“Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

You’d think that this would already be in the Constitution, and something that everyone would be behind right? Well, you’d be wrong on both counts. The Equal Rights Amendment failed, but now it’s making a comeback. Now being introduced as the Women’s Rights Amendment, it will be reintroduced with the hope of finally making sex discrimination have the same strict scrutiny that racial discrimination has in the courts.

The same woman who lead the grassroots fight against the ERA back in the 70s is out and has already given testimony is Arkansas just this year that helped defeat an ERA bill there. Phyllis Schlafly uses “scary” words and not the greatest logic to bring something that should be seen as a basic right into something that will be the downfall of American society. Let’s take a look at what Schlafly says, taken from the transcript of her testimony in Arkansas on February 7, 2007:

You know that the amendment does not put women in the Constitution, and it does not put gender in the constitution. It puts sex in the Constitution. Now we are at the mercy of the judges. The Equal Rights Amendment does not say whether it is the sex you are or the sex you do. We leave all those decisions up to the judges.

So she’s saying that maybe it might also protect homosexuals from discrimination? Or we can’t discriminate against someone because they like BSDM? I’m really not seeing why this part would be a problem anyway. I surely don’t want ANYONE discriminated against. Moving on.

These next arguments she makes are based on a report titled “Sex Bias in the U.S. Code”, which was co-authored by Ruth Bader Ginsbury. In 1977. Yes, she is still using a document that is thirty years old to base her arguments; just updating the wording a little bit to fit in with the current scare tactics.

Now nobody denies that if you have strict scrutiny you are going to have women not only subject to the draft, when and if there is a draft, but also subject to combat. […] It would treat women exactly the same as men, and women do not want to be treated the same as men in the military and in combat.

First off, why don’t we get rid of Selective Service to begin with? I certainly don’t want men or women drafted, combat or not. Do you think the men in combat really want to be there, let alone the women? Next, where is her proof that women don’t want to be treated the same as men in the military? Most of the women I’ve read about who joined want to be there, and don’t want special treatment. I personally don’t want to support any kind of military combat, but if there are willing people who want to fight, let them fight. Male or female.

The social security system rests on the concept of the dependent wife. I get my social security based on my husband’s income over the years, and I am sure that is true of many women here today. Social security is a very pro-women institution because it gives the benefit to the dependent wife, the dependent wife who is not, herself, in the workforce.

Do what? I would really like to see how this would happen. Say that both hubby & I do our time and retire, then I die. He is entitled to receive my SS benefits because he is my spouse. It’s not just women who get them, and it’s not like the ERA is going to take away that money. This is a very horrible argument that is just used to scare the baby boomers who are getting ready to retire.

…among the words that would have to be deleted from the federal code are husband and wife. Now that is a direct attack on the Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, which says that marriage is the union of a man and a woman as husband and wife. […] Of course, in the matter of marriage, it would open up the courts to all kinds of litigation by the gay rights movement which is working very hard on every type of judge they can find to give them whatever they want to have. Again, the Equal Rights Amendment says you can’t discriminate on account of sex, and that is what you are talking about. If you deny a marriage license to a man and a man, you have discriminated on account of sex. All of the highest legal authorities from Harvard and Yale have all said that the equal rights amendment would okay same sex marriage.

I don’t like the DOMA anyway, so this is a good thing! But oh yeah…GAY MARRIAGE…OOOOHHH…SCARY!!!!

She (Ginsburg) makes arguments that I never dared to make, that it will wipe out the laws against prostitution and the laws against bigamy – that it would reduce the age of consent to 12; She even goes after Mother’s Day because that would be sex discriminatory.

Ok, now she’s just getting loopy and crazier. Like Hallmark would EVER want Mother’s Day to go away.

The argument of the feminists is abortion is something that happens only to women; therefore, if you deny any rights or any funding on abortion, you have discriminated on account of sex.

She references New Mexico, which approved the use of the State’s Medicaid program, tax money, to pay for abortions when they are “medically necessary”. It’s not like the state is going to pay for anyone to just get an abortion just because. Another use of a hot issue to get an emotional reaction.

As the battle to get the WRA into the Constitution comes about, make yourself aware of their arguments. Be ready to counter these scare tactics, and put the right-wingers in their place. Don’t let their fear of “activist judges” interpreting the WRA to give abortions to everyone and give the queers the right to marry overwhelm people and keep this from passing.

Equality for all!

Anyone who thinks they are a tough guy/girl, needs to watch the show Ninja Warrior on G4TV. It is a Japanese game show, called Sasuke (named for a famous ninja).

There are one hundred contestants, including both men and women, who try to complete four separate obstacle courses. Sounds simple enough, right? Until you see some of the obstacles and realize how bad-ass you need to be to finish. There are ropes and walls to climb, a rolling log you must cling to while it rolls down a hill, a small ledge that you use only your fingers to grip while you go from one platform to another. Those are just a small fraction.

Oh, and did I mention that among the almost 2000 contestants, less than 200 have made it past the first stage. In the 18 seasons so far only TWO have every made it all the way through and finished all four stages. And neither of these were Olympic athletes, wrestlers, gymnasts, or any profession you would guess. And yes, there have been Olympic medalists compete in Ninja Warrior, but they always have been eliminated.

