Predictions for the New Year

December 21, 2013

Well, it’s that time of year again. It’s list time.

I don’t know what it is about the last two weeks in December that make journalists everywhere compile inane lists about various things that happened over the past year, but it’s true. I’m not really fond of lists or anything, but they’re easy to make and I have the perfect topic.

2014 is going to be a big year for several reasons, and here’s why.

Republicans are going to stay in control of the House, and Democrats will stay in control of the Senate

Here’s why. Gerrymandering is a real thing. It still exists and all the voters in the United States have been manipulated within an inch of their lives. So even though there are a few notable congressmen and women who are retiring (re: Michelle Bachmann), the general political makeup of the House will remain the same.

Besides, there aren’t many notable challengers for the 2014 general election. So nothing’s really likely to change.

Jennifer Lawrence is going to crash and burn

I don’t like the thought, believe me. I adore J.Law as much as the next woman, but it’s only a matter of time. She’s in early 20s, and she’s already hugely successful. She’s going to experience the inevitable quarter-life crisis that every twenty-something experiences, and since she’s a celebrity, she’s going to do it publicly.

It’s a shame that people have put her on such a pedestal, because everyone’s going to hurt when she falls.

CNN is going to get worse

I am not particularly fond of television news so I don’t have a high opinion of CNN to begin with, but I think everyone can safely agree that it sucked in 2013. Ergo, it’s only going to get worse.

I hope Anderson Cooper has the sense to get out before it’s too late.


They should replace the definition of incompetence with one word: Washington

March 1, 2013

Well, our trusty Washington lawmakers have done it again.

In case you’ve been living under a rock for the past couple of months, fiscal armageddon is fixing to strik in oohhh…about 12 hours. And guess who’s fault it is? That’s right, our lawmakers. And guess who’s doing something to stop it? That’s right, NOT our lawmakers.

Fiscal armageddon, also known as sequestration, is the $1.2 trillion in across the board spending cuts that came about as a result of the disastrous debt ceiling negotiations last year. It was supposed to be so horrible that it would FORCE our lawmakers to confront our deficit problems and come to a bipartisan solution. But since our lawmakers couldn’t negotiate an icy sidewalk without first blaming the other side, it surprisingly isn’t going to happen.

The more I think about sequestration the angrier I get. Literally, I’m so angry as I type this, it’s just ridiculous.

Sequestration is going to hit our armed forces the hardest, because half of the cuts are taken from defense spending. OK, so I get that we spend a lot of money on defense and at some point their budget needs to be reduced, but to do it all of a sudden? To just be like, “Yeah, we’re going to halve your budget and you’re just going to have to deal with it” is reprehensible. We should first WAIT until we’re NO LONGER AT WAR before we reduce the budget. That would be the sensible thing to do, right?

nope

Instead, our lawmakers are reducing the budget NOW and they’re making no moves to stop it. So you know what’s going to happen? Civilian employees are going on furlough. They’re going to have to take a 20 percent pay cut. Children at DoD schools are going to be forced to take days off because their teachers are going to be forced to take days off. Contract workers at military installations are going to be laid off, and we all know what it’s like trying to find another job in this economy.

It just kills me. I know that these people are civilians, but they’re serving their country, too. They’re doing their part to ensure the mission gets done, and how does their country thank them? By cutting their pay or laying them off. It’s just absolutely infuriating. I can’t even…GAH.

And you know, sequestration isn’t only going to affect military spending. It also affects education spending and health spending. In my state, about $11 million will be cut off from our schools, ensuring less teachers and bigger class sizes. Another significant amount of money that I can’t remember right now will be cut from the public health, leaving less money for early childhood vaccinations.

Our lawmakers seem to think this is one, huge, gigantic joke. They don’t seem to understand that they are screwing with people’s LIVELIHOODS. They don’t seem to get that ordinary people have jobs that don’t include messing around with huge amounts of money. And these assholes get elected over and over again.

The next time you see your lawmaker, do me a favor and tell him or her about this blogpost. I doubt it will sway anyone’s opinions, but maybe they’ll begin to understand how this is so not a joke.


Your political social media posts make me want to break shit with my face (or election rant No. 3)

October 18, 2012

I know I haven’t blogged in a while, folks, and I’m sorry about that. So to make up for it, I’m updating twice in one go. Because I love you.

Anyway: Brace yourselves for election rant No. 3 (No. 2 is right below this one).

<rant>

Social media is both blessing and curse. Blessing because now everyone can keep up with long-lost friends, stay informed of people’s lives, share photos and information with the drop of a hat and express themselves.

