Teh Painful Truth [entries|friends|calendar] Tyrror [♥] Userinfo [♥] Friends [♥] Calendar [♥] Memories [ userinfo | insanejournal userinfo ] [ calendar | insanejournal calendar ]

[Thursday, June 25th, 2020 @ 1:03pm] Hello All, My name is Tyrror and this is TehPainfulTruth, a journal in which I plan to express all of my rage and unadulterated fury in regards to what is seen in the news today. I am, by most people, considered to be very liberal, very progressive and, therefore, very like unto Satan for my beliefs on gay rights, equality, and in general how things should be run. Feel free to leave your comments, your concerns, and your condemnations however, considering I am only capable of responding to legitimate arguments and logical process, do not be surprised if you, like the majority of the human populace, are simply ignored.

Men: an expert on women... [Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011 @ 2:40pm] Can I just say that I utterly despise the religious right and all that its mainstream agenda stands for? Earlier today, in an attempt to be the best medical professional I can be, I spent a portion of my afternoon listening to a presentation on contraceptives from Planned Parenthood. That right there would be enough to get many of the nutjobs we let into office up on their soapboxes, but that's not actually where my anger truly flared today; that happened several hours later. After nearly an hour and a half of talk on contraceptives and the fact that a large majority of Americans not only don't know how to use them but may not even know they exist (mostly because of over religious parents attempting to keep their kids "safe" by not telling them anything that they could use to protect themselves) I come home and hope to get some reading done before settling into my nightly routine only to discover the following article: 9 New Laws in the GoP's War Against Women? For those who don't want to read it, and I'm actually going to suggest that most of you don't as we will very likely have a massive influx of damaged computers if that is the case, it proceeds to talk about 9 new bills which are being put forward to various state senates which, in one way or another, make it nearly impossible for a woman to be responsible for herself and instead make it the job of the government (or more precisely, the male government) to ensure that they don't do anything "bad". The majority of the laws focus almost solely on abortion, some redefining what constitutes rape and "danger to the mother" to such narrow terms that almost no one would be able to comply. Others attack the offices themselves, stating fake statistics about women who receive abortions having higher rates of mental disorders afterwards (the proper statistics actually claim the opposite, that those who have an unwanted pregnancy and do not get an abortion face far higher prevalence of mental disorders after the birth of their unwanted child) and some placing blame on the doctors, giving rules and regulations that they must follow in order to not be fined hundreds of thousands of dollars (for a single improperly handled patient, mind you). However, while it may seem like a good idea to regulate the medical professionals counselling these women, keep in mind that some things constitute counselling and others constitute torture. One of the laws has physicians required to perform an ultrasound prior to an abortion, during said ultrasound the physician is required to force the woman to look at the screen while they describe in detail everything they can see about the fetus, then they must send the woman home for a 24 hour "wait period" before she can actually have the abortion. Let me put that in simpler terms. A man beats you with a bat and you go to the ER where the doctor tells you in excruciating detail exactly what damage was done before he sends you home, untreated, and tells you to come back tomorrow once you have "made up your mind"...am I the only person who sees something wrong with this? In the state of Idaho pharmacists who disagree with abortion are allowed to ask a woman if she needs certain medications (such as anti-bleeding medications), something which blatantly goes against medical patient confidentiality ethics, because she has had or is seeking to have an abortion and, if that is the case, can refuse them the medications on merit of the "conscience" law. In Ohio, a law is up for vote which would edit abortion law to say that women can not abort after the fetus has a heartbeat, something which often occurs long BEFORE a normal, healthy woman realizes she may be pregnant. All the meanwhile, organizations which are not only against abortion but against women having any purpose but as baby makers set up fake clinics throughout the U.S. where they use stall tactics and fake advice to prevent women from having abortions or getting adequate medical care that might end a pregnancy, and these are currently legal in all but ONE state (Washington, props for you) while organizations such as Planned Parenthood, who offer dozens of other services aside from abortion such as contraceptives (at a reduced rate), medical exams, ultrasounds, pregnancy planning, aid with money and food through government programs, and more are under attack because they give women a choice as to how they want to run their own lives. With every passing day I see conservatives not doing what they claim to be named for (being fiscally conservative and thereby reducing government debt as well as government interference in the lives of its citizens) but instead doing everything they can to force government control on everyone but themselves. They want gay marriage outlawed, abortion outlawed, and the middle class kept in their place. They want the African Americans in jail, the Hispanics in Mexico, and they want your time spent at an airport to be somewhere in the 8 hour range but, demand that they follow the same procedures and just wait for the complaining to begin. Legislators are no different from the people they serve. If anything, by the definition of the word serve, legislators should be working to IMPROVE the lives of those they represent at the risk of detriment to their OWN. Physicians risk their health to improve the health of others, they serve their community. Police, military, security personnel: risk their lives daily to protect those that they SERVE. The legislators, though? Well...they're special... Special Ed maybe... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... Have an Opinion?

Egypt (and other terrible things)... [Friday, January 28th, 2011 @ 1:41pm] For those of you who do not follow the world news (namely anyone who follows this blog) you may not be aware that Egypt has been in what could be considered the biggest intranatnional uprising of it's age, and I figure it's about time I say something about it. I'm not going to say that I'm an expert on the matter, I'm not even going to say that I'm pretty good when it comes to knowing things as I've barely been able to keep up with the larger updates considering how fast they are going, but I do believe that, regardless of my lack of knowledge on the situation, I'm more knowledgeable than 99% of Americans so...her is some truth for you... (If you are looking for more detailed information or more recent updates I suggest you use my new favorite source of breaking political news over on twitter by following @blandliketheman) To start from the beginning, for many, many years now (I forget exactly how man but I believe it is something like 25) there has been a rather terrible dictator in the country of Egypt who has been doing many, many terrible dictator-y things (I'm not going to go into detail. If y need more details I suggest you think of several terrible things as quickly as you can that a lead of large groups of people could then ask yourself if a total jackass would do said things if given the choice, if the answer is yes, there is a high probability this happened in Egypt. If you still need more details I suggest you step away from the computer, ask a nearby person to slap you across the face, then go look them up on your own time...) after dealing with these terrible, dictator-y things for this long the citizens of Egypt suddenly woke up and though they might not like this and proceeded to march on several buildings and organizations important to the government demanding better treatment and, overall, a remaking of the entire government system starting with less terrible, dictator-y things. Mind you, this is not what most Americans would consider a protest. I believe that this is what most Americans would classify as "oh, shit" or perhaps "we're fucked" but not a protest. A protest tends to range from a small number of individuals to a moderate sized group performing any number of acts to prove their point. I do not believe most American are even capable of classifying several million individuals flowing through the streets like water, setting police cars on fire, getting attacked by their own police, and dying to prove a point that should not need proof. Let me give you a little more to run on. Several million people, to the best of my knowledge almost the entire population of Egypt, marched not the government starting on January 25th to what some might call a rather surprising outcome (anyone with a brain wouldn't call it surprising but most people seem to be unable to think about more than the turkey sandwich they had at lunch so I'm going to go ahead and call it surprising considering the number of individuals who can't seem to dislodge their heads from the ground long enough to realize that there's a SUN up here...moving on) Initially, protests were met as one might expect however, in very short order, the government including not only the police but the military began literally fighting back. Things were started with normal anti-riot tactics, but soon devolved into not only the police using live ammunition on the people they are sworn to protect, but setting buildings, vehicles, and even people on fire to prove who was supposedly in charge. Hundreds of people dying because the general masses would like t be treated like humans and the in power would prefer they remain slaves and who wants to guess what other major world powers are doing? (if you answer involves the words "sitting" and "ass" somewhere in them, you're likely at least close to right) Not only was the United States not doing annoying to stop the massacre of the Egyptian people, but during the first two days of the riots the U.S. Government spokespeople were continually referring to Egypt as a partner in such things as world peace and praising the Egyptian government as a friend. Today we see the two-sided face of the American government backpedaling as fast as they can, hoping to prove to their ignorant masses that they have always been against such terrible tyranny and dictatorships like this. If you are still able to think, a talent the government of all major world powers are trying to wipe off the face of the earth, you will be able to see this for the crap that it is...but most won't. Even worse than this, in my opinion, is that major news sources are already working on their brainwashing tactics, attempting to scare people into thinking that if the Egyptian people win over their tyrannical government the ever present and always vaguely described and not very well understood "radical Muslims" will take over the country and subdue it in their terrorist ways. Disregard that leaders of Christian and Muslim groups alike have banded together for this revolution. Disregard that the Christian Egyptians spent Friday morning using their bodies as shields to water guns, batons, and bullets to protect the Muslim Egyptians durning morning prayer. Obviously this group of people who respect each other as individuals, as human beings, more than as religious conduits are attempting to transform Egypt into a terrorist nation to be feared by all. Today we hear tales that the military as a whole began to march on the protracted. Fears of the wise and truly caring were of massacre and mass killings to subdue the people they are supposed to be guarding but, thankfully, reality saw the military enter the streets...and do nothing. Police have begun switching to civilian clothing and joining in the protest, other countries have finally (albeit grudgingly) admitted the evils of the Egyptian government and expressed support or at least ambivalence for the people of Egypt...but this is far from over. This government must now be rebuilt from the ground up, and it is almost certain that the U.S. Will attempt to step in to "help" by proposing new government structures to form what is almost certainly nothing more than a U.S. puppet, but who would ever think that the benevolent United States could do anything less than charity work in a situation like this...who could think indeed. I pity the future of this country when it finally happens here. I pity the future of this country when such revolutions finally occur in other tyrannical countries on which we rely entirely for food, medicine, and other services that there is no chance of them switching over to their own sources. My heart breaks for Egypt and the losses it has suffered, the name that some horrible individuals are attempting to give to it's people and the pain that it has felt for years. May this revolution be what they need to make their world better for each individual, regardless of race or religion. May they be safe, and may the powers that be carry them through. This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... Have an Opinion?