The prize? The title of Ninja Warrior, and 2 million yen. As of today, that is $16,930.50. Hardly anything compared to the prize money given on US game shows!

There are some fierce competitors, with “regulars” who compete in almost every tournament. Some of the most amazing of them are every day type people. Firemen, a fisherman (one of the winners), and a gas station district manager. More than one contestant has built replicas of the course in their back yard to train, and invited others to train with them.

YouTube has several clips, check it out if you don’t have G4TV. Hubby and I are addicted to this show, and have our favorite competitors. I can’t wait to see the new competition that finished wrapping!

Technorati tags: ninja warrior, television, japanese

A big thanks to David, the best webmaster in all the known universe, for getting the new WordPress interface up and running on Middle Raged Punk! It’s even set up so that those who read via RSS feeds don’t have to re-associate their feeds or anything. Plus there is a nifty plugin that lets you subscribe to comments. Poke around the new site, and I hope you like it like I do!

I still need to do some minor tweaking, like add more links into the Blogroll, and maybe add some categories. But overall, it’s all set up!

One thing to note for Internet Explorer users…

You will notice a big white spot above the first post. There is nothing to be done about that, sorry. My suggestion is download and use a different browser, like Firefox!

There is a new movement in the church, brought about by a man who thinks Jesus is portrayed as too wimpy and churches are sissified. As a result, Brad Stine founded GodMen, “Where simply being a man, created in Gods image, is celebrated.”

From their Welcome page: We have committed to see what would happen if, for one day, our faith and its struggles would be discussed with absolute honesty, transparency and openness - not sugar coated or framed in church language but instead spoken in frankness and maturity where men can see their innermost fears, shames, and secrets brought to light in a safe environment. Not for judgment but instead to reveal a commonality of unique male struggles shared with their own tribe, a band of brothers who promise to walk this journey with them to the end.

On the surface, I can understand this movement. More women go to church than men, and Stine is just trying to mold a church where guys can be Christian, worship, yet still feel and act like guys. However, I’m sure people wouldn’t be surprised to hear I do have some issues with this movement…

The most obvious is that this reinforces the idea that being nice, loving, kind, considerate, etc., are feminine traits that “real men” don’t or shouldn’t have. In fact, GodMen want to change Jesus’s image from turn-the-other-cheek kindness, to kick-the-tables-over-in-the-temple tough guy. They encourage men to embrace their testosterone and be assertive. To do what needs to be done as a man so their wives don’t find them boring and divorce them. (Yes, that’s what was said, check the link.)

One of the problems I see is that several places GodMen tell the guys to be, well, MEN. But then they don’t define what that is very clearly at all. So when you tell a guy to be a man, you get what has been ingrained by society about what a man is. The message, no matter how innocent and straightforward GodMen means, is taken as a mantra to be a leader, be assertive, and be dominant as they lead their families. And they aren’t very far off. Stien distributes a list of real man’s rules for his woman, and number one is “Learn to work the toilet seat. You’re a big girl. If it’s up, put it down.” I tried to find a complete list, but didn’t. However I did find this gem on his personal blog:

I am a sexist. By that I mean that I believe the two sexes ( or are there more, I can’t keep up with the latest adjustments to what used to be called common sense) are not only different but have innate aspects of their gender that makes each superior to the other in some areas. For example, men are stronger and faster than women. Always have been, always will be.

I am married and have a daughter. I wish the best for both of them and will support anything they desire to invest their passion in. I don’t think I am intrinsically superior to women except in some areas. What every American used to say after such a statement was “what’s your point”. Now it comes with anger, vitriol and the great cancer in America unreasonableness.Trumping truth for comfort is political correctnesses engine.That’s why my shows attack it. I want to see political correctness die in my lifetime, but first…I want to watch it suffer. Anyone along for the ride?

I can hear the red-blooded American males hooting in support as they drink their beer and eat their steaks. Quite different than what the GodMen’s site FAQ says about men being superior to women. I honestly don’t think these guys get it. They truly believe that they aren’t being misogynistic or anti-women, yet everywhere I see them using words like “lead, nurture, protect”. No where, like in my other post about the radio spots, do I see them talk about sharing responsibilities, support, or partnering with their spouse. How does treating your wife like property or someone who is not at least your equal not being misogynistic? Ask the wife of a guy who took off for a camping trip and left his wife at home to care for their infant if she thinks he’s being a good husband or father, and you’d probably get quite a different answer than what he says about being the “leader of the family”.

What it sounds like to me is these guys are using this movement as an excuse for their chauvinistic behavior.  There are already enough inequalities in the world, not to mention still in the church when it comes to leadership and control women have, why do we need to encourage this type of behavior?  Go ahead, change the church and worship how you feel comfortable, make it more “guy friendly”, but don’t perpetuate the problems between men and women in the process.

