Scratch Utah off the list of states to move to (if you haven't already): The Utah senate passed a bill that prohibits sex ed teachers from discussing homosexuality, sex before marriage and contraceptives, even if prompted by students.
I read this story this morning while I was sitting bored in a meeting. I barely managed to fight the urge of hauling my phone against the wall.
The upside is that the bill is so ludicrously unconstitutional that, even if it actually passes, all it would take is one case to head to the supreme court to have it struck down.
What's particularly disgusting is that the woman who introduced the bill said it was about "freedom". Freedom to what, exactly? Freedom for a boss to snoop into the sexual lives of female employees? Her website is equally appalling.
Freedom for religious organizations to enforce their beliefs. I really, honestly can't think of a better way to phrase that, that would put them in a better light.
Freedom for a religious organization to not be forced to support ideas they don't agree with?
The problem is that it is not really freedom from anything. It is simply freedom for religious organizations to force employees to play by their moral code. They just want to make themselves feel better by thinking they were oppressed by the big, bad government.
As I've always advocated (even as a small child), religious organizations should be treated no differently than secular organizations at all levels. Non-profit church? Non-profit corporation! For-profit church? Scientology!
There should literally be no legal distinction between a religious organization and any other sort of organization, nor any exemption from any law for religious reasons.
There should literally be no legal distinction between a religious organization and any other sort of organization, nor any exemption from any law for religious reasons.
That sounds great. Good luck with your endeavor to amend our national Constitution.
As I've always advocated (even as a small child), religious organizations should be treated no differently than secular organizations at all levels. Non-profit church? Non-profit corporation! For-profit church? Scientology!
There should literally be no legal distinction between a religious organization and any other sort of organization, nor any exemption from any law for religious reasons.
Makes sense to me as well. I don't know offhand what extra benefits a non-profit church gets over any other non-profit organization, but I don't see why they would need it if they were legitimately non-profit.
I'm pretty certain the country will still exist, but will no longer be considered a super power, except in the way that Russia is considered a super power.
It does depend on how conservative politicians continue to appeal to their base, though. If they lose by a landslide, they will be forced to consider what it will take to stay in power. That might mean ditching some of the rhetoric.
Realistically, though, I think we're seeing a slow decline and we'll probably be seeing a rising rat meat futures market.
How many people believe this country will even exist in ten years, given our current rate of self-destructive decline?
Oh pshaw. Things are getting better every day. The rhetoric of the right is an increasingly loud and slowly climaxing death rattle.
Time wins the battle for progress. It just seems so much slower, so much more impossible, due to our ability to watch it unfold in real time, to see the sweep of history before us. We're impatient because we know what's right, but the momentum of society weighs far more heavily than the velocity of our conviction.
Things get better every day. Conservatism has never, can not ever, win more than but temporary gains. The very nature of the position slips further from the reality of the world with every second that men live and think.
It may be a sin wave in the short term, but the progress of man is on the scale of the ages an inexorable progress upward.
If the right were truly winning, if we were truly at the chasm of apocalypse, would gay marriage be proceeding as quickly (relative to the civil rights battles of the past)? Would the silent majority have shied from the rhetoric of the right on birth control these recent days? Would Republican primary turnout numbers be as low as they are if this were truly a renaissance of the movement?
We'll win. We always win. The weapon is simply time. Don't confuse our impatience with a real danger of defeat.
I'm pretty certain the country will still exist, but will no longer be considered a super power, except in the way that Russia is considered a super power.
The United States will easily be a "superpower" for likely the rest of all of our lifetimes here. There's no real evidence of any challenge to that status.
The only evidence I'd be able to offer is supposition, really. The facts that I've seen show that our economy is still going to be strong and our military will remain strong.
Although, I found that my most recent hobbies have been slowly gearing me up to life in the world of Fallout, so I'll hopefully be covered.
I think it's kind of cool how the political system itself is becoming (or already is/was?) a circus itself. Like in reference to the "bread and circuses" thing. Our political system is a distraction from actual governance.
Past experience does not dictate future experience BOOYAH!
Well, y'know. A relative "booyah."
The complicating factor I find is that we have the Internet today. Ubiquitous access to vast swaths of information sufficient that people can selectively pull information of their choosing and build little intellectual fortresses.
I could foresee a regression to the intellectual equivalent of walled cities.
I have no idea where it will actually lead, though. This is just speculation on my part.
I have no idea where it will actually lead, though. This is just speculation on my part.
Economic ephemeralization.
Is a bullshit concept that ignores that people still have to create content, and that content creation is on a fast rise to meet demand. Look at Emily's job, and Rym's job, and Scott's job, and the $1.4 billion generated last year by the iTunes store, or the $102 million the Android Market raked in FY2010. This doesn't touch all the apps, songs, ringtones, and games sold by Blackberry, Verizon, and other providers, not to mention other digital distribution channels such as Steam. Ephemeralization is a fuddy-duddy concept used to lament the loss of manufacturing.
Yeah, I'm talking about the gradual isolation of subcultures based on a sort of "ignorance of the over-informed." Maybe even some regression to the equivalent of tribalism. That doesn't preclude production or even manufacturing. Hell, if people actually go all the way back to geographical isolation, we'd probably see a net increase in manufacturing as people turn to DIY initiatives. There are already an increasing number of people looking into growing their own food.
