Facebook
I’m pro-choice and I’m pro-life. It’s a definition that I’ve come to myself, interest-group free.
For a long time, I was about nothing more than ensuring a women’s right to choice—to choose if and when she would become a mother. Over time, my beliefs have become more complicated with the more people I meet, the more stories I hear, and the older I get.
Before either side sounds the alarm, hear me out.
In the abortion world, there are two camps: the extreme pro-choicers and the extreme pro-lifers. We seldom (if ever) see the regular people who have been touched by abortion. Planned Parenthood and the Ohio Right to Life both have testimonials from women to advance the organization’s interests, not necessarily the story of everyday women.
I’m not relinquishing my pro-choice beliefs. Instead, I’m adopting some new ones. Sitting for an entire day listening to testimony for both sides on House Bill 125, the “Heartbeat” Bill, I’m rattled and frustrated. Perhaps you should be, too.
It’s not just the fact that this legislation would prohibit abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected that brings about frustration. If you know me, you know I think that this is the wrong approach. If you disagree, then let’s agree to disagree. Still hear me out.
What I cannot understand—what baffles and confuses and angers me—is the fact that we have a middle ground, yet so few are willing to leave the comfort of their talking points and their derisive language to try to come up with a solution.
Abortion is “erroneous” fetuses have “civil rights,” and the constitution is “perverted”. Ok, ok—I get it. You are opposed to abortion. Fine. I personally believe it’s less black and white, but can we set those arguments aside and move toward the one that really matters: prevention?
When we want to prevent car accidents, we teach people how to drive safely. When we want to prevent poverty, we attack its root causes: addiction, education, unplanned pregnancies, etc. And when we want to prevent abortion—which we must all have a stake in—then we have to start with preventing unplanned pregnancies.
How? We could start with improving sex education. On an issue that clearly drums up endless passion on both sides, would we ever come up short on ideas? I doubt it. The key is to put our differences aside and reunite as Americans with a singular purpose: to improve the quality of life for everyone, young and old. There is something inherently pro-life sounding in that, if you ask me.
Yes, I’m pro-choice. But, like many others, including those on the pro-life side, we are so much more than our labels, so, if you dare, leave yours at the door and let’s actually solve a problem instead of creating new ones.
In case you’re curious, the Creation Museum, located just south of Cincinnati, Ohio, is a thriving venture that is fostering an era of ignorant, superficial Christianity. What it lacks in truth it attempts to overcompensate with iconic symbols that anyone will recognize and hopefully buy into (like dinosaurs, for instance). In fact, it seems to be one the ultimate goals of the Museum: to gloss over the contemplative analysis that close study requires in favor of assuming visitors will take for granted the truth in every display.
Rather than provide a historical presentation of Creationism that one can appreciate as a belief, the Museum operates under the assumption that it’s elementary exhibits will transform visitors into believers. Despite the fact that they warn on their tickets “Prepare to Believe,” I was struck by how the museum neither helped me to further understand Creationism as a valid concept nor did it ignite in me some combustible flame of belief; in fact, I would wager that the reliance on stereotypical displays pushed me further into my established beliefs and did nothing to broaden my understanding of Christianity or Creationism. Because, let’s face it, the Creation Museum is a religious attraction that attempts wholeheartedly to redefine science to suit The Bible, rather that suit research to define science.
Perhaps I hold museums with the highest possible expectations, for I feel that they are supposed to be the conduits of information; not only are they responsible for collecting information, but I expect in their exhibits elements of coherent synthesis and analysis. Clearly, the Creation Museum is a biased institution dedicated to the resuscitation of believers. But their sharp disregard for the basic tenets of scientific inquiry discredits their message. And while it can be expected that they would be critical of evolution, can we honestly find every answer of science in The Bible? Perhaps I am religiously ignorant, but to completely throw out the notion that “I think, therefore I am” troubles me. And perhaps the existence of such a museum should trouble more people, too.
Despite the fact that the exhibits are, on the surface, accepting of other mankind belief-systems and the diversity on earth, it’s hard not to feel some sense of subliminal messaging in explicitly defining marriage and unnecessarily calling-out abortion (what do either have to do with creationism?). While we can sit complacently with the notion that it is just one museum, let us remember that ignorance starts at an early age. I can’t recall just how many kids were in attendance, but the numbers were staggering. These are the people that will be lobbying against family planning, evolution, lgbt rights, and overall digging us deeper into the culture war. And while I would not stop anyone from the free exercise of their religion, seeing a museum dedicated to religious dogma only furthers the need to continue cultural advocacy.
