Mother Davis thinks back to the days of United We Stand, and considers,

One of the strongest propaganda points used to justify the invasion and long-term occupation of Afghanistan was that Afghan women desperately needed to be liberated from tyrannical religious laws. So, now that Afghanistan has been “liberated” for going on four years of American occupation, what is the status of women living there?

According to a new human rights report, women in Afghanistan are still suffering from widespread, systematic persecution, and the new, American-backed government is doing little to help them. “Throughout the country, few women are exempt from violence or safe from the threat of it,” the report states. In response to the report, Nooria Haqnagar, the Afghan spokeswoman for Women’s Affairs in Afghanistan, admitted that “In some remote areas, men deal with women like animals.”

Where are all the Republicans who used to get so fired up about protecting women from persecution? Well, here at home, the same Republican politicians who eagerly talked about the need to liberate women in Afghanistan four years ago are still refusing to support an equal rights amendment for women here in the United States of America. I guess that, in their minds, women only really need to be liberated when they belong to the enemy. How very reminiscent of Genghis Khan.

Updating her travel plans and taking Afghanistan off the “liberated” list,
Mother Davis

This morning, I read the following in my e-mail inbox:

go on all you want about your atheism. Its your right. But don’t you see how limiting it all is? Atheists are the most limited people I have ever met. No wonder in the world. No bigger picture. Just what they see in front of their eyes. You people have no imagination, and no sense of awe. That’s your right, and I don’t want to censor you. But. One day, when you pick your head out of the sand, you will see the awesomenness of Jesus’ love for you. On that day you will know how petty and small your web sight is with its dimestore philosophy. I’ve got the real thing. You’ll have it one day too. You have my pity util then.

I had a funny reaction to this e-mail, because I’ve always seen things the other way around. The universe itself is such a big, awe-inspiring place, full of wonders (and horrors). Which is the more limited, head in the sand approach to the universe? To be without a commitment to any religion (without religion, a-theism), to be willing to acknowledge and stand in the face of our ignorance, but further be willing to learn, explore and change a way of thinking when confronted with new information about the universe? Or to stop observing, stop exploring, stop wondering, and to simply say, “sorry, I’ve found the Truth and the Way. This is It. My religion is The One, The Answer, The End.”?

The latter strikes me as a defensive reaction against the possibility of having to think, explore, or examine complicated realities. The latter strikes me as reflecting a lack of interest in embracing wonder. So, sorry, anonymous writer, but I pick the former.

Today, there’s a new reason for gun lovers to fight like hell for the right to blast away with whatever kinds of weapons the want: You never know when a criminally maniacal toddler will wander onto your private property.

Yesterday afternoon in Minnesota, 4 year-old boy Evan Davis Klassen was shot to death when he walked behind a paper target as his family and family friends were firing their guns for fun. There were a million things this family could have done to have fun together. They could have played monopoly, or thrown a ball around, or sung songs by a campfire. But no, this family chose to unleash the power of advanced weaponry in the presence of children were not yet old enough to be left alone in a bathtub. Well, family values come in all shapes, I guess.

I’d really love to know more about the family values that say that it’s a good idea to dress your four year-old son in camouflage military-style clothes. You see, little Evan Davis Klasse had a pair of camouflage pants on, and those camouflage pants made it hard for the trigger-happy folks at the family gathering to see the little boy when he walked toward the paper target to see what all the bang-bang noises were all about. The shooter was just 30 feet away, and still couldn’t see the boy because of the camouflage. So much for those sharpened senses honed through target practice.

What are a mother and father thinking when they dress their four year-old son in camouflage? Are they thinking that it would be really neat to ahve a hard time finding their child at an outdoor gathering, or is it that they think that camouflage clothes would show that their little boy was a real gung-ho little tough guy, in spite of the fact that he was still scared by Oscar the Grouch sometimes? I’ve got a four year-old son myself, and the idea of dressing him up as a half-invisible little tough guy for weekend gatherings has never occured to me.

Here’s something to consider: The NRA and its allies are busy telling us that guns are necessary to protect our children from dangerous bad guys. However, the Klassen family have used their personal arsenal of firearms to defend their children from communists, rogue government agents, criminals or fanatical terrorists a grand total of zero times. On the other hand, the Klassen family has now used its personal arsenal of firearms to shoot one of their own children. The Klassen family hardly seems like a “well-regulated militia” of the sort referred to in the 4th Amendment’s description of a right to “bear arms”.

Gun lovers: This is not an issue of anybody trying to take your guns away from you. This is an issue of whether the gun culture is a good thing for American families. It’s constitutional to teach your kids to suck on thumbtacks, but it’s a stupid idea. Just so, the constitutionality of owning and firing deadly weapons as family friendly activity may well be defensible in a court of law, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a wise thing to do.

