I was bothered when I heard about a grocery store's attempt to shield the cover page of a magazine that displayed a family photo of Elton John and David Furnish with their newly-adopted baby. I was sickened to know that the store--Harps--where it occurred was in my own town.
When I heard, I had just come from Harps, a lovely store that sells a nice variety of produce.
Many people are saying they don't blame the store for what has become an international incident.
I won't go that far. If it were my store and I was asked to censor this magazine cover from public view, I would have refused. I am a middle-aged woman who has been married to the same man for 34 years. I am not gay.
I abhor censorship.
I'm saddened that there is so much hate and misunderstanding over something that is no one else's business--how people enjoy sex. How or with whom people have sex is no one's concern outside that of the participants.
I never understood the stigma toward gay couples.
Isn't the most important issue the happiness and love of two people? Are they really any different than heterosexual couples? Do children raised in an atmosphere of domestic violence between Mommy and Daddy fare any better? What about the child that witnesses Mommy shooting Daddy or Daddy beating up Mommy? Or what about the kids that just plain aren't wanted? Or there are the babies that are abandoned? To me, these incidents require much more attention than a couple of gay men who want to share their love with a child and who have the means to give the child every advantage possible.
Elton John is a talented, caring, giving, loving man. Why should he be denied fatherhood simply because he doesn't sleep with women? Having a child artificially is a widely accepted practice; why not for him?
The argument against homosexuality is ridiculous.
To appease the political arguments, all men are created equal.
To appease the religious arguments, love they neighbor.
It really is that simple. Isn't love a much more appropriate response when a happy couple has a child? I say congratulations Elton and David. May you enjoy all the joys of parenthood.
To the rest of you, look around. It is time you learn to accept that people should be judged by much more than their sexuality. That is just a small part of what makes us who we are.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Saturday, January 22, 2011
New page added
I have a new page.
Don't be shy. Leave a comment, or better yet, 'follow me.'
Or visit my other Internet pages, CH Website, CH Blog, and CH on Track.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Walking while texting is stupid
When Cathy Cruz Marrero fell into a mall fountain while texting, she decided to sue the mall. Tsk, tsk; How irresponsible!
Something similar happened to me six years ago, but with very different results.
My husband and I were in town to pay our taxes. I got out of the car, stepped over the curb and onto the concrete walkway the led to the sidewalk. I stepped on a manhole cover that was situated in the walkway. The moment I stepped on it, the cover flipped, causing my foot to go into the hole. My knee broke the fall as it slammed into the concrete. I have no idea how deep the hole was, nor how this happened.
I had to laugh though because I can only imagine how funny it looked. My husband helped me up. He looked pretty worried until he saw that I was laughing. Actually, it was a laughing/crying thing, since it really did hurt. He made me laugh more as he explained that he was talking to me when all of a sudden I disappeared from his view.
I was scraped, bruised, and bleeding a little, but my injury was obviously nothing serious. No bones were broken. When we got home I opted for a little Tylenol, an ice pack and assumed my favorite couch potato position with my leg elevated. I supposed I could have sued the city, though the thought really never crossed my mind.
One of the differences between my situation and that of Ms. Marrero is that I would have welcomed a video of the event. It would have been humorous to watch and would have explained just how this happened. Another difference is that I probably had a case since negligence cause my problem. She, on the other hand, caused her own injury by carelessness.
Truthfully, there are far too many cases like this these days. Everyone seems so bent on a 'get rich quick' scheme that they fail to take responsibility for their own actions.
It appears that Ms. Marrero is embarrassed by all the attention her 'fall' has received. Good. Maybe then she will realize that this boneheaded move was caused by her own actions. Perhaps next time she will take responsibility, if for no other reason than to avoid the embarrassment.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
We are and should remain "The Natural State"
There is an effort in the Arkansas House to change that defining phrase. A bill sponsored by Rep. David Sanders, R-Little Rock--House Bill 1005--proposes changing the state's slogan back to "The Land of Opportunity," its former nickname.
The initiative was discussed in the Government Affairs Committee. Thank goodness, legislators didn't act. According to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, there are concerns about the cost of changing the name even though the change would not mandate changing license plates or by tourism.
Sanders claims there is no cost claims. He says the effort is about a vision.
Our state's vision is my concern as well. I like the message provided by "The Natural State." Our uniquely natural environment is our best opportunity, one that is enviable. I would hate to see our state mirror other states whose focus is strictly economic development over that of the environment. I would never want to see the Arkansas legislature turn its back on the environment in favor of concrete and asphalt and border-to-border building as has been done elsewhere.
