The end of the [white] world?

Maybe it's just me, but I feel like the days of white dudes like Mitt are numbered. *Disclaimer: that number is probably high, but is nonetheless numbered. Now that the American people have spoken (not just via electoral college, but by popular vote too), that number may be on its way down.

In DUD style, my aunt posted a sad status today:

Ah, yes. Fairness. Good versus evil. Lazy versus hardworking. Life should be fair and full of simple binaries. After a few refreshes and 20 minutes of nothing, I had to comment. Especially since there were already 2 likes. 

We could go through the my aunt's sad status line by line but I'd like to focus on reality. The American people have spoken and they chose Barack Obama. We could focus on how Governor Romney and the GOP botched their campaign, but let's not. Let's focus on what really happened: the voice of America has changed. Governor Romney and his gang had the money and a 25 point lead in white, male voters. President Obama had 71% of the Latino vote, 73% of the Asian vote, 93% of the African American vote, and 55% of women. You can have all the old, white men in the country, and they are nothing without everyone else. And everyone else is starting to count a lot more than those old, white men.

America and the American dream no longer seek the status and stature of the white man. We are becoming increasingly comfortable with our individual, ethnic, and communal identities. Linguistically, President Obama and Governor Romney illustrate that exact point. Have you ever seen Mittens try to land a joke? Barack on the other hand, is hilarious. The American heartland, which was once seen as a the truer America, is no more or less true that urban centers (you know, those places filled with traffic, buildings, and people of color). These ideas that we've had about America are quickly becoming useless (GOP, are you listening?). We aren't a white, agrarian society anymore-- we don't need summers off to harvest corn. I don't have to get married to exist in this world. We are a diverse, innovative, technological, advanced country. We don't have to blindly follow the tradition of assimilation anymore. We can be pro-choice in every aspect of our lives.

The economy isn't just about money. It's about the choices we make, and how we live our lives. And for those people who continue to make choices and live their lives the way they post status updates (like the one above): you're welcome and you're lucky that there are plenty of people who live in the real America and show up when it counts. 

Sincerely,
1 of the 50.4% of voters who saved your asses


UPDATE 11-8-12 @ 12:58

Why is it that the Facebook posts of my GOP/conservative family members are so difficult for me to understand? Bad for our country, good for the blog. Shrugs.

UPDATE 11-8-12 @ 2:24

If he was talking about what I think, then he forgot about the gays.

Get your head outta the Cloud [Atlas]

I haven't seen the movie or read the book. I sure have heard about it though. Is Cloud Atlas a racist film? On purpose? Mehh, probably not. But all that "race bending" sure is ballsy. From my experience, you have to be pretty privileged to think up something like that in a time like this... Playing with race is a pretty touchy thing to do, especially in a country that is for the first time, a minority majority. 

So the movie is definitely not about race. Race is just the usual casualty of this type of... creativity. People from the film have defended their choices by calling the "race bending" not about race itself, but of humanity. I guess they're trying to show some transcendence-- an Asian woman can be a Latina, a white man can be Asian, a black woman can be a white lady... It's about humanity. Post-race, right? Any race, any person can perform any character, no matter what race because we've passed that shit. Right? Just slap on some light colored foundation on that dark skin and we're there. Asian? Slant-ish eyes. Boom! 

What I find problematic about this post-race/ transcendence is that we are still conforming to the most basic assumptions and stereotypes of race-- eyes, noses, skin color. We just put it on and we've nailed it. For something that is supposed to transcend seems to focus on some specific physical differences. And it doesn't even look cool. It looks like makeup.

The film got the most heat from Asian American organizations, who complained that the ridiculous looking dude in "yellow face" was just that: ridiculous. Asian men are super rare in film, especially in heroic, main-character-esque roles. To cast a white man with dumb wannabe Asian eyes is just insulting. 