I started out my blogging on LiveJournal, thanks to a good friend of mine, although I don’t update there much anymore. I do regularly read and sometimes comment on my Friend’s posts though, which is where I came across this gem. A little background…

You’d think I’d be crazy to read a career military, staunch Bush/war supporter, Republican’s blog. But besides that part of him, he really is a nice guy who I have a lot in common with as far as interests. Big sci-fi guy and a writer for instance. I will give him credit, in that he has an open mind. For instance, he changed his mind on the gay marriage issue and no longer opposes it. He is also vocal about issues he does not agree with in the administration and Republican camp, and doesn’t automatically oppose something because it comes from a “liberal”. Although he does believe there is a liberal bias in news reporting, and that Fox News is truly “Fair and Balanced”, I still haven’t convinced him to watch Outfoxed to show him otherwise.

Every time I hear or read what the right is saying about issues, specifically Fox News, I can guarantee that I will read something very similar, if not identical, on his blog. Take this specific example on the fallout of the Walter Reed scandal and its poor treatment of veterans.

Here is the Fox News article. Here is his post, complete with comments. I didn’t comment only because I don’t want to get into a flame war, which is what happens a lot on the intertubes.

I have no doubt he is horrified at the treatment of his fellow soldiers, but instead on focusing on that issue, or how we let the hospital subcontract out care without oversight, he instead brings up the point highlighted by Fox News criticizing the “socialist medicine” idea and that if we think this is bad, why would we trust the government to provide our health care?

Ummmm…yeah.

What I don’t get is the hypocracy. Not surprisingly, most of the responses were of “No, of course not!”. But yet these same people support the War on Terror, and expect the government can be trusted to rebuild and train the Iraqi people to run their country. And they can be trusted with their warrantless spying program. And if they can’t trust them to look over our health care, how can we trust them tolook over the running of our entire country and the military?

I just don’t get it. Now that my brain is hurting from trying to understand this logic, it’s going to asplode now.

I was sitting in my OB/GYN’s office, waiting for him to come in. There are the usual parenting, child focused, and other “women” magazines you would expect, but they have a radio station playing in the background. Unfortunately for me, it is the local Christian soft rock station, K-LOVE. It should not be news to people who know me that I am not religious. At all, not even faith here folks. In fact, I do not like organized religion in general, especially when it comes to it’s attitudes of women, sexuality, and that I’m supposed to not question and believe what I am told or I don’t get into their special club. But I digress.

I picked up a magazine and flipped through it, tuning out the “Jesus” this and “savior” that on the radio. I was snapped back into active listening though, part way through a commercial. I heard a man and a woman talking about marriage, and how it’s the woman’s duty to look good and provide an incentive for the husband to want to pay attention to her. And for her to take care of her husband’s needs. They rattled off a website, and I scrambled to find a pen and paper, just getting the address down as my doctor walked in.

I’m glad I wrote it down. I am horrible at remembering things like website addresses and names until I’ve gone there and used them enough they are in my memory. The website, Embrace Marriage, is run by a husband and wife, both licensed therapists who run their own church. I was disappointed that I couldn’t read or listen to every radio spot though. Some I really wanted to hear:

“Inspirational Moments to Live By”
as heard on K-LOVE and AIR 1.

Building Common Interests
Danger Signs in Marriage
Dating After Marriage
Developing Your Own Signals
How to Affirm Your Mate
How to Cherish Your Wife
How to Affair-Proof Your Marriage
Great Expectations
Making a Spiritual Connection
The Art of Listening
Common Courtesy Goes a Long Way
How to Respect Your Man
Making Big Decisions Together
Sharing Common Goals
Taking Risks Together
How Much Career is Too Much?
In-Laws or Outlaws?
Finding a Form of Service Together
How to Choose a Church
How to Fall in Love Again
Planning Your Family
Sex… The Icing or the Cake?
Taking the “D” Word Out
Concept of Giving
Prioritizing Marriage Over Parenting

Although you can buy a CD with each spot, about a minute long each, for a suggested donation of $15. They do have a couple you can hear for free, so I had to hear their other words of “wisdom”…

How to Respect Your Man

John: When your wife respects you even when you don’t deserve it, it motivates a man to behave in such a way as to be worthy of that respect.

Let’s see, how much is wrong with this… How about saying that a guy deserves respect all the time, just because he is your husband, no matter what he does? Or what about “the position…in our home”. To me that implies he is head of the house, not an equal, not a partner. Remember, he wants respect! Not love, not friendship. Let’s look at what they say about the wife in a marriage.

How to Cherish Your Wife

Liz: The wise wife will affirm her husband whenever he makes her feel special. Let everything you say be good and helpful. Get rid of bitterness and be kind and forgiving to one another, just as God through Christ has forgiven you. (Eph. 4:29-31)

Tender, young plant? I’m not some weak creature that needs protecting. Sure, give me love and encouragement and support. But don’t treat me like some fragile being that couldn’t survive without some strong man to protect me. I am a partner and friend to my husband. We share our love, our laughter, our kindness, and…gasp…duties. Don’t let John find out that some men don’t find it hard work to express their love and affection, and actually enjoy taking care of their children, not treating their wife like a subservient person, not an equal.

But then we are godless heathen freaks who have had no fights, save one when we first started dating and are still madly in love after almost 5 years of marriage (we’ve known each other for almost 10). Can Liz & John say that?