CANCER: WE ARE AWARE!!

     The month of September is 'Childhood Cancer Awareness Month'. Recently, there have been several highly, locally publicized incidences of metastatic cancers affecting children in surrounding counties. Almost all of them have lost the fight. Several of the families of these children have Facebook pages dedicated to the support & progress of the children & their families. Many of them have also had fundraisers sponsored in their honor in order to assist the families with the outrageous costs associated with caring for someone with the disease. Each time I see one of these children in the news feed, or local newspaper, my heart aches & I squeeze my own children's hands a little tighter.

     The "War on Cancer" was declared by President Nixon in 1971 upon signing the National Cancer Act, which bolstered the effort to find a cure for cancer via biological research & drug therapy. Forty plus years later, things aren't looking so good. The survival rate has improved, but the occurrence rate has sky rocketed and metastatic cancer is still a killer; although major non-profit research funding organizations would have us believe otherwise. They would have us believe that walking, running, playing hockey, & riding stallions for the cure is actually leading us somewhere. The fundraising has led us to more advanced testing & early detection methods, but that, coupled with the extended life expectancy (of 3 to 6 months) for advanced stage cancer patients, to the tune of $100k - 200k each, hardly explains where/how the annual $2.2 Billion dollars are actually paying off. And the truth is, no one wants to hear the truth. Because the truth is plain, it's ugly, and it's real. It seems more valiant to walk-a-thon, pray-a-thon, and ribbon plaster, than it does to just put down the boxed food & Bic Macs, eat green vegetables, and prevent 70% of cancers & chronic illnesses in the first place. This is no longer speculative information. The cold hard facts are in. One of the foremost nutritional biochemists in the world, Dr. T. Colin Campbell (Cornell University), along with other premier doctors in their fields, have discovered that diets rich in animal fats & proteins, as well as processed food-like products, CAUSE cancer, heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, and a host of other chronic illnesses. Whole food, plant based diets vastly decrease a person's chances of developing those diseases & can even reverse them; as well as other ailments such as reflux, rheumatoid arthritis, gout, acne, allergies, the list goes on... But people are more comfortable believing that a man with a lab coat & a bag of nuclear poison aimed at your veins, is somehow your saving grace. We've been bred to believe that medicine is the answer. That doctors practice wellness, when in actuality, they practice sickness. Billions of dollars are spent, and billions made in the treatment of chronic illnesses and cancers. There is no money in a cure. Drug companies & Research Organizations can't fund their private jets & Miami condos on wellness. There's no money in prevention. If you've made it this far in life & have yet to make the connection between your health & what you feed your body, there's likely no help for you. You'll spend your days playing patient-for doctors & hospitals. It's easier to over-eat a diet of sodium, refined sugar, & chemical laden food-like garbage, & ask a doctor for some more pills, than it is to re-think what you've always thought, eat some spinach & take responsibility for your food choices. 

     It's easier to tell a child's family that you'll paint your nails Gold, put up a ribbon, & give $10 along with a card declaring your family's prayers as well a sweet note that "All things happen for a reason & God has a plan for this child, we just don't know what it is." That's a cop out. And it pisses me off. The ole "I'll pray for you, God has a plan" bit is played out. It's the easiest way off the hook. It's a way to scapegoat the fact that we're poisoning our children. And maybe, just maybe, God's plan doesn't include killing children slowly while filling their bodies with medical napalm. Perhaps, God's wisdom & mercy is greater than that. Maybe childhood cancer is a call to re-evaluate our environment & the factors that contribute to the vast number of metastatic cancer occurrences in our babies. For every child that suffers, our resolve should be THAT much greater to guard the safety & wellness of the little bodies of the children we're called to care for. We should be angry with ourselves for allowing it to have gotten THIS bad, THIS big, THIS devastating! 

     Many years ago (around 1938 to be exact) a German born Jewish doctor by the name of Max Gerson, cured many chronic illnesses including migraines, tuberculosis, heart disease, and eventually cancer, using his nutritional therapies. He cured Nobel Prize winner, Albert Schweitzer's wife of lung tuberculosis & the two (Gerson & Schweitzer) remained friends for life. After Gerson's immigration to the US during the Holocaust, he performed a study of 50 cases using his healing therapies on cancer patients who were given up to die when standard treatments failed. He was thought by the medical community to be "radical" for his idea that diet could affect health. But like most all radicals before him (i.e. Nichola Tesla) it has come to light that he wasn't so 'radical' after all. But again, no one (except the patient) benefits from nutritional therapy, except maybe organic farmers. Big Food, Big Pharma, Big Insurance won't reap the benefits of our over indulgence in poisoned foods, which will propel our need for medicines to ease our misery, & thus bolster our needs for insurances that help pay to keep us alive & then bury us when the medicines stop working. 

