Fox & Friends…recently produced a litany of advice for young women that could have been ripped from the pages of a 1950s home economics textbook. Here are a few of the most egregious examples of Fox-approved tips for women:
“Don’t talk too much.”
Over the course of the interview with Hewlett, women are told to “keep their voices down” and avoid “talking too much” no less than four times… Call this the anti-Sheryl Sandberg mantra. Instead of asserting their right to actively participate in workplace discussions, women should refrain from “dominating” the conversation and be sure to monitor the volume and tone of their voices…
“Keep your husband happy.”
In the depressingly simple world of “Princeton Mom” Susan Patton, marriage is the be-all, end-all goal for women. Once you’ve found a husband, your job is to do everything in your power to nurture and care for him, making sure his needs are being met. Even though women comprise 47 percent of the US labor force, and 73 percent of working women hold full-time jobs, it is still, for some bizarre reason, their responsibility to offer their husbands a drink and cook them a meal at the end of the work day.
Never mind that women also spend almost twice as much time as their spouses on childcare each week. Fox’s hosts happily reinforced this sexist message, with Doocy asking Patton “When did it happen when men and husbands became doormats?” Because we all know asking a man to help out around the house or cook dinner is the pinnacle of emasculation. Even more disturbingly, Patton warns against ending relationships that aren’t working out because of “how difficult it would be to replace him.”…
RTFA for more – you’ll have to decide whether to laugh or barf.
19th Century Fox says: don’t talk, look pretty, focus on your family, don’t push for equal rights, and care for your husband. Stupid or ignorant? Your choice!
A Nigerian man detained in a hospital psychiatric ward because he did not believe in God has been freed.
Mubarak Bala was released because of a doctors’ strike which has seen many patients discharged, a charity said.
Mr Bala said he now wanted to reconcile with his family who committed him to the hospital in Kano where he says he was held against his will for 18 days.
But he said he wanted to leave the predominantly Muslim north of Nigeria after receiving death threats.
A humanist charity which took up his case said that Mr Bala, a chemical engineering graduate, was freed on Tuesday but news of his release was not made public until he was in a secure location.
“There are still deep concerns for Mubarak’s safety in a part of the country where accusations of ‘apostasy’ can be deadly,” the International Humanist and Ethical Union said…
In a statement released on Friday, Mr Bala said he was now staying with some of his family, had been assured of his safety and wanted to put things behind him “for the sake of reconciliation”…
He said he retracted “some derogatory remarks I have made online, out of anger”.
His lawyer, Muhammad Bello Shehu, told the BBC Hausa Service this did not refer to his faith but to remarks he had made about his father who he accused of being an Islamic leader who could not afford to have a non-Muslim in the family.
After the 29-year-old was admitted to a psychiatric ward at the Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, he sought help from friends via email and social media until his phone was confiscated, according to IHEU.
Mr Shehu said that no further legal action would be taken but that Mr Bala wanted another doctor to evaluate him to put it on the record that he was not suffering from a mental illness as the hospital has concluded.
Good thing we live in a modern country where there is separation of church and state.
Still overdue. Still marching.
Still overdue. Still marching.
Still overdue. Still marching.
Activists flew a blimp emblazoned with the words “Illegal Spying Below” over the National Security Agency’s data centre in Utah on Friday in protest against the US government’s mass surveillance programmes.
The one-hour flight was carried out by the environmental group Greenpeace, digital rights activists the Electronic Frontier Foundation and a conservative political organisation, the Tenth Amendment Centre.
The 41 metre blimp, owned by Greenpeace, was adorned with a sign that read “NSA Illegal Spying Below”.
In an email to Reuters the agency declined to comment. But a spokesman did note there was no restricted airspace over the data centre, housed on the grounds of the Utah National Guard’s Camp Williams in Bluffdale, 23 miles (37km) south of Salt Lake City.
The NSA says the facility provides the government with intelligence and warnings about cyber security threats. It is thought to be the agency’s largest data storage centre.
The blimp protest coincided with the launch of an online campaign that rates members of Congress on actions the activists say either further or stop data collection efforts by the NSA…
It’s right pleasing to an old activist like me to see an issue of human rights and privacy carry across ideological boundaries. The only one of the three groups that put this protest together that I’d ever find myself sharing a song together with – would be the EFF, the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
The occasion is not one for differences but common ground. That being a government that has marched away from the heart of the constitution that is the foundation of this nation. Maybe they tip-toed because they didn’t want us to hear what they were doing. A whistleblower named Edward Snowden took care of that.
Here’s a link to the website they were advertising with their flight. I hope it moves the cause of privacy forward, aids in bringing back the intent of a democratic United States of America.
The opposition to same-sex marriage is often characterized as religious in nature, but major religious groups are close to evenly split on the issue.
The following chart, based on the Pew Research Center’s own table, breaks down the split:
There are Christian and Jewish groups on both sides. Quakers are supportive, while Mormons aren’t. And two major religions — Hinduism and Buddhism — don’t have stances that are clear enough for Pew to interpret.