So, go ahead and tell me that I don’t sufficiently understand the importance of people in Minnesota using their personal firearms to defend America from tyranny, but I’ve got a simple request to gun-owning parents across America: Put your guns away, please - not because it’s illegal for you to run around shooting bullets all around you for fun, but because it’s simply a pointless and stupid thing to do.

In all the media hoopla over particular abuses and instances of torture at the American gulag at Guantanamo Bay, one important issue has gone unmentioned, until today. As the Washington Post reports today, “the fact remains that although one has been promised, no independent military, Pentagon or other body has yet published an extensive investigation into the multiple accounts of prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay.’

Every claim by the Bush Administration that everything at Guantanamo Bay is just fine, is nothing more than an assertion without proof. Many of the Bush Administration’s claims have been proven to be absolutely false. So, when Bush Administration officials make statements about what is and what is not happening at Guantamo Bay, we’re all being asked to take their word at it - blind faith with a bad reputation for being dishonest.

As the American people are being asked to give their moral support, along with billions of dollars of financial backings for Bush’s system of secret prisons for people he calls “evildoers”, blind trust in the assurances of government spokespeople is not enough. We deserve a complete, uncensored report on an independent, full-access investigation of Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and all the other prisons maintained by the Bush Administration around the world.

If the Bush Administration continues to be unwilling to provide such information to the American people about these prisons, that is in itself sign enough that he can be trusted to wage his shadowy “war on evil” no longer.

Things are smelling mighty dirty down in Tennessee, where several Democratic state legislators have been arrested on charges of corruption in relation to a federal sting operation. The politicians, including State Senator John Ford, have been recorded on audiotape and videotape, cooperating with undercover federal agents posing as corporate representatives offering bribes in exchange for pro-business legislation.

John Ford is the uncle and mentor of Congressman Harold Ford Jr., who represents Memphis in the U.S. House of Representatives. Just this week, Harold Ford Jr. announced that he would run to take the place of U.S. Senator Bill Frist when Frist steps down at the end of 2006 in order to prepare for the 2008 presidential election.

Harold Ford Jr. has not been a strong friend of progressives during his tenure in the U.S. House of Representatives. He’s flipped and he’s flopped, casting votes on issues depending on what way the favored political winds were blowing from. He’s said that he supports gay rights, but voted against them on many occasions. Harold Ford Jr. has refused to support H.R. 952, legislation that would make it illegal for the U.S. government to send prisoners held in the United States to foreign countries to be tortured. Congressman Ford has also not supported H.R. 1157, a bill that would revoke sections of the Patriot Act that allow government agents to secretly search through the financial and library records of law-abiding American citizens.

In spite of the fact that he is a Democrat, Congressman Harold Ford Jr. has often stood with George W. Bush. He’s provided support to President Bush’s attacks on separation of church and state, freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, and protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Harold Ford Jr. has been a shameless self-promoter in the U.S. House of Representatives, trying to make a name for himself by criticizing Democrats for not being Republican enough. Harold Ford Jr. has quickly become the Joseph Lieberman of the U.S. House of Representatives.

No one knows whether Harold Ford Jr. was at all involved in the corrupt activities of his uncle John Ford. So far, no evidence of a direct connection has emerged. However, it’s a plain fact that both Congressman Ford and State Senator Ford were part of the same political machine. From a pragmatic standpoint, Harold Ford Jr. is tainted by the ethics scandal that has engulfed John Ford.

There is another Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in 2006. Rosalind Kurita has been campaigning hard, and started months before Harold Ford Jr. stepped into the race. Ford is damaged goods, and will not be able rally Tennessee Democrats beyond the borders of Memphis to support his campaign in a general election. If Harold Ford Jr. really cares about anything more than his own political ambitions, he will drop out of the race for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate. Given his record, I don’t have high hopes for Harold Ford Jr.’s sense of selflessness.

When I was a teenager, I attended a camp called Boys State. It was described to me by my high school principal as an opportunity for high school boys to engage in a simulation of a state-level legislative session while staying on a college campus. It was a chance to get away from home for a few days, and it sounded like it would look good on a college application, so I agreed to go.