You tell me: Who's in charge here? [Wednesday, August 18th, 2010 @ 11:20am] There are very few things in this world that actually get me riled up to the point of wanting to speak above my normal volume none-the-less injure people. Many of them have already been seen in this blog: human rights abuses, voluntary ignorance, religious intolerance, etc. However, one of the forms of stupidity that strikes me as most infuriating is when my own profession, the medical profession, with all of their advanced knowledge and great wisdom, do something so innately idiotic that I am forced to wonder how these individuals made it out of high school. In the article I read today, a woman (listed only as V.M.) is reported to have been in a THREE YEAR LONG custody battle over her child for not signing a single piece of paper while giving birth. Were this paper to be something highly important, such as a piece of paper which says "I wish to keep this child as my own and, should I not sign this I hereby give up all rights to this child" I could understand why her child was whisked away from her within moments of giving birth, however that's not the case. The case, as it stands, is that the woman did not sign a "pre-release" form indicating that the hospital could perform a C-section should it be needed during the birthing process. Let me explain to those who may be unfamiliar with the redundancies of the medical process. Before a woman enters the birthing room in an American hospital, they are presented with some release forms to sign. Most of them revolve around the health of the baby or the mother during or shortly after the birthing process. However, in with all the other release forms is one that, whether or not the woman is expected to have any complications, would grant the hospital the right to decide if and when to perform a C-section on the woman to retrieve the baby. This "Pre-release" form isn't needed because, in the case that their is a complication, the woman can give permission at that point or, if the woman is unable to give permission, the husband or next of kin can give permission or, if there is no next of kin available, the hospital is legally allowed to declare the situation a "medical emergency" and perform the surgery regardless. In this situation, however, the mother (V.M.) refused to sign the "Pre-release" form and went about giving vaginal delivery with no complications and no worries, until shortly after the birthing process was finished when a nurse removed the baby to another room and refused to let the parents see the child due to "endangering the child's welfare" by not signing the form before giving birth. So, now it stands that three years later she still doesn't have her child who has been passed around the child welfare system while she fights a battle to prove that she did not in any way endanger her child by not signing the paper. I, for one, would like to burn this particular hospital to the ground. Listed in the article it states that this particular hospital (which remained nameless in the article) had a 50% rate of birth by C-section...there is NO reason for the number to be that high. The only two reasons feasible are that the doctors prefer the C-section for some biased reason or, more likely, the hospital can charge more money for the surgery and thus push the doctors to perform C-sections whenever possible. So, here I am, wondering if I'm one of the 8 doctors on the planet with common sense. We're supposed to be the Crem-de-la-Crem of the intellectual community. We're supposed to be wise and benevolent, but every day I'm inundated with stories of doctors and medical professionals who do stupid things for the good of themselves and the detriment of their patients. Please, someone just give me a scalpel and a shotgun... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 3 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Tonights entry brought to you by the number 8, the letter 'C', and my T-shirt... [Thursday, August 5th, 2010 @ 3:55am] I'm not entirely sure how much more gay tonight can get, however I'm determined to make it that much more so. I've got the soundtrack from Glee on in the background, I'm wearing my "Marriage is so gay" t-shirt, and I'm about to write an article about one of, what is very likely, the most prominent events of the modern age regarding civil rights and gay marriage. For those of you who live under a rock, yesterday (Wednesday, August 4th) Judge Vaughn Walker of the California court system made the declaration that Proposition 8, the ban placed on gay marriage in 2008, was "unconstitutional"! Needless to say, today is a day for great rejoicing at such a decision, however that doesn't mean we can let our guard down...but first the good news. What struck me, however, was not the ruling (that was just common sense to me) but the manner in which Judge Walker delivered it. While reading through snippets of his ruling I was amazed at the amount of conviction he managed to deliver with relatively few words and, rather than take away from that, I give you Judge Walker: "Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite sex couples are superior to same-sex couples, moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians." "Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional." So there you have it, end of story...right? of course not... As should be expected, the conservative, religious right has already filed for an appeal with the 9th circuit court and it is expected that the case will eventually make it to the United States Supreme court (where we can all hope that this will be put to rest for all eternity and the religious zealots will crawl back into whatever hole they came out of...I know, big hopes...). However, for the time being, the religious right is spouting off their hate-speak in the general direction of Judge Walker and for once I have a personal favorite idiotic statement of the day: "Judge Walker has ignored the written words of the constitution, which he swore to support and defend and be impartially faithful to, and has instead imposed his own homosexual agenda upon the voters, the parents and the children of California," This was spouted off by Randy Thomasson of the religiously conservative group SaveCalifornia.com during an interview in which he described the ruling as a "terrible blow" to voters' rights. I, however, find it rather humorous due to another quote from the ruling which I have, until now held off on because I wanted to mention this last argument first. Those who argue against the ruling have many reasons, however a very popular one is that the Judge should not be allowed to change what was voted into place by the people and that, if he does, it goes against the voters constitutional rights. However, in complete opposition to this, the Judge not only basis his ruling DIRECTLY off of the constitution, but also off of a ruling from 1943 which is hailed by those afflicted by religion due to its importance in being allowed to be religiously stubborn in public...I shall elaborate. In 1943 a case in West Virginia (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette) declared the freedom of speech and religion of a student overrides to some degree what a school can require of that student. In this case, it meant that the school could not require a student to salute or otherwise honor the flag (this is due to the fact that according to the doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses it is a sin to hold any object in a place of honor such as you would God). This was a big deal for the religious folks, it meant they could get away with some forms of insanity and blame it on "religious freedom", however now that the case is being cited as one of the top precedents for the reversal of Prop 8 I wonder if they will still hold it in such high esteem. In case any of you were wondering exactly how Judge Walker used the reference in his case here is the quote from his ruling followed by the full excerpt from the original case: "That the majority of California voters supported Proposition 8 is irrelevant, as 'fundamental rights may not be submitted to [a] vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.'" "The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections." So there you have it. It's not over by far, but as a first step it's a pretty big one and it sets enough precedent for the future that any ruling in opposition ought to be much easier to fight. There should be no reason for such cases to be put forth, as humans we shouldn't need to fight for the right to life and happiness, but that is the case in the modern age and most certainly when organized religion is involved but here's to hope and to a future where humans are humane and the world is a little bit brighter. This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 4 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Arizona Sheriff arrests the good-guys...again... [Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010 @ 7:42pm] I want you to imagine something for me. Imagine that you're back in elementary or middle school and there is a rather large, rather mean bully in your class who is only deterred from his/her wicked ways by the presence of a teacher or other adult authority figure in the room or nearby. Now, imagine that the aforementioned bully has the ability to demand all adults leave the room so that he/she can terrorize the class and, when an adult does return, the bully attempts to say that they can not be punished because "no one of authority was there to prove any wrongdoing was committed". You may be wondering why I'm having you put on a little play inside your own skull, well here is your reason. Human rights groups (such as Amnesty International) frequently train individuals in how to spot and record misconduct or abuse committed by legal authorities during organized protests. These individuals are referred to as "Legal Observers" and serve to both ensure the safety of the public just as much as they do to make the protesters feel safe. Since all they really do is watch and record, most people wouldn't think that they could get into much trouble themselves, however police in Arizona would beg to differ. A protest of Sheriff Arpaio of Arizona was held earlier this week in regards to his blatant racism and illegal/unethical use of the new, and mind you currently under legal scrutiny, immigration laws put into place in Arizona. However, this entry is really about how he's a bastard to the legal Mexican-American immigrants. It is, rather, about how he's a bastard to those who are legally attempting to get someone to do something about it. At the latest protest, the sheriff arrested BOTH of the legal observers (one who was taking the names of other individuals who were being arrested for pointless charges and the other who was simply making a video recording) in the hopes that, by arresting the two people there to keep everyone else safe, the protest would break apart out of fear and he could go back to arresting people based on skin color. It isn't hard to spot a legal observer in a protest crowd, because they wear bright green hats which proclaim their job title on them so that everyone at the protest knows who they are and where to run when the authorities go insane, but this particular authority seems to think that if you take out the people who are supposed to keep an eye on you then he can do whatever he feels like. I'm beginning to wonder exactly how many morons we can put in public office. First George W. Bush now all of Arizona...who's next? Needless to say, arresting the observers for no logical reason will likely have him in more trouble than he is already in for his unethical practices (there are cases already filed against him on several points) so I can't really demand too much justice, however I can demand that next time people actually bother to look at who they're voting for. I'm tired of myself and six other people being the only people in the whole country who don't base their voting record off of what political party I'm technically signed up under, the color of someone's skin, or how big their breasts are (and yes, the number one reason I heard that people around me wanted to vote for McCain/Palin was because "at least we would have a hot VP"). Learn to vote, do something right, and for God's sake stop using the bible as a reason for politics... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... Have an Opinion?

