yahoo censors comment re: gay marriage

Hawaii eyes gay ceremonies after civil unions pass

unless you have a specific religion under which you desire to be married, all civil marriages are legal for all american citizens. to claim otherwise is unconstitutional, according mostly to the Ninth Amendment of the Bill of Rights. unenumerated rights are the most important rights american citizens have to protect them from the government and the "moral" majority, or any kind of majority.

marriage in and of itself is NOT a religious ceremony, unless you choose it to be. there is no need to "defend" something that is clearly available under the Constitution to all citizens. with a 50% divorce rate, "traditional" marriage doesn't seem to be very well defended, does it?

yahoo censors comment re: charles manson punishment

Charles Manson follower Krenwinkel denied parole

charles manson is content and comfortable right where he is. i don't want him to be content and comfortable. i want him to be miserable and uncomfortable. he should be in solitary confinement at the strictest of prisons, where no-one is available to be an audience for his rants and delusions. i don't even want him to have a window or a conventional shower -- they can hose him down in his cell for all i care -- thru a slot, so he can't see them. he should be in a sound-proof room. he should get nothing to eat but a vitamin and baloney sandwiches. no cigarettes, no sex, no drugs, no audience.

this is the next best thing to a death sentence for "charlie."

yahoo censors comment re: Huck Finn calling Jim a nigger

Mark Twain remains censored, and uncensored

i am amazed and very pleased by the unanimity of the below opinions. bowdlerization is awful, misleading, and destructive. if Huck called Jim a n!gger, it was because that was how Jim would be referred to at that time. it is a learning experience not to be avoided by the PC police. notice that i cannot spell the "n" word correctly because yahoo would censor this comment.

p.s. they censored it anyway.

yahoo censors comment re: woolly mammoth

Researchers aim to resurrect mammoth in five years

i had heard -- at least a decade ago -- that Japanese scientists were going to try to clone a mammoth. i guess developing the technique to extract the dna took all that time. i am very excited about the attempt, and i hope it proves successful. i also hope they clone more than one, so they can reproduce.

where will they live? it'll have to be pretty cold, or they'll die of heat exhaustion. isn't the gestation period about 2 yrs or so? i can't wait to see baby mammoths -- i'll bet they're adorable :)

yahoo censors comment re: AZ shooter

Shooting suspect's nihilism rose with isolation

i happen to love Animal Farm, i like Brave New World, and i have copies of both Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto, which i intend to read. i hope these facts do not condemn me in the eyes of my fellow americans. i also believe that n!gger should remain in Huckleberry Finn -- this subject seems to come up every once in a while -- should bible-readers change the word "virgin" to "young woman," as in the original? you see how playing around with words can become a heated battle, but it is very important to read works in their original form, as the author intended.

i also happen to believe -- fervently -- that every schoolchild should read Animal Farm. it is a warning, not an advocative, treatise on totalitarianism. btw, every adult should read it, too. if you want to know why politicians act the way they do, Animal Farm is by far the go-to book. i can assure you -- it is safe to read it, without your becoming a murderer.

yahoo censors comment re: cross being unconstitutional

California memorial cross found unconstitutional

on your dollar bill, it used to say "E Pluribus, Unum" -- out of many, one. we are not one as long as god is involved. or god/s. would you like your money to proclaim "in Zeus we trust"? it's the absolute same thing.

the bible is studied in school for its historicity, and prayer can be said silently at any time anyone wishes. just don't make me have to listen to it. to paraphrase Mr. Darcy in Pride & Prejudice -- you may think of it, but not aloud.

don't confuse religion with science. science comes from the Latin "scienter" -- to know. religion comes from the Latin "re-lig" -- to rebind together. the former creates individuals; the latter, sheeple.

yahoo censors comment re: cross being unconstitutional

California memorial cross found unconstitutional

read the Constitution -- it's either oath or affirmation. witnesses don't have to "swear to god/s" and there ARE, whether you "believe" it or not, atheists in foxholes. we are everywhere.

i am a sincere nontheist. i would not want to be in a heaven that would have the faithful -- or me -- as a member. a non-existent hell is preferable to a faith-filled heaven. but i won't have to worry about that, as neither exist in fact, only in wishful thinking.

yahoo censors comment re: autism and vaccines

Study linking vaccine to autism was fraud

no one "catches" autism -- it is not contagious. it is strictly natural. an autistic person is born that way. read Temple Grandin and Dr. Oliver Sacks re: autism and Asperger's, which i have -- i have always had Asperger's, but it wasn't officially diagnosed until i was 56. until then, i was considered nonsocial and eccentric. i have Asperger-like memories from the age of 10 months, way before i received any vaccinations.

