In both Canadian and American politics within the campaigns of conservative/republican candidates it seems that women's right to choose has once again become the religious vote lock in. Roe vs Wade took place 35 years ago and still this is a major topic on the political agenda. Conservative men seem to be uncomfortable with women being given the ultimate decision-to continue their line or prevent its propagation. For 35 years, this has stuck in the sides of men. Nothing bothers me that much to attempt an overturn for over a quarter century.
Abortion is a touchy subject even among women in living rooms and cafes. We too are divided. I don't hide my views, I am steadfastly pro-choice. This automatically paints a picture in conservative minds of a child hating, promiscuous whore baby killer. Not true. I adore children, and using abortion as a form of birth control is irresponsible to say the least. What seems to escape the general populace is that the decision to have an abortion is not one akin to having ones nails done. 'to do today, get mani-pedi, buy bread, abort fetus', not so simple and casual. This decision comes fraught with anxiety, fear, regret, remorse and sadness, in varying combinations and severity of emotion. I know women who have had an abortion for whatever reason and they all wish they didn't have to but all admit that they are glad they made that decision. Pro-lifers would have them painted as hussy's that wanted to shirk responsibility and the inconvenience of child bearing and rearing. I fully disagree, as I have witnessed as many no doubt do daily, clear examples of shit parents. These children of said shit parents are treated like the unwanted beings they are. Their parents aren't resigned to loving them and caring for them now that their here but simply deign to have them around. Harsh but true.
In Levitt and Dubner's "Freakonomics" released in hardback in 2005, they link the reduction in violence in major cities not to the increased police presence but to abortion. Those who would have had children in less that ideal circumstances, were not. What about birth control? the pro-lifers say. How could you be so irresponsible? Life is so rarely that black and white. There are many circumstances in which birth control fails. Abstinence is a farcical 'solution' to the problem of an unwanted pregnancy. We are sexual beings. The husband and wife take comfort in sex during a difficult financial time or period of illness and end up pregnant despite their best efforts to prevent it. The time is not just inconvenient, it is unacceptable to bring a child into. The couple dating who experience an unwanted pregnancy who aren't ready for marriage, etc. I could give a novel of a list of reasons for abortion to be sought, and to each one an equally good argument could be had. Why don't they just suck it up and have the child? why not give it up for adoption? etc. All very easy to say, completely different to do. Why not get married? Have the child, the marriage isn't working and the money isn't coming in, no for the cute outfit at Baby Gap but for the 25 cent jar of baby food. Then the husband, in such despair over his situation begins drinking. At the same time so too begins the beatings. Fighting and divorce ensue. The child is now five years old and her first exposure to a "loving couple" has been the nightly beatings her mother got. True story folks.
Whatever the reasons (I beg the reader's pardon for my lengthy tirade) for abortion, it needs to stay legal and available to women. We will find a way, legal or no, as our fore-mothers did. Abortion as a politic agenda should be forever put to bed and left alone. Women must have the right to choose, and will exercise that right like it or lump it. If the conservatives are so very bothered by it, close the door to your walnut panelled study and pour yourself a brandy. Ivory towers rarely see far enough to witness suffering anyway.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Monday, August 18, 2008
Fur-get it
I have a confession-I am an incurable Vogue, Elle, Harpers Bazaar, fashion magazine addict. It is my porn mag. I hide this fact behind my current copy of the Great Gatsby and The Prosecution of George Bush for Murder. I decry their significant in my library infront of fellow bibliophiles but they are, nonetheless, my dirty, guilty, secret pleasure. A Saturday afternoon, a brand new Vogue and a glass of wine is my favorite escape. That said, I was disappointed and, frankly appalled when I saw a chinchilla coat featured in one of the pages.
I have three chinchillas. They are as smart (if not more) than my dog, they are sweet and trainable. I could no more wear dog fur as I could chinchilla. The method of destroying these animals is equally disturbing. I found this out when I unwittingly bought a guide to chinchilla health authored by a chinchilla farmer. She was and is an authority on chinchilla rearing, though my motives were much, much different. I can't recount here the method in which these lovely animals are dispatched, its too emotional for me. I am not a strict vegan, I love my Cole Haan leather purse, I don`t pontificate on the use of animals for food or clothing. A cow is killed and the meat is used for food. The skin is used for clothing. In the end the whole animal is used. I have plenty of vegan friends that would disagree with my rationale however, it is a fact. To create a chinchilla hat, for example, you require at least eight animals - EIGHT!- to make a hat. For a car coat at least 150 animals. They are small and the whole pelt is not used for clothing, only the dorsal portion, the belly fur being discarded due to colour and texture. The meat cannot be used, it is too muscular and sparse. I`ve never seen chinchilla on a menu even in the most progressive, outrageous restaurants. The chinchilla only looks large because their fur is long, but their bodies are quite slim and lithe.