A church’s stance on the issue also doesn’t necessarily reflect the population that actually follows the faith. While the Vatican takes a very clear stance against LGBT rights, most American Catholics don’t view homosexuality as morally unacceptable. Most American Catholics don’t even view homosexuality as a sin, Pew found.
Still, some groups with religious roots are definitely among the most ardent opponents of same-sex marriage rights. As LGBT advocacy group HRC points out, the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriage rights, has ties to the Mormon Church and Catholic Church. But Pew’s findings show the connection doesn’t necessarily reflect on all religions or even worshipers within those sects.
RTFA for the details and digressions. For the life of me I do not comprehend those religions and their leaders who are less than forthcoming in a public way about their support for civil rights. It didn’t used to be so. Early days, when I woke in jail on a Sunday or Monday morning it was no surprise to be sharing that cell with a Buddhist monk or a Catholic priest.
Days since, there has been no special repression of religious advocates for peace or equal rights. But, religious voices in favor of progress are dim and drowned out by anti-abortion bible-thumping, chickenhawks ready to spill Muslim blood on a foreign land – like Tennessee, Protestants who protest lawful rights for gay or lesbian couples. Where did they go this 50% of Believers?
There are people we elect to provide leadership in law and economy. There are people we choose, generally because our parents chose before us in some tired regression, to provide leadership in social well-being and morality. And neither of those classes have the courage or inclination to perform to their job description.
We’re left with the reactionary herd and disciples – elected or God’s minions – and frankly I’m pleased to see the nation in general and especially the generations new and about to be new eager to press on ahead of their papier-mache leaders.
In an emphatic defense of privacy in the digital age, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police generally may not search the cellphones of people they arrest without first getting search warrants.
Cellphones are unlike anything else police may find on someone they arrest, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. They are “not just another technological convenience,” he said, but ubiquitous, increasingly powerful computers that contain vast quantities of personal, sensitive information.
“With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans the privacies of life,” Roberts declared. So the message to police about what they should do before rummaging through a cellphone’s contents following an arrest is simple: “Get a warrant…”
The Obama administration and the state of California, defending cellphone searches, said the phones should have no greater protection from a search than anything else police find. But the defendants in the current cases, backed by civil libertarians, librarians and news media groups, argued that cellphones, especially smartphones, can store troves of sensitive personal information.
“By recognizing that the digital revolution has transformed our expectations of privacy, today’s decision is itself revolutionary and will help to protect the privacy rights of all Americans,” said American Civil Liberties Union legal director Steven Shapiro…
In the cases decided Wednesday, one defendant carried a smartphone, while the other carried an older flip phone. The police looked through both without first getting search warrants…
A ride on horseback and a flight to the moon both “are ways of getting from point A to point B, but little else justifies lumping them together,” Roberts said…
The decision will protect cellphones from warrantless searches going forward, but it may not be of much help to defendants in pending cases, or those whose convictions are final, said lawyer Gerry Morris…He said that courts could allow evidence to be used from police searches of cellphones that were done in “good faith” and relied on the law as it stood when the searches were conducted.
Still a two-fold victory. We’ve acquired the sort of protection many folks – from geeks to civil libertarians – agree we need in a digital age. Now, the task remains to take the modernized version of privacy and stick in the eye of paranoids ranging from the White House and Congress to the NSA.
Derek Kitchen and Moudi Sbeity, winning plaintiffs — their dog’s name is Goji
A federal appeals court has ruled…that states must allow gay couples to marry, finding the Constitution protects same-sex relationships and putting a remarkable legal winning streak across the country one step closer to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The three-judge panel in Denver ruled 2-1 that states cannot deprive people of the fundamental right to marry simply because they want to be wedded to someone of the same sex.
The judges added they don’t want to brand as intolerant those who oppose gay marriage, but they said there is no reasonable objection to the practice.
“It is wholly illogical to believe that state recognition of love and commitment of same-sex couples will alter the most intimate and personal decisions of opposite-sex couples,” the judges wrote, addressing arguments that the ruling could undermine traditional marriage.
The decision by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld a lower court ruling that struck down Utah’s gay marriage ban. It becomes law in the six states covered by the court: Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming. However, gay marriages won’t be happening in the near future because the panel immediately put its ruling on hold pending an appeal…
And everyone knows we can count upon the intolerant and bigoted to appeal this decision.
The decision gives increased momentum to a legal cause that already has compiled an impressive record in the lower courts after the Supreme Court last year struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act. Since then, 16 federal judges have issued rulings siding with gay marriage advocates…
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said blah, blah, blah, blah.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said in a statement on its website blah, blah, blah, blah.
Republican Gov. Gary Herbert in a statement said blah, blah, blah, blah.
Now same-sex marriage is legal in 19 states and the District of Columbia. Recent polls show a majority of Americans support it.
Concepts advanced in times of ignorance need to be reexamined in the context of society, science and knowledge growing over time. Only fools accept textbooks as unchanging and fixed. Yet, the weakest among our species, the least educated and those who profit from fear would keep this nation and the world in darkness centuries old.
Oh yeah, you can count Indiana, now, too. :)