     Gerson was snubbed, and eventually snuffed out. He was poisoned & died in 1959. Dr. Schweitzer eulogized him by saying "…I see in him one of the most eminent geniuses in the history of medicine. Many of his basic ideas have been adopted without having his name connected with them. Yet, he has achieved more than seemed possible under adverse conditions. He leaves a legacy which commands attention and which will assure him his due place. Those whom he has cured will now attest to the truth of his ideas.”
While the only legal cancer treatments in the United States are surgery, Chemotherapy & Radiation treatments, The Gerson Institute in San Diego, CA can provide infinite amounts of information about his healing therapies & where/how to obtain them. His daughter, Charlotte continues his work & is his longest surviving patient - as he cured her of cancer at the age of 12. 

    You don't have to believe in Gerson the way that I do. You don't have to believe that a cure for cancer is as simple as real food. But you owe it to yourself & every family who suffers alongside their loved ones to re-think what 'Cancer Awareness' really means. It's more than a ribbon, nail polish, & a long night spent walking a track. Being truly aware means being truly awake; Wide eyed to the possibility that things are not always as they seem. And the next time you tell a child with cancer that you'll pray for them, back up that prayer with a little research and accountability for the fact that we ALL contribute to the disasters that cause the devastation of cancer. Every time we forge headlong into gimmicks, quick fixes, and pretty packaging, we distance ourselves that much more from the truth. Simplicity is God's language. It's a wonder we don't speak it better.

The Right to be a Dumb Ass

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joxny3rco_4

Above is the link to remarks made on Sunday, by Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri. If I said his words "upset me" that would be a vast understatement. I've been devastated by his remarks, not only because they are callous and thoughtless but because he is not alone in his thinking. He and other dirt bags who claim to care about human life take their ques from Dr. John C. Wilke, who first articulated a point of view similar to this, in a book in 1985 and again in 99'. He says that because being raped is a "stressful event" (no shit!), that a woman's tubes are spastic thus sperm is less likely to fertilize an egg. Of course ACOG (American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology) and the CDC heartily disagree and assert that there is NO science to back up this claim, and that in fact there are approximately 32,000 pregnancies resulting from reported rapes each year. Morons like Bryan Fisher, director of issue analysis at American Family Association (one of those darling organizations that Chick-fil-A gives money to) defended Akin on his program "Focal Point" by citing Dr. Wilke. People from Missouri now have a "right to pray" which allows students to opt out of classes and assignments that violate their religious beliefs. But being able to deny a century and a half of scientific data because you think God POOFED the world into existence, instead of putting actual thought into it, which man uncovers via scientific exploration, is NO excuse for perpetuating bogus information created and spewed by one senile ass hole with an agenda. 

I'm too tired to mince words and pretend I give a damn about who reads this. Politics is a spin. It's all about finding catch phrases and spinning them out over and over and over again. It's the arena where brilliant statements like "wealth will trickle down" and "we'll put the money in a lock box" are born. It's the place where Pro-Lifers go to shove shit they know nothing about, down the throats of the public at large. It satisfies their morally superior thirst for grandiose. It gives Congressman, Todd Akin a platform for spewing "Magic Vagina Tales"! But I want Todd Akin to go sit down next to the 10 year old girl in Texas who is pregnant with her father's child, and explain to her why after only a decade on this planet, he wants her body to absorb the trauma of childbearing and the birth of her own father's baby. I want him to tell her why she HAS TO HAVE A BABY. I want him to visit with a boy who is caught in the middle of a vicious custody battle between his mother, who decided to keep him, and his father, a stranger, who raped his mother 6 years ago. Explain to that child and to his mother why family laws cover the rights of violent rapists and allow them access to these children in EVERY SINGLE STATE IN OUR NATION. 