Little did I know what Boys State was really about. Run by the American Legion, Boys State turned out to be a gigantic recruiting operation. All throughout the camp, we were pressured to jon the military, to adhere to a conservative political agenda, and to behave as devout Christians. We were guided in these directions by a team of military recruiters who were given absolute authority over the boys at the camp, taking us through a miniature version of boot camp. Those who disobeyed the sergeants in any way were ritually humiliated in front of the other boys, so we all quickly learned to do whatever the recruiters told us to do. When they told us to take part in the prayers at evening meetings, we participated. When a Marine recruiter told us that Semper Fi, the motto of the Corps, meant loyalty to God, we responded with a “Sir, Yes Sir”, because we knew that if we didn’t, we’d be punished.

I reflect on this great mess of a teenage experience as I read an increasing number of reports confirming that American soldiers in military prisons have been engaged in the systematic desecration of the Koran. In a discussion of the growing scandal yesterday, someone asked me if I thought that the desecration itself was the real problem. I’ve been considering that question since, and this morning it occurs to me that no, the desecration of the Koran is not what I really object to. What I object to is that the American military is being used not just to attack people, but to attack a particular religion as well. The real underlying problem is that the military is being hijacked by members of conservative Christian sects to promote their particular religious views on the taxpayer’s dime.

It doesn’t appear that President Bush himself ordered the desecration of Korans, although the incidents were certainly facilitated by Bush’s clear directions to push beyond the boundaries of interrogation methods agreed upon by free nations. Instead, the idea of using military authority to attack the Koran seems to have arisen spontaneously from the ranks.

We should not be surprised at pervasive attacks against non-Christian religion in the military, because Christianity has been co-opted as a tool of imposing authority throughout the military. We American taxpayers hire clerics to convince American soldiers that they are doing the work of God. A High-ranking general tours the country telling crowds that the war on terror is really a religious war against satanic Islam. Missionaries from conservative Christian sects are given exclusive access to military bases in the United States in order to gain converts among the soldiers. Military recruiters appeal to Christian faith as a reason to enlist.

A long symbiotic relationship between Christianity and the American military has developed over time, and this relationship has often encouraged abuse. Recent reports, for example, indicate that the leaders of the Air Force Academy have engaged in “the official promotion of evangelical Christianity” as part of the education there, and allowed ongoing harassment of non-Christian cadets.

The mixture of Christianity and the American military is dangerous to both Christianity and to the military. The moral high ground that Christianity seeks to claim is lost when its “turn the other cheek” message is cast aside in order to make it compatible with the institutional violence of the military. The American military’s credibility is also called into question when it appears that it represents the will of only some of the American people. The separation of Church and State protects us all from abusive authorities who seek to use religion to take away our liberty. When the powers of religion and the military are mixed, we are all put at risk, whether we are members of the military or not.

Finally, Tom Friedman gets it:

“Tell me, how is it that over 100 detainees have died in U.S. custody so far? Heart attacks? This is not just deeply immoral, it is strategically dangerous.”

On Friday, May 20’s Connection, the Libyan Ambassador to the United States was asked how he could justify his nation’s poor human rights record. He didn’t answer the question. Instead, he simply replied, “Well, your nation has Guantanamo, so I don’t know why you are even asking me that question.” We’ll hear that line over and over and over and over again, short-circuiting attempts at legitimate progress.

Shut Guantanamo Down.

A couple of days ago, I posted a link to an essay written by a fundamentalist conservative Christian asserting that daughters are rightfully possessed by fathers, who as a moral value ought to have dominion over them until such dominion is transferred to a husband.

Since then, a few people have written incredulous responses, asserting that this simply must be the wacked-out notion of some individual fundamentalist conservative Christian psycho, not some broadly embraced fundamentalist conservative Christian value.

Well, I wish that were so. But think again. This wacko essay been published in multiple locations (among other places here, here, and here), indicating multiple sources of agreement.

Other pieces of fundamentalist conservative Christian writing making the same argument can be found here and here and here and here and here and here and here and… oh, I’m exhausted.

It’s a trend. It’s a pattern. These are the people who Bush rode to victory with. These are the people who Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is pandering to. These are the people who want to shove their “moral values” down everyone else’s throat. Given that these “moral values” include this sort of father-daughter dominion crapola, wishing these people didn’t exist isn’t going to help.

Know those who wish to oppress you.