Who died and made you Queen of the Gays? [Saturday, July 31st, 2010 @ 4:31pm] There are many things in this world that annoy me, I will freely admit to that as if it wasn't blatantly obvious from the start. I commonly proclaim that my biggest pet-peeve is "voluntary ignorance" and I'm sure that anyone reading this blog has already come to the conclusion that I don't deal well with bigotry or hatred either. However one thing that I haven't voiced here yet is my extensive dislike of those deny other people their own creativity or artistic process. I'm not talking about crazy things, I'm not talking about when people from backwoods Louisiana say they need to hang dead goats from their door or kill the neighbors cat in order to work their craft, I'm just talking normal stuff. I'm talking people who write books or tv shows or movies and then find themselves bombarded with hatred because of how they decided to write something out. Today I am talking about this because I have recently located an article in a gay rights blog about how terrible Ryan Murphy, the creator of Glee, is for supposedly scrapping the plotline for the next season in which Kurt, the openly gay character, finds a boyfriend. Now, I can agree that this is a disappointment. I would love to see the boy find a lover and I would love to see the show push even farther the boundaries of comfort, showing what it's really like to be a gay highschool student in the United States, however that is not the end all, be all of the show. I wouldn't mind if people were just whining about how they really want to see two boys get together on the show, quite frankly I'd love to do a little bit to Kurt myself, but that's not what's happening. What's happening is people heard of the change of plan (mind you all plans are/were strictly in the "we don't know yet but here's what we're thinking" phase at the moment) and threw a piss-fit in which they proclaimed the author to be an idiot and evil and obviously having no sense of what direction the show should go in. In response to that I would like to point out one thing...IT'S HIS SHOW! I'm so tired of people bitching about authors and writers doing the wrong thing on shows and in books as if the public gets to decide what happens next. I'm sorry public, but as a writer I'm very adamant about the point that every writer has the right to do whatever he wants in his works. If he wanted to kill off the choir director and replace him with a small chihuahua next season I wouldn't be thrilled, but I would accept that it's his right to do whatever he wants with the show and everyone else should shut the hell up. So all in all...Shut up...and let the man get on with his work, when you make it big on TV then you can complain if your show isn't going in the direction you want it to...but not before then. This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 2 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Gay Nazis? Throw in some zombies and you have a video game right there... [Friday, July 30th, 2010 @ 3:34pm] A week or so ago I entitled an entry "Some days you feel like a nut, some days you just watch them set other people on fire..." However today I got to watch one set HIMSELF on fire...and what a good moment that was... From Stephen Colbert to John Stewart, this week is just chock-full of the most liberal, anti-hate newscasters the country has to offer...and they're damn funny to boot. Yesterday I posted a spoof video made by Stephen Colbert of the slanderous advertisement now known as the "Incoming Storm" campaign. Today, however, the dials on both the "bat-shit crazy-o-meter" and the "hilarious mocking-o-tron" have been turned up to 11 by John Stewart during his interview of Scott Lively, President of "Defend the Family". This interview would have been humorous enough on its own, however the reporter decided to take it one step further and actually investigate the blatantly false information given by Mr. Lively in the most ridiculous manner possible. But I suppose I should actually give some hints as to what is being reported upon...or maybe not... Due to the fact that I don't think I can do it justice, how about I just give you the video: Scott Lively on Hitler and the Gay Reich (Click me!) So, with that all out in the open, I would just like to add this; why can't all religious wingnuts hang themselves like this? In contrast, I would like to thank all those out there who fight bigotry with humor. There are many who would fight with anger, hate, and violence and while it is natural to feel angry when taunted by such stupidity, I would surely hope that no one will slip to violence on account of it. As it stands, we are better than them. We fight for true equality on all fronts, not just our own, and hope to make this world a better place for all. If we slip into violence or hatred all we will have done is returned ourselves to their level, leaving a never-ceasing war of violence, hatred, and slander. So please, continue to fight with humor and truth, let your words win out, let your hearts be pure, and let your hands be clean. Lets prove to the world what these "Violent, moral-less heathens" are capable of... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 1 Opinion | Have an Opinion?

Vampires, Jesus, and the memories of Ghandi... [Thursday, July 29th, 2010 @ 2:49pm] Apparently, after almost an entire week of the stupidest news articles I could possibly imagine, the world has decided to swing completely in the opposite direction and give me a day of peace. As such, I'm going to do something that I'm not entirely certain I should be doing but, whatever, fuck anyone who disagrees with me, it's my blog. In total opposition to my normal posts, I have decided to write an entire post where the main topic is not, in fact, my urge to punch someone and is -insert gasps of surprise- my praising someone for doing something right. I suppose I should start this entry off by saying that, in all actuality, I have never read an Anne Rice novel. Not that I hold anything against the woman or her novels, I've just never managed to get around to it due to the massive number of books constantly vying for my attention. With that said, I'm certain that most of you with brains have concluded that today's entry is going to be about Anne Rice (or possibly about vampires, but that makes somewhat less sense). A little bit of back story; several years ago, Miss Rice made the conversion into Christianity (Just go check out her facebook page, the thing is full of so many bible references that I think she outdoes Jesus himself) and from that point things moved forward rather smoothly, or so the Christian church thought. Yesterday, however, Anne decided that she was going to turn the church on its ear by telling them the one thing they never want to hear...the truth. She did it in the form of a facebook status update which said plainly and powerfully: "I quit being a Christian. I'm out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of ... Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen," And for this, I applaud her. Sometime between then and now she also commented on how the general feeling for why she made this statement was first summed up by someone who will ever be reviered by me, the Mahattma Ghandi when he said: "I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ..." As I'm sure everyone on the internet is by now aware of, I am a huge supporter of this comment and to those who would try to say otherwise I simply point to Uganda...yeah, you heard me. Thankfully, and somewhat surprisingly to me, the status change made by Miss Rice has accumulated over 4000 likes on facebook and not a single negative word, at least that I could see when I checked on it myself. So for once, and likely the only time for a long time to come, I give my applause to someone with fame and prestige for saying something that actually makes sense and telling off the world for being stupid...you've saved me a day of slowly killing my keyboard. I would like to mention that I'm not suggesting every Christian in the world stop being so, but I AM suggesting that they all take a serious look at the lack of sense their religion has made through the course of the last 2000 years. How about we all take a step back, realize that somewhere along the way things got really fucked up (I mostly blame Caucasian males from medieval England) and then take the religion back to what it was meant to be; a man and his followers telling the world that God loves them and that we should all be nice to one another for a change. On a COMPLETELY unrelated note, the following video was recently brought to my attention and I would like to give a quick shout out to Mr. Colbert (who I believe everyone should watch from time to time) and his attempt at making the right-wing idiots out to be exactly what they are...idiots... Follow the spiders, Harry... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 2 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Murderers, Child Pornography, and Tits galore...oh my... [Wednesday, July 28th, 2010 @ 2:06pm] Apparently I missed the memo that this week is dedicated to right-wing conservatives because I am utterly astounded by the number of reports I have managed to find, not only in the last few days, but in the last few hours all pushing forward bigoted, conservative values in the most textbook definition of the "Jesus complex" I have ever seen. Due to this, what will soon follow is almost certain to be one of my longest entries and will most definitely be the biggest conglomeration of news reports in a single entry to this point. In my last entry I made mention of the National Organization for Marriage's (NOM) current summer tour of the United States in which they are stopping in major cities and protesting marriage equality, arguing that marriage is between one man and one woman (a laughable case considering that the major supporters of NOM are the Mormons, the single highest group in the United States cited for polygamy) and that allowing marriage between two men or two women would destroy the sanctity of marriage and threaten the nuclear family, the wellbeing of children, and otherwise life as we know it. Well, things just keep getting better...at least for the comedians... Today several new articles have come out regarding NOM's bigoted campaign, and after reading them all I began to notice a trend. The first article I ran across informed me of yet another court case put forward by NOM, this one in California, in which they argue that they should not have to play by national disclosure laws because of threat of "harassment and intimidation." Let me expound upon this notion for those not certain what I'm talking about. In the years since proposition 8, the California proposition which revoked the legal marriages of hundreds of thousands of homosexual couples in California, NOM has been called upon by the public to disclose the amount and sources of the donations which it made to Prop8. According to national disclosure laws, any donations, monetary or otherwise, must be disclosed to the American public if those donations were made to a political party, member, candidate, or in the progress of a political endeavor such as the alteration of a law. Therefore, logically, NOM is required to disclose all of the information regarding the part it played in this and any other legal battle as well as where specifically those donations came from (in this case very likely a large number of churches and members of those churches) however NOM believes that it should be exempt from these laws because, quite obviously, the gay crowd will just up and beat the tar out of them...I think not... Their argument is that during the actual course of Prop8 running for ballot (as well as the other laws and discriminatory political moves they have backed) supporters of the "Homosexual agenda" have attacked them and, if they disclose the names of their supporters, those rates will skyrocket and many of their supporters could be injured or killed. Let us look at the facts. During the running of Prop8, the number of attacks on gay men and women or their supporters was rather high. It was a rather common occurrence for a supporter of the proposition to suddenly and violently attack one of the "sinful heathens" for something as simple as being in the general proximity of a child or stepping on their grass. However, and in