government step in and tell us how to run our lives (I mean more than they already do)? The correct answer is, "NO!" Believe me, now that we’re on this slippery slope of having the government totally control our lives, it’s only going to get worse. This isn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue either. Both sides should be outraged that our freely elected "representatives" control so much of what we do. This policy is not even consistent. In 1996 (according to abortiontv.com) there were over 152,000 abortions in New York. I can’t find a statistic on partial-birth abortions in New York as abortion statistics can be hard to come by (I’m sure some of our intelligent readers can find them). Anyway, here you have a situation where babies are being killed right up through the point at which their heads are sticking out of their mothers, but if one of them comes all the way out, you can’t feed him formula. One minute the child is exterminable, and the next minute the state steps in and limits his parents' options for his lunch. Keep in mind that this is a state where the death penalty was ruled 'unconstitutional'. New Yorkers apparently think it's important to preserve the lives of violent criminals who have chosen to break the law (and many who have taken the lives of others), yet they think it's okay to kill innocent, unborn and partially-born babies. And now, wishes to protect those babies (whose lives are valued less than the lives of convicted criminals) by forcing mothers to breast feed? Mind you, this is only if the mother didn't decide to kill her child first, which would have been okay. If she lets the poor kid live, she's not allowed to decide what to feed it. Does that really make sense to anyone? New York, do you care about human beings or not? Get your lie straight!
I know what some of you may be saying that here I am bitching about the government taking away our rights all the while implying that mothers shouldn’t have the right to abort something growing in their own bodies. Well, as I see it, our whole system of freedom and ‘rights’ is based upon me being able to do what I want until my actions interfere with your rights. I have the right for example to swing a bat around in my own back yard, but if I come in your yard and swing the bat at you then my rights have invaded your right to pursue happiness without being chased around by someone with a bat and that is a NO-NO. I have the right (for now) to have a party in my house, but if that party becomes out of hand and spills over into your right to live at peace in the neighborhood, then you can call the cops to shut my right down. And I have the right to have sex with my consenting, adult partner but if in the course of pursuing that right, we make another person-another human AMERICAN who has the same rights as me, then who is the mother or a judge or anyone to come along and take that person’s right to life and the pursuit of it’s own happiness away. I know, this argument is based on the notion that life begins at conception, because it does. All that child’s DNA (to become a complete person) is right there from the moment the sperm cell seduces the egg cell. Oh but the baby isn’t ‘viable’ you might say, well are you? The baby needs protection, nourishment and time to grow and so do you. Do you think you could survive if you didn’t have police, parents or friends ready to protect you on a moment’s notice? Do you think you could survive if you didn’t have someone planting and harvesting crops for your nourishment? Don’t give me that bullshit about viability. That baby needs a chance at life JUST LIKE YOU.

Can't we all try to get along?

OK so I’m not always the best at trying to find the good things in everyone else. But recently at church I was challenged to try to look for the things that I have in common with others rather than focusing on the negative (the things we disagree on). In this way I can make friends rather than just flipping people off all the time. Anyway, as I was thinking about this new way of looking at things, I thought I should be able to come up with things that I have in common with anyone. But then I was struck with the challenge of Hillary. Could I come up with some things that Mrs. Clinton and I actually have in common? I thought and thought and I came up with 3 ways in which we are alike. Despite popular opinion, we are both homo-sapiens. We both have kids (well she only saw fit to have one, but it’s still an offspring). And we both have dogs at home. My dog chases after sticks and hers chases after skirts. We can start from there and build some sort of relationship on those fundamental points. There you have it! This proves that anyone has something in common with everyone else. So be encouraged, get out there and start making friends. Especially you Christians, get out there and start with the common points and build on those. It’s hard to influence a camel when you’re just screaming at him to stop marching through the desert.

Bush Administration

This administration has, if nothing else, taught us some lessons about politicians. Mainly that what we need in politics today is someone who is at least consistent. (Bill Clinton was at least consistent, with him it was just one scandal after another.) We need someone who won’t ‘change’ when he/she gets to Washington and feels the pressure to conform to the ‘I’ll vote for your crappy bill if you vote for mine’ mentality. I know these things are done in the spirit of ‘compromise’, but we didn’t put you in office to ‘compromise’ – jack ass. Oh well, I guess we can just throw all the new crappy bills on the pile with the other 347,590,617,335,480 piece-of-shit bills on the record. We also learned that we need someone who doesn’t use flowery words or phrases, (buzz words) that have little of no meaning, just to make people feel good about wasting their vote. The good news is that six years into Bush’s administration we’re finally figuring out what he means when he says he’s a ‘compassionate’ conservative. The bad news is that it means he’s a pussy (I guess his last name really does suit him). Because he got a tax cut passed, conservatives tried to overlook it when he told congress to send him any kind of crappy additional Medicare bill regardless of the cost and he’d sign it. (Thanks for wasting all of our money poop-head!) They also defended him as the media forgot, on a daily bases, exactly what a ‘long war’ looks like. He’s starting to get on the nerves of even the strongest conservatives, however with this whole amnesty bill he’s trying desperately to ram through. (Has someone taken his dog hostage until he gets an amnesty bill passed?) And in the interest of trying to get along with a few, our president has alienated virtually everyone. Look man, if you’re a newly elected politician, the people who hate you are going to hate you regardless of what you do so you might as well do what the majority of Americans want you to do. You got elected for a reason stupid, so don’t screw the pooch. Stop flip-flopping when you get to Washington.