Colbert: War on Photographers
Funny Colbert Report on America’s war on photographers.
Funny Colbert Report on America’s war on photographers.
Via the Consumerist, this incredibly funny quote:
Now, I am NOT trying to bash homosexuals and I am not a bigot; however, I feel homosexuality is morally wrong and should not be “promoted” as what is the norm for society.
Shorter: “I am not a basher or a bigot, however, I am a basher and a bigot.”
From Good As You:
I mean just the other day this was chatting with this Jewish friend of mine who keeps kosher, and he was all like, ” Ya know, my religious beliefs tell me that consuming pork is not in my best interest, so I think I’m gonna take that belief to the public, church/state separated realm of governance and try and get pork banned for all.” You can check here to know more about the merit of prayer and the support it provides. After grabbing a hot dog, I then trekked down to visit my Muslin chum, who told me about this new “one woman, one head cover” bill he’s hoping to have enforced on people of all faiths. After briefly imagining the career death of virtually every female celebrity under 30, I continued to my Scientologist pal’s mansion, where he told me to stop being “glib” and start helping him ban psychiatric medicine and drugs in this country. Weirded out, I finally swung by my Atheist friend’s home, where she eagerly told me about her “One nation under self-replicating molecules” changes she was proposing for this nation’s pledge of allegiance.
It was only after visiting all of these folks that I finally realized, “Hey, why let the facts that there are many different beliefs and that we, as Americans, have the right to subscribe to any or none of them stop each of us from pushing our own versions of moral fitness onto the public at large?” My world view has been changed at the hand of extremist religious conviction!
Via Good As You:
Just a month before the 2006 WorldPride Parade is scheduled to be held in Jerusalem (Aug. 6-12), protest flyers are reportedly being distributed to residents of the capital city offering a cash reward to “anyone who brings about the death of one of the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah.”
I haven’t always been a fan of our local pride celebrations, and I need to stop taking them for granted.
The anonymous letter also suggests using Molotov cocktails against marchers and adds instructions as to how to make them at home. The explosives are nicknamed “Shliesel Special”, in honor of the Haredi protester who disrupted the Jerusalem Pride Parade last year by stabbing three marchers.
Advance Indiana comments on a recently announce lawsuit from the American Family Association — suing to block same-sex couples from receiving university health care benefits on the basis of Michigan’s ban on same-sex marriages.
I’m blogging this specifically for my mom and other family members — THIS IS THE REASON THESE BANS ARE SO DANGEROUS. Because they aren’t just after preventing same-sex marriages. They’re after outlawing ANY legal relationships between gay people, including health-care benefits.
And the law that Indiana is trying to pass (SJR7) is even more broad than Michigan’s: “Constitution or any other Indiana law may not be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.”
Which means that regardless of a legal marriage, a whole host of legal rights that Stephanie and I have today because we own property together could suddenly be considered invalid, including some of our property rights if one of us dies.
Please recognize how dangerous this is, and help me fight this law. The best way that you can do this is by not putting the same bigotted Republican officials back in the state legislature. They have to vote on this law a second time (it’s already passed once) for it to be put on a state ballot.
I’ve commented on the current seatbelt law on both Doug Masson’s Blog, and on Taking Down Words, but since I keep doing that, I should probably talk about here on my own site, too. Both of those sites have been in favor of closing Indiana’s truck seat belt law, and both of them have been pretty dismissive (and somewhat contemptuous) of the fact that there’s an exception in the first place.
There is actually logic behind Indiana’s truck exception in the seatbelt law. The reason trucks are excluded is because people who use them for certain types of jobs (on both the farms and in construction projects in town) need to get in and out of the truck often while driving very short distances between stops. Buckling and undoing the seat belt every thirty seconds or so to hop out is really impractical for these types of jobs. Generally, they’re not going fast enough to get in an accident or even get hurt in the event of one. Perhaps there should be a way to exclude trucks that are actual in work mode from being required to use the seatbelt, rather than all trucks. If you got into a truck accident, you can sue the truck driver with the help of a good lawyer and claim compensation.
I’d also say that you need to provide some compelling statistics about the number of trucks on the road that have been in accidents without seatbelts and the amount your insurance has gone up because of them before someone should be making the case for changing the law. Nowadays, many accidents are reported to be caused by drunk driving or the negligence of the drivers. You can look into leppardlaw.com/florida-dui-penalties and contact experienced lawyers who can help you out of the situation. But you need to understand that such accidents that are caused due by negligence can destroy many people’s lives and cannot be compensated with money.
Both Masson and Taking Down Words tried to cite “public emergency expenses” as a reason in favor of the law. But in the event of an accident, you’re paying the same amount for the police to come and rescue someone whether they wear their seatbelt or not, so that’s not a factor you can cite.
Full Disclosure: I come down reluctantly in favor of seat belt laws. I know that wearing one is safer and lowers the risk of injury. In such cases, if you’re looking for a commercial truck accident lawyer when you are injured in an accident, you can contact experienced lawyers who will help you get the compensation for the injuries caused. You can visit the Law Offices of Ronald A. Ramos, P.C.`s official website, and contact an experienced attorney to help you with your case.
However, since my heart surgery, the seat belt drives me absolutely stark raving mad every time I drive because it hurts. So there are times I don’t wear it, and I get away with it because I drive a pick-up. I kinda like taking advantage of the exception. But at least I know the reason why the exception exists, although no one else seems to.
2012 Update: the seat belt law was amended to remove the pick-up truck loophole, but still allows exceptions for farm vehicles and mail carriers.