the 1998 study was intentionally misrepresentational. self-aggrandizement was probably a factor, noting that he has a strong following in the u.s. even though he was stripped of his right to practice medicine in great britain. i'll bet all of his writings are now suspect, knowing that he would intentionally skew data.

yahoo censors comment re: north korea and iran

NKorea warns war will bring "nuclear holocaust"

the north korean people are eating grass and bark, and whatever they can glean from the mud. yet they can afford a nuclear enrichment program and nuclear weapons. something is wrong here. such a government is not interested in "peace" -- they don't know the meaning of the word.

north korean interests are strictly personal -- kim jong il and his toadies are in the business of power and domination. now they are threatening nuclear war -- just what we should expect from such a country engaging in nuclear experimentation. iran is next to use nuclear weapons to threaten the mideast and the world's most plentiful oil supply.

this is what can be expected from totalitarian theocracies. and if you don't think north korea is a theocracy, think again -- kim il sung is the father, and kim jong il is the son. we saw what can happen in such a climate, when japan believed its emperor was a god. read The Captive Mind, and see what can be accomplished by leaders assuming the roles of gods or their messengers.

yahoo censors post re: mccain on "don't ask, don't tell"

Mullen fires back at McCain's 'don't ask' repeal criticism

mccain was never the brightest bulb in the senate, or in flight school, or when flying, or when serving in the government. check his records -- he was the son and grandson of admirals, and that's where his qualifications began and ended. how does being a vietnam prisoner -- and tortured -- for five years qualify him to pass judgment on gays in the military?

even Cindy disagrees with him on this one. he has no credibility and less probity than Rodin's The Thinker -- i.e., a hunk of stone in a contemplative position. between grey and gay, i'll take gay any day. at least gays are capable of reasoned thought and compassion -- two things in which mccain is lacking. mccain is ye olde guard -- something we need less of.

the only opposition to gays serving openly and honestly is religious, and that has no place in civil government or a civilian military. look to the 10 Amendments, not the 10 commandments. The 9th Amendment guarantees our unenumerated rights, and that trumps particular religious "moralities" that are in actuality objectively immoral. a man of limited and circumscribed thought, such as mccain, is in no position to judge rationality. books like the bible and the qur'an prescribe death to homosexuals -- is that rational thought? the 9th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights implicitly guarantees freedom from any particular religious moral code. i don't think mccain is capable of such understanding, considering his limited philosophical talents. i suggest we as a nation not take him seriously in his bronze-age prejudices.

court rules site the birthplace of a deity

India less tense after court verdict on holy site

"Thursday's ruling said the Hindus could keep the area where the mosque once stood because the court determined it was the birthplace of Rama and archaeological evidence showed a temple had predated the mosque."

okay, a court has determined the birthplace of a fictional character; fictional, that is, except to its believers. this is positively surreal and beyond the bounds of reason.

as far as evidence that the mosque sat atop a temple -- it is common practice for "victorious" religions to build their houses of worship directly upon the site of a "loser" religion's place of worship. christians did it to jews, muslims to jews and christians, etc. this is very much relevant to the Ground Zero mosque debate. it would seem as though the muslims in that scenario would wish to build a "victorious" mosque atop a "loser"'s holy site.

it's all about "location, location, location."

yahoo censors comment re: attorney's anti-gay blog

Mich. assistant AG's anti-gay blog free speech?

Shirvell 'accused Armstrong of hosting the party with the intent to "liquor-up underage freshmen and promote homosexual activity in an effort to recruit them to the homosexual lifestyle."' -- did he really say that? is this the 21st century or the 11th century? homosexuality isn't something you're recruited into, as though it were a choice, and liquoring-up underage freshmen to get them to be homosexually active is just so ignorant. Shirvell studied law at the Ave Maria law school -- that should tell you his agenda right there. this is another of the many christian homophobes who believe (1) homosexuality is a sin, and (2) homosexuality is a choice. neither are true. he has forfeited his right to be a civil servant since, obviously, he cannot serve the civilians in his sinecure.

SCOTUS and westboro baptist church protests

high court looks at military funeral protests

this is clearly a case of intentional infliction of emotional distress. the phelps cult had no real business at Matthew's funeral BUT to inflict emotional distress. they are hiding behind two banners -- (1) religion, and (2) free speech. but you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, and you can't yell "i'm glad you're dead; god hates you; you're burning in hell" at a private funeral.

the cult's lawyer says they'll keep "talking" until they get their message across? -- they're not talking to anyone; they're yelling at everyone. they've gotten their point across; now they can go home and wait for their god to reward their good acts. SCOTUS should rule in favor of Mr. Snyder, because this is a clear intention to inflict emotional distress, hiding behind the guise of a church. it is a hate crime, just as if they had burnt down a place of worship or blown up some children.