I want someone to explain to me what in the Hell Todd Akin meant by "legitimate rape"??? I've heard it said that he was differentiating between actual rape and false claims of rape. Well, he wasn't asked about false claims. He was asked about abortions in instances of rape. I've heard people say that legitimate rape is the same as forcible rape (which as defined by the FBI, is anything but statutory. It includes intimidation and coercion - which accounts for more than half of all rapes). Unfortunately, a lot of people think that forcible rape is where a woman is beaten and physically forced. People tend to believe that if you're not viciously attacked in your home by a masked stranger and beaten nearly to death, that it's not actual rape. They blame victims for "putting themselves in a bad situation". In the not so distant past, many rapists weren't brought to trial on the basis that their victims weren't virgins. Because everyone knows that once a woman decides she wants to have sex with someone, her right to decide WHO-with, goes out the fucking window! Well I have news for you... I wasn't viciously attacked. I was coerced and threatened. And after it was over, I was tormented by the scum who did it as well as his friends, for months afterwards. I was followed, harassed, nearly run over, taunted, and threatened. I attempted suicide, twice. And then three years later I was assaulted AGAIN by a different man, but I was lucky and managed to persuade him to let me use the bathroom, and I was able to get away. So, Mr. Akin, were these legitimate attacks? Was I legitimately violated??? Were the 17 years of mental torment and desperation I suffered enough??? Would it have been better if I had been ovulating when I was raped so that I could have known the "blessing" of growing a seed of contempt and anguish? Would that have made it "legitimate"? 

As with most incidences of rape, neither of the perpetrators who violated me were ever charged and they have never done a moment of jail time for their crimes. I've done enough time for both of them I guess. And as far as sexual assault penalties go, 17 years is more time than they would have gotten if their sentences were combined anyway. 

One last thought and I'll retreat...
For weeks, good Christian folks came out of the woodwork to support the chicken chain whose head honcho hands money over to organizations that support the very men who are proponents of repugnant legislation that would allow rapists to sue their victims if they try to have an abortion and bills that would strip away a mother's right to live if her fetus were killing her. I saw nothing on Facebook for weeks except how Christian people were coming together to eat some chicken so that they could feel empowered in their struggle to preserve Biblical marriage (whatever the hell that means). But since Akin's comments on Sunday, not ONE chicken eater on my FB page has spoken out against Akin or his horrific comments. In fact, the only people who have mentioned it are myself, a fellow survivor of rape and a... GAY MAN!!! I find it absolutely fascinating that a homosexual whose rights the good chicken eaters try to supress, is the only other person who speaks out against Akin's remarks and exemplifies an ounce of compassion for women and victims of rape. That's very telling.

These last three days have shaken me and they've shaken my faith... in people that is. But I've gotta let it go. I can't fight you people. You Todd Akin's. I can't fight you all the time. I can't convince you and I can't change you. But I can move on from you. I can leave you behind me... Thank GOD.

Women AKA: Satan

Romney's recent pick of Vice Presidential candidate, Paul Ryan, inspired me to look into his choice for VP. I'm personally pretty liberal... But in terms of politics, I like the gov't outta my pocket so I'm often inclined to vote conservatively if the financial proposals make sense. After taking an in depth look at Ryan's budget and fiscal reform proposals, I have to admit that his "cuts" are pretty scary. But I will concede that something, ANYTHING has to be done before the whole system goes up in smoke. And while his plan isn't my ideal, in some ways it's better than the Democrat's "let's just spend until China calls USA home" plan. Unfortunately, while taking a look at Congressman Ryan's budget proposal, I also happened upon quite a bit of information about his plan for women...

I'd heard several times that Ryan voted against the Lily Ledbetter fair pay act (which gives women equal pay for doing the same job as men). But I try to take these "votes" with a grain of salt, because there are often other factors and proposals being considered in these bills. We're not always privy to the contents of these proposals - and so I try to reserve judgment for when I have more facts. I'm sorry to say, I have more facts. Aside from the FACT that Ryan's proposed cuts to SS, Medicare and Medicaid disproportionately affect women in this country; Congressman Ryan wants to ban abortions, even in cases of rape and incest. He voted FOR the Protect Life Act: It gives hospitals far reaching power to deny women abortion care without any exceptions for emergency situations such as cancer, heart attack, stroke, etc... Ryan proposed giving legal rights to fetuses starting at the moment of conception - ultimately outlawing abortion. He wants to de-fund Planned Parenthood and outlaw some forms of contraception.

