I Don't Think Jesus Saves Bad Business Practices

So. This wacky guy in OK has a commercial where he's hocking siding and, for good measure, Jesus.

Yeah guy, that's kind of a weird insert of highly questionable politicization in your commercial. I often wonder why people sometimes feel the need to include personal beliefs and opinions in situations where it seems generally understood that it's inappropriate to do so. Then I stumbled upon some reviews of his business. Now I understand completely. There are only two reviews that I found, but neither one of them was flattering or really surprising given the general attitude of the commercial.

Buyer Beware

The siding work provided by Terrell's was mediocre at best. Repairs were needed within two years. When I called to get the work repaired, Terrell's put me on a waiting list. I called again a couple of months later and they said I was still on the waiting list. I called back one more time and was told the same thing. Terrell's never called me back and I finally realized that the waiting list was just a ploy to deflect or put off their customers. I don't think they ever had any intention of standing behind their work.

Later, I went to another siding person and had to spend about $2,000 to have my siding put in good repair. I would not recommend Terrell's to anyone.

The second review is far more telling.

Rudest, worst service ever recieved.

We asked for a quote to enclose our patio into a sun-room, as we had from numerous other companies.

The quote we were given by the owner of the company was the most expensive and when we informed him about it, he yelled at my spouse, using profanity and had very ugly things to tell about how people of our race come into his country and take advantage of everyone, etc, and slammed down the phone.

It was very disturbing to experiance such hatred from the owner of the company, someone we would xpect would know better.

My spouse called him back to ask him id he realizes what he had just said to which the answer came back that "so what, s**(litigate) me you a*******".

May the Lord forgive him for all the hatred he carries.

So of course he's going to utilize that sweet sweet Christian privilege and appeal to his douchey tea bagging brethren - the business obviously can't stand on it's own merit.

Thanks to Unreasonable Faith and Cynical-C for the heads up.

Iran Says Yay To Elvis Hair, Boo To Puppy Love

Well, at least Iran is being a bit less sexist with its ridiculously controlling and restrictive rules regarding the legality of self image and self expression. I understand that banning the mullet is more for the benefit of society in general, but it seems like basically all punk hairstyles are forbidden - which I'm sure makes punks across America giggle with a special kind of punk satisfaction.

(July 6) -- Worried that Western ideas might be seeping into -- and onto -- the heads of their nation's young men, Iran's religious leaders have issued a catalog of acceptable "Islamic" male haircuts. Ponytails, spikes, mullets and Mohawks are now forbidden, but Elvis-style locks, floppy fringes and Simon Cowell-esque flattops get the ayatollahs' seal of approval. The entire selection of state-sanctioned styles will be revealed later this month at Tehran's Modesty and Veil Festival, whose organizers -- with help from Iran's Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance -- designed the hair guide. "The proposed styles are inspired by Iranians' complexion, culture, religion and Islamic law," Jaleh Khodayar, the fair's female organizer, told Agence France-Presse. "We are happy that the Islamic republic of Iran's government has backed us in designing these hairstyles."

I love how the author of this story specifies that the organizer is female as if that means anything. No one is impressed by the progressiveness of Iran having a female organizer for an event that is in part meant to forbid specific hairstyles for an entire gender.

Although Iranian authorities have long attempted to enforce a strict female dress code -- women who wear their headscarves too far back or flash some ankle risk being arrested -- this is the first time that authorities have clearly set out what is and isn't follicly allowed for men. Previously, that judgment was left up to police, who would arrest boys with hairstyles inspired by European soccer players or American pop stars, and subject them to a swift short back and sides. Barbers who offered decadent Western cuts and male eyebrow plucking also risked being raided and shut down.

First of all, eyebrow plucking for either gender is painful enough - the punishment is already built into the practice. Second, isn't it kind of a testimate to the frailty of a belief if it requires controlling the practice of metrosexuality in order to maintain it?