I want the truth, even if that means contradicting religion.
One of the biggest barriers to voting is registration. For the majority of unregistered voters, deadlines, red tape, and apathy all prey on one's ability to cast a vote. In a country where we pride ourselves on our liberties and civic engagement, we fall behind in participation in electoral politics.
Lest we forget, it is the mass of unregistered voters that have the power to sweep the political stage into an entirely new act. So, I registered--part spontaneous and part living up to my level of involvement. In my school district, and in many others, money is tight, and the quality of our education is at the stake of ballot box results. Entering this primary race with a long series of levy-initiative losses, the future is grim.
In Parma, however, there is an untapped resource of support: students who are eligible to vote. If history can tell us anything, relying on the school district to involve and intergrate young people into a vital position of leadership will be fruitless. While it is unfortunate, Ohio Advocates in Parma have decided to shift gears away from sex educaton until May, and instead will divert our energy to assisting in the registration of young, potential voters and mobilizing students to pass our levy. Good sex education will not be possible with poor education as a whole. We support quality education accross the board--not just in health class.
Representative of the deep cross-section of issues, the Ohio Advocates encapsulates a sense of flexibility and a dynamic stake in quality education. In case you haven't, go and register to vote...it is one of the easiest and exciting things you can do for yourself and your community!
The producers of the art-house thriller Black Swan understood the perils and possibilities of their film being accepted by a limited audience. Having passed the box office test with an average critical rating of an A-, however, fears have subsided. Ranking in at number seven on Entertainment Weekly's “25 Movies You Need to See Before Oscar Night,” the niche film is holding its ground against the more-mainstream contenders like The Social Network, Inception, and the same-sex family drama The Kids are All Right.
Having seen the film, and knowing many that have, people cannot seem to stop talking about it; just search related posts on Facebook and you'll see the nonstop status updates about Black Swan. And it's all for good reason. Watching it is a visual roller coaster, one that will leave you mentally exhausted as it runs course. Natalie Portman's character continuously plays with the fine lines of reality. The film is intense, the kind that has you hugging your knees as the simple plot unfolds (or maybe that's just me).
If this sounds like a push to go see it, then maybe it is. And while you're at it, consider the thing that everyone else seems to have overlooked: in an attempt to reach a wider audience of both men and women, the producers strategically inserted a lesbian sex scene with Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis. Now, I am not an expert on the original “vision” of the film, nor have I spoken with the Director. But am I the only one who is uncomfortable with the notion that filmmakers can insert some girl-on-girl action to elicit box office results? Consider Portman's statement in Entertainment Weekly (#1136, January 7, 2011):
Everyone was so worried about who was going to want to see this movie. I remember them [producers] being like, 'How do you get guys to see a ballet movie? How do you get girls to a thriller?' And the answer is a lesbian scene...Everyone wants to see that.
Two women having sex, according to the producers of this film, has the appeal to invite the gender-stereotyped male or female to a thrilling, ballet presentation. Is lesbian sex just an entertainment tool for Hollywood executives to fill their pocket? Obviously, the answer is no. I know plenty of lesbian couples that would very well be offended to hear that two women making love can be classified as a deal breaker, the icing on the cake—the representative of the bizarre or the must-see-to-believe.
I have a problem with any type of same-sex sex being glorified for entertainment purposes, particularly when such entertainment fills the sensory enjoyment of people that see a film like Black Swan just to claim the conversation piece of having seen Portman and Kunis go at it. Forgive me if I'm being sensitive, but I do not see this as a positive thing for the lesbian or women communities. Lesbians should not be equated as being a part of a freak show.
I won't tell you not to see Black Swan, but please refrain from going just to gawk at the ordinary sex made unnecessarily extraordinary.
(On a side note, Director David Aronofsky also directed Requiem for a Dream, the novel-made-movie that also includes a lesbian sex scene. The one in Requiem, however, is different because it is a significant part of the plot in the novel. In fact, the scene is painfully moving, and offers much insight into the character. Perhaps his previous work shows his present inspiration.)
In light of the recent tragedy that took place in Arizona, it may be time to send a thank you note to your state and national Representatives. Some of them are familiar, some new, of different parties or opinions — but the fact remains that it could have been your Representative that was hurt on Saturday. While I hope that a tragedy does not happen again, I cannot help but feel compelled to thank the ones that have been there for our cause in the past, and the ones that I want to be there for us in the future, while I have the opportunity.
I sent 5 easy emails in 15 minutues. You can (and should) do the same.