I recognize that to people who wish to legislate morality, this seems more than fair. But let's start by looking at what de-funding Planned Parenthood would do. It would eliminate this country's largest provider of reproductive health services. (Of all of it's provisions, abortions account for only 3%. Contraception accounts for 35% of it's total services.) De-funding PPFA would eliminate health services to over 3 million people, 75% of which have incomes at or below 150% of the Federal poverty level. Ryan's proposal would eliminate services such as contraceptives, emergency contraceptives, screening for breast, cervical and testicular cancers; pregnancy testing; pregnancy options counseling; testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases; sex education; menopause treatments; vasectomies and tubal ligations. After cutting funding for health care access, let's make it even more difficult for women to pay for cancer screenings and treatment for reproductive related diseases (which is ultimately what we're talking about when we discuss the disproportionate effects of cuts to Medicare and Medicaid that would on average, create a $6k per person, out of pocket increase).

Ok... Let's recap: We've banned abortion; gotten rid of the nation's largest reproductive health services provider; outlawed certain forms of contraception; raised out-of-pocket medical costs for seniors and people on Medicaid (50% of whose recipients are in nursing homes); given rights to fetuses; and now we're going to cut food stamps by 18%. SO - when the people who turned to PPFA for contraceptive services get pregnant, we know they can't have an abortion and if they're poverty stricken, we'll cut their food stamp benefits and funding for medical services.

Before I'm accused of being a "Bleeding Heart Liberal" I'd like to clarify that I'm angry at the injustices in our social programs as well. I see abuses to our system every single day. These social programs need reform and tighter restrictions to help eliminate fraud. They need more case workers and updated technology for handling their case loads. However, these programs DO benefit people who are truly needy in our communities. They are our nation's way of saying we care about our fellow citizens who have fallen on hard times and need a helping hand. They're not an extension of goodwill that we can then Lord over the impoverished and elderly in an attempt to treat them like 3rd class citizens.

While I've focused a great deal of this post on Congressman Ryan, he himself is not my intended target. It is the ideal that he represents. We're all familiar enough with nature's design to understand that female homosapiens are the ones who become impregnated, incubate and give birth to our species. But after that, I'm unsure what some people believe we're responsible for. There has been no lack of controversy surrounding women's reproductive rights for decades. After being allowed to attend public universities, hold jobs and vote, we wanted the ability to decide whether or not to have children too - and apparently that stirred up quite the shit storm, because after 40 years, we're STILL debating this!! But from the social conservative, fundamentalist standpoint, I want to make certain that I have this right, so bare with me while I attempt to unfold my responsibilities as an American woman from girlhood to adulthood and punctuate it with attitude about males:
As a young girl, I am expected to exude femininity, to be lady like and dignified and quiet in church (which I attend regularly). If I play sports, I must play gender specific sports like softball and volleyball (because no boy will be attracted to a girl who is more athletic than he is). I am expected to dress in a way that lets you know I'm feminine without being overtly so. I am to make good grades, learn to keep house and cook, and have an innate desire to reproduce. I MUST guard my virginity at all costs and understand that a male's sexual advances are only an attempt to steer me away from my true calling as a virgin bride to my soul mate (and boys will be boys, and boys like sex, and it's their right to seek it from anyone anytime, because that's how they're designed - but if he manages to get vaginal or oral sex from a girl then he'll know that she's not virtuous enough to marry, and WHEW! thank God he found that out early!) I should never be in a situation or a form of dress that would lend me a victim to a sexual assault. Rape is a crime and it's terrible, but if you dress like a slut then you're asking for it, and there's nothing we can do about that. Humm-dee-dum. After escaping high school with my hymen in tact, I should attend a college or university and prepare for a career in my chosen field of interest. If I manage to make it through college without bumping into my soul mate, I'll need that degree to land a job to support myself until Mr. Right comes along  *insert girlish giggle here*. At which point I'll surrender all of my goals in order to become his blushing bride. I'll be so excited and nervous about this wonderful world of Biblically sanctioned sex we'll be having. Whether I like it or not is irrelevant. As my husband's new help mate and side (rib) kick, it's my job to give it up in any hole he chooses whenever the mood strikes him (and ha-ha-ha! we all know that the "mood" strikes a man a lot! *wink*) If we're blessed by God and I'm not equipped with any defects, we'll start a family soon. I wont need contraception, because preventing births is the same as killing fetuses *sniffle snort* I'll then surrender all of my childbearing years to having and raising as many children as the Lord sees fit to give us. And if I'm dedicated, I'll raise them up well, maintain my fitness (because no man wants to come home to a haggard, flabby Mrs.) keep a clean home, make a great meal and keep that man o' mine stimulated! (all while keeping my big fat trap shut, because no man wants to hear a bitch complain. SHEESH!!) Now, it will be essential that all of our girls be raised in the same fashion. They must be virtuous, feminine, goal oriented virgins, Hell bent on only giving it up to one man - their husbands. Our little boys will be nurtured in a way that gives them pride in their masculinity. They'll have goals and dreams, play sports and try to plug any vagina they can get close to. If they happen to fall into a few loose women, no biggie, there are virgin brides out there somewhere waiting to be Mrs. Help Mate. And they'll, say it with me... "Live Happily Ever After" 

If I live my life in just this fashion, it would eliminate any issues I might have with Congressman Ryan and the entire Religious Right's desires to catapult women back to 1955. 

