Inconvenient Facts
For those of you who do not follow Mousewax, the fellow in the red scarf is Jesus.
Merry Christmas!
It would seem the AFA is getting a lump of coal for Christmas.
A day after the Ford Motor Co. reversed its decision to halt some ad campaigns in gay magazines, the anti-gay American Family Association lashed back at the auto giant, threatening a new boycott and claiming that Ford reneged on an agreement.
The AFA's statement was a response to Ford's announcement Wednesday reaffirming its support of the LGBT community. Going beyond its past advertising campaigns, Ford on Wednesday said that its ads in LGBT-oriented publications would encompass all eight Ford brands, including Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Mazda and Aston Martin. Previously, only Jaguar, Land Rover and Volvo ads appeared in gay publications.
Justin Nelson, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, suggested that any agreement with AFA probably didn't come from the top.
"If there was an agreement, it was probably done in haste. And given the Ford chairman's verbal recommitment to the LGBT community, that agreement may have been reached by a lower level of executives. It's a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing."1 (edited for clarity)
Of course, the AFA is all in a snit now and threatening a boycott again, which is, for me, a very nice Christmas present.
Wisdom from an unexpected source
My girls put on the John Denver and the Muppets Christmas album the other day. The lyrics of one song I've heard dozens of times over the years, really stood out to me this time.
I don't know if you believe in Christmas,
or if you have presents underneath a Christmas tree.
But if you believe in love, that will be more than enough
for you to come and celebrate with me.
Indeed. Whatever you are celebrating this time of year, be it the birth of Christ, the miracle of light in the recovered temple, or the qualities of character and culture that define you it doesn't seem like it should be that hard that we all share in each other's joy.
I'm a New York Jew; a life long Democrat and a card carrying member of the ACLU. ... I could never celebrate Christmas as a secular holiday. Why? It is the symbolic observation of Christ's birthday no matter how you look at it. But selfishly I want you to celebrate it so that I can see the trees, lights, decorations and even go to some Christmas parties. That's right; Christmas parties at peoples homes. Every other year my friends make an Italian feast in their Tudor house in Forest Hills Gardens, a picture perfect Ives & Currier Christmas community. It's wonderful, but I will never have a Christmas dinner in my apartment. 1
Nor should she feel like she has to. I would hope that her Christian friends would be euqally as gracious about invitiations to a Hanukkah or Kwanzaa celebration. Somehow I think the man who turned water into wine, who often sat at meat with with "out" crowd would have been.
Fix Or Repair Daily
Anyone remember that? How about "Found On Road Dead"? It would seem that I have overestimated the intelligence in the board room of Ford. From AMERICAblog:
Ford Motor Co.'s decision to cease advertising in gay publications for its Jaguar and Land Rover luxury brands is part of a truce between the auto maker and the American Family Assn. (AFA) Ford has agreed not to sponsor any future gay and lesbian events." - Wards Auto, 12/7/05
"When asked if the advertising was being discontinued because of the threatened AFA boycott, [Ford Spokesman Mike] Moran said, 'Ceasing advertising is an outgrowth of those meetings.'" - Metro Weekly, 12/8/05
"They are acting on our concerns." - AFA Chairman Donald Wildman, NYT, 12/5/06 1
You've got to be kidding me. Ford is really spooked by these guys? Would you believe Dan Savage, my favorite gay columnist, has something to say on the subject? Priceless as usual.
And while you've got 'em on the phone, ask them what Ford is so afraid of. The AFA's boycott of Disney was called off after nine years because it wasn't working. When the AFA threatened Kraft, the execs at Kraft told the haters from the AFA to go fuck themselves. But what did Ford do when the AFA threatened them? The "Built Ford Tough" boys collapsed into a puddle. "Ford Puff" needs to hear from people who won't buy cars from companies that cave in to right-wing hatemongers. 2
I'd love to see some demographics. How many people really answer the AFAs call to boycott? Apparently not very many or they might have had a successful campaign before now. It seems plausible to me that there are a great many more people who will refuse to buy cars from Ford, Mazda, Jaguar, Land Rover or Volvo because they pander to hatemongers. Does that therefore imply that Ford's customer base is comprised largely of right wing, fascist bigots? And I'm supposed to feel bad that Ford is struggling financially why? Does Ford really think wingnuts buying Chevy because Ford is too friendly to them thar perverted faggots is going to push them over the financial brink? Geeze. Good riddance. And don't let the door hit you on the way out, dearie.
The AFA and their ilk make me apopleptic. I found this tid bit on their AFA Journal web site.