My point is that the whole "post-race" thing is a cop-out. The transcendence thing, and the "we are all part of humanity" thing is bullshit. If we were really trying to get closer to transcendence and humanity, we would be casting Asian men. We would be casting people who are hardly ever casted in films-- not putting putting on yellow-face or brown face.  There are real implications to this: Asians are reduced to slanty eyes, Latinos reduced to brown skin... 

So before we get our societal heads stuck in the clouds, maybe we should deal with our white supremacist earth. 

My evening with a Japanese American Black Panther

On the subject graduate work in the humanities, there are two types of people: the believers and the skeptics. When I studied English and later comparative literature, I saw my share of concerned and perplexed looks. "But what will you DO with that? Teach?", as if teaching is an illegitimate goal. I thought I would go to law school, but have since then been living through detour after detour on this road trip of life. 

Last night I saw a talk on Richard Aoki, the samurai among panthers, by Dr. Diane Fujino. She recently published a biography about this Japanese-American activists and was presenting her work to her home campus of UC Santa Barbara. To say the least, it was inspiring seeing someone talk about one man who symbolized so much. A Japanese-American in the Black Panther Party. Is it really that hard to rationalize? He was a child of the internment camps, he lived in a black neighborhood in Oakland, he lived his life as the "other". I think we call get caught up in the hype of the Black Panthers, and even perhaps Black Studies, as being an exclusive group. But we forget why they're there in the first place-- they exist because they are real; they deserve to be heard, studied, and learned from. 

Anyone who dedicates themselves to the humanities isn't in it for the money (at least they shouldn't be 'cos they'll be disappointed), they're in it for what is owed to the past and what we hope for the future. They have to be in it for the long-game. No sprints. Not even a marathon. There is no end. History has been written once, through one perspective and it's time for it to by told by others. Richard Aoki was a prominent figure of the Third World Liberation Front who fought for Ethnic Studies to be added to university curriculum. He, and many others saw the status quo as... in my words: too white. Today, while there are many ethnic studies programs, there is no question that minority (well, soon to be majority) culture is still underrepresented. One of the panelists last night commented that Richard Aoki wouldn't say they failed, he'd say they just didn't finish the job.

At the beginning of the talk, Dr. Fujino was introduced by black studies professor, Dr. George Lipsitz who said that his profession is one of hope-- you write something and put it out there and hope someone is looking for it. I've been looking for this for a long time...

... The Bible tells me so

Not surprisingly, a family member of mine shared the above photo on Facebook today. She's young, so... translate that as you will. So far, it's been up for like, 5 hours and has 12 likes (weak-sauce).  Most headlines had Joe (who I wish could be my grandpa) winning overall. Bust out the Bible verses, armageddon is near. Sore losers much? Anyways, among the other ridiculous things popping up on my newsfeed since the Veep debates last night, this one kind of bothered me. There's something about invoking the Bible that grinds my gears, especially when it involves politics... 

Before any outsiders to my blog say I'm a godless harlot, I went to Church with my family on Sunday. Boo yah. My parents brought me up Methodist, and I grew up in a very liberal church. I wouldn't call myself a Christian, honestly. My Facebook profile lists Agnostic. I'm more of an appreciator of knowledge and ideas, no matter where they come from...

It just so happens that the pastor's sermon on Sunday was about the Bible. Divine intervention much? He opened his sermon by saying that the reason we come to church is to share, evolve, and grow together. Key word being evolve. He described the Bible as a "challenge document" that contains 66 different books, or canons, that were written, edited, and redacted by more than one hundred people over a period of 1500 years all over the old world. Despite it being one of the most important texts ever written in his opinion, he acknowledges that it is not an end-all and be-all. You can watch and listen to the sermon here: 

http://camvideo.sermonpodcasts.com/

Challenge document he says. He explains that when he reads the stories, which were the best form of science, faith, and knowledge at the time it was written (and rewritten) three thousand years ago, the world could have in fact been created in 7 days-- but it's not that is not the case today. We must use the Bible as a challenge document that gives birth to NEW and APPROPRIATE understandings. For example, Exodus. God parts the Red Sea to free the Jews from the Egyptians. The commodity of liberation is handed to you: Jews saved. Egyptians bad. It is a story of oppression and understanding the oppressor(s). Today though, he says, we can't look for a god to part the Pacific Ocean or bring down plague. Today, he says it is our challenge to look for liberation of gays and lesbians, of women, of Syria, of Libya.... The challenge is not to accept the status quo or the past, and instead to examine and change the future. We need to evolve.