Ter-ror-is-m n (Corporate; early 21st century)

1 An act that makes business owners terrified that they might not make profits
2 A political philosophy that holds that when the government abuses human rights, it is the fault of journalists who report on the abuse when people around the world express outrage
3 A political tactic involving the introduction of radical reductions in citizen rights based upon attacks that might happen sometime in the future

Example 1: The Department of Homeland Security is bringing Peter Daniel Young to trial on charges of domestic terrorism, for which he could serve 82 years in prison, for releasing minks from their cages on several farms. Government officials explained that Young had “created terror” in the minds of mink farmers.
Example 2: The White House angrily demanded that a major news publication retract a story about American soldiers flushing Korans down toilets, saying that the story was damaging to America’s reputation. Within ten days of the forced retraction, multiple independent sources, including FBI agents, corroborated the story.
Example 3: The Department of Homeland Security insists that it needs Congress to expand the Patriot Act, to include giving the government the right to grab the private records of American citizens without subpoena or search warrant. During testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, general counsel to the FBI, admitted that there has never been a single instance of a terrorist attack taking place because of delays caused by the process of getting search warrants or subpoenas, but she argued that such problems could take place some time in the future, and so the constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure ought to be taken away right now.

We are pleased to introduce The Irregular Wires, a clearinghouse for political news, editorials, information and messages useful to those coming from a progressive perspective. We bring the most important headlines from the liberal blogosphere here for you to imbibe and digest. Specifically, we have snatched RSS newsfeeds from a variety of bloggers writing on a variety subjects of interest and relevance, and brought them together into a set of webpages that update every hour to bring headlines from the latest posts from all these places to this one place. These headlines are themselves links that will take you to the blog where a post was originally written.

We have separate Irregular Wires pages for the following topics:

Generally Progressive Democrats the Environment Elections

Legislation the Media Religion Republicans

Science Sex War and Peace

Visit the Irregular Wires daily as they change to reflect the latest news and thoughts of others. Take what you find useful in your own work to build a more democratic, less hateful, more free, less fearful, more responsible, more responsive America.

Reuters: FBI memo reports Guantanamo guards flushing Koran

“Personally, he has nothing against the United States. The guards in the detention facility do not treat him well. Their behavior is bad. About five months ago, the guards beat the detainees. They flushed a Koran in the toilet,” the FBI agent wrote. “The guards dance around when the detainees are trying to pray. The guards still do these things,” the FBI agent wrote. The Pentagon stated last week it had received “no credible and specific allegations” that U.S. personnel at Guantanamo had put a Koran in the toilet.

Dear me.

In just 6 short months, the average American voter will wake up and start to notice politics again, with the advent of the 2006 congressional campaign season. It will be an exceptionally important election year, in spite of the dismissive attitude of veteran pundits who will call it an “off-year” election. The fact is that in 2006, reasonable Americans have the chance to start taking government back from the Republican Party’s fundamentalist fanatics. All of the House of Representatives and one third of the US Senate faces re-election, and if progressives can stop moping and get their act together, they have a good chance of regaining majorities in both houses of Congress. A large number of governors’ seats are up for grabs as well. giving American progressives the chance to place responsible leaders in charge of state governments, and on the path towards the presidency in a few years’ time.

Of course, a little bit of campaigning skill on the part of congressional candidates would help. An essential part of good campaigning is the proper use of timing. Unfortunately, a significant chunk of progressive candidates are showing a decided lack of rhythm.

Take, for example, Al Franken - a guy who promotes himself as a comedian. You’d think that, with years of experience playing the comedy game, Mr. Franken would have his timing down pat. Not so. Months ago, Mr. Franken announced on his Air America radio show that he was going to announce, a few days later, whether he would run for the position of United States Senator representing Minnesota - although he hadn’t lived in Minnesota for decades and had not previously mentioned any plans to ever move back. Then, a few days later, Franken kept his promise, and announced that he would not run for the position of US Senator from Minnesota.

Well, that’s fine, although I have to question whether Al Franken really took just a few days to figure out whether he should try to become one of the hundred most powerful legislators in the most powerful nation ever to exist on Earth. Could Mr. Franken really be that stupid? I don’t think so. It looks more like he was just trying to get people’s attention by creating a sense of suspense.

It’s troubling to me when politicians try to play Alfred Hitchcock. Americans like to feel a sense of creepy, growing suspense when they are watching a movie, but they don’t want to be kept in suspense by political leaders who are begging for their votes. Voters appreciate politicians who seem trustworthy, and quickly tire of politicians who seem to be playing games. All politicians play games, of course, but the key to getting voter approval is not to seem to be playing games.

It’s too bad, then, that Al Franken is back to playing games again. Just weeks after announcing that he wouldn’t seek the Democratic nomination to become Minnesota’s junior senator, Mr. Franken changed his mind and said that he hadn’t really ruled out running for the US Senate. Since then, Mr. Franken has announced that he is buying a townhouse in Minnesota again, and will establish residency there, though that doesn’t necessarily mean that he’s going to run for the senate seat. On the other hand, he remarked, he just might run for Senate, maybe, or… not.