contrast, the number of recorded threats and attacks on NOM supporters by supporters of marriage equality remain, to this day, in the single digits. You read that right, the number of assaults remains under 10 despite the number of years that has passed. So the question then is, where are all these people who have been intimidated and assaulted, NOM? Either there are hundreds of NOM supporters that just never reported an attack or they don't exist...I'm leaning towards option two. The next two articles I found regarding NOM and their "Tour for Marriage" caused the pieces of the puzzle to suddenly fall into place and it was easy to see what they were going for. One of the articles spends quite a bit of time giving a series of pictures and videos taken from two different angles. One, by the LGBT friendly anti-protesters, which shows the number of NOM supporters at the rallies rarely even making it to 40 members. The other, from the side of the NOM supporters, using camera angles, light, and actors to make the number of NOM supporters appear much larger than they are and, to top it off, make the marriage equality side appear hostile. What might be the point of making the other side appear hostile at a rally which is obviously failing? Well, that's where the third article comes in. It would seem that someone other than myself put together the facts that NOM is filing yet another suit to NOT disclose their sources and at the same time sending out a highly offensive tour...could it be that they are hoping to rile up the masses to such a degree that someone does get attacked at these rallies (something that hasn't happened at any NOM rally to the best of my knowledge) and thus use that information to prove to a judge the danger of the "sinful gays"? I think so. This is only added to by the fact that, of the few people to appear at the NOM rallies, almost none of them are of any consequence to the foundation. Rather, the largest contributers at the rallies are the craziest of the crazy, the folks who proclaim death to anyone they don't like and don't know how to weave their words to make them sound less bigoted than they really are. Thankfully, as the picture-based article was quick to point out, we don't fall for such tactics. We are no longer easily angered or scared back into our closets just because there are crazy people outside of them. We're here, we're queer...and this time we brought friends... Check out just one of our friends...I would like to meet her... In only slightly unrelated news, we also have two articles in which the right wing is attempting to force the rest of the world to accept their crazy ideals regardless of what the law actually says on the matter (such as in the NOM cases). First we have the case of Beverly Marinelli, a resident of New Jersey who has apparently taken it upon herself to condemn the world for reading books about real life. She has been spending her time as of late attempting to get schools and public libraries to ban books about gays and lesbians (in particular one book, Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology, ed. Amy Sonnie [Alyson, 2000]) and, surprisingly, she is succeeding in some places. At least two schools and one public library have already banned the book at her urging. One of the schools did not even receive a formal complaint nor did it proceed by the rules with the books removal, rather the book was simply pulled from the shelves on account of "child pornography" with no further explanation or vote of the school board. This book, which was proclaimed by the School Library journal as "one of the best adult books for high school students" is not being removed because of content unsuited for the age range (as books in a school are supposed to be labeled by) or because of material that is insulting to a race or group of people, but simply because an overly conservative woman does not like the idea of books about gay people...or more likely just doesn't like gay people at all and is trying to ignore their ever existing to begin with by wiping all record of them from existence. I'm sorry to inform you, Beverly, but as I stated up above, we're here and we have friends now so you're going down...preferably sooner than later. Lastly, I bring you an article solely on the topic of tits...yes you read that right. Sadly, the reason I'm writing on this one is less about the article (which doesn't surprise me) and more on the comments (which did). Apparently a woman at a Johnny Rockets restaurant in Kentucky was informed that she was not allowed to breast feed her baby in the restaurant and would either need to go outside or go to the restroom to feed her child otherwise she was going to be removed from the establishment. To the surprise, and annoyance I'm sure, of the manager the woman informed him that it was her right, as it is in 44 states, to breastfeed her child in any public or private place. In my mind, the argument should have ended there, however the manager still insisted and she was still forced to go to the bathroom to feed her baby. This, of course, caused outrage among mothers everywhere and the restaurant was boycotted...but that's not what really gets me. While I do think that the manager is extraordinarily ignorant for ignoring the laws which are put into place for such cases as this, what actually astounds me is found in the comment section. It was there that I read arguments such as "The woman should pump her breasts to avoid public discomfort" and "It's her own fault for getting upset about it". Okay, I'm sorry, but these people are about as stupid as they come. First off, as a medical student, I am very well aware of the fact that the feeding cycle between mother and infant is highly important. If that cycle is disrupted for something as stupid as "public discomfort" the mothers milk glands wind up out of sync, producing milk when it's not needed and not producing it when the baby actually needs it. Beyond that, the actual composition of the milk can be thrown off by pumping. And, possibly at the top of the list, the actual baby-mother connection is not only important for the production of milk (the feel, sight, and most importantly smell of the child causes subconscious reactions in the mother's body altering the milk production and composition as the baby requires it) but it is also important for the baby's well-being as, babies who are not fed directly from the mother, tend to be less emotionally stable and easily upset. I'm sorry, ignorant male who tried for this one, pumping is not the answer. As for the argument that the woman brought it upon herself, exactly how ignorant are you? The laws put in place state that this woman, or any woman, has the right to breastfeed her child, but you are saying that because the manager of a restaurant was not comfortable with the sight of a breast (something that in and of itself is incredibly ignorant) he has the right to ignore the laws and demand that she put her breast away? I think you need a quick lecture on what laws are. For anyone who is unsure, a law is something that is to be followed and cannot be altered by a single, non-elected official for any reason, least of all for personal bias against a natural bodypart and its function. So there you have it. The world today has suddenly been overrun by people who think that God hates everyone but them, that only books about Jesus should be allowed in schools, and that boobs are evil...I think I need a glass of tea before my head explodes... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 1 Opinion | Have an Opinion?

How many cultures can you insult in one day? [Tuesday, July 27th, 2010 @ 2:57pm] Today appears to be a day for right-wing republicans and crackpot conservatives... Rather than spend today's entry on a single article, which would be an utter waste considering the sudden uprise in the level of stupidity to be found on the net today, I have decided to make this post about two separate stories both of which have the same ignorant causes and the same insultingly vile outcomes. First, I come to you with an entry that has very few words to add. This is due to the fact that a picture is worth a thousand words, and this one is very likely worth even more than that: Click here if you like having your brain explode This lovely image is brought to you by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) which, if you live under a rock (or outside the country) is solely devoted to "maintaining the sanctity of marriage" while at the same time insisting that they are not bigots. NOM has, for quite some time now, been rather insistent on the fact that allowing homosexuals to become wed, thereby granting them all the same rights and restrictions of a heterosexual married couple, will be detrimental to the sanctity of marriage and ultimately destroy the foundation of marriage as we know it. However, when asked what the sanctity of marriage is, exactly, or how this destruction will take place, NOM has never actually managed to give an answer, instead always starting an answer then mumbling for a bit then ending with something about the bible while not actually making any coherent sense. Regardless, NOM is determined to prevent the acceptance of homosexuality withing the boarders of the United States (they would most certainly be determined to do so across the planet as well, however, unfortunately for them, extremist Christianity is not so well tolerated in areas of the world that are not largely populated by idiots). Throughout the course of their war against homosexuality, NOM has started there "Summer for Marriage" campaign (of which this sign is a product) whereby they intend to traverse the whole of the country during the summer and convince people why gay marriage is "icky"... Regardless of all of this, NOM is rather insistent that they have been unjustly labeled as bigots and their message as hateful. They are determined to prove that they are only trying to "save marriage" from the "sinful institution of homosexuality", however I would like to point back above...to a sign that says we should all die. Even if we were to somehow put aside all the political campaigns and protest rallies in which NOM has been recorded as calling homosexuals "polygamists, pedophiles, and rapists" in the making, I would still have to say that any group which advocates the killing of a large number of people (essentially genocide) can't be too full of "warm-fuzzies" deep down inside. However, I am waiting anxiously to see how NOM manages to try to shift the blame from this one. As one rather prominent news blog has already stated, it is very likely only a matter of time until, as in the past, NOM attempts to blame this on the "racist blacks"...however twisted that notion may be. Now, with one article under our belts, we go for the one-two punch with the ever ignorant, utterly annoying, amazingly illiterate queen of the north: Sarah Palin... Yes, it would appear that the one-time VP candidate is at it again, marching forth with her hordes of drones known otherwise as the national Tea Party Movement in an attempt to insult more people in under 140 characters than should be humanly possible. As I mentioned a few entries back, there is currently an attempt at building a mosque somewhere near ground zero for the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers in New York city. With this in mind, I have since that time learned several things about this mosque that make me continually question why it is being fought so badly...but then I remember that the church is involved and that explains everything. While the religious right would like you to believe that this mosque is a 16 story tall salute to the victory of Islam sitting directly atop the site at Ground Zero, the truth of the matter is that the actual building (being erected several New York city blocks away) is a 16 story tall community center which will, on one of the levels, contain a mosque as it is being paid for by an Islamic source. The building will also contain a gymnasium, a cafeteria, and an auditorium. It will indeed be tall, 16 stories as already stated, but it will in no way be a massive, stand-alone mosque shining the light of Islam on the streets below. Even so, I can still understand the unrest at having the mosque located there (even if I don't agree with said unrest), but what I am unable to comprehend is why those who protest its being