So, lets. There are Bible verses specifically about debates? Jackpot. How enlightened you must be to repost this! You sure showed me how serious and holy memes can be sometimes. But I challenge your verse with all the other ones about lying. I probably won't find one that specifically talks about stimulus money, or defense budgets, or math... All that aside, I'm glad you didn't come up with any Bible-memes about abortion. 

My afternoon with Rachel Maddow

Ah, Rachel Maddow. She's brilliant. Despite being unable to sign my book after the show, her words, message, and overall charm were more than enough to inspire and motivate. My sister and I were two of the about two-thousand patrons of the Arlington Theater in Santa Barbara yesterday afternoon. It was a comfort to see how many people came in support -- there's hope for America after all!

When I first started watching Rachel on MSNBC three years ago, there was very little not to like about her. If anything, there were those petty complaints a girl can have about another of her kind. But her wit, humility, and command of subject matter earned her the right to be imperfect in other ways. In her talk, she explained how she doesn't think about the thousands (or millions) of viewers when she's broadcasting. She instead thinks of her partner, Susan, or the camera lady, Jackie, or her parents, and how she would explain things to them. The true sign of expertise in a field is the ability to accurately explain complex ideas to laymen, without making them feel inferior, and to the contrary, empowering them to take interest. This is what Rachel Maddow has done for me. She readily admits that there is no such thing as unbiased news, and the fact that I know who she is and what she stands for only strengthens my convictions in her. 

Her greatest show of command was during the q&a portion of the talk when she was asked about how people should vote. Her answer to question like these was simply that the vote is only one (small) tool we have as people, and that not voting, or voting a third-party long shot really isn't to get your voice heard in our system. She suggested, in a very nonjudgmental and matter-of-fact way, to align yourself with the candidate that most closely represents your interests, vote for them, and if s/he is elected, to pressure them do doing what needs to be done. Political power doesn't only come around once every two or four years-- we have it every day. 

There was a noticeable sigh from the audience when the topic of the presidential debates was brought up yesterday. But in true Rachel-form, she quickly put both hands up and with a ear to ear smile, reassured the audience that it's OK because there are still 3 more debates coming up and everything will be fine. She is no pessimist. She is such an optimist that it's contagious. Probably for that reason, the audience roared in applause when she was asked if she considers running for political office one day. She was flattered but answered no, and left us with one of the most empowering statements of the night: She began by saying how honored she is to have so many people sitting in the dark on such a beautiful Sunday in "beach town" listening to her speak because we agree on so many issues. Then she posed the question: Why don't you run? There's about two-thousand people here who would probably vote for you too.

Maybe I will one day, Rachel. Maybe I will.

Trick or Treat-- Chicken Feet

It's been a while. Sorry. I got kind of busy, but don't take my lack of presence as a lack of interest. The DNC was awesome, and I made my first political donation to Obama for America. I also got a shirt, pictured above and premiered it over the weekend. 

I'm always careful in choosing outfits when visiting home because my mom is very... opinionated about what I wear. But this tank is no doubt super-cute. Plus it was like, 100 degrees, so it was totally appropriate. Like starting this blog, I decided that wearing the shirt is like standing up for myself, and could be an invitation to have some political discourse for supporters or opponents to the President. The only conversation I had, unsurprisingly was annoying, but short. Nonetheless, it prompted me to share. 