BUT. Pay attention to that last blessing, because it doubles as a curse.

Has anyone else noticed (in the 2012 election season especially) that their Facebook news feeds and Twitter timelines and Tumblr dashboards and whatever-the-hell-else-you-use-to-avoid-talking-to-people-in-real-life have devolved into this clusterfuck of awful? Because I certainly have.

And when I say awful, I mean AWFUL. Friend against friend, sibling against sibling, husband against wife. This shit is pervading my social media landscape with biting comments, angry retorts and other passive-aggressive fuckery. It’s turned social media into a damn war zone and I’m OVER THIS BULLSHIT.

Case in point: My friend, with whom I served on the Catholic Students Association executive board in college, recently shared a photo from the Obama campaign on his Facebook page. The simple act of sharing on Facebook, I think, is kind of innocuous. Basically, the Obama campaign has a Facebook page of its own and it posted a photo. My friend, who follows the Obama campaign on Facebook, saw the photo and clicked a little link called “share,” which allowed him to post the photo on his own timeline. Keep in mind, my friend added no commentary of his own to the photo. He just shared it.

Within SECONDS some other guy who was a part of the CSA with us (and someone I never particularly cared for) commented on the photo. In the comment he made a long list of legitimate reasons not to support Obama. Which was fine.

BUT THEN he ended it with this sparkly turd of a comment:

“So [friend], why do you support Obama again? Remember, he will fully fund and defend Planned Parenthood to the end. And he is at war with the Church and religion you claim to follow.”

OK, well ignoring the part about Planned Parenthood that makes no sense, THIS KID COULDN’T BE A BIGGER DOUCHEBAG IF HE TRIED. If there’s one thing I hate, it’s Catholics condmening and criticizing other Catholics.

And I could turn this into a separate post if I wanted to (and probably will at some point), but it’s just so damn WRONG. If we claim to be a faith that accepts one another, if we claim to be a faith of love and charity, this kind of criticism and condemnation is just plain wrong.

Not to mention, this is the kind of bullshit non-Catholics (hell, NON-CHRISTIANS) see that give us a pretty shitty name. When a brother or sister in Christ comes up to us and sees us condemning one another based on political views, it shows a lack of unity and a complete lack of Christian love.

AND ANOTHER THING: Both candidates have demonstrated opinions and advocated policies that go against Church teachings. Obama is the most infamous because he’s pro-choice. But Romney’s immigration policies chafe with the Catholic belief of demonstrating charity and compassion toward immigrants. As a Republican, Romney supports capital punishment, which JPII has condemned over and over again.

And tell me again, where in the bible did it ever say that amassing large amounts of wealth was a surefire way of getting into heaven? Remind me where Jesus advocated people going out, getting rich and not sharing. Demonstrate to me HOW the pursuit of wealth can ever be considered holy. I can’t remember where it said the wealthy should not pay taxes because they earned their money while the poor earned their poverty because they clearly haven’t worked hard enough. Because I must have missed that part of the bible when I read it. I’m still having a hard time trying to find it.

Anyway, after this jerkface posted his unbelievably mean-spirited comment, others followed. My favorites included:

[Jerkface], you need to respect people’s differing opinions. [Friend] can support Obama if he wants to, regardless of who you support. And you are free to support whoever you like, regardless of who agrees with you or not. But it is not at all acceptable for you to attack his faith, especially based on his political views.

Also:

Regardless of my own political views, i think it’s awesome that you are public with yours. Politics and faith unfortunately get tangled. They are not mutually inclusive or mutually exclusive.

But of course, this guy couldn’t leave it at that and had to comment with yet another glistening turd bomb.

I do respect other people’s views. And when I think they are in serious error, I will attempt to show otherwise. Especially when it involves intrinsic moral issues that affect 1 million unborn lives a year in the USA.

It is quite acceptable for me to call out other Catholics who mistakenly believe it is okay to publicly support a candidate who supports intrinsic evils, and who poses a real, and dangerous threat to religious freedom. It would be uncharitable, wrong, to let a fellow Catholic stray and commit public scandal by not challenging their position as they become an accomplice to the person they support.

By publicly endorsing someone such as Obama, one becomes an advocate of the policies and positions of that candidate. Since Obama is a huge abortion promoter and defender, it is impossible to disentangle the abortion issue from him. An endorsement of him, is an endorsement of the 1 million abortions provided per year in this country. The Church teaches this is an intrinsic evil that can never be justified. Interestingly enough, Hitler killed just over 1 million Jews a year. The US has far outdone what Hitler did since 1973.

