(Source: wordsandlyrics, via moseisleywelcomingcommittee)
Yup. You’re a bad person. Not even close.
Yeah, here’s the thing about this. If you say it’s okay to be all “against gay marriage” because of your religion, here’s what I have to ask you: are you advocating against the legality of other things your religion says is a bad? Like, say, graven images? Do you protest against Supernatural because it has angels in it? Do you call your local political representative to request the repeal of laws that allow divorce? Do you fight to shut down all shops and services on the Sabbath? Are you fighting to put laws in place against adultery? Birth control? (LOL: MAYBE!) Maybe cheating on your spouse should have a jail term attached to it, what do you think about that? While we’re at it, dissing your parents on the internet should be illegal too. Because there’s a commandment about that. Should come with at least a fine, right? Good idea? No?
From what I can tell, you folks are fine with some rules from the bible being personal ethical guidelines for your community rather than national laws. You think adultery is wrong, so you don’t do it. Swearing is bad, so you avoid it and ask for forgiveness when you fail. But you don’t insist that these things become illegal, because that would totally cramp your style. But when it comes to gays getting equal rights, suddenly it’s important that there’s an actual law against it. Suddenly the definition of marriage is really important. It’s not enough to be a guiding principle for a community of believers anymore, oh no. Now it has to be law for everyone, including people who don’t see the world the way you do, and don’t share your religious views.
Your religion has no place in the laws that govern me. If you think being gay is a bad thing, you shouldn’t find your ethical high ground in standing in the way of laws that allow equal rights for all. Because it’s not your place, and not your religion’s place, to punish me for something you think your god doesn’t like. And you know what, your Jesus said the same fucking thing. IRONICALLY.
And that, my friend, is why you really are a bad person if you don’t support gay marriage.
also. this quote is the equivalent of a white person in the 50s or 60s saying “just because I don’t like black people doesn’t mean I’m a bad person”
No, it doesn’t.
There is a difference between “I don’t like,” or “I don’t support,” and “I think we should repress and destroy and disallow opportunities for this.”
If you don’t like black people, don’t hang out with black people.
If you don’t like preps, don’t hang out with preps.
If you don’t like goths, don’t hang out with goths.
If you don’t like gays, don’t hang out with gays.
Don’t give money to gay or black or whatever charities.
Don’t go to rallies or parades.
Don’t help the gay or black or whatever person pin up flyers around your neighborhood.
THIS IS FINE.
But it is -not- fine to bully them, oppress them, enslave them, or make their behavior illegal.
IT IS FINE TO DISLIKE WHAT YOU DISLIKE.
IT IS NOT FINE TO PRETEND THAT YOUR DISLIKE DICTATES HUMAN RIGHTS.
Pretending that other people’s dislike, non-support, or other forms of negative opinion about something you care about or feel that you need makes the people who simply disagree with your viewpoint bad people makes you no better than them.
TO TELL ANYONE THAT THEIR OPINION MAKES THEM A BAD PERSON PUTS YOU OVER THERE IN THE SAME CAMP AS THEY ARE.Behavior makes bad people.
Opinions don’t.
It is possible to separate the two, and many people do it all the time.
Get it right.
(Source: the-unpopular-opinions, via moseisleywelcomingcommittee)
Probably the best part of readingHow to Read a Bookis the range of responses it gets. I was impressed with the amount of “trying to be ironic?” feedback it got. I sure got a laugh out of it. My sophomore and senior year high school English teacher used to reference Adler’s “guide to intelligent reading” at least once every three weeks. I had to read it. And I’m really glad I did. I think his method for analytical reading is a little overkill, but he’s an awesome writer, with such sound, logical arguments its really easy to follow what he’s saying and why it works. There’s a few moments where I don’t entirely agree with his logic and he sounds like a really, really old man (to be fair, it was first published in 1940), but I get why it stands the test of time. It really is a guide to taking your time and thinking about your reading, which, I agree, makes for the best reading. Unfortunately it just isn’t practical to follow his intense steps for every read, and I think it makes best sense for serious academic situations. Maybe I’ll give it a legit try over the summer, or if I ever make it back to school. I was a bit disappointing with his notion of “Syntopical” reading, which he called the highest level of reading. Really he just maps out how to do research on a topic - which is dandy, but hardly what I was hoping for. I think I’ve been taught dumbed down versions of his ideas, but it was surprisingly enjoyable to read through his incredibly detailed thought process. Below is a really, really amazing chart that summarizes the entire book. Dig:
Latoya Peterson (Source) (via andcouldheplayblog)
hmmmmm…i wonder what peterson counts as a “different space”…i need more context to know whether i’m behind this quote.