Wearing my super cute shirt, I sit at the 10 person round table for lunch. Another uncle, not Uncle Dave, but one who is similarly opinionated about "life", noticed my shirt and asked if I like President Obama. Uhm. Duh. I answer politely with a "yes". My aunt adds that he made a great speech at the DNC, to which I say, "everyone at the DNC who spoke was amazing". My uncle, willing to take the conversation "there" says, "Do you watch MSNBC?" Uhm. Duh again, I'm still smiling, but I know where this is going. So predictable. I knew what he was going to say next. "That's why you like him. Because you watch MSNBC. I used to watch MSNBC, and I used to like him too, but I don't anymore. They really like him, so that's why you do." 

Ugh. &$%@#!. I don't know what it is that make people think that I can't make my own decisions, political or otherwise. First of all, who gives a shit if I watch MSNBC? Secondly, it's MSNBC, not Fox. I don't have statistics on this but I would think that MSNBC viewers are more likely to fact check than Fox fans. But besides that, MSNBC calls the President out a lot. Have you ever watched Morning Joe or the Ed Show? Of course they like him, it's a liberal, progressive network, and the President leans that way. It's called, having similar interests. Duh. 

I only manage to say that the network is progressive, but am interrupted when the waiter comes to take our order. They have dim sum, and he asks if we'd like an order of chicken feet because its made to order or something. Another aunt laughs and says no to the feet, but I say I want to try it cos I'd never had it before. But more about the chicken feet later.

I missed my chance to finish the conversation with my uncle. Enough time passed between his diagnosis of my support and the ordering of food that it would've been in bad taste (IMO) to return to the subject, especially due to how ridiculous it was. A full 24-hours later, I think back to it and wish the waiter showed up 30 seconds later. That's all it would've taken for me to say what I needed to: I like the President because of all he's done despite the lack of support from the Right, not to mention the birthers and other "fringe" (yet mainstream) crazies out there, and Fox News. Moreover, the President is a symbol for the disenfranchised. He gets minority groups excited about politics and the possibilities of the future, which is super cool IMO. He's realistic, he comes from humble means, and has an amazing wife. He seems like an overall cool guy, brewing beer, playing basketball, and partying with Jay-Z, etc... The Affordable Healthcare Act and making family planning a mandatory service of insurance? TIIIGHT. If that's not enough, he killed Osama Bin Laden, for christ's sake. So before you tell me that the only reason I like President Barack Obama is MSNBC, you should ask yourself if you're willing to accuse me of being dumb. I can think for myself. I know what issues are important to me, and the President seems to be in my corner. If that's not enough, maybe you should ask 49% of voters if they have cable. 

Back to the chicken feet, because I know you're curious. The waiter must've forgotten to put the order in because after about 15 minutes of a foot-less lazy susan, we had to remind him about the order. 4 feet came out in a steel dim sum steamer. They weren't what I expected. I thought they'd be deep fried, but they were steamed or boiled or something because they were squishy and kind of gelatinous.  I took a foot and put in on my plate and just looked at it for a minute. My uncle, who is not of the minority-persuasion, laughed and said, "you know, if you don't just eat it, you'll psych yourself out and won't go through with eating it". That was it. Enough assumptions. I couldn't tell him off before because the moment passed, but not this time. I looked up at him, sighed, and said, "look man, I'm not afraid of food. I ordered it because I haven't tried it before, and because I've never eaten it, I'm just looking at how I should eat it before I do. Have you ever tried this?" to which he replied "no". "Well are you going to have one now?" "No." "Then I don't know why you're talking about it like that, so please just let me eat it and sssshh." No one said anything after that for a minute or two.

It wasn't a dare to eat it. It's food. It's food that nations of people eat. I wanted to try it, at least once, and I had that opportunity in front me. So I took it. Just because you think it's weird or gross, or just because you don't have the awareness, decency, or respect to shut the fuck up, doesn't make you exempt from being told. That shit is just irritating, right? Makes sense that he would look at chicken feet that way considering his broad assumptions on why I support the President. The President has given me the opportunity to be excited about politics, and sure MSNBC adds to the excitement with its interesting opinions and broadcasts. But it starts with me, my struggles and concerns as a young, female Filipino-American, and ends with my decision and vote. Duh. 