But well-groomed men aren't the only group facing increased scrutiny this summer. The growing number of wealthy Iranians who keep dogs -- viewed as "unclean" by the mullahs -- could also face a crackdown. Last month, a senior Shiite cleric placed a fatwa on the pets and called for such displays of hound-human companionship to be outlawed. "Friendship with dogs is a blind imitation of the West," said Grand Ayatollah Naser Makerem Shirazi, according to Reuters. "There are lots of people in the West who love their dogs more than their wives and children."

Well that is about the stupidest shit I've ever heard. The insinuation that allowing people to have certain pets will somehow negatively affect a person's relationship with their human family is steaming grade-a BS. But I can see how the Iranian Ayatollahs might find the human-puppy bond intimidating. Once people experience unconditional love, the 'love' of jealous, petty Allah might not seem so enticing...

Sharron Angle - God Planned Your Rape

This woman is a horrible human being.

It's a good thing she's not in a position of influen - dammit! This is not even funny anymore.

VJack posted about her on his blog recently, which is why I decided to listen to this audio in the first place. She's running for political office in Nevada and she seems to have at least some chance of winning, which is about 'some' too much of a chance if you ask me.

America - Turning Into A Theocracy?

Come on, Iowa conservatives, WTF?

DES MOINES, Iowa —

An influential group of religious conservatives said Monday it would sit out the fall gubernatorial election as promised after candidates it favored lost in last week's Republican primary.

The Iowa Family Policy Center's decision was a blow to Republican Terry Branstad, who had banked on support from religious conservatives in his race against Democratic Gov. Chet Culver. The group said neither major party candidate met its standards.

Danny Carroll, chairman of the Iowa Family Policy Center, said in a statement that Republican officials were pushing conservatives to support Branstad. His group had said earlier it would not support the former governor if he won the primary.

"After nearly a week of calls for blind partisan unity from Republican loyalists, the Iowa Family PAC today reaffirmed their intention to withhold support from either major party candidate for governor in 2010 unless one or both of them illustrates a fundamental transformation," Carroll said in the statement.

Despite pressure from Republicans, Carroll said, "Our commitment to Biblical principles and the constitutional rule of law is not the result of any political affiliation, nor is it something that changes depending on the names on the ballot."

Religious conservatives are important to most Republicans seeking statewide office because they make up such a large percentage of Iowa's GOP voters.

Polling conducted during the last round of presidential caucuses in 2008 showed that six out of 10 who attended Republican caucuses described themselves as evangelical Christians.

Although the Iowa Family Policy Center is withholding its support, Steve Scheffler, who heads the influential Iowa Christian Alliance, has backed Branstad.

My question is, why the hell is this group so influential in the first place? Religion seems to be creeping into American politics more and more, and with each increased amount of influence, this country is being led further and further away from what it was created to be - a place where anyone can believe anything - or nothing - and still be treated as an equal citizen with equal rights. The more we allow theocracy to seep into our political culture, the more we are at risk of destroying the very foundation of this country and what makes it so great.

I think we're past the point of incredulously wondering is these people are seriously trying to make the USA a theocracy, they obviously are and their political influence is enough to make an actual difference in some areas of the country. Now we should be focused on making sure they fail in their efforts to do so.

Court Repeals OK Law Requiring Mandatory Ultrasounds And Fetus Descriptions

Ok, so this is good news first of all, but it's still very strange that this was ever even suggested and the act was passed in the first place and it leaves me wondering - WTF Oklahoma?

OKLAHOMA CITY — An Oklahoma judge on Tuesday overturned a state law that required women seeking an abortion to receive an ultrasound and a doctor's description of the fetus.

Oklahoma County District Judge Vicki Robertson said the law violated constitutional requirements that legislative measures deal only with one subject. He did not rule on the validity of the ultrasound provisions.

Special Assistant Attorney General Teresa Collett said she will meet with state officials to discuss whether to appeal. The law was passed in 2008, but legal action has prevented it from going into effect.