There are so many things wrong with our government, the least of which is SS, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and Planned Parenthood. Our problem is lobbyists, special interests, corporate influence, the extremely wealthy (including these enormous corporations) continuing to receive tax cuts while our children, elderly and most impoverished Americans continue to take the spending cuts; bleeding dry the turnip that is the American worker all the while, forcing us into these budget cut programs. It's insane to give a corporate chain restaurant a tax break in order to lure them into a city (under the guise of job creation) and then tax the devil out of the private restaurant owner (who also employs people). THIS example is the road map to the heart of the problems we face as a nation.  Just like "redistribution of wealth" is bullshit, so is the "trickle down effect"! It doesn't exist. Rich people getting richer doesn't help people become less poor anymore than pumping money into the hands of people who have no desire to earn it, helps them to become productive citizens. But fixing these problems requires that we back away from judgments about people's personal lives and focus on the facts. And that is seldom a popular answer.

 And at the end of the day, what matters is our compassion and the love we have for our fellow citizens. My guess is, if God's really judging our nation, that's what he's looking at - and man are we doing a shitty job!

Are we literal yet?

• An example of one of the Biblical definitions of marriage - Deuteronomy 22:28-29 says that if you rape me and I'm engaged, then you get stoned (b/c obviously my man might still agree to marry me even though I'm ruint). BUT if I'm NOT engaged when you rape me then I have to marry you & you have to pay my daddy some money. Unless of course my daddy finds a different way to provide for me, then according to Exodus 22:16-17, I don't have to marry you. Whew!!! (so glad there's a loop hole there) 

  Holy jumping Jesus I'm glad all of our laws aren't Biblically based!! I don't think my own daddy would have sold me out, but if he couldn't afford to keep me then I might be married to a really short pilot right now - and raising his babies... Lets get literal y'all!!! Yeeehaw!

  I could do this all day, but the above scripture references were far and away my favorites. I like how there are some things (especially from the Old Testament) that we're supposed to look upon with great consideration given to the time period and context upon which it was written. Of course women today can make a living for themselves and don't need a husband to provide for them, so obviously it wouldn't be socially relevant or even necessary for women to marry their rapists.

  Then there are things we're supposed to take quite literally, like the very few passages remarking on homosexuality (a word that didn't even exist then). We're supposed to believe that loving relationships between two committed same-sex partners is the same as the forced sodomy committed against young boys that Paul was referencing in a majority of his scornful passages. (It's true, look it up!)

  Fundamentalists believe that the mass cultural (what they see as a breakdown) shift in our value system is due to the break up of the family, and maybe it is. But not for the reasons they think. Divorce and feminism they feel, have set us up for national failure. In Ephesians 5: 23-32 it says plainly that the husband is the head of the wife, and like the church submits to Christ, we ladies must respect and obey our husbands. And if more of us did that and left all the leadership stuff up to the men, then things would be juuuust fine, like they were in the 50's - when men could still beat their wives half to death and spent nary a night in jail for it. Back when things were good, silence about rape and incest were the best way to handle those sorts of things. Looking the other way when (some) men abused and tortured their wives and children is how we kept the status quo... But then women began to demand equal rights and look where that got us. We started earning degrees, working full time and supporting ourselves. The next thing you know, we're no longer listening to you, we're filing for divorce, and we're voting too!! And some simple minded, Biblical brained, short sighted barbarians, are still under the impression that where this country went wrong, began when women stopped submitting to their husbands. I counter that and suggest that where we went wrong was in asking women to lock-step behind some men who weren't worthy of being followed in the first place.