I loved the DNC

The DNC blew the RNC out of the water. The RNC looked like amateur hour compared to the past three days of the DNC. My god. I'm fired up, even more than before, just the FLOTUS wants me to be. HE is the POTUS, who's been making the tough choices for us all. 

Dang, Uncle Dave, how can you not love this guy? I've been a mess for the past three days because of all the speeches I've been watching. It wasn't like the nausea and disgust I felt last week, during the RNC. Everyone who spoke at the DNC gets me. And if you don't feel the same, I would conclude that you have no soul.

Way to go, President Obama. You are MY president. You represent my interests as a woman, the child of immigrants, and a young person looking for innovation, change, and hope. 

Best. Speech(es). Ever. #DNC

Now, make your donations!

The fact is, you should just trust me.

Election 2012 is not about the economy, Medicare, or policy-- it's about trust, which is kind of hard to have nowadays. There are so many distractions, motives, and scandals that there is no credibility left.... I mean, look at Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson. ($#@&^!!) The institutions and people we used to turn to for truth are now corrupt or bought. Even entire media networks operate 24/7 with an agenda (cough ..FOX, cough). For every idea, there's a website or voice who validates it with expert testimony, statistics, and research.  How else  could your vegan- libertarian brother in-law cyber-scream all those "facts" at you?

The campaign ads alone will make you paranoid. But the trust-me thing doesn't stop there.  This theme has manifested itself in several different ways this season, which maybe isn't new, but it's certainly overwhelmingly in your face. Well, maybe not in yours, but in mine for sure. 

Mitt Romney won't release his tax records, but we should trust that he's done what is legally required, which according to him, isn't less than a whopping 13%. But we just have to take his word for it. Same goes for his stance on his economic plan. Generally, he wants to cut taxes, reduce spending, but the details are for us to trust him with, and he knows it will all work out. Paul Ryan says he didn't accept stimulus money, but did, and then said he just couldn't recall. He also says that President Obama stole $70Billion from Medicare to put in into Obamacare... we were supposed to trust that it stopped there. He neglects to mention that his plan would've done the same thing, except he wouldn't put it back into "care". This past week, Romney and Ryan have changed positions on Medicare and the economy, it amazes me how they act like their current position has been their only position. For a littler perspective, President Obama was questioned for being a real American aaaand he showed us all his birth certificate. Interesting....

I've always thought that voting for the President was like voting for the person who essentially represents you and your interests. How do you even know what Romney has to offer? Is it trust? Me thinks not. 

And speaking of voting, are we supposed to believe trust that voter fraud is a problem? Or, do we trust that voter ID requirements would mostly affect inner-city minorities who can't afford cars (or a driver's license)? Do we believe that in 2008 more voters than before were young, poor, and African American? I think we know who they voted for... Trust me. ;P

It's got to be Paul Ryan (but I certainly hope not)

A week ago, 5 of my friends "liked" Mitt Romney. Today there are 7. Did Mitt release his tax returns? Did he actually answer a question? Do they feel bad because Rafalca didn't medal? Is it the commercials? I thought about posting another status asking the "what's to like" question, but considering the crickets I heard last time, I'm not gonna pull a Romney and repeat something that's pointless.

I really hope that the 2 newest likes for Romney don't have anything to do with his veep pick, Paul Ryan. Do people NOT know about Ryan? Do people understand the implications of having Ryan as a Veep? 

Ryan in a hoot. First of all, a very good friend of mine said he dyes his hair. So he's a liar. Do you see all of President Obama's grays? At least he's honest. Other than that, just to name a couple things, here's what I know about Ryan:

• He voted against the Lilly Ledbetter fair pay act
• He believes live begins at FERTILIZATION (wtf)
• He wants to defund Planned Parenthood
• He wants to turn Medicare into a voucher program
• He wants to cut Medicaid
• He basically wants to criminalize abortions

Oh and he says that President Obama is driving our country into the ground. Right. Cos all the things he wants and believes in wouldn't. He's such a forward-thinking man, that Ryan! 

