The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks! » Search Results » morality http://omnipotentpoobah.com Sometimes you are the shitee, sometimes the shiter. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:51:21 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Pass the Butter Mr. Gorbachev: The Uselessness of Corporate Personhood http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2012/01/19/pass-the-butter-mr-gorbachev-the-uselessness-of-corporate-personhood/ http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2012/01/19/pass-the-butter-mr-gorbachev-the-uselessness-of-corporate-personhood/#comments Fri, 20 Jan 2012 00:58:05 +0000 Omnipotent Poobah http://omnipotentpoobah.com/?p=6669
Prosperum

TALK TO CHUCK - The 99% have a plethora of investment opportunities.

The concept of corporate personhood was created more than 100 years ago and ever since has been the bane of private citizens. At each challenge judges uphold and strengthen the concept. And the moves aren’t ancient history.

Can you say unlimited campaign financing?

The reputation of Congress, indeed of all politicians, is lower than whale shit at the bottom of the Marianas Trench. The Anti-Big Government types look at unrestricted capitalism as their savior. They’ve spent decades vilifying the words liberalism and socialism while talking up the advantages of a corporate personhood that will invariably do the right thing if only government got off their back.

If only we didn’t tax corporations and the wealthy, jobs would rain like fillet mignon-fed cats and dogs. Yet, the taxes are low, the rich continue to monopolize the economy, most of their money remains offshore, and the jobless are rapidly becoming the homeless.

We’re still waiting for the trickle down here, dammit.

The ‘Never Saw a Regulation I Liked Crowd’
Deregulate companies? They already thumb their noses at existing regulations and spend more than the GNP of Ecuador to protect extra-personhood. The response to the BP fiasco shouldn’t have been to remove regulations, it should have been to make sure BP followed the ones already in place. In the end, they were able to set the damages they would pay. Sorta like you negotiating the fine for a traffic violation…oh wait! You can’t do that. And the regulatory agencies, manned by former 1% wing tippers are in cahoots too, as one might expect when the fox guards your hen house.

Know the difference.Well, a funny thing happened on the airplane flight to the yacht…unrestricted capitalism isn’t so much in vogue these days. People are beginning to give it low marks in the Jon Huntsman range. The notion of, “What’s good for GM is good for the country” doesn’t mean quite as much as it used to. People are beginning to see that, more often than not, unrestricted American-style capitalism is just as warped, just as weak, and just as corrupt as any other type of burgeoning dictatorship.

Contrary to popular belief, St. Ronnie of Reagan didn’t say, “Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall and win one for the Gipper” and it fell straightaway.  It didn’t fall under the bulldozer blades of an American offshore multinational, like Halliburton at all. It fell because the socialist/communist cabal kept trying to spend money to defend against paper threats like the unusable Star Wars program.

When the wall did fall, Americans spent a lot of time puffing their chests and lecturing the rest of the world on the wonders of capitalism. “Kill a commie for Christ and deregulate everything in sight” was the mantra. Instead, the beleaguered Russian peasants got more beleagerment (not unlike our 99 percenters), Mafia wars, and an oligarchy so virulent it makes our corporate personhood look positively benign.

The Romneilians, Newtonions, and just plan Fuckledupistanis aren’t unjustly accused victims of class warfare. They’re well armed enough – possibly with old Star Wars surplus – that the rest of us don’t have a chance. If I was a betting man, I’d lay a bet against myself right now.

Embarking on the Costa Concordia
The Party That Couldn’t Elect a Sane Candidate talks a good game about billionaire jealousy, but in doing so, they are missing the boat. At the end of the day, most regular Americans couldn’t care less how much the overclass makes. It cares where the fallout from it hits them – in the pocket. They are, after all, capitalists. Even if they have no real idea why.

If there is one thing as quintessentially American as capitalism it is the notion that we are a nation of freedom zealots with a keen eye toward fairness. We don’t like to see some asshat take home a gaggle of gold geese while we get to clean up the goose shit after he’s gone. It’s positively unAmerican.

