Monthly Archives: February 2007

The alternate reality of Iraq

I’m sick and tired of the portrayal of our servicemen and women as being some sort of barbaric, blood-thirsty thugs. I’m sick and tired of the portrait being painted of the Iraq mission as being an invasion, occupation, a war for oil, etc., etc.

I’m not simple enough to think I can do much, but I can do a little. I plan on scouring the internet to find stories and photos of positive changes we’re making in the world. I’m fully aware that these won’t be published by the Main Stream Media (not even by Fox News, which I am very disappointed about). I vow to find ’em and post ’em.

If you or someone you know wishes to submit such photos or commentary, please give me a shout at breakingpointwp@yahoo.com

This photo is dated Wednesday, February 14, 2007.

Greetings

The caption reads:

A US soldier from the 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment of the Second Infantry Division greets a child in the Shaab neighborhood of Baghdad, Iraq Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2007 during a house-to-house search.

Who is showing the American people this images? No one! Why? There are a thousand different reasons.

I’m proud of these men and women. They deserve better than they’ve gotten from us.

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under In the news, Media, Politicians, War and Peace

Can’t have kids? Your marriage is voided.

Heard this about an initiative (Initiative 957) being pursued by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance organization?

Initiative 957

If passed by Washington voters, the Defense of Marriage Initiative would:

  • add the phrase, “who are capable of having children with one another” to the legal definition of marriage;
  • require that couples married in Washington file proof of procreation within three years of the date of marriage or have their marriage automatically annulled;
  • require that couples married out of state file proof of procreation within three years of the date of marriage or have their marriage classed as “unrecognized;”
  • establish a process for filing proof of procreation; and
  • make it a criminal act for people in an unrecognized marriage to receive marriage benefits.

The story is here. The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance website is here.

The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance’s website states:

What we are about

The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance seeks to defend equal marriage in this state by challenging the Washington Supreme Court’s ruling on Andersen v. King County. This decision, given in July 2006, declared that a “legitimate state interest” allows the Legislature to limit marriage to those couples able to have and raise children together. Because of this “legitimate state interest,” it is permissible to bar same-sex couples from legal marriage.

The way we are challenging Andersen is unusual: using the initiative, we are working to put the Court’s ruling into law. We will do this through three initiatives. The first would make procreation a requirement for legal marriage. The second would prohibit divorce or legal separation when there are children. The third would make the act of having a child together the legal equivalent of a marriage ceremony.

Absurd? Very. But there is a rational basis for this absurdity. By floating the initiatives, we hope to prompt discussion about the many misguided assumptions which make up the Andersen ruling. By getting the initiatives passed, we hope the Supreme Court will strike them down as unconstitutional and thus weaken Andersen itself. And at the very least, it should be good fun to see the social conservatives who have long screamed that marriage exists for the sole purpose of procreation be forced to choke on their own rhetoric.

Further:

The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance (WA-DOMA) announced on Thursday that their proposed initiative to make procreation a requirement for legal marriage has been accepted by the Secretary of State and assigned the serial number 957. The initiative has been in the planning stages since the Washington Supreme Court ruled last July that the state’s Defense of Marriage Act was constitutional.

“For many years, social conservatives have claimed that marriage exists solely for the purpose of procreation,” said WA-DOMA organizer Gregory Gadow in a printed statement. “The Washington Supreme Court echoed that claim in their lead ruling on Andersen v. King County. The time has come for these conservatives to be dosed with their own medicine. If same-sex couples should be barred from marriage because they can not have children together, it follows that all couples who can not or will not have children together should equally be barred from marriage. And this is what the Defense of Marriage Initiative will do.”

Mr. Gadow also stated, “Our agenda is to shine a very bright light on the injustice and prejudice that underlie the Andersen decision by giving that decision the full force of law.

And there’s more!

This initiative is the first of three that WA-DOMA has planned for upcoming years. The other two would prohibit divorce or separation when a married couple has children together, and make having a child together the equivalent of marriage.

Enough is enough! These strong-arm tactics need to be responded to with equal force. At what point will we rise up and refuse to allow the further destruction of the building blocks of our society? While there is always room for discussion and debate that doesn’t mean that anything and everything goes.

Please, don’t start rattling the homophobe and prejudice sabres at me. I am neither one of those things. I am, however, firmly convinced that the erosion of our basic traditions and values are leading us down the same path that Rome took…and we all know what happened to them.

Leave a comment

Filed under Duct tape zone, In the news, Issues, Left and Right, Marriage

Anna Nicole Smith – Dead at 39

Anna Nicole Smith died today.  She was found unresponsive in her hotel room in Florida and could not be revived.  She was pronounced dead at the hospital a short time later.  At this point, no cause of death is known.

Anna Nicole Smith

Anna Nicole Smith was born Vicki Lynn Hogan in Texas in 1967.  Most Americans know something about the ups and downs of her life.

See her biography on Wikipedia, here.
Anna Nicole

I would bet that Anna Nicole would still be alive today had she remained Vicki Lynn Morgan.  The life she lead – as a stripper, Playboy Playmate, celebrity – certainly didn’t do much to enhance her life.

She was mocked along the way, for being overweight, for being ditzy, for being druggy.  There seemed to be few who helped her and many who took advantage of her.

The loss of her son, Daniel,  likely still haunted her.

She was a lost soul, aimlessly adrift, who never found the anchor she needed in life.

She may also be a cautionary tale to Britney, Lindsay, Paris, Nicole and Kate.  Life is fragile.  You cannot continue to abuse it or it will leave you.

Anna Nicole left a 5 month old daughter.  If drugs or alcohol played any part in her death (and that is just speculation on my part, but given her history, not without merit), it illustrates even more the damage that an ungrounded life can do.  If the constant up and down of her weight – or the remedies she used to lose weight and keep it off played some part, it brings home again the deadly nature of our obsession with physical appearance.

A lot of people knew Anna Nicole was in trouble – her erratic behavior was well documented.  Who was looking out for her — her best interest?  Who was hanging on for their own self-interest?

Poor soul.  Perhaps she can rest now.  God Bless her daughter.

1 Comment

Filed under Entertainment, In the news