built are so insistent to insult just about everyone they mention... In the case of Sarah Palin, she has somehow managed to insult all of New York, the religion of Islam, Elizabethan England, and everyone on Earth with the ability to read... You may be wondering how exactly she could have done such a thing singlehandedly. If you are, in fact, wondering that, then it may be an even greater surprise that she managed to to it all in under 140 characters via a twitter message. It all started with a single message and an imaginary word: "Ground Zero mosque supporters, doesn't it stab you in the heart as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls. refudiate." I am sorry to inform you, Miss Palin, but "refudiate" is not a word...nor am I entirely certain which of several words you were going for with that statement. Beyond that, I'm not entirely certain what the "Peaceful Muslims" are supposed to be "refudiating" for. It sounds to me like you want them to apologize, or maybe even submit to you, because they are attempting to build a structure which would be beneficial to the community at large. Needless to say, due to her fame, this tweet was given almost instantaneous response by those, like myself, who are unable to figure out exactly what she meant. Her response to people condemning her ignorance and inability to write? "English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!" That's right, in an attempt to downplay her ignorance, Sarah Palin has decided to compare herself to Shakespeare. I'm sorry, but anyone with any form of literary ability would like to verbally and literally slap her around for this one. Just because you can't spell does not mean you have the right to proclaim to the world that you have "invented a new word, like Shakespeare"... On top of that, she also asks the "Peaceful New Yorkers" to "refute the Ground Zero mosque plan if you believe catastrophic pain caused @ Twin Towers site is too raw, too real." So she has managed to insult all of Islam by demanding an apology for them trying to do good, every literate person on the planet by saying that she is "like Shakespeare", and now every person in New York for intoning that they should all stoop to her level to cast Islam out of the city just because of a sect that did something horrible in the past. This is like me saying that no church can be built near me because I am still too wounded by the Oklahoma city bombings and that all Christians everywhere should apologize to the world then go hide in a hole and die for what one madman did on one terrible day. I'm sorry, world, but you can't keep blaming random people because you once knew and idiot who looked like them...get over yourselves. Needless to say, I'm waiting to see how things play out and, if I may say so, am rather hoping that the mosque DOES get built because I think it would be highly beneficial to the community at large and, hopefully, help to heal the rift that has been opened between Islam and the American people by the ignorance of the past. Here's to hope, and a future we can all share in peace. This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 2 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you just watch them set other people on fire... [Monday, July 26th, 2010 @ 10:12pm] I must admit that I have been rather sloth-like as of late in my attempts at insulting large portions of the world with their own stupidity, however I do so hope to alleviate that problem in the coming days. Today, I have chosen to start with something that even has a large number of the people that I tend to point at and laugh shaking their heads with shame...so that has to be bad, right? I come to you today with the story of the Dove World Outreach Center of Gainesville, Florida (talk about a mouthful for just the name of the church). As I'm sure all of you are already aware, the world has for many a year now had to deal with the utter insanity of the Westboro Baptist Church and most of us, at least to my knowledge, were of the general opinion that for someone to be more crazy than Fred Phelps they must obviously be missing large portions of their frontal cortex. However, during this last week we have all been proven very, very wrong... The Center (as I will now refer to it for lack of wanting to type out their ridiculously long name) has apparently decided to publicly spend its summer doing just about anything it can to outdo the Westboro Baptist church so long as it stops short of burning crosses and fornicating with animals in the name of Christ. First, the entire congregation is apparently spending the entirety of the summer publicly boycotting the new mayor of Gainesville. Why, do you ask, are they doing this? Well, the answer is simple; the mayor is openly homosexual and should therefore be case out from the country. I am always boggled by people who protest newly elected officials. I am not boggled because I don't think that any elected official should ever be protested or because I have some naive belief that those who we elect are beyond the realm of evil and stupidity, I am boggled for one simple reason; the majority of people who protest elected officials never bothered to vote in the first place. Now, I can not say with any factual evidence that this is the case for the Dove World Crackpot Retirement Center, however I am willing to sell my soul to Vishnu that it's most likely the case. To top this all off, the most common culprits of such protests are largely extremist Christian sects who tend to be protesting for some strange diversion from actual Christian beliefs (A.K.A. Jesus did not have a left testicle therefore women cannot be president...etc). This, however, is not all they are planning for the summer. Come the close of summer, in early September, will be the 10th anniversary of the September 11th crashes. To many people this day has become a sort of American holiday that, at the very least, I can understand...however I have never heard of a more perverse or ignorant way to celebrate it than the Dove Wackjob Center for Resentment. They have, over the course of the summer and continuing until 9/11, been collecting Qu'rans which are mailed into them from across the country and plan to set them all ablaze in what may very likely be the most insulting "religion flipping the bird to religion" moment of the decade. I can understand the hurt and pain felt by people effected by 9/11, however I am still stunned (I know I shouldn't be) by the fact that an entire religion which has caused more pain and suffering on this planet than any other, can take a sect of another religion and use it to demonize the religion as a whole. If that happened every time a sect from a religion did something utterly stupid, Christianity would have been in the hole about thirty seconds after its conception...these people just aren't bright. And apparently, since this has been going on, the rate of hate-based crimes in the area of the Center has skyrocketed. Pipe-bombs, attacks, the whole shebang is now raging because the congregation of a single church which proclaims to follow a man who continually spoke of "loving always" has turned to hate for a little bit of summer fun. Old catholic priests used to use several utterances when casting out demons that eventually became well-known to the public, but I think they may need to alter their prayers a bit lest the entire planet fall to its doom wrapped in a lovely cocoon of stupidity... "In the name of sanity, I cast you out..." This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 3 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Oil...It's good for you! [Wednesday, July 21st, 2010 @ 10:19pm] I've come to two conclusions in the last several minutes. The first is that I use the phrase "Things that make you go, 'Wha???'" far too often due to the stupidity that I either hear about from friends or read in the media. The second, and most likely the more important of the two, is the fact that people who care only about themselves very commonly feel the need to convince the rest of the world that, even though whatever they are trying to do is quite obviously selfish, they are actually, in some way we don't quite understand for some reason, trying to save the world. Or, to simplify things, by getting everything they want they will somehow be the hero of Earth. I think I'm going to call this the "Jesus Complex"... The most recent incident of the Jesus Complex that I have read about involves a team of individuals who, through the most convoluted logic I can even begin to imagine, are attempting to convince congress not to do what common sense entails and, instead, continue with the destruction of Earth and country. This time, I am sad to say, I do not have the joy of disproving everything the religious right stands for or berating an entire political party (although the republicans are certain to get in on this as soon as possible). No, today we go up against the third of what I consider to be the "Great disappointments of the modern age"...The Oil Tycoons. For those not in the know when it comes to alternative energy sources and oil (something I very closely watch due to my unabashed support of alternate energy) a new bill was proposed in congress not that long ago commonly referred to as the Kerry-Lieberman proposal. This proposal would instigate a cap of CO2 emissions for all American companies, effectively placing a limit on how much C02 pollution they can produce and charging them rather large fines for going over the limit. You may be thinking "Well that sounds like a good thing, what could the problem be?" The problem is a particular company called "CO2 is Green" which has started a radical ad campaign aimed at the wavering Senators (mostly in Washington State for some reason) in an attempt to get the bill at least modified, if not shot down altogether. It's right about here where I punch corporate big-wigs with an inability to know what good is when they see it. There reasoning, in some areas, can at least sound good if not thought about too deeply. However, in other areas, their reasoning is about as effective as screaming "Pasta!" at an incoming army then hurtling corn at them for no known reason. These reasons start easily enough. By putting a cap on pollution, you will be decreasing the number of jobs available. This is, in all likelihood, true. By reducing the amount of acceptable pollution a company can produce, that company will likely be forced to lay-off employees because, as I am equally certain, they will refuse for some time to alter their pollution levels thus giving them immense fines to deal with. However, I feel that this will also force forward the push for "clean energy" sources thus creating thousands of new jobs for those displaced from "dirty energy" and pollution greedy, multi-million dollar corporations. So, is it really such a bad thing that we give big companies a spanking in the short term in the hopes of actually getting a long term solution? I think no, but so many people in this country are so used to instant gratification, so used to just getting their way when they yell loud enough, that I'm rather certain there will be an inordinately large number of greedy, self-righteous twats who believe that, since this could effect them badly for the time being, it must obviously be evil. Fuck the future, I want my ice cream now... The next argument put forward by "CO2 is Green" is that this bill will make no difference (aside from hurting companies and the families that work for them)...Um, hello! Am I the only person in the world who actually managed to pass a science class? I'm consistently surprised (I know I shouldn't be but I am) by the amount of voluntary ignorance that this country manages to show off on a daily basis. We have known for over a decade of the detrimental effects of releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (the two largest being carbon dioxide, CO2, and simple water vapor, H2O) we have consistently measured this detrimental effect, yet people continue to say that we don't know anything. It strikes me in much the same way that overly-religious individuals refuse to accept scientific facts because they contradict religion, only here people refuse to accept it because it contradicts them being able to buy the most expensive cake tomorrow...Exactly how much stupid is allowed to accumulate in a single location before it becomes a black