It seems in 2008 the Oklahoma legislature enacted the Freedom of Conscience Act (full text Word doc). The bill not only contains very broad conscience protections for medical personnel who object to participating in a variety of procedures, but it also requires medical providers, before performing an abortion, to conduct an ultrasound and describe and display in detail the ultrasound image to the woman seeking the abortion.

Now, this is effed up in all kinds of ways, but Stephanie Toti says it best here:

Stephanie Toti, an attorney for the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights that represented Nova, said Oklahoma is the only state in the nation that mandated a physician to both conduct an ultrasound and describe the images to the patient.

"The ultrasound provision takes away a patient's choice about whether or not to view an ultrasound, and it requires physicians to provide information to their patients that the physicians do not believe is medically necessary," Toti said.

"It's an affront to women's autonomy and decision-making power, and it's also an intrusion to the physician-patient relationship."

It seems obvious to me that this is an aggressive tactic meant specifically to bully and browbeat women who are already in a compromising position and often an emotional state. I stay away from posting too much about abortion because I have personal experience with it and find it very difficult to stay emotionally detached enough about the topic but this to me seems like a form of mental abuse. It's like the legislature saying 'We can't stop you from getting an abortion, so instead, we're going to force you and your doctor to have a conversation about the fetus before it's aborted, just so you feel like a real piece of shit for making this decision. And remember, you can always change your mind.'

Is this legislation religiously motivated? Well, it's very cleverly propositioned as a means to 'allow patients to know the full scope of the medical procedure they are requesting.' However, when you look into the political standing and backround of the main author of the bill, Todd Lamb, it's difficult to ignore the importance of religious this man presumes personally and professionally. The fact that this is a seemingly religiously motivated bill which is presented as if it is a medically inspired piece of legislature makes it all the more unsavory.

The presumption that abortion is as easy a decision as what to have for dinner that night is disgusting to me, as is the presumption that women don't understand 'enough' what they're doing by having an abortion. Most women are fully aware and suffer emotionally from making the choice - that doesn't mean they didn't make the right choice for them, the unborn, and society in general.

I'm glad this law was repealed and I have to assume it won't take long before the people who proposed this bill propose similar bills to take its place - ones which can't be dismissed on the same technicality. I can only hope for the people of Oklahoma - women and men - that ya'll have the sanity to stop these kinds of legistlastions in their tracks. How long will it be before the 'ethical protection' of doctors means the only physician in your small town can refuse to sell you condoms because of their religious beliefs? Or refuse to fill your heart medication because they feel medication is a sign of mistrust of their lord? Seriously, this kind of legislation is dangerous for reasons that go above and beyond abortion. Abortion is just the 'easiest' target when it comes to religiously motivated medical ethics legislation.

Kissimmee, FL "In God We Trust" Ordinance Withdrawn, Bigot Pissed

KISSIMMEE, Florida - Kissimmee commissioner Art Otero is not letting go of his effort to add the words "In God We Trust" to the city logo and says he will take the initiative to a referendum if needed.

An ordinance that added the motto passed on first reading through the City Commission last month but was withdrawn last week by the board, after Mayor Jim Swan said that Otero's comments had brought "ridicule" on the city.

Swan read a statement at the meeting saying that the commission's original intent to add the motto for "patriotic purposes" had now been "tainted."

"Staff has been distracted from its normal duties responding to citizens comments and demands on the issues. There have been threats of boycotting local businesses and future businesses looking elsewhere," his statement said.

Otero had told the Orlando Sentinel he started the logo effort because he feared the country was moving toward "liberal postures such as homosexuality, gay marriage, abortion and the legalization of marijuana." He also referred to the Obama administration as "socialist."

Read More...

