For Step One Click Here

So I have a new venture I just launched at youtube, and this is one of the fruits of my labor. I came up with an ad for the podcast! It addresses many of the issues that we as people are facing that some of us are somehow oblivious to. Hopefully it gets you thinking. Remember, if you’re not angry, you’re not paying attention.

Here it is

It seems that here in today’s political climate, you can’t escape the ever present rash of bigotry. I knew it would happen. When the race began, and we had prominent, popular candidates who were female and black,I knew that issues would never be the at the forefront of the media’s discussion or tone. I figured the -isms would take over and dominate the discussion (along with the normal amount of political backbiting and mudslinging, of course. Or should I say, I knew that their tone would at least be felt, and low and behold I was right.

Sexism and racism reared their ugly heads and seemed to leap forward to form the basis of the masses opinions of the candidates. With sexism taking more of a precedent, because men don’t want to lose this seat of power after all this time. That, and given the societal conditioning of the general public with regards to gender roles, people don’t think that we are ready for a female President. It’s not her stance on the issues that people focus on as the x-factor of her campaign, it’s the extra x-chromosome that they focus on. “Sorry, Hil, too many x’s, go off and have a good cry why don’t you, for you are never going to be qualified to lead here in the U.S.” they seem to say.

And now ageism has turned up as well. Chuck Norris, Huckabee backer, was just reported as having said that John McCain is too old to be president, because the stress of the job would do be too much for him, and age him quicker than other candidates. Hmmm, Chuck, like who?

Can we not stop this shit already and just look at the fucking qualifications of the people running? Is it too much to ask that we have an all inclusive forum wherein all qualified individuals who wish to run be given the opportunity to do so? Can we not let go of the -isms of fear, yet? I thought it was supposed to be about what is best for the country, and I think that it would be best if we judged these people by what they had to say, not how they looked, their race, their age, or their gender.

Maybe we’ll get there….

Enough of this shit! New Hampshire just granted civil unions for same sex couples, and that’s a great step for some, but to me it’s like the humane slaughter debate in the vegan community. It doesn’t fix the problem. It pacifies it. The problem is the denying of rights to same sex couples in this country where we are all supposed to be protected equally under the law. And we aren’t!

Once again, I’m left shaking my head, wondering where the fuck the disconnect is. Why is this injustice allowed to stand? The answer…religion. Marriage is not a government institution (it is only for some reason recognized by the government to judge the base of your value…I mean taxes, but we’ll get to that.) no, marriage is a religious institution. A contract between two people* and God (*the aforementioned people being of the opposite sex, of course). Oh, so at the core, this argument is being made from a religious standpoint…no wonder there is so much intolerance attached.

So if marriage is a religious institution (must be presided over by a registered member of the clergy) then it has no place having any kind of bearing on our government or it’s policies. (I told you we’d get there) I say that marriage across the board be stricken from the government’s records, and all citizens who wish to be joined in civil union can and will be. Then the government and big business (which aren’t they really the same thing at this point anyway) can recognize only civil unions to determine the status and benefit allotments for every person in this land of the free** (**again, the aforementioned free refers to only to heterosexual white males with an upper level annual income, all other ‘citizens’ need to refer to the amended definition of ‘free’).

Religious institutions can still have their ceremonies and those wishing to participate in them can go for it and have their exclusive club ripe with self-righteous indignation, but it won’t get them any special recognition in the eyes of our government and our employers. Isn’t that truly the way it should be? If all of us aren’t free, then none of us deserve to be! Equal protection and acknowledgment shouldn’t be a pipe dream…it’s supposed to be the way it is.