These are kids I went to college with and served on a RELIGIOUSLY AFFILIATED STUDENT GROUP WITH. Since we all share a common faith, I thought I could sort of defuse the situation with some light-hearted truth.

I do not support Catholics criticizing other Catholics over political views. Unity, people! There’s enough division in the political world. We don’t need it in the Church.

Sigh. Silly me. I should have known that, in throwing my two cents in, I was opening myself up for attack.

There is no unity when grave sin is overlooked. Then it is false unity (a lie). There is unity in the Church on abortion…it is that it is an intrinsic evil and can never be tolerated. To dissent from that is to separate oneself from the Church.

My reaction went a little something like this:

Here’s the D: I’m all for freedom of speech, religion, the press and expression. I love the First Amendment. If I could marry it, I would. As an American citizen, I will always, always, ALWAYS support your right to free speech.

But as a Catholic, I can NEVER support you using your beliefs to condemn someone else. It’s like having a penis: It’s great if you have one, but you can’t go waving it around and you can’t go shoving it down kids’ throats.

And for the love of GOD, please keep this shit off social media! If you disagree with someone else’s opinions, grow a pair and confront them about it IN PERSON. Jerkface only wrote all of that crap because he was hiding behind a pretty awful picture and a keyboard. I guarantee you if he saw my friend in public, there was no way he would have said any of that judgmental shit to his face.

The truth of the matter is, we’re going to look back on all of this nonsense when we’re really fucking old and shake our heads at our own stupidity. Because that’s what this is: stupidity.

</rant>


Fuck your lawn signs (AKA election rant No. 2)

October 18, 2012

Election day is less than a month away.

HOLY SHIT, GUYZ I’M FREAKING OUT.

No but seriously. It occurred to me (read: an individual who shall remained unnamed notified me) that I haven’t rant-blogged about elections in a while, and since I promised more election rants: Here’s the latest.

<rant>

As a journalist, I’m not allowed the luxury of political opinions. Or more specifically, I’m not allowed the luxury of expressing my political opinions. It’s a time-honored tradition of my profession and my forebears to maintain a level of unbiased objectivity, blah blah blah…

I find it kind of ironic my profession is dedicated to fighting for first amendment rights while simultaneously preventing its practitioners from expressing those same rights. But that’s what this rant is about today. This rant is about how non-journalists choose to express themselves, namely in the form of what I consider election season’s greatest evil: lawn signs.

I hate lawn signs. I hate them with a fiery passion typically reserved for cable news networks. They’re awful, and these are the reasons why:

  1. They’re expensive to produce.
  2. They’re unnecessary.
  3. They do not fulfill their purpose.
  4. They’re a hazard to everyone.

Reason No. 1 is fairly self-explanatory, so I won’t expand any further. As for No. 2, lawn signs are a superfluous show of support. Let’s face it: Most people who have lawn signs already have a plethora of other items that declare which candidates hold their political favor. For example, say you’re strolling down the street in your suburban, middle-income-earning neighborhood and you see a resident with a Obama/Biden sign planted right in front of his rose bush. Then you look over at the car parked in the driveway and you notice the bumper is plastered over with bumper stickers saying, “I think, therefore I am a Democrat,” and “May the fetus you save be gay.” If it were me, I might think to myself, “Wow, that car has an awful lot of bumper stickers. Why in the world would this person need a lawn sign?”

And in such neighborhoods, people with lawn signs and bumper stickers are not at all reserved when it comes to their political opinions. When I brought up my scenario, I bet all of my readers had a specific neighbor in mind. You know that neighbor, and chances are you’ve probably discussed politics with said neighbor. You’ve also probably been treated (read: tortured) to hours upon hours of political rhetoric from this individual. And let’s face it: You probably think this neighbor is a stuck-up asshole. So it comes as no surprise to you how this person chooses to vote, but it kind of pisses you off because he’s an asshole.

Which leads me into reason No. 3: THEY HAVE NO PURPOSE. Sure, lawn signs are supposed to declare your support, but aren’t they also supposed to encourage undecided voters to support the candidates emblazoned on the lawn sign? No where, on any of the lawn signs I’ve seen around town, do they list the candidate’s platform. It only lists the candidate’s name and the seat he/she is running for. NOTHING that would convince an undecided voter to vote for you. So what is the fucking point?! THERE IS NONE.