and this is a nontheist talking. i personally don't believe in any gods, but i do believe in respect for peoples' grief. Matthew Snyder is beyond grief now, but his family and friends are not. they are vulnerable to attack, and emotionally sensitive. turning his funeral into a hate-filled spectacle is the same thing as yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, as i said before. it creates the exact same kind of emotional distress.

what schools and students need, and why

Obama -- money alone can't solve school predicament

i have been saying, for years, that our education system has more than enough money, not enough good teachers -- and, consequently, too many bad teachers -- and too short a schedule. finally, obama has said something i can agree wholeheartedly with! i am a testament to what good teachers can do for students -- they inspire, create curiosity, and generate interest in the subject matter by bringing it to life.

here's a shout-out for some of my best, A#1 teachers: Mrs. Salisbury (4th grade), Mr. Davis (8th grade), Dr. Harned, Lorenzo Thomas, and Dr. Haney (university). they all deserve(d) much more money than we pay them. and librarians, too -- don't leave out the very important keepers-of-books. these people should be compensated monetarily according to the importance of their careers and the success that they have achieved.

another thing -- teaching to the test is not the way to find out if you are a good teacher. teaching the subject matter well and successfully is the way to find out. how interested are the students? are they excited to come to class? are they intellectually stimulated? do they welcome tests, in order to show what they know as well as find out what they don't yet know? do they do homework willingly, even gladly? these are some of the ways to judge a good teacher.

and if teachers had more time to teach students, students would learn more. that's just common sense. with good teachers, students would be much more anxious to attend school, much less likely to ditch classes (right, Ferris?), and much more likely to understand the subject matter in a mature way that generates lifelong interest. they just might be interested in having a clear mind for learning, rather than a clouded mind by drugging and drinking. we are educating citizens, future leaders, fellow homo sapiens. what could be more important?

democrats v. republicans -- a pox on both of you

it is unfortunate that both major political parties are really two heads of the same coin. they are both corrupt and ineffective. much of what they do is to slander the other party, as if the truth were limited to the one being attacked. my husband used to say, "if you have one finger pointed at me, then you have three fingers pointing back at you."

when republicans point at the democrats and accuse them of, e.g., abuse of power, they are condemning themselves as well, with their own words. nothing can be said about the one that is not true of the other, as well. and, as we all know, two wrongs do not make a right.

political parties are sects that are beholden to one another. they invite corruption. i believe it was James Madison in Federalist 10 or 11 who railed against the party system. right now, it is the party that builds the platform for which it stands; it should be the individual who is running for office -- any office -- who is required to set forth his or her platform. and i don't mean that they should just say, "i'm for the democrats" or "i'm for the republicans." they need to set out detailed statements/explications of their political views. this would of course require thinking and writing; and reading, by the public.

we are all complicit -- we need to fully participate. we cannot afford to be mentally lazy when it comes to electing representatives, and they cannot afford to be mentally and philosophically lazy when it comes to defining their platform. no more adhering to the republicrats; let's see individual accountability and individual participation.

candidates need, for one, to leave religious values out of their platforms. the First Amendment gives us rights that cannot be undone, no matter how much one sect would have their moral standards thrust upon all citizens. this goes for democrats as well as republicans -- one would legislate what goes on in our bedrooms, the other would dare legislate what goes on in the rest of the house.

there is an evil at work here; it is called bureaucracy. untold millions of trees are killed to make the paper behind which politicians hide, the huge mass of paperwork that does naught but obfuscate and misrepresent.

popularity should be exorcised from candidacy; personal traits, such as religious belief, should be kept personal. i look forward to the day when an atheist can openly run for office and actually be elected. we have had atheists in office, but they must behave as though they were caught by the throat of a "don't ask; don't tell" policy. belief in gods should not be a prerequisite for holding office. the Constitution allows for oath or affirmation, and that is all it has to say on the subject. the Bill of Rights works as a check upon government -- the "they shalt nots" that government cannot perpetrate upon its citizenry. too many people mix it up with the ten commandments -- the "thou shalt nots" -- that ought to be obeyed by one and all. this is explicitly forbidden by the First and Ninth Amendments.

it is very difficult to vote in today's climate. one must settle for the lesser of several evils, and then hope that congress is of the opposite persuasion, so that nothing can get done. this is the safest we can ever be, when it comes to enacting legislation. it is simply a total waste of the sapient mind and of a reasonable citizenry.

but at least we get to vote, which is a good thing, as martha stewart would say. how and whether our votes are counted and registered is, of course, another story. practically every election since 2000 has brought up that political bad boy. we remain uncertain as to whether our vote "counts," and this engenders disillusionment in the entire system. and we're back to the beginning of my argument ...