I carry on about chinchillas because I am the joyful owner of three but my rant extends to all other animals which are destroyed solely for their pelts. We don`t need fur. Fur looks great and a beautiful fur bolero finishes off any outfit for winter. However, textile technology has progressed to such an extent that faithful reproductions can be made that only the designer themselves would be able to discern as an imposter. And seriously, if anyone approaches you and proceeds to pet your coat-they owe you a dinner.
Can we all stop using fur? I personally think that unless you're a mob moll from 1935, fur had its time as an emblem of luxury. If you want to display overt luxury and an 'I have more money than sense' aura, buy a conflict free diamond. Now there's a statement.
I have three chinchillas. They are as smart (if not more) than my dog, they are sweet and trainable. I could no more wear dog fur as I could chinchilla. The method of destroying these animals is equally disturbing. I found this out when I unwittingly bought a guide to chinchilla health authored by a chinchilla farmer. She was and is an authority on chinchilla rearing, though my motives were much, much different. I can't recount here the method in which these lovely animals are dispatched, its too emotional for me. I am not a strict vegan, I love my Cole Haan leather purse, I don`t pontificate on the use of animals for food or clothing. A cow is killed and the meat is used for food. The skin is used for clothing. In the end the whole animal is used. I have plenty of vegan friends that would disagree with my rationale however, it is a fact. To create a chinchilla hat, for example, you require at least eight animals - EIGHT!- to make a hat. For a car coat at least 150 animals. They are small and the whole pelt is not used for clothing, only the dorsal portion, the belly fur being discarded due to colour and texture. The meat cannot be used, it is too muscular and sparse. I`ve never seen chinchilla on a menu even in the most progressive, outrageous restaurants. The chinchilla only looks large because their fur is long, but their bodies are quite slim and lithe.
I carry on about chinchillas because I am the joyful owner of three but my rant extends to all other animals which are destroyed solely for their pelts. We don`t need fur. Fur looks great and a beautiful fur bolero finishes off any outfit for winter. However, textile technology has progressed to such an extent that faithful reproductions can be made that only the designer themselves would be able to discern as an imposter. And seriously, if anyone approaches you and proceeds to pet your coat-they owe you a dinner.
Can we all stop using fur? I personally think that unless you're a mob moll from 1935, fur had its time as an emblem of luxury. If you want to display overt luxury and an 'I have more money than sense' aura, buy a conflict free diamond. Now there's a statement.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Vincent Bugliosi - my hero without a cape
This post is an addendum to my previous post dated August 05, as I have continued to read through Mr. Bugliosi's book.
Mr. Bugliosi has presented fact upon fact that the Bush administration has deliberately and knowingly lied to the American people to further their agenda. I'm not sure what that sour taste is in my mouth, the lies the American government told or the ease with which the American people bought into such lies. I remember thinking while casually following the developing war campaign in Iraq 'how could such a financially poor country purchase such large quantities of Uranium?' I knew Hussain was indeed rich but a dictator doesn't become so by putting his own money into WMD construction. In a country where more people vote for their American Idol and purchase more US and People magazines than they do The New York Times, can we expect anything more.
My opinions matter little since I am not American (thankfully) however I do resent the fact that Canadian Soldiers are being deployed for "peace keeping" missions. They are still killed by roadside bombs and insurgents. One cannot honestly blame the insurgents or even civilians that throw stones or fire weapons at soldiers. Would you not do the same had your husband, brother, sister or even child been wounded or killed as a result of the war? I watch as a good friend of mine re-reads the last letter her friend sent her before being killed in a "friendly fire", sadness glazing over her eyes. He was young, vibrant and healthy, killed by American cowboys bent on being heroes instead of heeding orders from their commanding office.
Is everyone asleep? When the first friendly fire occurred I was outraged! I railed against it in my overbearing and opinionated way, and was met with down turned eyes and weak shrugging shoulders. Friendly fire in and of itself is an oxymoron, like saying kind evil or happy sadness. It is ludicrous.
This war has lined the already bulging pockets of a few select fat cats and left thousands, thousands!, with ruined lives. I have the privilege of secondhand insight into the ravages of war through a close friend. I have listened quietly, rapt with attention as my friend recounts the Gulf War and his escape. The sad fact is, he is not the only one I have listened to tell such tales. To listen to these stories, one must truly listen and feel the pain and anxiety to full appreciate it.