If the overclass was smart – and not in that “I flew my company into a smoking hole” way – they’d be well advised to protect those who produce their wealth from the corporations that steal it. One day capitalism, like communism, socialism, and fascism will have lost its usefulness and appeal and there’s not much 1% of the population can do if the other 99% comes for them in the dark of night. Capitalism needs to be rescued from itself before it also collapses under its own weight.

If they aren’t smart – as would seem to be apparent from their lack or management skill and absence of morality – they will wake up one day and not see the face of Jesus on their toast, but a “NO” slash through a dollar sign.

Pass the butter Mr. Gorbachev.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
]]> http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2012/01/19/pass-the-butter-mr-gorbachev-the-uselessness-of-corporate-personhood/feed/ 0 A Hell of a Way to Rally People to Your Cause http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/09/16/a-hell-of-a-way-to-rally-people-to-your-cause/ http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/09/16/a-hell-of-a-way-to-rally-people-to-your-cause/#comments Sat, 17 Sep 2011 01:10:36 +0000 Omnipotent Poobah http://omnipotentpoobah.com/?p=5660 Theist BoardOne man’s immorality is another man’s religion, even if the immorality of that religion is pointed out by atheists. It’s common for religious adherents to sometimes act immorally – and sometimes hypocritical – despite what their religions supposedly teach. The same is true for atheists and what they believe. People are what they are, sometimes inconsistent, narrow-minded, and  disagreeable.

But, there’s the message and then there’s the way you deliver the message.

Backyard Skeptics, an organization that bills itself as, “Where humanists, rational thinkers, atheists and agnostics have a place to explore the world without religious dogma,” plans this weekend to rip pages out of the Bible they believe portray immoral biblical law.

The message that the Bible has passages that are immoral is a valid topic for discussion. Some reasoned discourse on biblical questions like these would be welcome in an era when understanding one another is limited to how loudly you yell at your opponents.

Non-Desecration By Destruction
But Backyard Skeptics Director Bruce Gleason says, “We’re not there to burn the Bible or desecrate. There are plenty [of] verses in the Bible that if you did any of those things today, you’d be thrown in jail immediately.”

True, some of those things would get you arrested, convicted, and maybe even sent to death row. But, Gleason’s claim that he isn’t there to “desecrate” the Bible rings hollow. Most Christians would beg to differ that ripping pages out of their holy book isn’t desecration and they aren’t the only ones.

Muslims understandably weren’t so pleased when renown nutcase and “clergyman” Terry Jones thought toasting marshmallows over an open fire of burning Korans would be a fine thing. In fact, Jones’ justifications weren’t all that different from Gleason’s. “Jesus would not run around burning books,” Jones said last year, “but I think he would burn this one [because He disagrees with it].”

And interestingly, Gleason’s protest engages in what Christians might call evangelism, but with a secular twist. “We want to make this a better world for secular and humanistic values,” Gleason said. “We don’t believe prayer works. We don’t believe religion adds anything except a sense of false hope.”

I believe Christians often rely too heavily on martyrdom. It’s their constant screed they’re an endangered species being systematically rubbed out by the forked-tailed devils around them. That’s an outrageous debating point for a group that makes up 75-80% of the American population. It’s nothing more than needless antagonism toward people who don’t believe what they believe…just as atheists ripping pages out of a Bible make their motives suspect.

Jugheads Doomed to Hell
And it’s not that theists don’t engage in their own intolerance. Atheists are probably one of the groups most singled out by theists. At least Muslims believe in some God, even if many Christians believe Allah is a mere pretender to the throne of higher power. Believe in yourself and you’re some sort of jughead doomed to Hell and sucking the faithful right along with you – a sort of reverse Rapture.

This isn’t a Constitutional issue. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that desecrating books or flags, or almost anything else is free speech and on that I agree with them (as long as that freedom is doled out equally for all). After all, they only ruled the speech free, not that it wasn’t ill-advised or provocative.

No, this is a matter of communicating beliefs. Dueling billboards that promote God or atheism? OK. Handing out information about your beliefs? OK, as long as you don’t tag along trying to convert me when all I want is a nice walk in the park. Ripping, burning, pissing on, or otherwise disrespecting someone’s belief symbols is intrusive, insulting, provocative, and needless.

