Another Day, Another Untruth!

Another day, another series of twisted illogical assumptions, this time in the form of a blatant copyright infringement on the Charles Schultz

“Peanuts” franchise. Let’s take the lies one by one. Pro-choice, at least to most sentient humans, implies that an individual should have the right to choose or nor choose to do a certain thing as long as his choice doesn’t infringe on the rights of others. 

That sad, let’s start with lie #1. Smoking is dangerous, but so are many things, many of which involve occupations which serve society, such as being a fire fighter or policeman. The difference is that smoking has clearly identified negative health consequences which cost all of us, smokers and non-smokers alike, millions of dollars in health care costs. As long as my tax dollars are being used to cover medical expenses for those suffering from what amounts to self induced heart and circulatory and respiratory diseases clearly linked to smoking, then I certainly have the right to oppose the continued use of tobacco products. Now, if I can get smokers to sign a waiver clearly stating that no matter how grievously ill they are, no public monies will be spent on their care………! But, alas, that’ll never happen.  

Second lie: While there is (was) a lunatic mayor in NYC who attempted to ban large sodas, this is not a political issue of either party, but of an independent NYC mayor. End of statement.

Third lie: Neither party has ever sponsored an initiative to ban gun ownership by any responsible person. Of course to the NRA, that has come to mean that any psychopath, even if severely autistic and anti-social, or clearly identified by a mental health professional as dangerous, should have easy and immediate access to handguns and ammunition. Once again, the twisted logic of the far right has turned what is a public safety issue for the many, into a cry for protection of the lunatic few. Neither party has ever attempted to ban ownership of sporting guns by those who use them for legitimate reasons, but even former president Reagan openly and strenuously supported the ban on sales of assault weapons. There is no coherent argument to be made for the sale and possession of AK-47s, yet the Ted Nugents of the world scream “personal liberty’ when anyone mentions curtailing their availability. This is, of course, the same Nugent who created a fictitious resume claiming to be an auxiliary sheriff and participating in numerous drug raids (all lies, and so proven), diametrically opposed to measures advocated by essentially every police chief in America.   Only a lunatic sycophant of the Far Right could rationalize holding those two absolutely contrasting positions!    

Fourth and fifth lies:  Incandescent bulbs and coal. This barely deserves a response, but what the hell. Coal’s off-gasses, the products of its combustion, are a litany of carcinogens; those that don’t cause cancer contribute to acid rain and global warming. Over 60% of non Tea-Party Republicans acknowledge the reality of global warming. The death of sugar maples in New England and fish kills in the same region in the 1970s, and the recovery of both as EPA requirements and stack gas scrubbers radically reduced C02 emissions of rust belt power plants are self evident. Regulation in the public’s environmental interest is a Republican issue, as history reveals in the careers of Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft. The EPA was created by legislation signed into law by Richard Nixon. What’s the beef? Regarding light bulbs: Please, find a real issue!

 Sixth lie: Of course anyone can choose to honor (their) God. Also, of course, by extension it must also mean that if that’s what they “really” mean (they don’t)   Republicans/Tea partiers /Democrats alike must also honor the acts of worship represented by the 9/11 acts of terrorism. Oh, hold on now, Mike, how can you…….!!!??? So now we come to the crux of this lie; it’s misstated. What those of the ultra conservative side really mean would be stated more like this: “Can I choose to honor God as I choose to see him, in a manner I choose to worship, in any public place I wish to, to the exclusion of all other forms of religious viewpoint and practice?” To the lunatic Right, the answer to that is a resounding “Yes!” To the rest of us, the answer to the question as originally stated is, “Of course, but remember, just as I wouldn’t dream of thrusting my Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh, agnostic, atheist, or Wiccan point of view into your schools, workplace, or town square, I have the right to not be hit over the head with your fundamentalist Christian point of view either. If seeking Biblical confirmation of this point of view, here are several helpful hints:

Matthew 6:6 ESV “But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.”

Matthew 6:1-34 ESV “Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. “Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others.”

Luke 5:16 ESV “But he would withdraw to desolate places and pray.”

I am the last person to ever claim that the Bible forms a basis for any decision or action, since so many decisions and actions contained therein are genocidal, fictional, militaristic or just downright silly, yet when speaking to true believers, there is little else to do.  Institutionalizing of religion by the state has had disastrous consequences, justified state persecution, and sparked rebellion essentially everyplace it has been done. What don’t the far rightists get about that?

The final lie: Abortion as a public concern. The words have been turned here. What is (or should be), truly a personal choice, has been manufactured by a segment of society into a societal issue.  Just as one’s personal relationship with whatever  supernatural sky spirit they choose to follow should be personal and private (at least, insofar as it doesn’t infringe on the space of others) a woman’s right to make or not make the choice to terminate a pregnancy should be private as well. In the fringe, here, I would not support the use of federal funds to pay for such an act, as this, just as the public displays of religion so cherished by Rightists, constitutes  public funding of a private decision.  

Unfortunately, it is a common failing of the ultra-conservatives to only observe issues such as this from one side, so smoking, polluting, amassing hordes of ammo and guns by essentially anyone (all of which by the way, can be clearly linked to negative public impact), are to be fiercely protected private rights, but the most private decision of all, the decision to terminate a pregnancy, is a public matter? Sound stupid doesn’t it. That’s because it is.