Therein lies the rub. We aren't willing to accept their gods, and this unwillingness begets hatred. Now, no one is forced to accept the belief that one can be saved only through faith in Christ, but that is irrelevant. The mere fact that Christians believe it brings hostility. They want to control our belief, to force their belief on us. Our belief that all religions are not equal causes their anger level to go off the charts.3
OK. Can we get this straight once and for all? I don't give a flying f*** what you believe. You can worship leprechauns for all I care. What begets "hatred" is your constant meddling in the lives of other people. I want to force my beliefs on you? Am I the one making financial threats to anyone who doesn't believe like I do? Am I agitating for laws to be passed that force people to live according to my beliefs? No. I just want to be left alone to live as I see fit and I absolutely resent your pompous, self-righteous attempts to force everyone around to you live by your standards. And for the love of God, drop the martyr act.
While you're at it, you can stop blaming Jesus for your bigotry. When the woman taken in adultery was brought to Jesus, did he start throwing stones? No. Did he organize a boycott of anyone unwilling to throw stones? No. "Neither do I condemn thee. Go they way and sin no more."4 Get it right, assholes. It's "What would Jesus do?" not "What would I do if I were Jesus?"
2Savage, Dan, "Savage Love," December 13th, 2005, Villiage Voice, villiagevoice.com
3Wildmon, Don, "Why their hate will never end," November/December 2005, American Family Association Journal afajournal.org
4John 8:11, Holy Bible, King James version
Saving Face
Ford Motor company is embroiled in controversy at the moment. Ford is being accused of caving to pressure from wingnuts at the AFA by pulling Land Rover and Jaguar advertising from gay and lesbian media. Ford claims it was strictly a business decision. Indeed, Volvo will continue to advertise in gay media.1 Cynics have said, "We have only Ford's word that it was the ineffectiveness of those ads that led to their becoming a sop to the fundies."2 Honestly, it sounds to me like typical AFA delusions of grandeur. Just like when they claimed Disney had backed off on its gay-friendly company policies in response to their boycott of Disney theme parks.3 Uh-huh. Sure they did.
Ford has a pretty good track record on gay and lesbian issues. It seems odd to me that they would do an about face in this one case. The AFA is threatening boycotts all the time. I am not aware of a single one that has made any significant difference in sales. Most companies, including Disney, Kraft, Proctor and Gamble and Wells Fargo, have either simply ignored the blathering from the AFA or told them to go ... soak their heads.
Ford's sin may be that they hoped a business based decision would also grease the squeaky wheel. Not sure they deserved to be vilified as institutionalizing homophobia, but they could at least take a page from the conservative handbook and "avoid the appearance of evil."4 Ford remains silent on their discussions with the AFA. I guess we'll never know if it was business or the AFA that led to the withdrawal of the ads in question. One should keep an eye on Ford to see if its contributions to GLBT causes changes. If not, it seems to me the AFA is easily bought off. So much for their vaunted principles.
HAT TIP:Greg Prince
2Nobles, Joseph, "Ford's Institutionalized Homophobia," Inner Cog
3 Me, "Tempest in a Teapot," s007767.com
4Holy Bible, King James version, 1 Thessalonians 5:22
Podiatry Marksmanship Award
Sony has been in the news recently thanks to their deceptive practices when installing XCP, a technology that prevents users from making more than a specified number of copies of a CD tagged with the software. The main issue is the software was installed without the knowledge or permission of computer owners and then took steps to cloak its installation from all but the most savvy of computer engineers. Secondary, but equally grievous, was the security gaps the software created allowing malicious software to install itself and employ the same cloaking technologies used by XCP.
Well, they've done it again. MediaMax Version 5, unrelated to XCP, is at least not installed on the sly, but has also been found to create security risks on the user's computer.1 Sony is urging owners—excuse me, licensees—of the relevant CDs to download the patch. Way to go, dipwads. If Microsoft didn't do such a good job on its own of creating security holes, I'd make some comment about companies dorking with the operating system being held to strict integrity requirements.
Why is it so hard for software companies to grasp the concept that the only people screwed by anti-piracy measures are legitimate owners—sorry, licensees? Pirates will just hack a way around any measure put into place. I'm sure there are cracks and hacks out there already to get around MediaMax's limitation on disc copying. Besides, I only have to rip the CD once. From then I can just copy the copy. In case you haven't noticed, Sony, digital is not like analog. You don't take a quality hit making a copy of a copy.
The solution to the problem is easy. Don't buy music from Sony BMG. As much as it pains me to do so, I'm cancelling my 6 year membership in the Sony BMG music club. Sony and the RIAA will, I'm sure, continue to blame lagging sales on piracy and completely ignore the effects of their draconian policies.
Discretion is the better part of valor
It seems that a lesbian couple is suing a private practice for refusing to artificially inseminate one of the couple on religious grounds. 1 The professed objection of doctors Brody and Fenton is the woman was unmarried and should not, therefore, be having children. The doctors have won their appeal, the reason being it is not illegal to discriminate based on marital status. The plaintiff alleges the discrimination was based on their sexual orientation.