Costs must be measured beyond dollars and cents. In my view, this is one change that isn't needed. And it is certainly is one we can afford.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Sarah Palin celebrity: Mission Accomplished
Since the shooting in Tucson, there has been a firestorm of controversy regarding the now infamous map
put out by NRA sweetheart Sarah Palin, in which she 'targets'
congressmen/women who voted for health care legislation for defeat.
The map which put several congressional districts in the United States in the crosshairs, also included the name of the 'targeted' congressmen/women. One of those was U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who now fights for her life after a gunman put a bullet through her brain in an attempted assassination.
There is no explanation for a maniac with a gun as there there is also no explanation for the coming together of the events of Jan. 8, 2011 that resulted in the death of six innocent people and the wounding of 14 others, including Congresswoman Giffords.
Thanks to Palin's map, if she set out to make a name for herself. Mission accomplished.
I admit that I am hardly a fan of Ms. Palin. In fact, I pretty much abhor her politics.
While her actions have been far from benign, Palin likely did not influence the shooter in Tucson.
Nor is the ramped-up use of partisan vitriol since around the time Palin entered the political scene solely to blame. And in spite of the woman and her cohorts instigating contempt from many places, I will stop short of defending Palin.
In my view, her brow-beating style of politics is deplorable, intimidating, and destructive. I admit that upon hearing of the shooting, I too remembered Sarah's map during the last election. I was appalled by it then, as I remain today.
While Sarah can be given no responsibility for the heinous shooting spree of this deranged young man, she should open her eyes to the possibility that if not him, perhaps someone else could take her suggestions seriously.
It is also my view that Sarah Palin is not intellectually capable of understanding that her actions are indeed incitive. They are ignorant and irresponsible.
While posting a map with gunsights on it, is for me a deplorable act, it is what she knows. In Sarah Palin's world, there is nothing wrong with targeting people much like she finds no fault in targeting defenseless animals for her own amusement. In the larger frame, one which Palin purports to want to lead, there is very much a problem with such an attitude.
That is why I believe Sarah Palin is done with her political play-acting. She has had her fifteen minutes of fame. It is time for her to go back to Alaska and cavort with the caribou. She should quietly retreat from the national stage for which she has thrust herself.
During the election of 2012 when Barack Obama wins his second term as our President, I don't even want to hear the name, Sarah Palin.
The map which put several congressional districts in the United States in the crosshairs, also included the name of the 'targeted' congressmen/women. One of those was U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who now fights for her life after a gunman put a bullet through her brain in an attempted assassination.
There is no explanation for a maniac with a gun as there there is also no explanation for the coming together of the events of Jan. 8, 2011 that resulted in the death of six innocent people and the wounding of 14 others, including Congresswoman Giffords.
Thanks to Palin's map, if she set out to make a name for herself. Mission accomplished.
I admit that I am hardly a fan of Ms. Palin. In fact, I pretty much abhor her politics.
While her actions have been far from benign, Palin likely did not influence the shooter in Tucson.
Nor is the ramped-up use of partisan vitriol since around the time Palin entered the political scene solely to blame. And in spite of the woman and her cohorts instigating contempt from many places, I will stop short of defending Palin.
In my view, her brow-beating style of politics is deplorable, intimidating, and destructive. I admit that upon hearing of the shooting, I too remembered Sarah's map during the last election. I was appalled by it then, as I remain today.
While Sarah can be given no responsibility for the heinous shooting spree of this deranged young man, she should open her eyes to the possibility that if not him, perhaps someone else could take her suggestions seriously.
It is also my view that Sarah Palin is not intellectually capable of understanding that her actions are indeed incitive. They are ignorant and irresponsible.
While posting a map with gunsights on it, is for me a deplorable act, it is what she knows. In Sarah Palin's world, there is nothing wrong with targeting people much like she finds no fault in targeting defenseless animals for her own amusement. In the larger frame, one which Palin purports to want to lead, there is very much a problem with such an attitude.
That is why I believe Sarah Palin is done with her political play-acting. She has had her fifteen minutes of fame. It is time for her to go back to Alaska and cavort with the caribou. She should quietly retreat from the national stage for which she has thrust herself.
During the election of 2012 when Barack Obama wins his second term as our President, I don't even want to hear the name, Sarah Palin.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Shooting in Tucson
We must look at the big picture, Let's raise the bar
Being a news hound can be a horror, as was the case Saturday. I spent the day engrossed in the coverage of the attempted assassination of a U.S. Congresswoman and subsequent slaying of six other innocent people in Tucson, Arizona.
Let's try harder to get it right?