The last reason is the one that spawned this blog post. They are a public hazard.

Case in point: I live off a fairly busy intersection that sees a lot of traffic. For some unknown, God-forsaken reason this intersection does not have a traffic light. Instead there is one right-of-way street and a set of two-way stop signs. I live on the side of the stop signs, so every time I leave to go to work and come home, I have to stop and look both ways on the right-of-way street to make sure I don’t crash into anybody.

Well since that right-of-way street also happens to be one of the more traversed ones in town, these STUPID FUCKING POLITICIANS decided it would be a fantastic idea to line the side of the road with lawn signs, effectively blocking my vision.

SERIOUSLY. ON ONE OF THE BUSIEST STREETS IN THE FUCKING TOWN YOU ASSHATS HAD TO GO AND PUT YOUR FUCKING LAWN SIGNS WHERE VISIBILITY IS ALREADY ZERO BECAUSE IT’S AT THE TOP OF A FUCKING HILL. YOU MOTHERFUCKING LAZY STUPID SONS OF BITCHES.

Sorry. My capslock and backspace keys broke simultaneously.

Anyway. I equate lawn signs to alcohol: It’s a hazard to other drivers, so use in moderation.

</rant>


Why so serious?

September 16, 2012

I’ve noticed an odd and dangerous trend sweeping social media lately, and I want to talk about it here.

When I come home for the day, my cat often gives me this very serious expression, like she’s judging me for something. I think most cats have this ability, but Bast’s eyes have a natural slope downward toward her nose, so she usually looks angry or consternated.

In an attempt at humorous commentary about my cat, I posted this as my Facebook status:

“I’m really getting tired of coming home to my cat judging me for my poor life choices.”

Obviously this is a joke. I don’t really have any regrets in my life. When I examine the path that had led me to where I am and the choices I’ve made thus far, I’m proud. I’m college-educated, and I have a job doing something I love. This job allows me to live in a nice apartment and not starve. It also allows me to have fun on the weekends. I live within my means. I go to Mass every week as dictated by my Catholic faith. I give back to charity. I volunteer when I have the time. I call my mother every evening. I don’t do drugs and I don’t drink to excess (very often, anyway). The only thing in my life I could really consider a vice is my smoking habit, but even that pales in comparison to everything else in my life I do right.

In short, I’m a good person, and I have a good life I’m thankful for because of God’s grace and also because I’ve made good life decisions. So it stands to reason that my friends who know me well enough to know how I live my life would recognize my status as a joke. PLUS, I cats don’t judge people. Or at least I don’t think so.

But one of my Facebook friends commented,

“so stop making poor life choices….”

Thinking that he knew it was a joke, I replied,

“MY CAT ALREADY JUDGES ME, [Facebook friend], I DON’T NEED YOU CHIMING IN.”

But apparently he didn’t realize the status was a joke because he answered,

“Im not judging you, if you’re going to put it out there for anyone to read then expect comments. If you aren’t happy with choices/decisions you make, fix it. It’s your llife and you control it.”

All I could do was shake my head and sigh.

As I’ve already pointed out, I have a good life as a result of my good decisions. So yes, condescending Facebook friend, I know I control my life. And I know how to control it. In all seriousness, I don’t need you trying to tell me with your well-meaning but patronizing platitudes about self-empowerment.

Not to mention, I very rarely ever post anything serious on Facebook. Most of my statuses (Stati? I really need to figure that out) are about funny events or witty commentary about my life. Case in point: my last Facebook status was,

“Too much pressure and I’m nervous!”

This, obviously, is a lyric from “Party in the U.S.A.” by Miley Cyrus. I was hanging out at a karaoke bar with some friends and we made two of our macho, cowboy-hat-wearing soldier friends sing it for us. I thought it was hilarious, so I posted it.

So I explained to my friend that the status was just a joke. And he said,

“lol ive gotten used to people taking fb verrry seriously.”

I’m sure this is true, but this is what annoys and saddens me. Whyyy do people take social media so seriously? I know potential employers check social media before hiring people nowadays, but that doesn’t mean you have to automatically stay away from content that shows wit or character. In fact, I doubt that my Facebook status about my cat would have raised any eyebrows in any potential employer.

Not to mention, if I really WAS making poor life choices, why the hell would I post about it on Facebook? Why in the world would I make that shit public for my entire friends list to see? For example, say I was a drug addict. Would I post statuses(i) or pictures about the huge amounts of coke I’m about to snort? No! You know why? BECAUSE THAT’S IDIOTIC.

