Tuesday, July 15, 2008
My Blood is Better Than Yours
Yesterday I donated blood, a pint of that good ol' red stuff to help save some lives. One thing that has always bugged me about donating blood is the pre-screening questions that are in place to disqualify people from donating because their blood is unhealthy to be recieved, or potentially unhealthy to be recieved.Although it makes sense that you would not want to take blood from a person who has West Nile Virus, the fact that sexually active gay men cannot donate is completely asinine. Not only are gay men not allowed to donate but women who have had sex with a man who had sex with a man are not allowed to donate. The only reason they prevent this class of people from donating is because the high risk of AIDS. They test all blood for AIDS anyway! Why can't the dude just say yes I am gay but I do not have AIDS, simple enough! They asked me, a straight guy, if I had AIDS, I said no, and they took my word for it, apparently gay men are liars? I think it is time the federal government stops supporting myths like AIDS is a gay man's disease, and start focusing on reality.
Normally I would simply avoid the offending organization, sort of like the boycott on the San Diego Manchester Hyatt, but not giving blood means that some poor sap who needs it wont get it, that does not really feel like justice. So that is why I continue to donate, but there has got to be something that we can do to let the government know that their policies are antiquated and myth based! ¶ 2:41 PM - 3 Comments - Links to this post
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Why I am NOT a Democrat (Well, one reason)
As I say in my FAQ section of the webpage, I currently do not identify as a Democrat. I am liberal and I do usually vote Democrat and I will be voting for Obama. With a recent congressional vote it has become LEGAL for government agencies to wiretap phone calls without a warrant. President Bush has been a long time supporter of this bill because it empowers the government to help fight terrorism. This new law helps strengthen our efforts against Al Qaeda because we can monitor their communications, and as Missouri Senator Christopher Bond puts it, you should not be afraid of this law "unless you have Al Qaeda on your speed dial."Fuck that. I more of a believer of: "Those who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Our right to privacy has been a cornerstone of our constituion and of democracy. I do not mean United States Democracy, I mean democracy, as in that thing we are trying spread across the world, whether they want it or not. From the looks of it, the United States does not want democracy just as much as Iran or Iraq do not. Actually, that is not a fair claim because, "We the People" want democracy, we love democracy, too bad democracy makes things balls hard for ruling the world. By the way, the quotation from above was not some random thing I found, it was first spoken by Benjamin Franklin, ya know that guy who is on the $100 bill because he was like our founding father who helped create America. Way to go Bush for completely trashing his dream.
But in all fairness, I cannot solely blame Bush. I actually should not blame him at all since he has no legislative powers, especially since we have a House and Senate being run by Democrats. That's right folks, Democrats gave Bush this power of warantless wiretapping on a silver platter. That is mest up. It came with much disappointment when I saw Obama was one of the cowards who voted yes.
Not only did Obama and most other Democrats agree to this new law but they also agreed to something called RETROACTIVE IMMUNITY. Basically, Bush, with the help of Verizon and AT&T, had been wiretapping people's phone calls for years now with out any law to give them this power. So, what they were doing was illegal. With retroactive immunity this law basically says "Whatever" to any wrong doings. Imagine giving retroactive immunity to a serial murderer, that would be nuts to say hey, you killed some people, but whatever dude, we're cool.
The bigger picture here is that, retroactive immunity is legitimizing Bush's crimes against our very own constitution and the Democrats are doing it for him! I do not have Al Qaeda on my speed dial but as Ben said, I do not think the trade off is worth it, and if you do, well then you do not deserve the protections that a legitimate government would normally provide.
Now, our only hope is the ACLU who have already filed a lawsuit. I have always loved them :)
Sources:
New York Times
American Civil Liberties Union
Labels: Bush, law, Obama, politics
¶ 12:52 PM - 2 Comments - Links to this post
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Cell Phone Ban while Driving - Day One
With today's end marks the first day of the ban on driving while holding a cell phone, hands free are OK! Here are my thoughts: I do not think the problem with cell phones in car is the act of holding the phone but the actual conversation. Drivers begin to focus on the conversation and the driving becomes the secondary action, thus, going hands free will just give a false sense of security.Many people do not have hands free though, thus, this law will prevent some people from talking at all. I have hands free, do not usually use it, but I do not usually talk in the car anyway.
One good thing about the law is that it prevents stupid people from diving one handed. I absolutely hate being in a parking lot, stopped, waiting for a huge fucking SUV to back out, going as slow as a snail, only to see some douche bag trying to one hand his/her boat in reverse, making sure not to hit any cars or people. PUT DOWN THE PHONE! Oh, so stressful, my heart is racing just listening to this.
If you do currently own a hands free and would like to, I recommend the Jawbone. The Jawbone has no blue light (main catch) but also has noise cancellation, and some other goodies. I wont link to it because hopefully Kontera ads will auto link Jawbone Bluetooth Headset directly for you :) otherwise try jawbone.com ¶ 11:08 PM - 1 Comments - Links to this post
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Bang Bang!
Just recently the United States Supreme Court found a Washington DC law which banned the ownership of handguns, to be unconstitutional. The courts 5-4 decision claims that the right to own a gun is protected under the second amendment, even if the ownership of the gun is unrelated to being in a militia.I am pretty upset by this ruling, the right to own guns came because our founding fathers felt it necessary to protect the state from the British attacks from Canada during our infancy. Now that we have the worlds strongest military we really do not have that fear. I think it is time for the United States to move forward and realize that we do not need guns.
As the Cliche goes "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" but what guns do is kill people easily and efficiently and as guns get smaller, quieter, and more powerful, they will kill people even more easily.
And what do we really need guns for? Don't say hunting, people can hunt with bow and arrows just fine :)
Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7474924.stm
Labels: law, politics, violence, weapons
¶ 11:28 AM - 1 Comments - Links to this post