  I'd follow my own husband into Hell if he asked me to, simply because I know he'd have a damn good reason for asking it of me, and would only ask if he believed he could lead me safely through to the other side. I suppose it's all about who's reading what and what they're reading into things. But when I see: "As the church submits to Christ, so you wives must submit to your husbands in everything. And you husbands must love your wives with the same love Christ showed the Church. He gave up his life for her to make her whole and clean, washed by baptism and God's word. He did this to present her to himself as a glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish. Instead, she will be holy and without fault. in the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. For a man is actually loving himself when he loves his wife." I don't find that I am bound by God to follow any man's word as though it were God's, or that I am to obey what my husband commands because he holds a higher authority than I do. I read from Ephesians and I think, God made men strong, brave and filled with the desire to provide for and protect his own family. He gave them sound logic and the confidence to stack reason onto good judgment. God made women gentle, kind and filled with the desire to nurture her family. He made her loving and emotional and able to tend the needs of the heart. In this, I see that God created us as a balance for one another. Should we choose to marry, I am to set aside my emotions and trust my husband that he will lead us according to God's will. Likewise, he will set aside logic and listen to my heart, trust that my emotions are genuine, that I will protect his heart (their hearts are fragile, you know?) and he will love me for it, the same as he loves himself. And just as my husband trusts that I would go to the ends of the Earth for him, I trust that he will only ask of me what he believes in his soul, will keep me safe and coming home to him. And as sad as it is, not all men inspire that kind of trust. But they should... Because that's how God designed them. He might not have made women as strong as men on the outside, but he made us mightily brave on the inside. 

  So if when you look around you, you don't see people living up to what the Bible says, ask then "What makes them defy it?" Perhaps Christians aren't being "persecuted" after all. Maybe... Just maybe, they're not living up to God's design for them. And if they did, the changes we wished to see, would surely come.

  If we all partnered with trust, extending it and deserving of it, I can only imagine what good would come of it. So let's leave judgment to our God, and worry more about living up to our design. 

  
  

  
  

Who Put the "Gay" in Chick-fil-A?

As with all things swarming in the media, I have to comment on the recent anti-gay and Chick-fil-A controversy. First let me say that I love their chicken! I love their buns, pickles, waffle fries; I even love their chicken wraps! I have always had a pleasant, sometimes even bordering on delightful, experience at each restaurant I've visited in the last 20+ years. I would never accuse the company of not knowing how to run it's businesses.


 In today's fiery arena of public politics, it's easy to get caught up in the dramatics of choosing sides. Everyone wants to be right, and in an effort to be more right, we'll hear all manner of argument, including name-calling. My favorites are: bleeding heart liberal and right wing nut-job; neither of which accurately or fairly describes any point of view. 


You don't need me to rehash the details of the controversy. We all know that Chick-fil-A has come under fire by Gay/Lesbian equality activists and the media, for their stance on same-sex marriage. Quite honestly, things were running smoothly until Cathy, President of Chick-fil-A, decided to make his feelings on the subject of gay marriage, known in an interview with the Baptist Press. Now that we all know a bit more about this company, it's been hard, for me, to overlook a few things. Obviously, I firmly support all of my LGBT brothers and sisters in their fight for equal rights under the law. But I could care less about what the president of Chick-fil-A thinks about it. Where I take issue is with their WinShape Foundation that donates millions of dollars to organizations I'd rather set on fire than give money to. I have a problem with any company that uses it's profits to promote an agenda, especially if I've contributed to their bottom line. I'm not saying that because someone owns a business, that they're not still entitled to hold firmly to their beliefs and vote accordingly. What I am saying, is that when you own a multi-billion dollar corporation, it's wise to expect that people will not only disagree with your perspective but also take issue with you taking the money they, as consumers spend with you, and handing it over to classified "hate groups". 


We all have the right to decide what "family" means to us. The Cathy's have decided that only heterosexual people should be allowed to be part of a family - and if that makes them happy, then so be it... But I, as a long time Chick-fil-A patron, have a right to disagree and decide that I no longer wish to support The Marriage and Family Legacy Fund, The Family Research Counsel, The National Christian Foundation and least of all, Focus on the Family and Exodus International. At first glance, they simply appear to be Christian focus groups that promote a peaceful, Biblical agenda. But some of these groups are classified as hate groups and anti-gay organizations by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Unfortunately, some of these organizations are responsible for mass bullying of gays, especially gay children. And if having a gut churning dislike for that makes me a "bleeding heart liberal', then that's what I'll be. The "Day of Dialogue" was started by Focus on the Family to provide support for Christian students who wanted to voice to their peers that homosexuality was wrong. They believe that our schools are an appropriate place for heterosexual students to inform homosexual students that, according to God, the gays are going to HELL. 