I first learned of the tragedy through email from at least three well-respected news organizations under the heading, "Breaking News." A short time after the initial news of the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, another "Breaking News" item reported that she had been killed and four people were dead. The items were presented as a simple statement. There was no mention of non-verified information. Countless Twitter posts echoed those initial reports.
During a catastrophic event, we all hunger for details as we seek any shred of hope for which to cling onto. Such a traumatic scene can be chaotic. Only after switching to television news did I learn that Congresswoman Giffords was still alive and in surgery as she continued to fight for her life.
Comfort from official statements
Official statements were offered by Speaker John Boehner, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, many of Giffords' colleagues. Even President Obama addressed the nation, as he offered heartfelt sympathies to all those affected by this tragedy. His statement was terse; his demeanor was solemn. It was strangely comforting.
"An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve," Boehner said.
Congressmen may not get it
Correction Mr. Boehner. An attack on one who serves is an attack on all of us. This act was not just against a member of congress, it was an attack on a human being who happens to be a Congressional Representative. Yes, it could happen to any one of you, but it could also happen to any one of us.
There has already been talk of possibly implementing some type of security for members of Congress, though early indications suggest such a special detail would be dismissed by members themselves. Good, because I have to ask, will I have security when I go to my local McDonald's or other fast-food restaurant where shootings have taken place and innocent people have been mowed down? Will there be special security in my grandchildren's elementary school, at the place where my children work, or other places of learning and working, which have been similar scenes of untold tragedy?
It's all about guns
Let us not miss the point. This was a violent act, that is not unlike many that have already played themselves out in quiet neighborhoods in residential, commercial and industrial locations in both rural and urban areas across the country. This happened to occur in an upscale Tucson, AZ neighborhood. But what about all the other neighborhoods across the country where this kind of act occurs on a nightly basis? What about the inner cities where killings are sadly commonplace? It seems this domestic terrorism is far more imminent than foreign terrorism. People are just not safe in their own neighborhoods. There are too many guns on the street, and what's more, they are killing machines.
Perhaps this heinous act in Tucson will illustrate to members of Congress that there is a problem with the ability of people, all people, any people, to obtain a semi-automatic weapon—a very efficient killing machine. What is the purpose for anyone having a 9mm Glock that has the ability to rapidly fire into at least 18 innocent people's bodies in a matter of moments? Why would anyone need one of those? Why are assault weapons made, except to use them for slaying or maiming innocent people?
According to one news source, this weapon would have been banned had the Congress not let the assault weapons ban expire during the Bush Administration. Had that been done, this shooter may not have been able to carry out this act.
Tone down the rhetoric if you want, but the real issue is our domestic weapons of mass destruction. The first amendment which guarantees our freedom of speech is being pushed to the limits. But sticks and stones mean little when compared to the abuses of the second amendment. Those who wrote the amendment never envisioned a 9mm Glock in the back pocket of a mentally ill person who hated the government. It is lunacy to defend such an indefensible act.
Instead of the first discussions in the 112th congress being about added security for elite congressional members, shouldn't the discussion be about curbing the over-arching violence experienced in this country. The people's house has been tampered with. Welcome to our world.
Being a news hound can be a horror, as was the case Saturday. I spent the day engrossed in the coverage of the attempted assassination of a U.S. Congresswoman and subsequent slaying of six other innocent people in Tucson, Arizona.
Let's try harder to get it right?
I first learned of the tragedy through email from at least three well-respected news organizations under the heading, "Breaking News." A short time after the initial news of the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, another "Breaking News" item reported that she had been killed and four people were dead. The items were presented as a simple statement. There was no mention of non-verified information. Countless Twitter posts echoed those initial reports.
During a catastrophic event, we all hunger for details as we seek any shred of hope for which to cling onto. Such a traumatic scene can be chaotic. Only after switching to television news did I learn that Congresswoman Giffords was still alive and in surgery as she continued to fight for her life.
Comfort from official statements
Official statements were offered by Speaker John Boehner, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, many of Giffords' colleagues. Even President Obama addressed the nation, as he offered heartfelt sympathies to all those affected by this tragedy. His statement was terse; his demeanor was solemn. It was strangely comforting.
"An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve," Boehner said.
Congressmen may not get it
Correction Mr. Boehner. An attack on one who serves is an attack on all of us. This act was not just against a member of congress, it was an attack on a human being who happens to be a Congressional Representative. Yes, it could happen to any one of you, but it could also happen to any one of us.