What have the American people given up for this war they were so in favor of? World War II brought wide spread rationing of supplies and in some countries,compulsory surrender of all metals, yes even your wedding ring, for the war effort. Had the American people been told "hey we need to go to war to fight the TERRORISTS! Uh but you gotta hand over that SUV and oh the plasma T.V's gotta go too...war effort n' all" American's would have shit themselves, and put their fat foot down, 'no way man!' But onward Christian soldiers, you can keep your gas guzzlin' SUV, your T.V, your Kentucky Fried Chicken, and your kids can still go to soccer practice. You can listen to your satellite radio, watch American Idol, American Gladiator, American programming at its best. Your life is unchanged. If the war were to cease tomorrow, there would be no parade or kissing in the streets, mobs would not pile into Times Square to watch the coverage on T.V. Hell you may not even know about for several days or weeks. Precisely because you have not been affected in any way. Unless you are a mother in Michigan whose only son came back in a box in "un-viewable" condition, and you now have to deal with the heart pulverizing loss of your flesh and blood along with the foreclosure on your house that you couldn't make payments on from your wages at the local Wal-Mart. The congressmen's kids are currently tooling around town in their brand new Mercedes-Benz. They didn't need to enlist to get college money. Daddy found some in the couch.
Why, you ask, does this small town Canadian feel so angry? I'm angry because bullshit has always pissed me off. I'm not anti-war. I'm anti-war without reason. If country A is going to bomb the crap out of my country, yes I want to prevent it. If Country A has something my country wants, talk it out boys! I am by no means fractionally as intelligent or current as Mr. Bugliosi but my parents did a decent job of giving me some common sense. And by that I live. My common sense tells me that this war, this current American government administration, and American people are full of shit.
Wake up people. It's not too late.
(This is by far my longest post and rambles terribly but hey, it's my blog after all)
Mr. Bugliosi has presented fact upon fact that the Bush administration has deliberately and knowingly lied to the American people to further their agenda. I'm not sure what that sour taste is in my mouth, the lies the American government told or the ease with which the American people bought into such lies. I remember thinking while casually following the developing war campaign in Iraq 'how could such a financially poor country purchase such large quantities of Uranium?' I knew Hussain was indeed rich but a dictator doesn't become so by putting his own money into WMD construction. In a country where more people vote for their American Idol and purchase more US and People magazines than they do The New York Times, can we expect anything more.
My opinions matter little since I am not American (thankfully) however I do resent the fact that Canadian Soldiers are being deployed for "peace keeping" missions. They are still killed by roadside bombs and insurgents. One cannot honestly blame the insurgents or even civilians that throw stones or fire weapons at soldiers. Would you not do the same had your husband, brother, sister or even child been wounded or killed as a result of the war? I watch as a good friend of mine re-reads the last letter her friend sent her before being killed in a "friendly fire", sadness glazing over her eyes. He was young, vibrant and healthy, killed by American cowboys bent on being heroes instead of heeding orders from their commanding office.
Is everyone asleep? When the first friendly fire occurred I was outraged! I railed against it in my overbearing and opinionated way, and was met with down turned eyes and weak shrugging shoulders. Friendly fire in and of itself is an oxymoron, like saying kind evil or happy sadness. It is ludicrous.
This war has lined the already bulging pockets of a few select fat cats and left thousands, thousands!, with ruined lives. I have the privilege of secondhand insight into the ravages of war through a close friend. I have listened quietly, rapt with attention as my friend recounts the Gulf War and his escape. The sad fact is, he is not the only one I have listened to tell such tales. To listen to these stories, one must truly listen and feel the pain and anxiety to full appreciate it.
What have the American people given up for this war they were so in favor of? World War II brought wide spread rationing of supplies and in some countries,compulsory surrender of all metals, yes even your wedding ring, for the war effort. Had the American people been told "hey we need to go to war to fight the TERRORISTS! Uh but you gotta hand over that SUV and oh the plasma T.V's gotta go too...war effort n' all" American's would have shit themselves, and put their fat foot down, 'no way man!' But onward Christian soldiers, you can keep your gas guzzlin' SUV, your T.V, your Kentucky Fried Chicken, and your kids can still go to soccer practice. You can listen to your satellite radio, watch American Idol, American Gladiator, American programming at its best. Your life is unchanged. If the war were to cease tomorrow, there would be no parade or kissing in the streets, mobs would not pile into Times Square to watch the coverage on T.V. Hell you may not even know about for several days or weeks. Precisely because you have not been affected in any way. Unless you are a mother in Michigan whose only son came back in a box in "un-viewable" condition, and you now have to deal with the heart pulverizing loss of your flesh and blood along with the foreclosure on your house that you couldn't make payments on from your wages at the local Wal-Mart. The congressmen's kids are currently tooling around town in their brand new Mercedes-Benz. They didn't need to enlist to get college money. Daddy found some in the couch.
Why, you ask, does this small town Canadian feel so angry? I'm angry because bullshit has always pissed me off. I'm not anti-war. I'm anti-war without reason. If country A is going to bomb the crap out of my country, yes I want to prevent it. If Country A has something my country wants, talk it out boys! I am by no means fractionally as intelligent or current as Mr. Bugliosi but my parents did a decent job of giving me some common sense. And by that I live. My common sense tells me that this war, this current American government administration, and American people are full of shit.
