I fucking told you so!

Well, fucktardery is particularly rampant in this area, but today I saw a news story about whooping cough (pertussis) springing up in this area... The thing is, I blogged about this back in April in the local paper. No wonder I am so compelled to create the Facts, not Fantasy website to highlight this.

So far, no one has died, but I would like to quote Dr. Plait from one of his blogs about a baby that DID DIE. Will the anti-vax pro-disease fucktards not be satisifed until babies are dying all around them?

In America, people who claim vaccines cause autism are a major health threat. Some of these folks are just parents, people concerned about their kids, people desperately looking for a cause for a devastating illness. Others are vocal advocates of nonsense, saying things that are proven beyond reasonable doubt to be untrue.

The end result? Kids, including infants, are getting sick, and some of them are dying. Never, ever forget that, no matter how loudly these people yell, and no matter what garbage they spout (including, inevitably, in the comments that will follow this very post). Babies are dying.

In Australia, this movement is taking root as well. Calling the alarm to this, a TV program in Oz called "Sunday Night" aired an excellent exposé of what happens when parents don’t vaccinate their kids: they risk their children’s lives, and those of others. In the case shown on the TV show, a four-week-old baby, Dana McCaffery, died of whooping cough. This innocent infant wasn’t eligible for vaccination yet, but the lack of herd immunity — that region has lower-than-average vaccination rates — sealed her fate. The fact that other parents didn’t vaccinate their kids gave that little girl a death sentence.

Here’s the segment from that program. Warning (and I’m serious): if you are a parent, or any kind of feeling human being, this segment is seriously disturbing. I could barely watch it.

If you aren't tearing up after watching that, I seriously doubt your humanity. And to thing, this was totally preventable.

Florida Fucktardery (Politics)

Yeah, so I am stuck in the Panhandle of Florida, or lower Alabama as many call it. If it wasn't for the incredibly beautiful beaches, and a great job, I'd really want to move out of here. The theitardery that goes on here is simply amazing!

So, come november, Amendment 2 is up on the ballot. Basically this is the "Marriage Amendment" bull that the far right use to bring out the masses. Now the local pastors are reving up their intollerant masses:

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/marriage_11209___article.html/amendment_church.html?orderby=TimeStampDescending&showRecommendedOnly=0&oncommentsPage=1#slComments

Not only that, but these gems of literature were published in the opinion section:
Called By god: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/opinion/sarah_11248___article.html/john_real.html
Palin: god's pick: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/opinion/presidential_11249___article.html/palin_vice.html

Needless to say, I dispair more and more being a rational thinker. And what gets me down more are the comments some folks make on these stories. It's simply amazing to read the vile filth they write in the name of their god(s).

So, what do you do if you live in an area like this to keep from going into a deep dispair (or on a homicidal ramapge)?

More Florida Fucktardery - School Prayer

Okay, the story linked in the title is about the ACLU suing the Santa Rosa School District regarding a systematic government endorsement and fostering of the christian faith in the local school district. Of course, some theitard made the claim that the Ccnstitution guarantees freedom OF religion, Not Freedom FROM religion.

This claim is common (as seen in the comments section), but it rests on a misunderstanding of what real freedom of religion entails. The most important thing to remember is that freedom of religion, if it is going to apply to everyone, also requires freedom from religion. Why is that? You do not truly have the freedom to practice your religious beliefs if you are also required to adhere to any of the religious beliefs or rules of other religions.

As an obvious example, could we really say that Jews and Muslims would have freedom of religion if they were required to show same respect to images of Jesus that Christians have? Would Christians and Muslims really have freedom of their religion if they were required to wear yarmulkes? Would Christians and Jews have freedom of religion if they were required to adhere to Muslim dietary restrictions?

Simply pointing out that people have the freedom to pray however they wish is not enough. Forcing people to accept some particular idea or adhere to behavioral standards from someone else’s religion means that their religious freedom is being infringed upon.

Freedom from religion does not mean, as some mistakenly seem to claim, being free from seeing religion in society. No one has the right not to see churches, religious expression, and other examples of religious belief in our nation — and those who advocate freedom of religion do not claim otherwise.

What freedom from religion does mean, however, is the freedom from the rules and dogmas of other people’s religious beliefs so that we can be free to follow the demands of our own conscience, whether they take a religious form or not. Thus, we have both freedom of religion and freedom from religion because they are two sides of the same coin.

Interestingly, the misunderstandings here can be found in many other myths, misconceptions and misunderstandings as well. Many people don’t realize — or don’t care — that real religious liberty must exist for everyone, not just for themselves. It’s no coincidence that people who object to the principle of “freedom from religion” are adherents of religious groups whose doctrines or standards would be the ones enforced by the state.

Since they already voluntarily accept these doctrines or standards, they don’t expect to experience any conflicts with state enforcement or endorsement. What we have, then, is a failure of moral imagination: these people are unable to really imagine themselves in the shoes of religious minorities who don’t voluntarily accept these doctrines or standards and, hence, experience an infringement on their religious liberties through state enforcement or endorsement.

That, or they simply don’t care what religious minorities experience because they think they have the One True Religion. And maybe that's their point?