parties, gender equality, and the law of war...

well, lieberman lost his bid for the democratic nomination for his own senate seat...to which i say, good for the democratic voters of connecticut. but, lieberman has filed to be placed on the ballot as a third party candidate...to which i say, good for joe lieberman. let me explain...lieberman is a fool and bought into the "tough on defense" bullshit, and it will most likely cost him his job (barring a miracle come november). perhaps the democratic party of connecticut finally woke up and realized it had been supporting conservative assholes for too long because they weren't quite as conservative or as big of assholes as the guy with (R-Conn) after his name (because, god forbid we get too many female senators...that would shake up the proper social order - which we will get to below). but then the democratic party once again proved it has lost touch with the ideals that transformed it from a party of racial oppression and war-mongering (the torch which it passed onto the republicans decades ago) to one of humanity and compassion...its leaders basically came out and told lieberman he is an asshole for running for office anyways and that the "democratic voters have spoken"...by this they are of course ignoring the lack of voter turn out in primaries and are implying that anyone who is not either the front runner for democrats or republicans need not apply. for that, i say fuck the democratic party (which should rename itself the "american lesser-of-two-evils party") - well, that and for moving right constantly rather than standing their ground and for allowing the conservative christian numbnuts usurp the claim of morality when their morality is un-american. so if you are in connecticut...don't vote for a democrat, don't vote for a republican, and don't vote for lieberman...find another candidate worthy of your vote, stop throwing it away on the same old bullshit and make it count by putting in the column of someone that represents what you truly believe.

the FDA is re-considering Plan B...although the restrictions it suggests are crack-smoking stupid - for instance, they are requesting its over the counter use be limited to women over the age of 18 but require anyone under 18 to get a prescription. basically, this means that the group of people that need it over the counter the most, young girls unprepared for motherhood and less likely to be mature enough to handle the embarassment (compliments of the christian right who labels them whores, although any strict christian parent should be aware that it is your children who are sexually active, big time) thereby making them less likely than those over 18 to seek a prescription (or know where to go to get one without paying a shitload for a doctor's visit and exposing themselves to the scorn of over-bearing strict parents whose attitude towards life makes them more likely to beat their children). makes perfect sense...keep it from those that need it the most and are the least likely to ask for it but give it to those that need it less and are more likely to ask for it. the brilliance of conservative views on morality on birth control.

and here is the problem with the conservative view on abortion...it considers pregnancy and child-birth punishment for the transgressions of the mother, for her inability to control her sexual urges (although notice, the father doesn't get much punishment...but really, they aren't sexist at all). responsibility for your own actions is what they love to tell you...but then their stance makes children responsible for the actions of their mothers and fathers. this bullshit with making Plan B available to those over 18 while putting in road blocks for those under 18 also manages to punish those who are less culpable - i.e. those subject to juvenile punishment rather than adult sanctions - and not those that are more culpable. the brilliance of conservative morality on birth control.

that being said, it is a step in the right direction for gender equality...which the theocratic republican party is attempting to role back. it is no mistake that women made major strides towards equality when birth control and reproductive rights took hold in this country. which is exactly why the conservative, rich men in power are so threatened by it...it shakes up the moral order that they see as ideal...god over man, man over woman. forcing women to go through child birth keeps them from pursuing things like equal rights, equal opportunity and serious careers. this is why conservatives are against choice...to punish and to maintain the "moral order."

israel's actions are illegal. a recent, ongoing discussion about this has shown me that people do not understand that laws surrounding the conduct of war and when war is legal. i hear a lot of israel supporters declaring that israel has a right to defend itself...but that right is limited by international law (and was done so, ironically enough, in response to nazi aggression...my how the tables have turned). self defense for a soveriegn nation must be limited first to those actions directly proportional to the harm suffered...in this case, a limited skirmish leaving a handful of israeli soldiers dead and two taken prisoner (all though some believe collective harm fits in...but if you want to go to collective harm, then Hezbollah - assuming for purposes of this blog that it is a state actor, which it is not, which means you cannot go to war against it - had every right to kill a few soldiers and kidnap a few given the devastation israel wrought on Lebanon and the detainment of scores of lebanese). this is what makes israel's actions illegal...dismantling the infrastructure of a country (that was not responsible) and slaughtering hundreds of civilians (even if you drop leaflets telling them they are going to be killed first) while levelling an entire section of lebanon is so far out of whack with the harm it is clearly retribution and collective punishment...both very much illegal when it comes to warfare.

but this is what happens when the united states tries to unilaterally redefine laws surrounding war...suddenly acts that german leaders were put to death for after nuremburg become acceptable acts of "self-defense" - and by this i mean "preemptive" wars, that are actually wars of aggression...the western powers did not make targetting civilians a crime at nuremburg because the allies participated in wholesale slaughter of civilians, which american leaders even referred to as "terror bombing" at the time, and which, then, as now, served only to strengthen opposition to the allies - but really, your country has never done anything immoral.

america...i wish you would stay where you are...