If not now, then when would be a good time for me to let you (theoretical you) know that you're going to Hell for being a fat glutton who gossips too much? Can we set aside some time to chastise people with tattoos? Should we have students be on the look out for other kids who are wearing blended fabrics? Isn't school the perfect place for kids to go and be ridiculed and told they're going to burn in Hell???


Once again, let me say that my issue is not with the principles upon which Chick-fil-A was founded. I do NOT care that Mr. Cathy doesn't want gays to marry. I care about how he spends the money that I help to contribute to his company's profits. When possible, I like to make my purchases guilt free. I wouldn't do business with someone if I knew they beat their spouse or held KKK meetings. I want to do business with companies that understand that their values aren't necessarily representative of everyone else's, and thereby use their profits in an all-inclusive ministry, not an exclusive one. 

Love & Marriage, Sex & a Carriage

I'm overcome with gratitude for a man named Ross today. Ross was a friend to and of my parents when I was a young child. He attended parties at our home and came for several holiday meals. I met him when I was 3 and remember that he was tall, kind, smiling and in possession of a most impressive mustache. He was the first gay person I ever knew. And today I am overwhelmed with memories of Ross and feelings of love and admiration for my parents for never force feeding me dogma; as I understand it to be very bitter.

In an apparent newsworthy fashion, our current President, Barack Obama, announced that he supports gay marriage - making him our very first President to openly take that stance. The fact that it comes on the heels of North Carolina voters confirming by majority that they want to limit the Constitutional definition of marriage to that of a man and woman, makes his declaration, too wittle too wate. But nonetheless, it is a markedly historic  position for our nation's leader to take and so I will, as I have during the reign of his entire administration, take it in stride.


If I have never been blatantly clear about my stance on this issue, let me say now that I support gay marriage 100 percent. If I have never been clear about my stance as a Christian, let me say now also that I am 100 percent Christian. I am not religious. I am not Republican. I am not a Democrat and I am not sitting around with my thumb up my ass waiting for someone to tell me what to think. It took me years to syphon through the gads of information available on this topic. I haven't yet reached the bottom of the pile but I finally made it to a comfortable resting place, whew!!! For years I tried not to identify myself as a Christian because the modern day fundamentalists give it a backward, bigoted, backwoods feel and I'm not comfortable swallowing swamp water. But one day, on my own, right by myself, I talked to God and his son and he delivered me brand new. It has been with renewed faith and conviction that I can proudly say, I am a Christian because Jesus loves me and I finally learned to accept it. Not because I congregate or segregate, discriminate or any other "ate".


I am still learning from the Bible. I am still learning from Walt Whitman, who said to "...re-examine all you have been told... dismiss that which insults your soul." If there is anything I have learned from the Bible, it's that it's confusing, contradictory, bizarre and in many ways, beautiful. People do an awful lot of picking and pecking from it, deciding and deciphering what they like and will use; and so I decided that I could do the same. "Context and translation" are popular words people use when they want to cut their hair or tattoo themselves, drink alcohol or party until all hours of the night. But somehow scripture becomes finite when Paul says something about homosexual or deviant sexual acts. (Paul, is the ONLY one that ever utters a word about "homosexuality" - which by the way, has no Latin translation because Roman sexuality was only described as dominant or submissive.) Roman Imperials were well known in Biblical times to have sex with young boys who did NOT consent to the sodomy. Paul found it egregious and repulsive, which it was. There is no proof that Paul ever spoke or knew of a loving relationship between two people of the same sex, as being that of a deviant nature. Probably because homosexual relationships did not exist then, in the same context as they do now. People who look to scripture to tell them a myriad of things, do not often quote Jesus himself. When using the Bible to defend their positions regarding their dogma, they often overlook the fact that that was the one thing Jesus got really fired up and pissed off about. Jesus made it abundantly clear that loving our neighbors as ourselves, was THE commandment above all others! He even went so far as to call the Pharisees a bunch of hypocrites who were unjust, unmerciful and unfaithful! They shut the kingdom of God in men's faces - basically cutting off their own noses to spite themselves, because they weren't getting into heaven either! 


I just can't help but believe that if Jesus Christ himself didn't say a word, or utter a single peep about homosexuality, then it couldn't have been THAT big of a deal. And what with me being a Christian and all, I happen to think that what Jesus said, was the be all, end all...