Wake up people. It's not too late.
(This is by far my longest post and rambles terribly but hey, it's my blog after all)
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Crime and Punishment
The war in Iraq has claimed many lives both those in service and civilians under siege in their rural and previously quiet villages. It is a war that, in general agreement, is totally superfluous and without foundation. Even in my smallish city in Ontario several kilometers outside Toronto, I know people who bear wounds from this war.
Vincent Bugliosi, LLB in his most recent published work "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" wages his own well thought out and masterful war on the current American president. My first question is "Is George Bush really the mastermind behind this mass murder?" I myself suppress a snicker at my question's use of the word "mastermind" and "Bush" in the same sentence. I somehow feel a small degree of pity for the man who, like the imbecile child has been manipulated into delinquency by his intellectual betters (Rumsfeld, Cheney et al), though by no means misunderstand my phraseology of misdemeanor in relation to the war.
My second question is, is this really the first time the American government has used manipulation and frank lies to initiate war (Pearl Harbor ring a bell) ? Can we persecute one without all who are guilty? It seems to me, and I'm certain most of the rational thinking and literate public, that Bush is a mere puppet to those who have had this planned long before Bush had sobered up from his last college bender.
But for the sake of argument and simplicity lets say this was his idea all along (pause for laughter) and he orchestrated the war in Iraq (for which he would be hard pressed to located on a map of the world), is he personally liable for damages caused to the service men and women and civilians alike or is his government also equally liable? And lets say that any one of the states that has suffered the loss of one of their own, that is to say all of them, were to bring forth legal proceedings against him/his government, what would his penalty be? Life imprisonment? Death? Financial remuneration? None of these hold any possibility due to varying penal procedures in each state. The jurisdiction logistics alone would take decades to tease out.
As much as I would love to see ol' Bush in a Texas chain gang digging road side pits, this dream shall never be. The truth, dear reader, is that he will quietly slink away from office at the end of this term to a quiet ranch in back water Texas (the man will never leave America, dumb as he is he is well aware of the price on his head. Also you have to know that France is in Europe to actually go there) only likely to be heard from again in twenty years when some distant relation with a publishing grant will write some watery tripe about the puppet president. He will retire with his decent pension and beloved dog(s).
So, my final thought (did I hear someone say 'finally!!' ?), is press on dear Bugliosi esq., though your vision is certainly a Utopian one, it does fail to inspire hope that at least one person had the stones to say what everyone thinks but was always too scared or too stupid to say. Here's to you. Cheers.
Vincent Bugliosi, LLB in his most recent published work "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" wages his own well thought out and masterful war on the current American president. My first question is "Is George Bush really the mastermind behind this mass murder?" I myself suppress a snicker at my question's use of the word "mastermind" and "Bush" in the same sentence. I somehow feel a small degree of pity for the man who, like the imbecile child has been manipulated into delinquency by his intellectual betters (Rumsfeld, Cheney et al), though by no means misunderstand my phraseology of misdemeanor in relation to the war.
My second question is, is this really the first time the American government has used manipulation and frank lies to initiate war (Pearl Harbor ring a bell) ? Can we persecute one without all who are guilty? It seems to me, and I'm certain most of the rational thinking and literate public, that Bush is a mere puppet to those who have had this planned long before Bush had sobered up from his last college bender.
But for the sake of argument and simplicity lets say this was his idea all along (pause for laughter) and he orchestrated the war in Iraq (for which he would be hard pressed to located on a map of the world), is he personally liable for damages caused to the service men and women and civilians alike or is his government also equally liable? And lets say that any one of the states that has suffered the loss of one of their own, that is to say all of them, were to bring forth legal proceedings against him/his government, what would his penalty be? Life imprisonment? Death? Financial remuneration? None of these hold any possibility due to varying penal procedures in each state. The jurisdiction logistics alone would take decades to tease out.
As much as I would love to see ol' Bush in a Texas chain gang digging road side pits, this dream shall never be. The truth, dear reader, is that he will quietly slink away from office at the end of this term to a quiet ranch in back water Texas (the man will never leave America, dumb as he is he is well aware of the price on his head. Also you have to know that France is in Europe to actually go there) only likely to be heard from again in twenty years when some distant relation with a publishing grant will write some watery tripe about the puppet president. He will retire with his decent pension and beloved dog(s).
So, my final thought (did I hear someone say 'finally!!' ?), is press on dear Bugliosi esq., though your vision is certainly a Utopian one, it does fail to inspire hope that at least one person had the stones to say what everyone thinks but was always too scared or too stupid to say. Here's to you. Cheers.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)