I really don't think that those 7 people believe that planned parenthood should be defunded, or that abortions should be illiegal, or that women shouldn't be paid at a decent rate... So what do they believe in? They don't believe in President Obama, and they like Mitt Romney. Maybe they seem themselves in Romney's message of "you did that on your own (so don't give back or give anyone else a chance)". 

All I can hope for is that swing voters aren't as batshit-crazy as these 7 friends of mine...

Well, he's not boring (just scary)

It's on: Mitt Romney chose Paul Ryan, an equally scary man, perhaps scarier, as his Veep. Elections are just around the corner, but this is where we seem to be at. I really can't imagine America's toss-up states to go with the Romney-Ryan duo. At least I really hope not. I have faith in you, America. Even though you have proven to be untrustworthy.

What's to "like"?

Of my 686 Facebook friends, 5 "like" Mitt Romney. Yea, I had to take a second to process that too. I went so far as to go to Mitt Romney's Facebook page to confirm this. Most of my Facebook friends is a friend of one type or another, so of course, I respect their opinions. This one too, sort of... But I am very curious to know what it is about Romney that they like. If it's just because they don't like President Obama, then it's not really a "like" for Romney... it's just a like by default. That's not really winning. So I posted the following:

I have yet to receive an answer from a Romney fan. My most vocal Republican supporter for which this blog is primarily dedicated to is no longer my Facebook friend, so I have been waiting since yesterday for someone else to step up. I realized that anyone directly connected to me on Facebook can see I am a progressive, Pro-President Obama kind of gal, which is exactly why I worded it the way I did. I even added the disclaimer that this is a freebie. But no....

I did a little stalking of these 5 friends and (not surprisingly) discovered that 2/5 listed themselves as conservative, 1 claimed Latter Day Saints as their religion, 1 is from the middle east, and they are all pretty young. Coincidence?

So why like him? I'm not sure what there is to like because I haven't heard him actually stand for anything. In most interviews I've seen, he dodges questions, has no stance on anything, and isn't funny (if he is, it isn't on purpose). Granted, I get a lot of my news from the lame-stream media, so I may be biased. I decided to check out MittRomney.com, which confirmed things I don't like:

• Values:
• He wants to over-turn Roe v. Wade and defund Planned Parenthood
• He supports "traditional marriage" (aka, anti-gay marriage rights)
• Energy:
• He prioritizes carbon-based energy sources
• Immigration:
• High-fence border between the U.S. and Mexico
• Taxes:
• Cut corporate taxes by 25%
• "Smaller, Simpler, Smarter Government"
• Privatize Amtrak
• Defund the National Endowments for Arts and Humanities 
• Reversal of Obama-era Defense cuts
• Reduce federal workforce by 10%

Oh, and did I mention, most of those sections began with a description of President Obama's failures? So is it about really liking Mitt Romney, or hating the President?

After a lot of squinting and head-scratching, I had enough. I don't get it. If they knew all of that, would they still like him? How does any of that seem like a good idea? The only way that could happen is if someone told them to... FOX NEWS! But no, none of them liked Fox News.

I guess it won't be that easy to figure out. This will continue to perplex me just as much as Chick-fil-a appreciation day. I just hope the swing voters aren't as crazy. ;)

I know I shouldn't, but I kind of like it...

Ah, I haven't lost my touch. That ability to concisely articulate my opinion and get an angry reaction from a family member. It doesn't matter if we are blood related or connected by some institutional technicality, but I gone done it again. Sorry, Uncle Dave, you aren't the only one. 

I know what comes with going against the grain, or the family... but IDK, true colors intrigue me. It's very interesting to see how one will react to my "radically liberal" views. Uncle Dave at least attempts to reason with me condescendingly before deleting me as a friend, but this one is new: "So what's your fucking point" followed by "if you love the gays so much you can go to hell with them and get aids". 