I also don’t post inspirational quotes or song lyrics (because they mostly come off as cheesy). And I avoid posting anything political because it invites a bunch of uninformed and ridiculous commentary.

The problem as I see it is that people are getting way to fucking personal on Facebook nowadays. Leave your problems off of your status because you come across looking like a needy asshole or someone who doesn’t have your shit together. And let’s face it: if you’re putting your shit on Facebook for the whole world to see, you probably don’t have your shit together in the first place. I mean, if you were going through some crazy break up with your significant other or if your family was driving you crazy, would you tell random strangers about your problems? No.

Sigh. Maybe my inner-hipster is just really annoyed by the fact that my Facebook friend didn’t understand my hilarious irony.


Military disenfranchisement

August 25, 2012

Ahh…election season.

With the 2012 presidential election just around the corner, politicians everywhere are beginning to bombard their constituents with increasingly negative — and downright wrong — campaign ads. They all hope to convince the undecided and uncommitted electorate that voting for the other side would bring about the apocalypse, and the only way to preserve American life as we know it is to vote for Mitt Romney, a true American, or to vote for Barack Obama, because he’ll keep us from going to back to the Dark Ages.

Whatever. Since I don’t live in a contentious swing state, nor do I own a television or pay for cable, I don’t see them everywhere. I find them amusing more than annoying.

But instead of finding new ways to piss off the American public, what the politicians really SHOULD be doing is making sure that every citizen can make it out to the polls. And that includes a voting bloc generally overlooked by both the public and politicians alike.

I had a very interesting conversation with a friend this morning about soldier’s voting rights, and I decided to take to the blogosphere to post more thoughts about the subject. (To the friend this is referencing: You had to have seen this coming.)

As I’ve established on this blog previously, I am an election nut. So like those horribly negative campaign ads, expect more rants/posts about voting and modern disenfranchisement as November approaches.

Living in such close proximity to a military installation has trained me to keep my eyes and ears open to issues especially sensitive to soldiers and their families. One of these issues is the continued disenfranchisement of our boys in uniform.

It’s not a too much of a problem for soldiers who are at home. They’re subject to the same voting procedures as everyone else. The problem is for soldiers who are deployed overseas. These soldiers have to abide by absentee voting procedures, and absentee voting procedures are generally just a clusterfuck of awful, made ten billion times worse by the fact that every damn state has a different procedure.

Here are the problems:

  1. Much like the U.S. Census (which is another issue), soldiers’ votes are counted toward their home of record. Not where they actually live. This makes it difficult because, as I’ve said before, voting procedures are different in every single state. So a single unit deployed to Afghanistan is subject to potentially 50 different absentee ballot procedures.
  2. In order to get their hands on an absentee ballot, soldiers have to request them. Do you really think these soldiers (who are already preoccupied with their survival) are going to remember to request a ballot? Why aren’t we making sure we send enough absentee ballots WITH them when they deploy?
  3. When soldiers finally get the ballots, there’s no effective way to get them back home. So they usually come back late.
  4. There are no effective ways to keep our soldiers informed of issues while their overseas. They have spotty access to the news and, once again, they’re preoccupied with their survival. Voting is usually the last thing on their mind.

My friend pointed out that an easy (and frankly obvious) solution to the absentee voting procedure would be to let the U.S. Department of Defense govern soldiers voting overseas. With modern technology and the Internet, it’s ten million times easier today than it was twenty years ago.

But the problem with this is it would LITERALLY take an act of Congress. And as we all know, they can’t get anything right.

This is just one of the myriad problems with our voting laws, but I think it’s probably one of the more important and pressing problems. These men and women risk their lives everyday to protect our freedoms. The least we could do is make it easier for them to have a say in who their own commander-in-chief will be.


Why moderates hate this Chick-Fil-A debacle

August 2, 2012

Apparently not.

As a general rule, I don’t post my opinions about fad issues. I consider fad issues as subjects that have a shortened news life: no longer than a week at most. If they last longer than a week, it’s because pundits and extremists force the topic long after the general public has forgotten it.

So I don’t bother forming opinions or even writing about fad issues because their relevancies don’t last long enough for me to care. Not to mention, they usually have no bearing on anything of immediate or even long-term importance.

But in the case of this whole Chick-Fil-A debacle — I just can’t. I can’t not write about this. It’s just pissing me off so much that I have to say something to relieve my frustration.

For those of you who don’t know, CEO of Chick-Fil-A Dan Cathy made some remarks about gay marriage. Cathy subscribes to the “traditional” views of marriage, and defines it as a holy union between one man and one woman. He went further.

