Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Cop Fired for Wearing Confederate Flag Underwear.

Look, I know how kids are. Kids can be cruel; they can say ugly things and make fun of someone by mocking his or her name. And while I have no actual proof, I think it's reasonable to assume that, at some point during his childhood, some of the kids that knew the now former North Charleston police officer, Sgt. Shannon Dildine, called him Shannon Dildo. It has to's too easy.

After reading reports of Dildine's dismissal from the North Charleston Police Department for posting, on Facebook, a photo of himself wearing Confederate flag boxer shorts, I'm inclined to think that having Dildo as a nickname might not have been inappropriate.

Chief Eddie Driggers said Dildine could not have continued as an officer because any arrest of a minority could be challenged on the basis of possible racial bias.

"In light of current events, posting an inflammatory photograph in a way that permitted it to become widely distributed shows a lack of judgment that is unacceptable," Driggers said in a letter to Dildine.

Dildine has 10 days from the date of his Wednesday firing to appeal.

Although I recognize that Dildine did indeed show a lack of judgement, I hate to see anyone lose his or her job over this. Therefore, in a spirit of tolerance, I'm offering Dildine a possible defense for his actions. Dildine can swear that this photo is only part of the story. He should claim that he had gone on to, huh, "soil" his boxers, thereby showing contempt and disrespect for the Confederate flag.

Who knows? They might just buy that story.

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Walmart ISIS Cake Causes Major Butt Hurt.

In Slidell, Louisiana a good ol' boy peckerwood redneck gentlemen went in his local Walmart and attempted to purchase a cake decorated with a replica of the Confederate battle flag with the words "Heritage, not Hate" spelled out atop the flag.

When Walmart refused to decorate the cake according to his instructions, the good ol' boy peckerwood redneck gentlemen underwent a major butt hurt.

As explained in in his Youtube video, the good ol' boy peckerwood redneck gentlemen printed a copy of an ISIS flag and took that design to another Walmart location in order to have a cake decorated with it.

The good ol' boy peckerwood redneck gentlemen does not explain why he took the ISIS design to a different Walmart. I suspect the good ol' boy peckerwood redneck gentlemen created a scene at the first location and was either too embarrased to return or else was banned from that particular Walmart for acting out.

The good ol' boy peckerwood redneck gentlemen goes on to vent his outrage toward Walmart, saying the company had some 'splainin' to do.

Knowing Walmart associates as I do, I'm reasonably sure that the cake decorator at the second Walmart had no idea the image was that of the ISIS flag. It's also quite possible that the cake decorator believed the flag to be a 'sex toy flag' like the one flown in a London gay pride parade.

Thursday, June 25, 2015

Farrakhan Confirms Limbaugh's Flag Prediction

When the brouhaha over the Confederate flag erupted recently, Rush Limbaugh told his radio audience that  the American flag would be next.

"Can you just hear it now? I can hear it now: ‘The United States flag has flown over slavery and symbolized racism, discrimination, bigotry, homophobia for hundreds of years; the Confederate flag flew only four years, and we’re getting rid of the Confederate flag.’ Mark my words."

Hearing Limbaugh's comments, Fox News reporter, Ed Henry said that Limbaugh Is "Engaging In Hyperbole ... The American Flag Is Not Next"

Now, just days later, Louis Farrakhan proved Rush right with his remarks before the Metropolitan AME Church in Washington, DC:

"I don’t know what the hell the fight is about over the Confederate flag. We need to put the American flag down. Because we’ve caught as much hell under that as the Confederate flag," comments that were met with cheers and applause. He added, "Who are we fighting today? It’s the people that carry the American flag."

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

The Atheist and The Confederate Flag.

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote how I had found myself in agreement with "a guy that sports a tattoo on his neck" in our mutual dislike of Pat Robertson. As I wrote then, atheist Dan Arel isn't a fan of the televangelist and founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network and neither am I - albeit for different reasons.

After coming upon a post Arel had published on, I learned that he and I share a similar disgust for the Confederate flag currently flying in South Carolina's capital. Although his post contained a bit of snark, we both agree that the flag is a symbol of racism and does not deserve our respect.

However, I don't understand why he is opposed to the Confederate flag. As a Christian, I know why I oppose it and I have no trouble explaining my opposition.

Christianity teachings us that we are all children of God, that we are all created in His image. I listen when Christ says, "Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me". I believe when we mistreat our brothers and sisters we are mistreating Jesus as well.

I realize that some will counter that some Christians have used their misunderstanding of the faith to justify their racist beliefs. That does not, however, address the question I have for the atheist.

If one does not believe in any God - whether we're talking about the Christian deity, or Allah or even Vishnu, for that matter - if you do not believe in the existence of any Supreme Being or Creator, the only alternative is the belief that we are the product of a random collection of material "stuff" that accidentally came together without any "purpose" behind it all. If we were not created by a "creative intelligence" then we are the end result of a cosmic mishmash.

If the atheist view is the correct one, why does it matter in the least how we treat other human beings?

I know why I believe racism is sinful. I just don't understand why the atheist thinks so.

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Progressives Attempt to Divide Conservatives With Laudato Si.

There is no lack of "news" headlines on the Internet attempting to spin the Pope's "climate change" encyclical into a political groove.

From USA Today - Pope's climate change statement a challenge for Republicans.

Desmogblog writes - Republican Presidential Candidates Attack Pope’s Climate Change Encyclical

And from Huffington Post - Right Wing Steamed Over Pope's Climate Change Encyclical

Hoping to divide Republicans, Democrats are overjoyed that GOP Catholics more convinced about climate change than other Republicans.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has even gone so far as to say, "We really must listen to his Holiness as we go forward.".

Are the Democrats ready to embrace Pope Francis and his encyclical, Laudato si completely?

Is Pelosi, fellow CINO John Kerry, and Democrat Presidential favorite, Hillary Clinton ready to accept what is written concerning abortion in Laudato si ? quotes the papal encyclical:

"Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties?"

Another bothersome quote for Democrats:

Instead of resolving the problems of the poor and thinking of how the world can be different, some can only propose a reduction in the birth rate. At times, developing countries face forms of international pressure which make economic assistance contingent on certain policies of "reproductive health". Yet "while it is true that an unequal distribution of the population and of available resources creates obstacles to development and a sustainable use of the environment, it must nonetheless be recognized that demographic growth is fully compatible with an integral and shared development." To blame population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues.

I've read Pope Francis' latest encyclical and I've found nothing in it that I can object to. I'm not a scientist by any stretch of the imagination, so my thoughts on whether the planet is experiencing anthropogenic climate change involves a certain amount of trust in "authorities". I trust Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, President Obama and their ilk about as far as I can hurl the planet Earth, but I don't put much faith in the scientific views of Rush Limbaugh or Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe either.

Is the Earth warming? If so, is that warming due, in large part to human activity? I have absolutely no proof one way or the other, but I trust Pope Francis more than anyone else speaking on the issue.