Something about this whole scenario bothers me. First off, we have here an example of why gays want marriage and nothing less. As long as they are unable to legally wed, there is a loop hole for anyone wishing to deny services where marriage is a viable screen for their bias against homosexuals. Only a damn fool would believe these doctors have no issues with homosexuality and their objection is solely on the grounds of the couple's marital status. Proving that is another matter, though it should be easy enough to subpoena the office records to see if any unwed woman has been treated in that office. If one is found, the lesbians would have a case. If not, the lesbians are pretty much out in the weeds.
At the same time, it seems equally foolish to be trying to prosecute these doctors. It's not like the doctors were denying the lesbians critical life saving procedures. I can see how it is a good idea for doctors to be criminally liable when a life is on the line, but artificial insemination is, by definition, an elective procedure. Nor was the clinic the only clinic available where treatment could be obtained. We are talking about San Diego for crying out loud. In fact, the couple did have the procedure done at a different clinic and now have three year old son.
The question is not whether or not are the doctors views acceptable. That is entirely a matter of opinion. The question is do we really want to be in the business of defining what private citizens are allowed or forbidden to do or think in their professional lives? How is this materially different from the Boy Scouts? It was decided that the Boy Scouts, a private organization, have the right to be selective (or discriminatory, depending on who you talk to) about their membership. It seems to me a private medical practice has the same right. Doctors at a county hosptial would obviously be held to different standard.
Doctors Brody and Fenton may be backward and old-fashioned in their thinking, but last time I checked Americans are allowed to be backward and old-fashioned. If you don't like the views of a group or individual, no one is forcing you to associate or do business with them. Nor do I understand what the lesbians are after, other than trying to prove a point. Would you want a doctor performing a medical procedure on you who was being forced to do so against their will? Not me. Even if the lesbians eventually win their case, would they choose to use the services of that clinic should they decide to have a second child? Not likely.
Happy Kwanukkahmas
Here we go again. 'Tis the season to piss and moan about being oppressed by Christians and to whine and complain that one don't get no respect. Bill O'Reilly's rant about the "war on Christmas" is by now as famous as it is stupid. I just don't get this attitude, especially at this time of year. War? At Christmas? Whatever happened to peace on earth, goodwill toward men?
Do I get upset if someone of Jewish persuasion wishes me Happy Hanukkah? No. Why would I? They are expressing a wish of good cheer, good health and good life in terms that are familiar to them. If I would have chosen different terms, what does it matter? Can I not appreciate the sentiment regardless of the words used to express it? Really, people, buy your underwear a size larger next time.
Last night two members of the local Mormon congregation showed up at my door and invited me to a holiday breakfast party at their church on Saturday. Am I interested in going? No. Did I chew them out and tell them to get the hell off my porch and to not bother me with their religious tripe? Of course not. Their intentions are good and their well wishing sincere. Now if they were trying to pass a city ordinance that would require me to attend their holiday breakfast, that would tick me off.
I seriously doubt many Christians are really up in arms about "Happy Holidays" or "Seasons Greetings" banners in stores. Frankly, the commercialization of the season has nothing to do with the original spirit of Christmas. It seems to me entirely appropriate that stores avoid using Christmas and thus keep the commercial separate from the spiritual. However, according to O'Reilly:
Every company in America should be on its knees thanking Jesus for being born. Without Christmas, most American businesses would be far less profitable; more than enough reason for businesses to be screaming Merry Christmas.1
Yeah. That's why Christ was born. His ministry, life and death was to improve the bottom line of Macy and Gimble's. Christians who get their knickers in a twist about department stores being too secular have completely missed the point of their own celebration.
The only thing I have issues with is X-mas. If you really have your panties in such a wad that you can't say or write Christ, then just say Season's Greetings or Happy Holidays. X-mas just strikes me as rude, inconsiderate and unnecessary.
I love this little gem found in the comments over at Balloon Juice.
This is a message from Brother Scalpel of the Ineffable Argument. I represent the Unitarian Jihad.
As God is our witness (or, at least, the witness of the 20% of us who accede to believing in a personal deity, although Sister Solitude of the Personal Solipsist asks that the minutes reflect her belief that none of the other votes count, as she alone exists. She remains silent on whether there is a personal deity)...we have acted as we (or others, acting on our behalf, as 80% of committee suggests) have in order to protect our brothers in arms (aware, as we are of the sexist connotations of the terms 'brothers', to which 36.27% of the committee, with a 95% error bar of 6.7%, object) by delightening the oppressive people of colored lights.2
HAT TIP: Greg Prince
2"demimondian", blog comment, December 1, 2005, balloon-juice.com