To find the contact info for U.S. Congress and State Legislatures, go to the directory!
So said the Cleveland City Council on Monday, November 29, 2010. A group of supporters joined the meeting to accept first copies of the resolution, the both supporters and the Council were proud to lend support to a vibrant community.WHEREAS, on December 1, the lights of Cleveland will turn off at 5:20pm for one minute in memory of our frineds and family who have passed away; at 5:31, the lights will go back on and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum will be illuminated in red to show our unified committment to promote prevention and provide care, services and treatment to citizens of Northeast Ohio; and
WHEREAS, this resolution constitues an emergency measure for the immediate preservation of public peace, property, health, or safety, now, therefore, be it resolved by thhe Council of the City of Cleveland that this council supports the Greater Cleveland HIV/AIDS community in recognizing World AIDS Day on December 1.
If you're in the Cleveland area, check out the events @ 5:00pm. If not, turn off your lights @ 5:30, look at the Cleveland skyline to see the lights go dark, or join in any way you can. Thank an advocate, remind leaders, and remember the importance of this day throughout the year.
In solidarity, remembrance, and perserverance...
It's a tough question to answer--what are you thankful for? Can we honestly reduce our thanks to a sentence or two? Give me a paragraph, a chapter maybe, or even just the opportunity to look into someone's eyes and know the answer without asking.
I'm thankful for my ability to communicate. I can read, write, advocate, speak, and write this blog. We have the ability to progress, and we are through communciation.
I am thanful to be living in a world where I do not always have to hide who I am, and to have a family who loves me without reserve. And I am thanful for the future, to know that it holds an even better world for us.
I know that we all have things that we are not thankful for. The elections, perhaps. The potential anti-progress we now face. Yes, it seems like a much easier question to answer: what aren't you thankful for? But really, these new challenges will keep us energized, courageous, and more eager to make the world a better place for young people, women, adults, l,g,b,t people, minorities--everyone and anyone who needs us. Perhaps we do not always know what we're doing, but I think we always know what we have to do.
To draw on ashtom's recent blog Tales from a Phone Bank Newbie, I've recently lost my phone bank virginity!
I'll be honest, it was really awkward at first, and I stumbled over my words, and not everyone was happy to hear from me, but I'm ready for more!
I made somewhere around 100 calls in the hour-and-a-half I spent with other dedicated callers. To make the process easier, Planned Parenthood provided me with a script that I used for the first few calls. As I got more comfortable, however, the conversations became more natural. I got to hear why people were apprehensive about the upcoming election--I spoke to them about why I care about the elections, and, even though the conversations were not all excellent, I planted something for peole to think about over the next 3 weeks. Planned Parenthood really cannot make the process any easier--everything is automated; all I had to do was talk!
I plan on doing it again, and encourage you to try it, too. Of course, I was nervous at first, but I cannot sit by and let this election be up to fate. I have to know I did as much as I could to elect our awesomely supportive incumbent Governor! How can you not be motivated by the alternatives in your state!?
Refer to Ashley's blog for more reasons on why phonebanking is awesome!
Sometimes, as activists, we are forced to break out of our own comfort zones, to set aside our own fears for something bigger. I've found myself in this type of situation plenty of times, whether it be speaking in front of hundreds, or speaking in front of one. I'm sure we've all been there.
Last Friday, however, I wasn't obligated to speak or make a convincing argument; I had to let my blood do the talking.
It's healthy blood, really. Although I probably don't eat a balanced diet, or exercise enough, my blood's still red, and it's more than willing to come out of my body. I'm certain I have no blood-borne diseases—just ask my Doctor (she even says I have good veins).
Please, take some. It's a life-saver. If you hire a phlebotomist, and use it within 42 days, it's all yours. Unfortunately, this is how it must be done. The Food and Drug Administration does not allow “men who have had sex with men” (MSM) to donate blood. Despite my health-consciousness, my blood (and that of other gay/bisexual men) is considered too “at risk” for donation.
In abiding by this policy, donation centers, such as the Red Cross, are forced to deny willing donors the possibility of saving lives, and, in effect, they alienate a relatively large sector of the population, and place a greater strain on those who can donate because of shortages.
At a time when it is known that HIV (in particular) can be spread to anyone, gay or straight, and when there are more protections, screenings, and knowledge now, why must this policy live on? It is a question the FDA is looking into this week, and one we tried to answer for them when a group of concerned people got together to do a mock donation. A handful of gay, HIV-negative men donated several vials of blood, signaling the fact that it was unusable, yet could have saved 6-8 lives.