In conclusion, I have to acknowledge that many people do in fact disagree with me and that's okay.  And for those that think our nation is going to Hell in a FedEx Overnight delivery pouch, I offer this as further proof that it is: In 1 Timothy 2:12 Paul clearly states that (KJV) "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority of the man, but to be in silence." And in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 says "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." But I guarantee you that everyone who  reads this has in fact been taught in school or even in their church by none other than a blasted woman!!! And therefore I see no way to restore this country to "...one nation, under Paul" errr.... I mean "God" until we get women out of our schools, stop them from teaching, put men in charge of Sunday & Bible School and shut down their wicked influence. They shouldn't be allowed to be CEO's or hold any type of authoratative position over a man in any capacity because by gum, Paul said so!! Now I'm sure a lot of people will start Google-snooping around to find reasons why Paul didn't mean what he said. They'll try to bamboozle you with words like "context" and "translation" but don't you let them. If Paul said it, (after all he mentioned homosexuality or deviant sex 7 whole times) then we know it must be concrete. If we're ever going to restore America, we have to shut the women's pie holes and force the gays to die alone. It's the only way... Right?

My Answer...

                                         
                                  (Valerie, my Dad & Me in 1998)


In the last few days I've tumbled over and over in my mind, a question I was asked by a woman I didn't know very well. I was having dinner with friends and their friends at a restaurant (where margaritas were present, hooray!) and somehow at the tail end of dinner I managed to blurt out that I'd never managed to complete my education or travel like I had wanted to because "I got knocked up right out of high school." You see, before I ever had any idea what I wanted to be or do, I knew that whatever it was, involved a lot of travel and adventure. I thought I would enjoy being a photographer for National Geographic or maybe even a fighter pilot.  I didn't have any particular knack for photography or knowledge of aviation, but a girl can dream. During the course of this conversation I decided to explain, like I always do, that I was married now and that my husband and I have been together since our daughter was three months old. I suppose after all the years I've spent explaining myself to people, in doing so it somehow makes me feel like less of a statistic and more like a "normal" person if I can help people to understand that I'm not a welfare dependent, single parent with multiple baby-daddies. I feel more comfortable if they know I've always tried not to be "that person". Although, not blurting out that I got knocked up when I was young, might be helpful in keeping my humble beginnings unknown, huh? So anyway, after hearing this, one of the ladies seated across from me asked how I raised my children or better yet, how I helped/guided them not to make the same mistakes that I did, or to follow in my footsteps?  It took me by surprise because up to that point I had NEVER been asked that question or one similar. It definitely gave me pause for thought and I wasn't at all offended. I felt as though she had a genuine interest in my answer and I didn't feel judged. But I was definitely surprised.


I was raised in a conservative household by educated parents who instilled in all their children, an understanding that we should have great aspirations and follow them through with higher education. It was not a typical road map for disaster that led me to have a child out of wedlock at the age of 19 without the biological father present in mine or the child's life. It was my stubborn will and the forces of nature, combined with the guiding hand of my benevolent God who knew what was best for me, that led me to have my daughter, Valerie. I have never considered raising either of my children differently from anyone else in an effort to keep them from duplicating my journey. And I guess that's mainly because I've never considered it a mistake or a black mark against my morality. I do have a desire for people to see me as their equal and so I feel compelled to "explain" myself and my current circumstances as a way of lessening any judgement people may first pass on me at their discovery of my family dynamic. That's my issue, not theirs. But in general, I feel I raise my children the same as everyone else. I try to be very very honest with them. If they ask a question, they get a truthful (albeit age appropriate) answer. I know that a vast majority of people consider sex before marriage, and certainly children before marriage, to be morally objectionable. Our society, and most others for that matter, has historically benefited from the family unit and it's ability to provide a majority of the social and economic substance necessary to stabilize their nation. Personally, I just happen to believe that how a family comes to be and who the family is made up of,  is not nearly as important as how much love there is between the family members.


And so my official answer is this: I raise my children to be good people. I raise them to love as much as possible, to forgive without question, to hope for great things, to love God, their country, their family and friends. And most of all, I raise my children to face the consequences of their actions head on. To never be ashamed of who they are and to know that they are loved without end, beyond measure and that they can and will survive whatever this life throws at them. Others may see my life with my daughter as a moral question to be answered... I see my life with my family as the only possible way for me to have ever achieved true happiness and satisfaction. If I am nothing else to my children, I hope that I am an example to them that no life and no person is perfect. They will make mistakes, they will have great successes. But come what may, I hope that they see in me, what happens when you take responsibility for your life choices, learn from them and get on with being who you're meant to be.