hole? Moving on from the "point two that shouldn't exist" we hit what is most likely the most ignorant arguing point of all time, point 3: CO2 is good for us! Using an isolated study on tomatoes, "CO2 is Green" attempts to prove that constantly increasing the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is actually a good thing, the complete opposite of what those "liberal, hippy, extremist scientists want you to believe." The study, in all simplicity, states that when tomato plants are exposed to higher than normal levels of CO2, the plants produce more fruit and higher quality fruit. To that I respond very simply with this, Water is a good thing, but you can still drown... While it is true that increasing the amount of CO2 a plant is exposed to will, to a degree, make the plant thrive, if you exceed that point the plant will suffocate despite the fact that it breathes CO2 (rather like how humans on pure oxygen become high and then pass out unless they are already short on oxygen such as the elderly). Beyond that, this experiment (which consequently was only meant to test how plants grow under different air compositions, not to prove any sort of ecological point) does not take into account the fact that, if that much CO2 were actually in the air the temperature of the Earth would increased to such a degree that it would be rather startling if the tomatoes could grow at all. With this in mind, I must wonder who decided to come up with the catch phrase of: "If you love tomatoes, you'll love global warming!" Quite possibly the most idiotic of all talking points being used right now is the "They're picking on us because of the oil spill" argument. To this I have two things to say. First, the oil spill happened months after the planning for this bill had begun, something that can be proven using congressional paperwork dated for well before the oil spill. Beyond that, I feel that I must point out that even if this hadn't been planned from the start, it would be rather stupid for us NOT to use the oil spill as a reason to find other sources of energy. What kind of crazy does it take to believe that you can make fun of your enemies all the time but they can only make fun of you when there is nothing to make fun of. We're not going to stop just because you made a huge mistake and want some time to sweep it all back under the rug before you get back to telling us how wrong we are. All in all, what I see here is a bunch of people, all of whom were or are major players in oil companies, attempting to maintain their current lifestyles by lying to the rest of the world and hoping that no one notices because they've wrapped the whole selfish package in a thinly veiled layer of "save the world". Here's to hoping that congress is more intelligent than a bunch of selfish big-wigs...but I doubt it, because most of congress is or was at some point in their lives, big-wigs as well... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 2 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Islam: Has it gone too far? [Wednesday, July 14th, 2010 @ 4:48pm] I really wish that I had an icon that said "History: Because I said so" or something along those lines because at the moment keeping my rage in check at the absurdity of the Christian populace at this very moment is taking more strength than I was aware I had. It is very rare for me to become truly angry anymore. I can be annoyed, I can be frustrated, I can want to knock some sense into people, but true anger is something I don't feel very often and that is a good thing for those around me...today is not a normal day. I am utterly astounded by the ignorance and stupidity expressed by Christians around the world today, but even more so by those within the United States and, most painfully, those within my own family. I am hurt and devastated by their inability to remember their own pasts while casting judgement on another's future. My heart breaks and bleeds for the small minds and closed hearts which dare to make their hatred and venom publicly known, to the detriment of mankind... What may have me this bothered, you wonder? It is, in fact, a rather complicated concept which has coalesced into a single point of hatred in New York City as of late and can be summed up with a single word... Islam What bothers me the most about the news report (which is not actually done by a true news program but simply a British man who runs a website against Islam) is not, actually, the main point of the report but instead the anger, hatred, and ignorance which comes along with the main point. The general point is this: On September 11, 2001 two planes struck the twin towers in New York City and, consequently, approx. 3000 people died from the terrorist attacks. These attacks were eventually connected to a small sect of the third in the line of Western religions known as Islam and the attack was proclaimed by this sect to be Jihad, a religious war against countries or groups of people who do not hold to their teachings. Now, nearly ten years later, plans have been released to build a very large, 10 story mosque within a few yards of "ground zero"...the opening date is set for September 11, 2011...the ten year anniversary of the tragedy. Needless to say, many many people are upset by this and want the plans to be scrapped and, quite honestly, I cannot blame them for that. While it is true that 90% of Islam does not hold to the tenants which were the cause of the 9/11 attacks, it should be easy to understand that placing a shrine to the religion which caused such turmoil there is a rather stupid move to make, not even mentioning opening it on the anniversary of the disaster. With this said, I see no real problem with protesting the mosque being built...there are many other locations to build a mosque, a church, a cathedral, or a hole in the ground that would not be offensive to many Americans. What I do hold fault with is the venomous words that came along with what could have been a very simple protest. The argument is essentially that Islam is evil, that it should be made a crime and eradicated for the evils some of its followers have committed. The arguments are varied, playing off of the fear and the hurt that many Americans suffered following 9/11 but all of them can be immediately turned back on those who are doing the arguing and they are simply hoping that no one will notice...well sorry boys, but unlike the rest of the United States, I don't live under a rock and I can dress myself in the morning. Here are some lovely quotes from the report that made me wish I could throttle the speaker and anyone else who holds the same feelings without admitting their own faults: "Diversity has been good for America, it's been the making of that country. But American diversity has always been grounded in the values, the individual liberties, that make America what it is. Islam rejects those values and that's the difference." Wait wait wait wait...here we have a blatant Christian man who is claiming that Islam does not belong in America because it does not allow diversity? Well that's just straight up rubbish, and for several reasons. This argument is used regarding the "Islamization" of the world as he calls it, whereby he insinuates that Islam is attempting to take over the planet and wipe out every non-homogeneous person (for those of you with IQs which to not reach the double digits, that means anyone who's not the same). My argument here is, if it is a requirement that all religions accepted in America also be accepting of diversity of all kinds, then I suggest we remove all of the Western religions in their entirety (those would be Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and the Bahi) because each of them builds on the last and they all claim that, in order to get into heaven, they must become just as God says, follow his word without doing anything different, and preach is word to the unbelievers until they believe...sounds like that's against diversity to me. Beyond that, however, I would like to point out that there have been several times in which Christianity has blatantly attempted to push their values and commands down the throats of those who are non-Christian and, when told they can't, used the banner of diversity and religious freedom to keep right on hurting others so...lets make sure we're talking about something that only Islam does the next time you want to boot another religion out of the country guys... "The ground zero mosque is intended to serve the same purpose in America. Building mosques on conquered, sacred ground is standard practice, it's what Islam has always done to assert its supremacy and that is what's happening here." As much as I would like to say that eventually he realizes the error of his ways and suddenly says "Oh crap, I seem to be talking about things that my religion has done to innocent people as well," he doesn't and instead proceeds to be more and more infuriating to anyone who has the ability to think. Mind you, I'm not saying that Islam in one form or another has never done any of these things, that would be just as stupid as this twat who thinks that yelling at the internet about how much better he is than someone else. However, I would like to point out the following. Ok, so maybe this mosque is meant to act as a sort of victory marker for the sect of Islam that committed the terrorism (Mind you he never actually discusses the point that there are two main sects of Islam, one of which is only about 10% of the religion and also happens to be the one that committed the attacks in 2001) and if you want them to not build it there then go be productive and make sure it isn't done, but don't act like you haven't done the same. I have one word for you if you think that your religion is so much better than this one when it comes to killing the innocent...Crusades... The number of innocent bystanders killed during the Crusades of the Christian church in Europe and the Middle East are astronomical compared to the number of people killed in the 2001 terrorist attacks. I'm talking hundreds of thousands to one in comparison here. But, because these attacks are more recent apparently they are instantaneously more terrible, more evil, more worthy of hell...or is it really just that Christians don't like diversity that includes other religions and is trying to get rid of anyone who is different...wait, that sounds like something I might have talked about earlier... "Because 9/11 could never have happened without Islam, and it's teachings, and it's doctrine of Jihad, and it's false promises of an impossible afterlife..." This particular quote just made me stare in awe at the stupidity that could have spawned it. It is true that this particular attack could not have occurred were Islam non-existent in the same way that McDonald's could not exist if the McDonald brothers who founded it were never born, but it's the last bit that really gets me. Someone who, of their own admission, believes in a religion that speaks of an afterlife, of a heaven and a hell, would be so brash as to say that the afterlife according to Islam is a "false promise" and "impossible"? Exactly what kind of double speak is this. I must argue that, if you can believe in AN afterlife then it should follow suit that you can believe in ANY afterlife. You cannot prove to me that yours is correct (I'm sorry I must have missed the memo from Jesus) so you cannot use the "I know my religion is right so theirs is wrong" excuse, therefore if someone wants to propose some other life beyond life you have no factual evidence with which to refuse them that ideology. Do you refuse them because what they are being promised in heaven is non-sensicle? Well so is what your afterlife proposes (at least from the point of reality as we know it) so that doesn't work either. Come on people, lets at least attempt to use the ball of water that we should have between our ears... "Any religion that enforces violence in incapable of bringing spiritual enlightenment, how obvious does that have to be? And it has no right even to call itself a religion! Without the shield of religion to hide behind, Islam would be banned in the civilized world as a political ideology of hate and we have no obligation to make allowances for it anymore than we do for nazi-ism..." Oh dear lord...this is far too easy... I want all of you, every single one of you reading this right now, to pop