Many other Democratic demi-candidates have tried to hype up their future maybe-campaigns with this kind of publicity-numbing sense of suspense. Michael E. Gronstal, for example, has tried to take advantage of his current position as the Democratic leader of the Iowa State Senate to make the announcement that he plans to… later… maybe sometime this week… begin… to plan his decision-making process… about whether he might announce… later… that he will form an exploratory committee… to consider… running for governor of Iowa. I’ve heard more exciting announcements about lint.

Luckily, the Democratic Party has some straight-talkers who don’t beat around the bush. Take Dr. Bob Johnson, for example, who is running against longtime Republican incumbent John McHugh in New York State’s 26th congressional district. Dr. Johnson knew that he had a tough race ahead of him in 2006, so he started planning for it even before the 2004 election was over. Dr. Johnson never played any coy games about whether he would run - he’s declared his candidacy openly, and without hesitation, from the start. It’s this kind of behavior that earns the trust of voters, and if the Democratic Party had more straight-talking candidates like Dr. Johnson, the Republicans would have a great deal more to fear in 2006.

Yesterday, we dug up what the fundamentalist conservative Christians in America really think about Tyrannosaurs on the Ark. Last week, Resonance dug up what fundamentalist conservative Christians in America really still think about women. Sarah Faith Schlissel of the Chalcedon Foundation writes:

I’ve been Daddy’s girl from Day One. My first word was “Dada.” I’ve always wanted to do what Daddy was doing, go where Daddy was going, read what Daddy was reading, say what Daddy was saying…. Little wonder people call me “Daddy’s Little Clone.” I mean, take a look at the picture heading this column! No wonder that, for fairness’ sake, in family votes, our two are counted as one. But does this exhaust the ways in which I might be reckoned “Daddy’s girl”? Beyond being an X-chromosome donor, may we think of the “-’s” in “Daddy’s” in the possessive sense, and affirm with legitimacy that Daddy is my owner? That “my heart belongs to Daddy” is certainly true. But do daughters, per se, belong to their Daddies? …I define courtship as the discovery of a life-partner for a daughter under the direct oversight of the father. Any man seeking to beg, borrow or steal a daughter’s hand without her father’s endorsement is seeking to gain, in unlawful ways, “property” not his own. Daughters are Daddy’s girls in the objective sense, and this particular daughter rejoices in that truth. I am owned by my father. If someone is interested in me, he should see him. I don’t feel qualified to discuss the role of sons, but it seems clear that there is a peculiar relationship between the father and the daughter. Since a daughter is, by the grace of God, always under authority–there being a transfer at marriage from a father’s to a husband’s–daughters are “Daddy’s” uniquely. While he must raise his sons to be loving husbands and fathers who make houses possible, he raises his daughters to be submissive, godly wives and wise mothers, to make houses homes. He raises a son to be a provider; he raises a daughter to be provided for. Proud independence is no noble goal for a woman, and the spirit which pursues it is no part of a godly girl’s trousseau. Of course, those who exalt independence, denying headship to a husband, will certainly deny it to a father. Thus, they find the idea of courtship offensive. But those who acknowledge that God’s way is right (Luke 7:29, 35) find the idea of “authoritative stewardship” quite pleasant! …As strange as it may sound, in the peculiar relationship of the father and daughter, God, as it were, takes a back seat. God has created a hierarchy such that the daughter is directly answerable to her father, and her father then answers to God. This doubles the father’s responsibilities, because he must account to God for the way he raises his daughter. The father’s ownership, of course, is an in order to thing. God has given the daughter to the father so he can raise her in the fear and admonition of the Lord, protect her from harm and want, protect her from other men, and sometimes, protect her from herself, even from foolish decisions she might make on her own. If we’re understanding this properly, just think of the impact it has on courtship. In modern “dating,” the girl is seen as belonging to herself. Therefore, it’s a logical conclusion that any man who wants to be romantically involved with her has only to ask her permission. But if it’s true that the father owns (has lawful authoritative stewardship rights over) his daughter, then the young man must seek the father’s approval. It’s not simply up to the girl. This changes the tone of any relationship there might be. If it’s the father who must give his approval, the young man knows that he is being watched, and he has to prove himself worthy. God has given fathers a lot of insight into the character, impulses and designs of young men. Flowers and sweet words might win the daughter; but Daddy’s a man, and it’s a lot harder to pass Daddy’s tests. Further, a godly father is aware of his daughter’s capabilities and needs, and can often see more clearly than she whether a young man is a complement to her and whether she can aid him in his calling. The order of God, as indicated in his word, is that God himself defers to the will of the father when it comes to his daughter. God says, “You heard your father. The answer is no.” