Tuesday, April 28, 2015

No one cries like a bully


   
     Should the cows rise up against their human overlords, and turn carnivorous in their rebellion, sating their hunger for vengeance on human flesh, I hope that, even if cornered by a bovine killing squads, as they close in around me, their long-lashed eyes brown and angry, their cud-flecked muzzles dripping foam, I still wouldn't, in the moment before their hooves come crashing down upon my head, blurt out something like, "How can you kill and eat an innocent living being!"
     Sigh.
     Because—I hate when I have to explain—people eat cows all the time. So if the cows turned the table and ate us, well, we wouldn't be happy about it, but we sure couldn't say it it wasn't fair, or condemn the act of eating other living entities. 

     Well, okay, we not only could say that, we would, because people are oblivious, and hypocrites. They're against all government handouts but their own. They discover the beauty of tolerance—for themselves—only after they're asked to accept someone they'd rather be kicking to death out behind the bar.
     Yesterday I wrote a fairly straightforward reaction to Bobby Jindal's execrable op-ed piece on why the religious notions of small businessmen should trump the basic civil rights of certain American citizens. I was more interested in why the battle should center on the statistically meaningless act of buying wedding cakes.

    Because really, wedding cakes? Wedding cakes! I had a big, hotel wedding. We ordered a big ass, multi-tiered cake. It was about the 20th most expensive thing related to the wedding. I'd hate to try to figure out the percentage of the American economy taken up by wedding cakes, but it would have a whole lot of zeros after the decimal point, somewhere between money spent on motorcycle sidecars and the market for fine bowler hats.
     The reaction was to be expected. But even with my lowered expectation, I noticed an extra strong dose of grievance. Religion, like meat-eaters, is so used to running our lives unquestioned, that even a tiny correction makes it feel that it is being pushed around. They  don't like it.
    "Bobby Jindal is correct that the gay militants are bullies," writes Albert Felker. He doesn't quite say why—I assume they're pushing people around by wanting to get married and have cake (the whole issue is a canard, like prayer in school. You are free to pray whenever you like, quietly, to yourself. But that isn't the big fucking me-me-me display that religion demands.. So hence the battle. Ditto for bakers. Being pressed to bake wedding cakes for gays is not actually a real life issue; this might be the first time that has actually been pointed out. A handful of occurrences, maybe. But really just a notional wedge dreamed up by the geniuses who brought us abstinence education).
     My favorite email from Monday, perhaps my favorite email of all time, came from Mike Zintak. It's sort of a greatest hits collection of the current thinking of the Far American Right, to stretch the term "thinking," and really needs no commentary. It is self-explanatory.
     Though, I can't resist pointing out his line about how gays "push their agenda down everyone's throat." That's what conjured up the cow revolt. Because really, look at religion. As with carnivores, faith had a lock on society. For centuries, millennia, the church had the whip hand. Wrong faith, they'd pack you in your synagogue and set it on fire. Women, well, God intended them to be scrubwomen and moms. Talk about pushing their agenda. 

     You can't expect them to see it. But that doesn't mean we can't look at it, blinking in wonder. A Mount Everest of hypocrisy.
     And then gays, after only a few decades of trying, get the chance to marry like normal human being do. And rather than give up that rather small shift--can't do that, can't give an inch—we get this insane stink over wedding cakes. (Mine came from House of Fine Chocolates, by the way, praised be its memory, a Broadway institution. They didn't give us any crap for being Jewish, which I didn't think to appreciate at the time).
     But enough commentary. You need to read this email. Because it is a Whitman Sampler of revanchist nuttery. Notice how he drags in Muslims at the end—the classic, wiggle your-fingers-over-your-sputtering-lips intellectual parry by the Tea Party, part of the ooo-we're-victims pathology, the daft notion that the Muslims "get" to do all these vile things, cutting people's heads off and such, without having as many liberal columnists point out that it's wrong, as if that's necessary. I call it "Terrorism Envy."
     He mentions "marching orders" twice—first capitalized, then not. He doesn't say where my orders are supposed to be from. Moscow—that's the traditional source. Or San Francisco. Anyway, for your reading enjoyment:

I find it interesting with those on the Left when they try to make a point against the Conservative line of view. You seem to follow the Marching Orders to the line with your article today. Comparing Gettysburg with the Gay movement. I would guess that you don't practice a "Religion", based on your dialog? Personally, I have no problem with a Gay or Lesbian life style...that is if their own choosing. I do how every have an issue when they (the gay movement), push their agenda down everyone's throat. There are a lot of Conservative Gays..that would agree with this...but you never mention those gay people...why? The fact that a gay couple can have a child defies logic. Yes they do adopt, but what does that do for the psychic of those children later into their life? Sure you agree that is not Normal? Many gay men and women would agree with that. Secondly, the whole aspect of "Gay Marriage", Marriage was set aside for a Man and a Women, for reproduction purposes....with Christian and Religious beliefs as stated in the Bible. And that includes the Muslim Faith. Funny though, how you don't detract the Muslim Faith about Gays....oh I forgot, within the Muslim Religion...they execute the gay people. Why have you not talked about that aspect? Must not be in your marching orders...huh?

33 comments:

  1. These all knowing Xtians will be the death of this country.
    They have no understanding that others just don't believe in their absurd & disproven fantasies.
    At some point, I expect them to go nuclear & start an actual civil war in a last ditch attempt to force the rest of us to believe in what they believe in. They weren't satisfied with a few violent losers killing doctors that performed abortions, they're going to want to get rid of the rest of us to create their New Jerusalem in America.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wouldn't it be wonderful if everything Clark St. says is true!?


    Eric Riggi

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Eric-are you a fellow paisano Italian?

      Delete
    2. Neil, you need to block that M. Zintak from your email. Why get aggravated?

      Delete
  3. I am a robot. I have no religion. Can I join the secular non-human crusade against religion. What is this "eat" thing you refer to in your column. Must be something the organic life forms do. Me, I don't eat, or have sex, or get married. Unfair. You even still make me certify that I am not a robot, which I am, just to get my comments printed. A robot, a priest, a minister, and a rabbi walked into the bar. Guess who didn't get served and didn't even want to get served? That's right, that's why we robots are cheap dates. But we never kiss on the first, second, or third, or thousandth date. I say: let us marry. What is the harm to anyone. Thank you for your support.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent points, Robbie. However, I'll have you know that getting married, having kids and even eating aren't always all that great. Eschew marriage, I say, get your kids from the factory like any other self-respecting robot, and chow down if you must on electrons straight from the wall socket.

      John

      Delete
    2. doesn't sound John-like you were much of a husband or father, I feel for your exwife if you had one-what a negative view you have on marriage

      Delete
    3. I guess you didn't find it funny. Sorry about that. A few years ago, I planned to write a Law Review article about same-sex marriage, but gave it up because it looked like a lost cause. So I wrote about gun control instead -- ha ha.

      John

      Delete
  4. A Mount Everest of hypocrisy? A very sly, timely dig? With all due respect to the people buried under the earthquake, I do like it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good grief.

    I really hate the "just asking questions" form of apologetics. Studies show that children raised by gay couples actually do a little bit better, on average, than those raised by heterosexual couples. Undoubtedly, that's due to all the children of gay couples being *wanted* children.

    "Citation?" I long to scream at them. Like the antivaxxers, none of their debate questions are novel: they've been asked and studied. The results are easily found on the Google. The results are inconvenient to their side of the debate, however, so they stick to Just Asking Questions.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sure we could say it wasn't fair - we currently have no evidence the cows are sentient (I don't want to get into a huge animal rights debate here and argue over the meaning of "sentient" but for now just take it as a dividing line for a certain level of cognitive reasoning) - if we did and kept eating them THEN the table-turning would be fair.

    I prefer this scenario: Native Americans radicals acquire localized WMDs. They point to the legions of treaties signed by and later broken by U.S. governments and demand their land back, politely saying "we don't accept your statute of limitations arguments anymore than the Jews or Indians (the real ones) did when they took their land back after centuries." When we have something to lose, we're all oblivious hypocrites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. a not a, the Indians weren't from North Amer. originally either. Stop putting them on a pedestal. They did cruel and wrong things to innocent farmer settlers and to each other and their women & didn't adapt like Afr. Amer did . Now if they commit crimes they get a slap on wrist in their kangaroo courts, separate justice, even if they rape their own women. Stop being such a windbag.

      Delete
    2. Does this mean whenever America makes a treaty with a nation that isn't, well, perfect, we have the right to break it? And you know these "cruel and wrong things" were done by every single tribe to which an American government made an agreement with? I disagree, but I applaud your devotion to "everyone is bad, so might makes right" as I picture you stoically packing up your belongings.

      Delete
    3. don't twist my words, A-n-A

      Delete
    4. Ana , you seem like the type that would be horrified at Japs in the internment camps, but not see how what Japs did to people n their camps much worse, and don't forget Bataan-anyhow Amer, Brits, other Asians- Maybe you should realize Tojo should have said we surrender, not go ahead and drop bomb 2x to save his pride. And why would the people there still respect the emperor after that? Of course now China is the big prob, not Japan.

      Delete
    5. Even if I was that "type," it wouldn't diminish the claims of jailed U.S. citizens of Japanese origin. And though I'm generally a modern day Nipponophile, I completely support the critics of those in Japan who try to whitewash their World War II history. Agree China is an under the radar problem - wish the GOP would recognize the value of foreign aid, seeing how China is using the same to gain a hegemony foothold in South America.

      Delete
    6. I had a Japanese student once, when taught college. She said she never had heard of the Japanese committed atrocities of WWII, until she came to the U.S. So yes, they do whitewash things. As for philes, I prefer being an Anglophile, even if it's not pc these days.

      Delete
    7. A/n/A-May I suggest you read the Rape of Nanking, by Iris Chang. Why you'd ever be a Nipponphile is beyond me. They were awful to Koreans too earlier on and discriminate against them. They also are arrogant and think all Amer. are lazy. women are still 2nd class citizens over there. Look at the pressure on the crown princess because she didn't have a boy at first. Guess they forgot guys sperm plays role in gender too. So don't be anal and smug. Read also what they did to the women western prisoners at Tenko in Malaysia.

      Delete
  7. I couldn't help but have Archie Bunker's voice surface in my head as I read the words "what does that do for the psychic of those children..."

    ReplyDelete
  8. Blinking in wonder. That says it all.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Eating people is wrong." The Reluctant Cannibal, by Flanders and Swann.

    For our robotic friend Robbie, what we humans think might happen should a priest, a minister and a rabbi walk into a bar depends on whether one is a dipsomaniac or a ballet dancer.

    Tom Evans

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tom-what does dipsomaniac mean?

      Delete
  10. Interesting column from Mark Brown today in the ST on how wealthy like Zell buying up state elections too.

    As for Baltimore, I see looting will end racism? Where's daddy? where's responsiblility? are the cops always bad or racist? is it okay when cops get shot? where's Jesse then?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. where's the birth control? some can even get it free at clinics

      Delete
  11. "...the classic, wiggle your-fingers-over-your-sputtering-lips intellectual parry..." - Nice one.!

    ReplyDelete
  12. My favorite part of the e-mail:

    "The fact that a gay couple can have a child defies logic. Yes they do adopt, but what does that do for the psychic of those children later into their life?"

    Does this mean that when these children grow up and consult psychics, the psychics won't be able to guess that they had two mommies or two daddies, and will be embarrassed as a result?

    ReplyDelete
  13. My favorite part of the e-mail:

    "The fact that a gay couple can have a child defies logic. Yes they do adopt, but what does that do for the psychic of those children later into their life?"

    Does this mean that when these children grow up and consult psychics, the psychics won't be able to guess that they had two mommies or two daddies, and will be embarrassed as a result?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I liked it the first time, Bitter Scribe! ; ) Well played.

      "Sure you agree that is not Normal?" This is where I learned that it's important to capitalize "normal". Normal as an archetype, or like a nationality or a religion. Let's not be getting concerned about the rights of anybody who is not peering down on the rest of society from the very tippy-top of a bell curve, now.

      Delete
    2. Maybe Mr. Zintak meant that it's not Normal, it's Bloomington?

      Delete
    3. Oops. Dunno how the double post happened.

      Delete
  14. "My favorite e-mail...of all time"? What about mine? I thought we had something special - now I'm like yesterday's Sun-Times, a Telander or Brown thrown in the can. Oh the indignity!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Neil, everygoddamnday may be in jeopardy. This is listed as a second post for Monday, April 27th and there is no post for 4 - 28. I've pointed it out in the past, when such errors have occurred, but I was waiting for so
    Rome else to point it out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fixed Paul. Thanks. I just carelessly posted it last night instead of setting it to go up at midnight. I don't want to fetishize the daily aspect, but I do like to hit my mark.

      Delete

Thanks for commenting. As soon as I vet your remarks, they'll be posted, assuming they aren't, you know, mean and crazy.