It's simple, Otero. You had a chance of getting this BS passed until you showed your cards and left no doubt that this ordinance was not proposed by an American Patriot (tm) in the name of American Patriotism (tm) but rather as an anti-gay, anti-Obama extremist hell bent on pushing your god in any way possible in order to quell your own unfortunate fears about the big bad pace of social progression.

You forgot the cardinal rule of underhanded religiously driven politics - never be honest about your motivations or intentions. Stick to secular-based patriotism arguments and pretend the religious motivations don't exist AT ALL COSTS.

I have to thank you, however, for removing all doubt in regard to what the motivations behind this and no doubt most other pro-"In God We Trust" implementations really are.

Bush Administrations Abstinence Programs Produce Unsavory Results

It would seem that abstinence doesn't work. I know, I know, of course abstinence works if it is honestly adhered to, but according to the latest Centers for Disease Control numbers, the falling rates of teen pregnancies and STD's either stalled or increased, in some cases sharply, by 2005 - Bush's 6th year in office.

According to the CDC, birth rates among teenagers aged 15 or older had been in decline since 1991 but rose sharply in more than half of American states after 2005. The number of teenage girls with syphilis had risen by nearly half after a big decrease, while a 20-year fall in the gonorrhea infection rate was being reversed. AIDS cases in adolescent boys had nearly doubled.

What do abstinence groups say in response to these telling numbers? What is their answer? Why, more abstinence of course! Now, the fact is that even though abstinence is in fact a certain way of not getting pregnant or spreading STD's, it's not a viable solution to teenage pregnancy or STDs. Why? Because teenagers are horny and they are going to get down, whether you give them a condom or tell them to think about Jesus and take a cold shower.

The emphisis should be on a healthy approach to sexuality, not an approach which leans toward shame and ridicule when a person or two people feel compelled to react on completely natural urges. No one should feel strange about having sex or not having sex because it's a personal choice - one that you might make at 15 or 35 - and while as a mom I would hate to think of my beautiful baby boy knocking boots at 15 I would also rather he have every oppertunity to engage in that kind of activity safely and with the utmost amount of education on the subject rather than trying to pull out or perpetuating other ridiculous myths in regard to sex.

Sorry kids, if the chick is on top, she can in fact still get pregnant.

It's no secret that abstinence programs and religious institutions more often than not are interweaved with one another which leads me to ask this question - what needs to happen before these organizations face the fact that less education will never result in positive trends? When will these groups be held accountable for the fact that ignoring the teen pregancy problem by only offering an outdated and unrealistic solution is the same thing as willingly allowing teen pregnancy to become a much much worse issue?

Yet Another Religious Hypocrite

It's already old news that South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford has publicly admitted to having an affair with a woman in Argentina and it seems the public has already shrugged this off as yet another conservative proponent of the family values agenda who has failed to live up to the standards he so passionately demanded of the American public.

Why is it that this kind of hypocritical behavior is so common among conservatives that when a news story like this pops up the only surprise expressed is that he was having an affair with a woman and not a man, and yet the conservative 'family values' platform still holds some considerable clout in the political ring?

Conservatives (I should point out that by conservatives I mean religious conservatives. This to me seems redundant but as there are a few non-religious conservatives out there and those few would undoubtedly find this blog were I not to make this distinction.) love to establish reputations of being pious and moral. This conservative morality is meant to be viewed as a superior kind of morality because it has the will of a creator god behind it - as if to insinuate that a moral atheist by definition cannot be "as moral" as a christian. When one of their flock is exposed as being just as human and just as prone to behavior that most would consider immoral it seems the attitude shifts quickly to one of shame and guilt. The paramount of morality becomes the picture of a repentant sinner and the person in question remains just as useful, simply painted in a different light.

No doubt the reaction from the christian community will be one that completely disregards the glaring hypocrisy and irresponsibility of Sanford's actions and will instead focus on the regretful man himself. Prepare for a barrage of 'Love the sinner, hate the sin.' and a soon to be announced 're-affirmation and strengthening of belief' coming from Sanford.