I DON’T UNDERSTAND LGBTQ+

 

 

 

There is a difference between prejudice, bigotry, and political correctness.  All three are personal opinions that shade a subject according to the perceiver.  And each is intended to limit the freedom of action and expression of others.

 

Prejudice is an attitude that prevents the objective consideration of an issue.

 

Bigotry is intolerance linked to prejudice. 

 

Political correctness is an effort to avoid making others uncomfortable through actions or language, regardless of whether such actions or language are correct. Political correctness also makes it uncomfortable to express ribaldry - humor that borders on indelicacy - which I find amusing.  

 

 

Scientifically, genetically, there are two genders, male and female, the inseminators and the progenitors; but the blurring of sexual orientation has existed since the advent of mankind.  It even shows itself in our closest cousins, the chimpanzees.

 

LGBTQ+ has nothing to do with gender science, but identifies how an individual feels.

 

At a personal level, I do find all of the gender categories confusing.

 

Lesbian: I get it. 

 

Gay men: I get it.

An aside: Gay men I have met are the nicest people.  But kissing some dude and seeing him necked is not on my bucket list.  My brother-in-law is gay.   He is the most loving and considerate person I have ever known, and I love him dearly.   I would hold him up as an example for any young boy to emulate.

 

Bi: Why not?

 

Trans: Now there is a perplexity.  Attractive looking, nice skin, nice breasts, all the correct orifices; never have periods, never have PMS, never suffer menopause – I would think females would be jealous.

 

Queer: now what’s that?  You already have LGBT – What's the difference? 

 

+ : Come on.  How many categories do we need?   You should watch who you associate with your group.  At some point, you will look ridiculous.

 

It is all about sexuality and our feelings and proclivities.  Let’s not exclude heterosexuals.   Make that group feel included.  LGBTH 

 

But the real question might be: Why do we need to identify ourselves with any group?   Groups divide us. 

 

Like Popeye says: I am what I am what I am….

 I'm the Ol'Buzzard

 

THINGS MOVE ON; BUT THEY DON'T CHANGE

We thought they would in the  sixties; 

Great stereo if you use headphones.

but.......

the Ol'Buzzard

MY GOD - WHO'S CRAPPING IN THE NEXT STALL?

I feel sorry for this boy.   A liberal living in Mississippi.   The things he is saying I can relate to personally.    Potluck suppers that always begin with a prayer.  When you first meet people they want to know what church you attend.  People calling on the phone and wanting to pray with you.  Religion permeating all aspects of life - accompanied by the narrow minded bigotry that religion spawns.    

The total ignorance is suffocating.  

So here’s to The Liberal Redneck.

the Ol'Buzzard

SUNDAY MORNING

Sunday morning and people get dressed up and go to church to worship their respective god; they sing and prey and put money in the plate when it is passed around.  They feel self-righteous and  pious as they interact with others of their congregation. 

The rest of the week they swim in their prejudices and bigotry, more concerned about politics, money and station than about the people around them. 

If they were serious they would just look out for other people.  

And realize that we are not special - we are all in it together.

the Ol'Buzzard

POPE MANIA

We are caught in a tsunami of Pope mania.  It is easy to forget that the Pope represents a religion that imposes a broad cavern between perceived reality and what is actually real. 

We now live in a world where the socio-religious would impose their dogma on all mankind.  The purpose of the Catholic Church (and all religions) is to consolidate ignorance under the banner of immortality.  If life after death doesn’t exist there is no reason for religion; so the Catholic Church deals with death by abolishing it.

Twenty percent of the world in Christian and sixty percent of that world is Catholic; and for that Catholic majority the Pope is the direct, infallible representative of God.

It was Popes that instituted the Inquisition from 1231 to 1820.  Millions were tortured by the Catholic Church and died horrible deaths, including many scientific notables at the hands of the inquisition. 

God has released his wrath and then changed his mind many time with the succession of Popes.   Even in the last century Pope Pius XII supported the Nazi rounding up and imprisonment of Jews.

  

Now this Pope is expounding somewhat limited liberal ideals.  Along with addressing climate change he also states that women who have had abortions and homosexuals may not go to hell if they return to the church and confess their sins – not well received by much of the misogynistic Catholic clergy that believe Eve was responsible for original sin and homosexuality is an abomination. 

The Catholic Church, which this Pope represents, requires blind faith and allegiance.

    

The Churches’ doctrines are:

• A belief in the virgin birth and other outlandish miracles.
• The veneration of human sacrifice and transubstantiation.
• Sexual suppression – opposition to birth control…
• Female phobia – dictating female reproduction policies…
• Censorship.
• A promise of resurrection and an afterlife.
• The repression of logic and suppression of scientific enquiry – stem cell research...
• Intolerance, bigotry and pious outrage – organize opposition to gay rights initiatives.
• Expounding a belief in Gods, angles and demons.   Now, in the twenty-first century, the Catholic Church still has a group priest especially trained to perform exorcisms on the mentally ill.

Religion thrives in the absence of reason.   The greater the absurdity the stronger the beliefs. 

This new Pope is expounding some liberal ideas, but saying that women who have had abortions and gays may return to The Church is the equivalent of the evil witch of fairy tales that eats children sending flowers and candy packages to pregnant women.  He is still the representative of a repressive and indoctrinating religion defending twelfth century dogma in a twenty-first century world.

the Ol’Buzzard

MARRIAGE EQUALITY AND MORE

We are a country of laws based on freedoms guaranteed by our constitution; and sometimes it takes the courts to reexamine our laws and put us back in compliance. 

The Supreme Court’s ruling that freedom to marry is a basic right of all American citizens also reaffirmed a second point: that any one person’s or group’s religious beliefs cannot be dictated as the basis of law for the entire country. 

The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees an individual’s basic right to worship, or not worship, as he or she pleases - free from government dictate; but it also guarantees that the government shall not enact any law based on one group’s religious doctrine and impose such doctrine on all American citizens. 

Every time I hear a politician invoking his religious belief (or the Bible) as the basis for or against a proposed or standing law or ruling I cringe.  

The First Amendment to the Constitution states plainly:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…  

It has always been touted that the Pilgrims came to the ‘new world’ seeking the freedom of religion; but the reason for their migration was to flee from a nation mandating a specific religion’s doctrine as law – a freedom from mandated religion. 

Unfortunately many fundamentalist Christian sects in the United States would see this country as a Christian theocracy and impose their beliefs and bigotry and prejudices as the law of the land; and for a long while our Citizens have been endanger by a movement of radical, mostly Republican, legislatures aimed on enacting a form of Christian Sharia Law and declaring this country a Christian nation. 

The Court’s ruling today was based on the Constitutional premise of equality of the law; but it also reaffirms the First Amendment - that all persons in our Nation have a right to their religious beliefs and to worship as they please; but they do not have the right to inflict through legislation their personal religious doctrine on the public at large. 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

the Ol'Buzzard