In other words, it’s a hell of a way to rally people to your cause.

The Omnipotent Poobah, aka Jack Koeneman, is an atheist.

 Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta
]]> http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/09/16/a-hell-of-a-way-to-rally-people-to-your-cause/feed/ 2 Pat Robertson is Divorced From Reality http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/09/15/pat-robertson-is-divorced-from-reality/ http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/09/15/pat-robertson-is-divorced-from-reality/#comments Thu, 15 Sep 2011 20:19:20 +0000 Omnipotent Poobah http://omnipotentpoobah.com/?p=5642
When you’re talking about the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) a good defense is apparently a good offense – and no one is more offensive than Pat Robertson.

Robertson, God’s official gaffemeister, says it’s okay to punch out of a presumably ‘traditional’ marriage if one spouse has Alzheimer’s.

“I know it sounds cruel, but if he’s (the spouse) going to do something, he should divorce her and start all over again, but make sure she has custodial care and somebody looking after her,” Robertson said.

From the quote, it’s hard to tell if he intends this privilege as a traditional male-only perk, but that’s another gaffe for another day.

Robertson’s unusual advice comes with a sort of ecumenical escape clause. According to God’s worst PR person, marriage vows to take each other “for better or for worse” and “in sickness and in health,” are suspended by the whole “til death do us part” sub-clause.

Why? Robertson says Alzheimer’s is “a kind of death.” He doesn’t cite a traditional values bible passage explaining his position, but if gays can cause hurricanes and earthquakes I suppose Robertson can choose only the gospels he finds convenient.

Robertson also breaks from the traditional dogma followed by most other Christians by ignoring Jesus’s words in the Gospel of Mark. Words that say divorce and remarriage is adultery. You know, that pesky 7th Commandment plastered on school hallways across the land.

Perhaps Robertson needs to stop by a school hallway for a refresher course.

As with most of his goof-spouting, he derives his idea of consistent piousness comes from the same intellectual font as Michelle Bachmann’s – Nasty, Rude, Brutish, and Short – Official Barristers to God. He gets all the communal property in his traditional values divorce so he can dole it out as he sees fit, including his definition of death.

Morality is the business of the person living it, not some failed faith healer claiming to have a non-secular cellphone with the Big Guy on speed dial. Married gays would, and expect to be, in the same positions as straights. Some accept each other in, “for better or worse and in sickness and health, until death do us part” and stick it out. Some, not so much. Just like traditional couples. It’s a tough decision for anyone, so I’d suggest you follow your own wise advice. “(I) wouldn’t put a guilt trip on anyone who took such a step.”

But Pat, if you wouldn’t put it this on someone else, you should feel guilty as hell about putting a guilt trip in other circumstances – like gay marriage.

 Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta
]]> http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/09/15/pat-robertson-is-divorced-from-reality/feed/ 0 Pissing on an Imaginary Tree http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/05/30/pissing-on-an-imaginary-tree/ http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/05/30/pissing-on-an-imaginary-tree/#comments Mon, 30 May 2011 16:33:08 +0000 Omnipotent Poobah http://omnipotentpoobah.com/?p=4902 Piss on You

URINARY INFECTION - It's bad enough to bark up the wrong tree. Pissing up an imaginary tree is far worse.

It’s de rigueur for small government advocates to carp about government intrusion, over-regulation, or the wisdom of forcing laws down to local levels, sometimes at the risk of being inconsistent.

Inconsistency is bipartisan and a product of trying to solve difficult problems without context or tainted by personal economic preferences or moral beliefs that others don’t share.

Fair-Weather Libertarians
For example, gay marriage. Many fair-weather libertarians, Tea Partiers, and conservatives support the federal Defense of Marriage Act, despite its codifying government meddling in personal lives. The position creates a conflict between a personal moral decision and a fear of Big Brotherism. One can’t make a black and white argument for both. You either have to sacrifice a little personal morality or soften some iron-clad objections to government meddling.

So, let’s look at a new issue within the paradigm of small government, regulation, and personal freedom – the state of California requiring porn actors use condoms to cut STDs for professional pud-wielders and, by extension, the rest of us.