(via fromthemargintothecenter)
I support this (looking at you Emily)! I’m less concerned with the concentration of feminism in specific spheres (blogosphere being one) and more concerned with spreading out the knowledge of gender literate people. To the blogs!
(via fromthemargintothecenter)
My friend bob showed me this… AMAZING! For all the Catan nerds out there, this shit made me giggle like a motherfucker.
This is probably the best explanation of privilege I’ve heard in a long while… Read it. Basically, it uses a video game analogy that is spot the fuck on. Life is easier for some people and harder for others. This is sad, and while I think we’re getting better as a society there are forces at work who are trying to maintain the status quo. Usually, these forces are White, heterosexual males because, and this is important, they really really like the way the world is. Why wouldn’t they? It’s totally awesome for them. Anyway, make sure you read the article so we can talk about it.
I’ll wait. Go ahead. Actually, I’m gonna go play video games, but there will be a quiz later so do your readings.
(via babyrandy)
I am guilty of this… I definitely talk about friendzoning a lot. While I understand the argument, I don’t feel like I’m shaming women for saying “no” to men. To me, the problem with “friendzoning” isn’t the fact that women are denying men what they want, the problem is what people are looking for in their prospective partners. Obviously, this isn’t exclusive to women, though in my personal experience my female friends have struggled with this more than my male friends have.
The “disneyification” of love and romance makes it very difficult for men to live up to the impossible standards set by the media. Specifically, the idea of romance and the way that someone is supposed to pursue their love interest is embarrassing and often little more than glorified stalking. I try to remind my lady friends about this when they complain about the lack of good men in their lives: it’s very difficult to pursue a confident and secure woman when you yourself are insecure and not sure how to go about it. “Friendzoning” is often the result, with a non-traditional (“traditional” in this case meaning “confident,” more or less) man being cast aside as uninterested or uninteresting.
(Source: angels-and-angles, via moseisleywelcomingcommittee)
Pizza Rolls on Pizza Bagel bites On Personal Pizzas on a Pizza.
America.
what a nice salad
what a nice salad
what a nice salad
WHAT A NICE SALAD….
what a nice salad
what a nice salad
‘MERICAN SALAD
Celebrity chef Mario Batali • Discussing the diet he’s currently on — he’s eating like he’s on food stamps (an average of $1.48 per meal, or $31 per week) in protest of potential cuts to the federal food stamps program. His family was nice enough to join him in what he calls a conversation starter about being hungry in the U.S. Unlike most people on food stamps, he knows ways to make the best of a bad situation, smartly sticking to foods like lentils, apples, rice, beans, peanut butter and jelly. But the problem is, eating good on a diet like this is tough, so many do not. Think his family’s experiment will be effective? (via shortformblog)
(via reagan-was-a-horrible-president)
(Source: , via reagan-was-a-horrible-president)
Heartbreaking Tearjerker of the Day: In 1988, Nicholas Winton’s wife revealed to the BBC his long-kept secret: He’d saved 669 children from the Nazis at the dawn of World War II through his organization of the Czech Kindertransport. (This clip is from a BBC program that honored the “British Schindler” by inviting some 80 of the children he saved to surprise him in the audience.) In all, more than 5,000 people owe their lives to Winton.
In the more than two decades since the media got wind of his humanitarian exploits, Winton has been knighted, had a minor planet named after him, been commemorated by two statues — one each in Prague and London — and been the subject of three films and a play.
Winton still wears a ring given to him by some of the children he saved. It is inscribed with a line from the Talmud, the book of Jewish law: “Save one life, save the world.” He celebrates his 103rd birthday this week.
[reddit]
(via reagan-was-a-horrible-president)