“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage. I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about.”

Cathy’s opinions aren’t news. He’s always presented himself and Chick-Fil-A as a Christian company. It’s also not news that he’s donated huge sums of money to political advocacy groups dedicated to lobbying politicians to fight for “traditional” marriage.

Regardless of the fact that none of this is any surprise to anyone, Cathy’s remarks sparked a huge public relations clusterfuck for his company. The gay community pretty much immediately started boycotting the restaurants, and other companies and even government officials joined in. Most notably, the Jim Henson Company decided to cut off business ties with Chick-Fil-A, and the mayors of Chicago and Boston condemned Cathy for his remarks.

As you can imagine, Christian groups were outraged at the LGBT community’s outrage and formed a counterstrike to the boycott. Mike Huckabee dubbed today “Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day,” where Christians and Chick-Fil-A supporters alike were encouraged to eat at the restaurant to support Christian values, freedom of speech, freedom of business practices, blah blah blah.

For those of you who know me personally, you know that I vehemently disagree with Cathy and mainstream Christianity. Love is LOVE. The oft-quoted-to-the-point-of-cliche verse of 1 Corinthians 13 begins with “Love is patient. Love is kind.”

I just cannot believe that love in any form, whether it be platonic love between friends or romantic love between partners, could ever be considered wrong. If God is love, then God is in all relationships. And yes, I fully believe that God is in relationships between two men or two women. And if God has a strong presence in the relationship between two men or two women, then I fully believe that they should commit themselves to one another.

So now that we’ve gotten my personal beliefs out of the way, let me go on to say this: We live in AMERICA. We have a FIRST AMENDMENT. And since Cathy is an American citizen, he is allowed to say WHATEVER THE FUCK HE WANTS. Even if I think he’s a big, stupid bigot who probably should have kept his mouth shut in the first place, he didn’t. And he’s allowed. He’s allowed to have his bigot opinions and he’s allowed to voice them as loudly and as stupidly as he wants.

Because here’s the thing: Our Founding Fathers didn’t throw the First Amendment in there to protect the speech that everyone agrees on. They threw the First Amendment in there to protect the minority. The problem with being ruled by a winner-take-all democracy is that 51 percent of the public can overrule the other 49 percent because of that measly, 1 percent difference. To prevent the dissenting minority from being swept up in the “tyranny of the masses,” the Founding Fathers threw in the First Amendment to allow the minority some sort of reprieve.

And here’s another point: Cathy’s free speech isn’t infringing on YOUR right to disagree with him. As far as I can tell, the boycott is going just fine, and the Internet has exploded with people condemning him and his company, if my Twitter and Facebook accounts are any indication.

Now, I personally will no longer eat there because I don’t want the money I spend at Chick-Fil-A to be funneled into political action groups whose sole purposes are to prevent gay couples from getting married. And if you feel the same way, then I applaud you. We’re on the same side, sister suffragette. But that’s a PERSONAL decision. Don’t turn my decision to avoid Chick-Fil-A into some sort of huge, political statement because it’s not.

Also, you don’t get the right to make other people feel like assholes just because they don’t want to boycott Chick-Fil-A. You don’t get to use a fucking FAST FOOD RESTAURANT as some sort of symbol for gay rights. That’s not how this works. What goes in a stupid Chick-Fil-A sandwich? Bread, chicken and a damn pickle. You don’t get to turn that into some sort of symbol for bigotry and hate. It’s not the same as someone saying “faggot.” You don’t get to equate it as such.

That argument swings both ways, too. Conservatives and Christians, you don’t get to turn Chick-Fil-A into a symbol of freedom and Jesus. It’s not a crucifix, it’s not a bible, and it’s not the Bill of Rights. It’s a fucking SANDWICH. I can make one at home for myself, and it wouldn’t mean a damn thing to anyone else but me.

The fact that this fad issue has turned into a symbol of intolerance for one side and a symbol of freedom for the other just pisses me off. It’s issues like these that rile up the extremists on BOTH sides to the point of infuriation, and exasperate the people, like me, who straddle the line.

Bottom line: Quit trying to make people feel like assholes for eating or not eating a sandwich. IT’S A SANDWICH.

Ugh…I hate this. I hate this so fucking much. I hate that this is an issue, I hate that this is in the news, and I hate that people are talking about this. I hate that I’M fucking talking about this. And I absolutely HATE that I had to defend Dan Cathy.