The decision’s already at a state level, so one point for the local decision crowd.

But, it should be a regulation bother for the strict, anti-regulation folks. More unsheathed boffing, more big bonuses for horny porny CEOs. Almost nothing is more profitable than porn in a free-market.

Schtuping for Hire
Yet, many with a pantload of self-proclaimed piety wouldn’t object if Big Brother and the Choking Company moved in and outlawed porn altogether, not withstanding government’s interference in schtuping for hire.

Most people would prefer a sharply delineated world where decisions are a binary yes or no. But, they also want exclusive moral notions of right or wrong, despite what that means to everyone else.

When they catch others in their inconsistency trap, they’re powerful anti-inconsistency wolverines scarfing up the carrion. When they catch their leg in the trap they’ll chew it off to explain their own inconsistencies with arguments as weak as an elementary school debate team’s.

News flash. The world is complex. The world is capricious. Big, small, or medium government isn’t the answer on its own. Neither is keeping everything we’re already swimming in. Sometimes yes is no and sometimes no is yes. Anyone who thinks the world should always be totally fair or consistent or based solely on their morals or ideology is a dog pissing on an imaginary tree.

And, it gets the rest of our shoes smelly and wet.

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta
]]> http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/05/30/pissing-on-an-imaginary-tree/feed/ 5 The Battle Over South Dakota’s Justified Homicide Bill http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/02/17/the-battle-over-south-dakotas-justified-homicide-bill/ http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/02/17/the-battle-over-south-dakotas-justified-homicide-bill/#comments Thu, 17 Feb 2011 19:50:28 +0000 Omnipotent Poobah http://omnipotentpoobah.com/?p=4261 South Dakota‘s proposed “justified homicide bill” has been withdrawn for the time being, but don’t be surprised if it returns like cow flop on a South Dakota rancher’s boots.

What’s the controversy? Read from the bill for yourself, “Homicide is justifiable if committed by any person while resisting any attempt to murder such person, or to harm the unborn child of such person in a manner and to a degree likely to result in the death of the unborn child, or to commit any felony upon him or her, or upon or in any dwelling house in which such person is.”

Some proponents of the bill, including bill sponsor and anti-abortion advocate Rep. Phil Jensen (R-South WTFistan), claim the bill has nothing to do with abortion. Opponents, and even some advocates believe that’s hogwash – and if you can read, that seems a reasonable interpretation – and doubt that it’s legally sound.

Legal wrangles over abortion have gone non-stop since Roe v. Wade became the basis for the law of the land, but the nation rarely looks at the pretzel logic behind the legality debate.

Pro-lifers often argue a fetus is a full-blown human being and that it’s justified, if not morally correct, to perform a sort of vigilante capital punishment on abortion providers because they’re “murderers”. So if self-appointed juries can mete out capital punishment for “murdering” abortion providers, how can many of those same people support state-sponsored capital punishment.

Even if one wraps themselves in the cloak of religion, how’s it possible to cite the 6th commandment without caveat – Thou shalt not kill – as the basis for killing an abortionist while ignoring it when a capital criminal walks the Green Mile?

And for the record, pro-lifers could reverse this tangle of law and morality to bash the other side. After all, why is it OK for pro-choice advocates to argue it’s OK to terminate a pregnancy, but are equally inflamed about abolishing capital punishment.

The legality of this issue is valid, but it’s a dicey legal case that’s spread beyond just the courtroom. For years, both sides have short-sightedly used Roe v. Wade as a one-issue litmus test for judge approval to the exclusion of all other issues. Judges should be made up of more than this one issue.

Abortion is a tough nut, a moral and legal tangle whipped raw by high emotion. There’s no perfect answer because it isn’t a zero sum issue with a clear winner or loser – no matter how much the opponents and proponents wish it would be.

Perhaps we’d all be better off to step back and think about this a little more dispassionately instead of counting the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pinhead.

Or, a South Dakota legislator.

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta
]]> http://omnipotentpoobah.com/2011/02/17/the-battle-over-south-dakotas-justified-homicide-bill/feed/ 0