back up to that quote an change a single word. I want you to take the word "Islam" and make it say "Christianity"...does the sentence read any differently? No? I thought so. If, by some bizarre hemorrhage to your brain, you believe my last statement to be false I will give you the most recent in a 2000 year stretch of hatred pro-ported by the Christian church to prove my point and I can do it with a single word...Uganda... In case you have been living under a rock in an attempt to believe that no one who believes in your God could ever do something wrong, evil, or deadly, let me explain. Currently, in Uganda, there is a bill which is going through their equivalent of congress in which it says all gay people are to be arrested, imprisoned, and put to death without trial or any other right. This bill is being advocated not only by Christians in Uganda, but by very large churches IN THE UNITED STATES. That's right, this so-called "civilized" world mentioned above is working for the killing of people who are different because someone out there can't read a 2000 year old book properly. Now, if you want to argue that this is just a single, radical portion of Christianity and they don't speak for the whole so we shouldn't blame all Christians I ask you this, why blame all Muslims for the terrorists actions of a small Islamic sect? Just as with the crusades, this bill will kill hundreds of thousands of people all in the name of Christianity in comparison to a few thousand killed in these attacks, when you put those numbers next to one another I certainly know which seems more evil to me. In closing, I am not saying that I agree with harm or killing done by anyone. I detest all forms of violence however I am simply making the point that, if you are going to proclaim that an entire religion is evil and should be wiped out from the earth due to their violent nature, you may want to make sure your own religions doesn't match them or (in this cased) completely outdo them in the realm of evil and violence done in the name of religion. Anyone who wants to tell me how much better than Islam Christianity is might as well shut up, I have my degrees, I have my knowledge, I am much more well-informed than the rest of the human populace and I know where Christianity stands in terms of it's "Moral high-ground" approach...If you choose to believe it then you're just a fool who I must pity for your utter lack of wisdom and common-sense. I feel I must mention this before I go, my favorite line of the entire report is the very last one which is extraordinarily ironic taken in comparison to all the hatred and bigotry in the rest of this deluge of vileness. "Peace and Godbless..." Good to know that, when it comes to Christianity, I can count on them to berate me for the first 99% of the interaction, but I always get a blessing in the end...how generous... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 5 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Hate Mail: How to know when you're doing something right... [Friday, July 9th, 2010 @ 5:50pm] I have the feeling that today will be another "Two Entry Day" because of the amount of stupidity in the media, however this was the first article, or rather set of articles, that struck me so this is what you get first. Waymon Hudson, writer for the "Huffington Post", has for a while now been posting a series of articles in which he discusses some of the more entertaining hate mail he has received as a homosexual man in a legally committed marriage writing in a public forum. Luckily for the world, Hudson applies to the "I must be doing something right" mentality of hate mail otherwise the sheer amount would have seen him back in the closet no longer than it took for him to come out. What has always struck me about hate mail such as this, however (and continually strikes Hudson as I am glad to read) is the utter lack of not only logic, but any obvious source of education at all. All but one of the emails/letters/tweets Hudson writes about in his several entries is filled to the brim with grammatical errors, spelling mistakes so obvious most small children could spot them, and in several cases a lack of punctuation or sentence structure at all. I'm not expecting the illogical right-wing to have attained graduate degrees or for the monstrosity known as the tea-party to be fluent in prose, however I do think that they could at least finish a thought or perhaps throw in a period...I don't even care so much where they put it anymore so long as it's there! A rather insightful comment on one of the articles states "Does the tea party not have spell check?" to which someone else replies "They are likely foaming to badly at the mouth to stop and check something as useless as spelling." Quite frankly, and I know this is terrible but in all honesty true, I am surprise that these individuals have the ability to read his articles well enough to be angry over them none-the-less have the ability to write even if it is almost illegible. To emphasize my point I give you a few of his quoted hate letters: " Sorry, you can't be a DAD and be Gay, a MAN is a DAD, a gay dude is Quire & NOT a man. Get it? I'm not interested in Ur GAYnes" "It is not natural nor does it fit in religion.If it was meant to be there one only be one sex. As ir is it takes two sexes to produce a family. Wake up and smell the roses. You are not Gay you are queer. Michael Bailes" "hey Hudson, stop deceiving the public. Nothing happened to Pastor Ssempa in fact everything went on smoothly. Otherwise, Hudson, to remind a bit, this law caters for Ugandans alone, and I wonder why someone like you who is not a Ugandan should get concerned. OK, I know, you might say u care about the nation but for your own information and as the Uganda's motto stands "FOR GOD AND MA COUNTRY" you should know that Uganda is for God and not mere human beings OK. And God's will has to be done in our country. Turn to God Hudson." The first one is quite possibly my favorite of everything he posted simply because of the comment stream on the article (very likely over 100 comments long) in which the readers and Hudson himself proceed to think of any possible way they can to use the misspelling of "queer" as "quire" in a more logical/phonetically correct manner. The comments go on and on with things like "I know that I'm just preaching to the quire (haha)". Also, I am assuming that most of you grasp the final quote is in reference to Hudson's article regarding the immoral actions of Pastor Ssempa of Uganda who is trying to put into effect a law which will sentence all gay men and women to death for "crimes against God". The letter is essentially telling Hudson (as far as we can tell) that because he does not live in Uganda he shouldn't be talking about what they do to which Hudson replies: "As for why I and so many other people around the world are so concerned with this bill, it's simple. We care about our fellow man. We care about human rights. We care about what would surely be a mass extermination of gay people in Uganda." He then goes on to inform the author of the hate mail that there are many people who work for human rights even though they will never see the effects of what they do or feel the effects of what might occur had they never tried and that just because someone's warped and bigoted view of god will not change that. I'm sorry Betty (the hate mail's author), we all have rights, and those of us with souls have a conscience so you may just want to quit while you're behind... As I said at the start of this entry, I'm glad Hudson is taking this so lightly. He's a wonderful reporter who writes from the mind of a normal person trying to tell others what is going on, not from the point of a mindless corporate drone attempting to make a buck. Hopefully he will keep writing, and keep to his theory on hate mail because I really do think that, when it comes to others hating you, you must be doing something right... To sign off, I leave you with these words of wisdom from the always great and wise, The Mahatma, Ghandi: "I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... Have an Opinion?

The Bible: As misunderstood as that emo kid no one talks to... [Wednesday, July 7th, 2010 @ 3:04pm] In the realm of "Things that are obviously true because someone, somewhere, at some point in time said so" there are several clear winners: Elvis is still alive, the world was created by an invisible man in the sky, and God hates gay people. However, anyone with two pennies to rub together and the time to actually look into the matter will find otherwise... As someone who has spent a rather large amount of time studying Western religions, I have been aware of this fact for an exceptionally longer time than your average lumbering Christian sheeple but, by some strange turn of fate, the reality of the bible has finally made it into somewhat mainstream news as today I read the headline: "Homosexuality: Not a Biblical Abomination" I'm sure that the majority of you are currently thinking "But if I turn to Leviticus and hunt down that one verse that is the only one I can recall saying something about gay people the word 'abomination' is right there, in black and white" and you would be right if it weren't for the fact that the word "abomination" is used there simply because of a lack of modern-day equivalent terminology. Call it a typo, a translational error, or 'the best we can do at the time' but in the end what you get is a biblical verse (actually about 110 biblical verses) which is translated very, very wrong. In short, the original Hebrew word used here, toevah, is translated in the King James version of the bible to be "abomination" regardless of the sentence structure in which it is placed. However, what is being referred to is not the modern day version of abomination (a terrible sin which will pretty much send you straight to hell in a handbasket) but rather refers to a specific type of cultural boarder-crossing. It must be remembered that, throughout the whole of history, the Jewish/Christian people have been persecuted rather relentlessly until modern times when they "took the high ground" so to speak. Because of this, there were many laws set in place in the Jewish community that would allow other Jewish folk to identify them while not necessarily giving them away to possible enemies. These "Jewish laws" included the doing or not doing of odd thing such as planting two different plants in adjacent fields, working on Saturday (the actual Sabbath against common belief), and (of course) having intimate relations with someone of your sex. What does this mean in terms of people who are not Jewish, then? Ask any good Rabbi and they will tell you this...absolutely nothing. The Jewish people consider themselves to be of a chosen set of people, chosen by God to follow specific rules made only for them. The rest of the world need not worry about such things. However, even beyond this, if a Jew were to break one of these laws what does it mean for them? Are gay Jews screwed for life?...Also a negative there, that just means that they are not in keeping with Jewish law, not with God's law, so they'll only be "the weird guy" while on Earth. So why with all the "gays are evil"-ness of modern day Christians...well, for that you have to ask a priest. The funny thing about it is that anyone taught at a reputable seminary school (where priests, pastors, and fathers learn the bible) KNOWS about all of this. They are taught how to read in Hebrew, how to read according to the times it was written in, and how to differentiate true Law from minor laws (note the capitalization indicating which was written by God). So why all the problems? Easy, someone, somewhere, at sometime in the past decided gay people were icky...and as this article started with, it's hard to argue with a DWM (Religious scholar speak for 'Dead White Man' and referring to the fact that most of the discriminatory laws were made by high ranking religious white men who turned religion on its ear to suite their lifestyle or pocketbook). So with that said, I actually like most of the Christian religion. I'm rather fond of Jesus himself and can dig a large majority of what he and his merry men stood for. However...I think we need to have one major preist roast and start over...reading from page one this time... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... Have an Opinion?