Interesting.

Those two sentences were posted on a chick-fil-a related wall post on another relative's wall. Her friends were having an interesting discussion of it, and I even contributed a funny in there. A day after the record-braking sales day for the anti-gay fast food chain, it became apparent how much it wasn't just about the chicken. It's about the gays, and how they should all go to hell like they're supposed to. 

One thing is for sure: I will say what I think if I feel that it's necessary. In this case, that was true. The original status update was the "what's the big deal" stance. "Hate Sandwich Bonanza" is on the front page of HuffPost today, and the pictures don't lie. People stood in lines that wrapped around the building and waited for hours to reach the counter, order the traditional "family meal" (get it?), and tell the person at the counter how all the faggots should die. OK, not everyone said that last part, but some totally did. A lot of them probably said stuff like, "I support marriage between a man and a woman, just like chick-fil-a does". But still. You didn't go to chick-fil-a yesterday for the hot sauce. 

Back to the post: I prefaced my commented by saying "I just gotta say", meaning, "really, I tried to hold it back but I just can't". And I put it out there. It's not a freedom of speech issue. It's more of a anti-hate issue. Chick-fil-a's philanthropy consists of donating millions to anti-gay organizations, including the Pray the Gay Away stuff. wtf. I thought I was being pretty light and polite about it, and I even said that I anticipate being called lame-stream... but I guess lame-stream doesn't always encompass the fate of hell and/or AIDS.

It all started with "what's the big deal? it's just chicken and you're really missing out on a great sandwich". 

Well, it IS a big deal when people respond to a boycott by doing the opposite of boycotting (in masses). It's a big deal when Sarah Palin and her wife husband, Todd have to stop by for a photo-op. And it's honestly, kind of a big deal if you have to testify on Facebook that the sandwiches are so good that you don't care about any of this since you're the winner who gets the yummy chicken. It must be a big deal if an inanimate, non-living, consumable thing's deliciousness is more important that a human being's rights... It's especially a big deal when someone tells you to go to hell and get AIDS because of it. 

Gay rights is just another component of the culture war, but it can't be dismissed in the name of tasty fast food. Being tolerant of gays existing isn't enough. Tolerance is not far from a dislike. It's probably a just few steps above hate. I tolerate the smell in public bathrooms, but I try to pee before I leave the house so I can avoid the hassle of tolerance. 

The post was deleted within 5 minutes of the crazy. It's unfortunate, but it's not hard to find similar rhetoric.

You are what you eat (on Chick-fil-A day)

Chick-fil-A: 5 Reasons It Isn't What You Think

Aug. 1: Chick-fil-A day. HAH. It looks like Uncle Dave isn't the only family member of mine who wants discriminatory free speech to be tolerated. Today is the day CFA fans are supposed to "come out" and support the Christian, anti-gay marriage business. And these supporters are citing the first amendment, saying that we all have the right to proclaim intolerance. If David Badash is correct, not only did CFA's CEO say that he doesn't support gay marriage, he also has donated millions of dollars to anti-gay groups and is bringing God into the argument. We will be judged for the sinful behavior of the gays! 

Now, let me just say that boycotting CFA is not a big sacrifice for me. I don't like the food. All this hullabaloo is just an extra thumbs up to back up my distaste of the place. BUT just because it's not a big sacrifice for me, or for others doesn't make it a non-big deal. It is a pretty big deal that people feel so strongly about "freedom of speech" that they will go out of their way to stand in line for a mediocre chicken sandwich. Is it really worth the time and effort to stand in hour long lines to prove a point that discrimination is a right? I guess so.

Some would say that being American means freedom, including freedom of hate. And if you want to go down in history as that kind of American, then you are free to do that (get it? you're "free"?).  But let me just say that this has kinda-sorta happened before, and is happening to other minority groups as we speak! Immigrants, African Americans, Native Americans, women... the list goes on.

Being American should mean that you can practice your religion and have your beliefs, as long as you don't set us all back by promoting inequality.