There has already been talk of possibly implementing some type of security for members of Congress, though early indications suggest such a special detail would be dismissed by members themselves. Good, because I have to ask, will I have security when I go to my local McDonald's or other fast-food restaurant where shootings have taken place and innocent people have been mowed down? Will there be special security in my grandchildren's elementary school, at the place where my children work, or other places of learning and working, which have been similar scenes of untold tragedy?
It's all about guns
Let us not miss the point. This was a violent act, that is not unlike many that have already played themselves out in quiet neighborhoods in residential, commercial and industrial locations in both rural and urban areas across the country. This happened to occur in an upscale Tucson, AZ neighborhood. But what about all the other neighborhoods across the country where this kind of act occurs on a nightly basis? What about the inner cities where killings are sadly commonplace? It seems this domestic terrorism is far more imminent than foreign terrorism. People are just not safe in their own neighborhoods. There are too many guns on the street, and what's more, they are killing machines.
Perhaps this heinous act in Tucson will illustrate to members of Congress that there is a problem with the ability of people, all people, any people, to obtain a semi-automatic weapon—a very efficient killing machine. What is the purpose for anyone having a 9mm Glock that has the ability to rapidly fire into at least 18 innocent people's bodies in a matter of moments? Why would anyone need one of those? Why are assault weapons made, except to use them for slaying or maiming innocent people?
According to one news source, this weapon would have been banned had the Congress not let the assault weapons ban expire during the Bush Administration. Had that been done, this shooter may not have been able to carry out this act.
Tone down the rhetoric if you want, but the real issue is our domestic weapons of mass destruction. The first amendment which guarantees our freedom of speech is being pushed to the limits. But sticks and stones mean little when compared to the abuses of the second amendment. Those who wrote the amendment never envisioned a 9mm Glock in the back pocket of a mentally ill person who hated the government. It is lunacy to defend such an indefensible act.
Instead of the first discussions in the 112th congress being about added security for elite congressional members, shouldn't the discussion be about curbing the over-arching violence experienced in this country. The people's house has been tampered with. Welcome to our world.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Love OWN, Oprah Winfrey's new network
I celebrated the New Year with some serious couch potato activities.
Sunday night was delightful, as I checked out Oprah's new OWN (Oprah Winfrey Network), a so much better choice than watching Sarah Palin shoot defenseless animals.
I give Oprah's new network rave reviews. I loved the Master Class piece with Diane Sawyer. I've always liked Sawyer, but there was so much I didn't know about her, like the fact that she worked for Richard Nixon during and after he left the White House. As a retired journalist, I could relate easily to Sawyer's professed quest for truth and her being driven by curiosity.
I felt as though the audience and I gained an understanding of how Oprah knows Diane Sawyer, and how she respects her and her work.
I also enjoyed the All Stars show with Dr. Oz, Dr. Phil, and Suze Orman. The show had the structure of a Dr. Oz show, where nothing is out of bounds when it comes to learning about, in this case, the body, the mind, and our financial health.
I've also enjoyed the behind-the-scenes footage. After working in a newsroom, it was easy to relate to the 'nuts and bolts' of the shows.
I would say it appears that from an audience perspective, Oprah delivered a healthy, happy, bouncing baby network that is in fine health and promises to grow to be successful and very healthy.
I've enjoyed Oprah's journey since she came to Chicago and am anxious to follow this, her latest endeavor. I wish her all the luck in the world, although she probably doesn't need it.
Sunday night was delightful, as I checked out Oprah's new OWN (Oprah Winfrey Network), a so much better choice than watching Sarah Palin shoot defenseless animals.
I give Oprah's new network rave reviews. I loved the Master Class piece with Diane Sawyer. I've always liked Sawyer, but there was so much I didn't know about her, like the fact that she worked for Richard Nixon during and after he left the White House. As a retired journalist, I could relate easily to Sawyer's professed quest for truth and her being driven by curiosity.
I felt as though the audience and I gained an understanding of how Oprah knows Diane Sawyer, and how she respects her and her work.
I also enjoyed the All Stars show with Dr. Oz, Dr. Phil, and Suze Orman. The show had the structure of a Dr. Oz show, where nothing is out of bounds when it comes to learning about, in this case, the body, the mind, and our financial health.
I've also enjoyed the behind-the-scenes footage. After working in a newsroom, it was easy to relate to the 'nuts and bolts' of the shows.
I would say it appears that from an audience perspective, Oprah delivered a healthy, happy, bouncing baby network that is in fine health and promises to grow to be successful and very healthy.
I've enjoyed Oprah's journey since she came to Chicago and am anxious to follow this, her latest endeavor. I wish her all the luck in the world, although she probably doesn't need it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)