Campaigning for Muslim School Holidays in New York City [Monday, July 5th, 2010 @ 2:54pm] I'm sorry to inform you all of this, but my disappearance the past few days has not been a figment of your imagination. Actually, in an unlikely set of circumstances I managed to be out of my apartment until well after 1am for the past three days making it rather difficult for me to post despite the fact that I still managed to find time to at least locate the articles if nothing else. So here we go with my first in a few days. Today's topic is the Muslim religion. However, unlike most of the ignorant self-entitled twat-bags that consume my country, I will not be proclaiming anyone of darker skin tone as a threat to my lifestyle nor will the word terrorist be mentioned even once. Instead, this is about something that the country was founded both on an for but most Americans would now rather ignore because it means they have to be nice to people who aren't walking Churchitarian automatons like they are. Several days ago a protest was held outside the city hall in New York city by a group of Muslims attempting to get two Muslim holidays recognized by the school system. One might immediately imagine that this is a group of radical progressives but, rather on the contrary, there was not a single adult involved. Instead, the entire procession was held by a group of elementary and middle school students fighting for their own freedom and religious rights. The story is rather understandable from the get-go, however it becomes even more so when a little bit of background is done. Apparently, due to the fact that several Muslim holidays require a day of celebration or ceasing of all work in respect to God, these students were receiving failing grades on assignments or having to make up work in their own freetime for following their religious beliefs. This would have been almost acceptable (at least the making it up in their own time part) if it weren't for the fact that Jewish and Christian holidays are given as time off in public school, meaning that those students do not have to make the same decisions of God vs. School. It was because of this that over a year ago a bill was put forward in the New York state senate which would include the two most major holidays on the Muslim calendar (the two for which the students were fighting) in the school calendar and remove this unfair decision from the students. Where is the problem, then, you might ask? Well, it's wit the governor of New York. You see, the bill flew through all of the other major branches of state lawmaking only to wind up on his desk, and what was his response you might ask? "The students already have too many holidays..." While I can understand that you don't want to take away time from schooling, Mr. Governor, I'm also rather certain that what you've just done could very easily be determined in a court of law as biased against religion (something which is rather prominently covered in this old piece of paper we have called the constitution). I find it rather astounding that, in a country which was specifically created to allow people to practice religion as they see fit, we still have morons such as this who are willing to place one religion over another and attempt to make a feeble side-long excuse as to why it's the right thing to do. I'm sorry, Mr. Governor, but in my opinion you only really have two choices in this matter; either give the Muslim students the same respect and religious freedom as all others in the public school system, or remove all semblance of religious effect from the public school system entirely. As I'm rather certain that the crazed Christian public here will not stand for the latter, that pretty much leaves you with one choice. Now, sign the paper, stop being a douche, and let us all go have so communion wafers for Christ's sake... This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 2 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Forced Marriages Rise in UK [Thursday, July 1st, 2010 @ 11:23pm] First, I would just like to mention that Tattoos hurt so this may be a rather short entry...but we shall see. Today's entry is brought to you via Jolly Ole England..or at least via their "Foreign and Commonwealth Office". It appears that the number of men being forced into marriage with a woman whom they have no feeling for, for whatever reason, has increased drastically over the last year. And I'm not just talking regular drastic, I'm talking "Oh fucking Christ" drastic. From 134-220 self-reported incidents by men trapped in unwanted marriages las year to 1,682 this year. It's like someone walked into London and shouted "God's bringing the flood again and this time only straight, married couples are getting on the Ark!" What is the number one reason for a family forcing their child, be they male or female, into an unwanted marriage you may ask? Why it's simple, dear child, for the world as a whole only hates what is evil and there is only one group of people so evil as to deserve wiping out by force! (No not the French, they're just mildly annoying) I'm of course talking about the gays! Now, let it be said, this is not the only reason but it is by far the most common one. Suspicion of homosexuality apparently causes parents, most particularly those of immigrant status (Southeast Asian and Indian being most prevalent) to up and get their little boys hitched before they can even begin to think about taking part in this terrible realm of sin! What gets me is this, however: If one of the "epidemics" of our age is frequent divorce, why would you proclaim that they best way to solve this is to force gay men to marry women and deny themselves for the rest of their lives (this is also the case for many lesbians but the numbers are not as surprisingly high). So many right-wing creatures are spending all of their time screaming about the fact that children need to grow up in supportive homes, that people shouldn't divorce, and then turning around and supporting the deprivation of gay men and women from a life that would both make them and their spouse happier? I say unto thee, "Nay, pilgram, for you do not practice it as you preach-eth." Until such a time as a conservative can look me dead in the face and tell me with scientific fact that allowing gay marriage would not decrease the number of divorces and ultimately make a whole lot of people a lot happier, I'm going to have to continue listening to them in the same way that Charlie Brown listens to any adult in the show...you know the noise, now go on and make it every time someone says something stupid to you...the world will be better off for it. This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 3 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Attack of the Gays: Multiple entries about how being gay is wrong... [Wednesday, June 30th, 2010 @ 6:47pm] Apparently today is "Gay Bashing" day and I just simply wasn't informed. Rather than do just one article today, I'm going to mash together two articles with similar themes and hope none of you notice... First, Gays vs. Oil? Who knew there was a competition? The article, in a manner that I am certain was meant to specifically entertain me, starts off with the following: "Anyone else reminded right now of that Eddie Izzard bit, where he walks around and asks people whether they would prefer "cake or death?" As you might imagine, most people choose cake." But without some context I'm also rather certain that no one reading this has any idea why that is related. Long story short, a group of radical Christians located in Maine (the Maine Family Policy Council) has issued an opinion piece earlier this week in which they compared the BP oil leak in the gulf to the "flood of immorality" in the United States. However, not content to leave it there, they continue by saying that at least the oil spill will eventually be dealt with and therefore the oil spill is much better than the "gay problem". Some part of me just wants to laugh at that. Something which is destroying the earth, the wildlife, and has already taken human life and is bound to take more is better than a group of people who are commonly caring, compassionate, and want to give help in a way that no one has ever given it to them. There's a typo here right? But no, this is a rather common consensus with with conservative Christian nut-jobs. This which are, in truth, not actually mentioned in the so called "good book" are much worse than things that are preached over an over again simply because some man in a white robe who's been dead for hundreds of years said so once...can someone please explain why it is so hard for these people to think before they speak? This brings us to article 2 for the day, though. Apparently someone has taken the comments of groups like this further to heart than others and started applying it to her workplace...and unfortunately for the world she's a doctor... Dr. Maria New of Florida has decided that women should not ever like other women or, for that matter, should not wear pants, play with action figures/cars, or do anything that is "un-feminine" so she has decided to start treating her maternity patients with an experimental hormone which, as of right now, has not been approved by the FDA for ANYTHING, none the less what she wants to use it for. This hormone, dexamethasone (which my memory keeps telling me I last heard of as a poison but I could be wrong) is being used in the hopes of "preventing these new babies from expressing romantic feelings for other girls or acting in an un-feminine manner". I'm sorry, but there are so many things wrong with this. First, I was rather certain that most Christian groups were against the whole "playing God" thing. Also, since when do people get praise for possibly poisoning pregnant women? Lastly, how is a doctor of all people getting away with actions such as this without being sued out the ass and put on trial by the medical board? In a single week it seems we've gone from the Condom Fairy to the Dr. Kavorkian of the unborn. I think that one of the comments on one of the articles put it best though, and we those words I leave you. "I'd love to take this lot out in the Gulf of Mexico, toss them overboard then say, 'Well, it's not as bad as gay marriage!'" This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 3 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

Fired for speaking a single word of another language? [Tuesday, June 29th, 2010 @ 4:02pm] Things that make you go... o_0 WTF? I've just finished reading today's "dose of stupidity" in which a hospital in Baltimore City fired several nurses and a secretary for speaking their native language of Tagalog. As a medical student I could understand this for several reasons, but none of those reasons apply here. Were the nurses using their native tongue during a medical procedure, in which case they could have confused other medical staff? No. Were they discussing with outside individuals in a manner that resembled the breaking of doctor-patient confidentiality? No. Were they, for that matter, acting in any sort of suspicious or obstructive manner? No. The Nurses were eating lunch in the break room with one another, having a conversation and otherwise being human. The Secretary used a single word (an honorific with the equivalent in English being "sir") to refer to a Filipino doctor. So what, then, is the problem? Well, quite frankly, from my point of view nothing. However, the hospital they work for has apparently recently erected a rule in which it states a zero tolerance policy for foreign language speaking by ER staff to prevent confusion during medical emergencies. This may seem like a good thing, until such idiocy as this begins to happen. It is true that these individuals are staff in the ER and that they were speaking a foreign language? Yes, however were they doing so while in the ER or in reference to medical procedures? No. They were simply talking to other individuals who easily understood what they meant and were, in the process, not risking a single patients safety or well-being. This is, quite obviously, not about the patients well being, but instead about someone with a lot of power in the hospital (perhaps many someones) who simply do not like immigrant-folk attempting to make a decent living in America. It very easily reminds me of an old job I used to have where one of my co-workers was a complete imbecile by choice (one of my biggest pet-peeves is when people have all the opportunity to gain knowledge but bypass it for some ignorant reason). At one point during the work day I used a word not frequently used in American English but very common in British English to which he responded that I should "Talk American because I'm in America" and I responded by "I was speaking English, considering there is no language called American" and his response was "This is America, we speak American!" Here we have an example from my past about how people, in their own ignorance, can't seem to grasp the idea that a person can speak several languages. Yes, these individuals were, at the time, speaking Tagalog, however that does not mean they are not fluent in English (in fact most immigrants who learn English know how to speak, read, and write better than native born Americans). It is possible to be fluent in several languages and, therefore, any individual speaking a different tongue during their free time ought to just be left as they are. Even my own mother, who I love dearly, becomes annoyed with people speaking foreign languages in public places because "You live here, learn English" and I need to constantly remind her (to no avail) that they most likely know English very well, they just choose not to speak it when grocery shopping/at the mall/on the street/in the next car/etc. According to the report, the women fired for speaking Tagalog are now filing a legal suit against the hospital and I hope in the name of all things holy that they win. If they had been speaking in the ER during a procedure or even just under medical pretext I could understand the problem, however they were simply going about their day, and no one should be fired for saying hello to the doctor walking by your desk. This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes...the truth hurts... 3 Opinions | Have an Opinion?

navigation [ viewing | most recent entries ] [ go | earlier ]