In response to an article written by Angela Townsend of The Plain Dealer, some say lift the ban, while others are much more reluctant (and ignorant, and...uhhh radical).
- This is completely disgusting. I would decline all blood from any homosexual. Because of this sickness, diseases have come into play. If I ever had a blood transfusion from a homosexual there would be one helluva a law suite!
- This means that our blood supply will be less safe. They are risking our lives by doing this. Errors happen in screenings and HIV/AIDS can lay dormant or miss the window for testing. You will be risking your life to draw from the blood supply if they remove this restriction.
- It's about as safe as the blood from the straight guy with the manicure and $1000.00 suit, who sleeps with whatever little skank he can pick up from "the club" every other night....Or the person who has recently discovered the fun of having a tattoos - and got them done at some unclean chop shop because he didn't know better, but who didn't report it to the donor registrar and gives anyhow,
- Why not just have a prohibition against anyone, male or female, having engaged in anal intercourse in some certain period of time? I would think that would solve all of the problems.
-
It's time for this ban to go. I am gay and have been in a completely monogamous relationship for 14 years, but am excluded from giving blood, but a straight guy who sleeps with prostitutes and has mistresses can give blood. Specific activities, not orientation, make you more of a risk for contracting HIV. How many straight guys have had sex with women who have had bisexual partners? This ban reinforces the stereotype that all gay men are promiscuous and have HIV.
- I am thankful too, to the blood donor whose blood saved my now 12 year old daughter's life when she was just 3 weeks old...I don't know or care either, about the race, sex, or sexual orientation of the person who donated the blood she received.
John Kerry, Kirstin Gillibrand, Dick Durbin, Daniel Akaka, Sheldon Whitehouse, Sherrod Brown, Frank Lautenberg, Bob Casey, Bernie Sanders, Russ Feingold, Mark Udall, Al Franken, Maria Cantwell, Carl Levin, Tom Harkin, Mark Begich, Rolland Burris, and Michael Bennet have already signed on!
Title: Ab-Only Sex Ed Activists Now Embark To Change Teen Driving Standards
Abstinence-only-until-marriage proponents have broadened the scope of their activism, with many now advocating for teenage driver reform. The sudden shift of focus comes from a recently published study analyzing statistical data and safety concerns relating to young drivers involved in automobile accidents.
Currently, many states allow teenagers to obtain a driver's license at the age of 16 upon the receipt of a driver's education certificate. Abstinence-only advocates, however, have begun rethinking this system. Leslee Unruh, the current director the Abstinence Clearinghouse, believes that young people, and teenagers in particular, are being taught wrongfully that driving can be a safe and acceptable practice at a young age. She believes that teaching young people that driving can be done safely, especially at a time when they are most vulnerable, is destroying American families, and that states are responsible for increases in teenage fatalities.
“Kids are smart. They respond. They respond negatively to a mixed message. They don't want to be told 'Ok, wear a seat belt, and you'll be fine.' They want to know 'should I drive and risk my life, my emotions,' or 'should I should I just wait,'” stated Leslee. “There's only one safe choice, and that's to wait.”
To Leslee's credit, her belief has been supported by a report recently published by The Christian Science Research Institute. The study found that upwards of 50% of teenage fatalities occurred because of safety belt complications, leading many ab-only advocates to rally for their removal. The study concluded further that other issues, such as drinking, drug use, suicide, and depression can all be linked to the confusion young people are faced with when they are on the road. The report criticized state governments for their “so-called comprehensive driver's education mandates,” citing that this poor policy has led to millions of teenage deaths and and an unreasonable amount of risky behavior.
Leslee and others have now began taking their argument to state legislatures, urging them to draft and pass legislation that would make it necessary to be in a committed, strong marriage before a driver's license will be issued to the patriarch of the family. This legislation would also eliminate the notion that driving can be safe before adulthood.
Leslee and others have made some success in persuading corporate America to join them in their crusade as well. Automaker Toyota, in light of their recent safety scandal, announced that they would begin phasing out their safety belts in an attempt to not only eliminate risk, but also to reduce customer costs significantly.
In response to backlash, Leslee stated that “[w]e don't want to limit a young person's abilities by encouraging them to drive.” Instead, she insists that we teach alternatives to driving, such as riding a bike, roller skating, walking, or skipping. She, and many others, envision an America where all young people are free from the dangers of driving unsafely at a young age —an America where children are out of vehicles, and are instead playing preciously in the street.