Hell, if people actually go all the way back to geographical isolation, we'd probably see a net increase in manufacturing as people turn to DIY initiatives. There are already an increasing number of people looking into growing their own food.
Source?
There have been booms and busts and home-agriculture for a hundred years in the US. I highly doubt there's a current new movement that's bigger than the Victory Garden era.
The Victory Garden movement was implemented during an era where people were less removed from agricultural production. That is not the world we have right now. Food production has undergone absolutely radical changes in the past 100 years, drifting from a local production model, to a centralized farming model, now drifting back to a local production model with a reduction in chemical processing.
Here's an article about recent changes in food purchasing habits among Americans:
The gist is that there has been real growth in the preferential purchase of "locally-grown" and "natural" products - a preference towards things which are made close to home.
This is a conscious shift away from the modernized agricultural practices of the last 60 years. Coupled with this is an increasing number of resources available to people who wish to grow their own food.
I'm making a projection, yes. This projection is based on a shift in food purchasing patterns over the past several years. My entire point is that there is a growing shift towards community-focused agriculture rather than national-level agriculture.
It's a great setup for the building of truly isolated communities.
Is a bullshit concept that ignores that people still have to create content, and that content creation is on a fast rise to meet demand. Look at Emily's job, and Rym's job, and Scott's job, and the $1.4 billion generated last year by the iTunes store, or the $102 million the Android Market raked in FY2010. This doesn't touch all the apps, songs, ringtones, and games sold by Blackberry, Verizon, and other providers, not to mention other digital distribution channels such as Steam. Ephemeralization is a fuddy-duddy concept used to lament the loss of manufacturing.
You are forcing me to devil's advocate something, but it's probably a good discussion to have. What of the ephemeralization of the content creation and distribution industry? Just because jobs have moved into these non-agro/manufacturing industries doesn't mean that the concepts don't apply equally. Entertainment can potentially be created faster and faster for less and less labor. Honestly, that's quite realistic given the circumstances.
Comments
I knew US politics was fucked up, but it's pretty bad when an revolting sexual deviant can run for president and get away with it.
I read this story this morning while I was sitting bored in a meeting. I barely managed to fight the urge of hauling my phone against the wall.
What's particularly disgusting is that the woman who introduced the bill said it was about "freedom". Freedom to what, exactly? Freedom for a boss to snoop into the sexual lives of female employees? Her website is equally appalling.
Freedom for a religious organization to not be forced to support ideas they don't agree with?
The problem is that it is not really freedom from anything. It is simply freedom for religious organizations to force employees to play by their moral code. They just want to make themselves feel better by thinking they were oppressed by the big, bad government.
There should literally be no legal distinction between a religious organization and any other sort of organization, nor any exemption from any law for religious reasons.
It does depend on how conservative politicians continue to appeal to their base, though. If they lose by a landslide, they will be forced to consider what it will take to stay in power. That might mean ditching some of the rhetoric.
Realistically, though, I think we're seeing a slow decline and we'll probably be seeing a rising rat meat futures market.
Time wins the battle for progress. It just seems so much slower, so much more impossible, due to our ability to watch it unfold in real time, to see the sweep of history before us. We're impatient because we know what's right, but the momentum of society weighs far more heavily than the velocity of our conviction.
Things get better every day. Conservatism has never, can not ever, win more than but temporary gains. The very nature of the position slips further from the reality of the world with every second that men live and think.
It may be a sin wave in the short term, but the progress of man is on the scale of the ages an inexorable progress upward.
If the right were truly winning, if we were truly at the chasm of apocalypse, would gay marriage be proceeding as quickly (relative to the civil rights battles of the past)? Would the silent majority have shied from the rhetoric of the right on birth control these recent days? Would Republican primary turnout numbers be as low as they are if this were truly a renaissance of the movement?
We'll win. We always win. The weapon is simply time. Don't confuse our impatience with a real danger of defeat.
Although, I found that my most recent hobbies have been slowly gearing me up to life in the world of Fallout, so I'll hopefully be covered.
Both the reason why Rym is right, and the reason why Rym is wrong.
Well, y'know. A relative "booyah."
The complicating factor I find is that we have the Internet today. Ubiquitous access to vast swaths of information sufficient that people can selectively pull information of their choosing and build little intellectual fortresses.
I could foresee a regression to the intellectual equivalent of walled cities.
I have no idea where it will actually lead, though. This is just speculation on my part.
There have been booms and busts and home-agriculture for a hundred years in the US. I highly doubt there's a current new movement that's bigger than the Victory Garden era.
Here's an article about recent changes in food purchasing habits among Americans:
http://www.ift.org/food-technology/past-issues/2011/april/features/food-trends.aspx?page=viewall
The gist is that there has been real growth in the preferential purchase of "locally-grown" and "natural" products - a preference towards things which are made close to home.
This is a conscious shift away from the modernized agricultural practices of the last 60 years. Coupled with this is an increasing number of resources available to people who wish to grow their own food.
I'm making a projection, yes. This projection is based on a shift in food purchasing patterns over the past several years. My entire point is that there is a growing shift towards community-focused agriculture rather than national-level agriculture.
It's a great setup for the building of truly isolated communities.