yahoo censors this comment re: arresting the pope

Different pope, different times for pope's trip to England

ratzinger should be arrested. he was in charge during the initial stages of the sex-abuse scandal, and he is in charge now as the ultimate figurehead of the rcc. he is the gang leader, and should be made to pay for his crimes and his aiding and abetting criminals.

yahoo censors this comment re: the nature of islam

obama commemorates 9/11 with appeal for tolerance

to everyone out there in internet-land -- rent the documentary "Islam: What The West Needs To Know" before you talk about free speech rights. islam is determined to take over the world, until they are the only religion, except for the dhimmi. read the qur'an and the hadith. it's all in there. islam is a religion of the sword; they have elevated death while killing infidels to the level of martyrdom. there is nothing peaceful about a religion whose name literally translates to "submission" and whose stated and unstated desires are for world domination. there is no such thing as a moderate muslim -- they are considered apostates and are targeted for death by assassination. if you read islam's religious texts, you will see that "moderate" has no place there. believers are permitted to lie and deceive to get to the eventual goal.

again, watch "Islam: What The West Needs To Know" and listen to what the experts say. they will kill over a cartoon, a book (Salman Rushdie's "The Satanic Verses," even over a threat to burn their qur'an. they will kill at the drop of a hat, because islam is all about killing. no doubt about it.

to those who believe that the acts of 9/11/01 were cowardly, they were not. they were the acts of deeply committed religious people who KNEW that they would be rewarded in islamic heaven with virgins and family members. they were merely following the precepts of their religion to the letter. let that be a warning to all those who do the same, no matter what religion it may be.

yahoo censors this comment re: legalizing prostitution

men and women who sell sex are businesspersons. they should be able to advertise, their health should be regulated, and they should pay taxes. the opposition is mainly from the religious community, whose sense of morality is conflicted at best, perverted at worst.

and another thing, why should businesses be closed on sunday? i'm all for 24/7/365 workdays. if you want to go to church, fine -- go to church. if you want to buy a bottle of liquor, fine -- buy a bottle of liquor. sunday is just another day of the week.

the post office should lower the price of stamps and deliver mail 7 days a week. then, maybe they'd get more business. there would certainly be more jobs available.

all these objections/prohibitions are based on judeochristian morality, which has no place in secular government. just because one group of people find sex purveyors immoral, doesn't mean that they are immoral. if you don't like it, turn off the tv, change the channel, don't hire a sex worker, etc. but don't impose your outmoded, faith-based morality upon the rest of us.

reason tells us that there are people -- of both sexes -- who want to engage in sex, and there are people -- of both sexes -- who are willing to accommodate them. a person's religion or faith in general have no business in the public arena. i am personally offended at the imposition of an irrational morality that ignores reason in favor of belief without evidence. sex sells, and there will always be people -- of both sexes -- who are willing to sell. let's let them!

re: an SF website without star wars or star trek ...

i was hoping for real speculative fiction, not the "cowboys and indians" in
space b-s. anybody out there like Cliff Simak? James Blish?
Ward Moore? C.M. Kornbluth? Kuttner and Moore? Ted Sturgeon?
L. Sprague de Camp?

Clifford Simak is my favorite author.
we had a correspondence shortly before he died, but it's been
published in a czech translation of one of his books. so i am in a
czech book :) i would suggest anyone read The Big Front Yard, Immigrant,
Drop Dead, Desertion (from the book City), Skirmish, Way Station, and lots
more.

and don't forget Kornbluth. his The Words of Guru
is absolutely fascinating and repulsive at the same time;
truly frightening in a weird way. he co-wrote The Space Merchants,
a great book. and many, many more before he died at age 38 --
much too young.

there are really too many to tell you about,
mostly from the '30s to the '60s. i've been a real fan for almost 40 years.
no militarism, no belligerence, no war-making (except in de Camp's Lest
Darkness Fall, an excellent short novel about a modern man trying to prevent
the dark ages from coming, back in 565 c.e.

really, it's more than star wars and star trek. although Galaxy Quest was
great :)

the evil that is faith

people -- read The End of Faith by Sam Harris, god is not GREAT by Christopher Hitchens, and The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. you will realize how inherently evil is faith -- belief without proof -- and how no religion should be tolerated in a supposedly modern, urbane society. the more we give faith a free pass, the more we will have people flying planes into buildings. after all, they were only doing what their faith told them, and they were sincere believers, not crazed animals.

truly civilized people find the idea of faith repugnant and ridiculous. don't sanction faith over scientific proof, and don't make up irrational arguments in favor of god and faith that can be refuted by the merest among us thinkers. faith allowed pedophiles to be alone with children, and faith kept those children silent about their abuse for a very long time. what will faith be responsible for next?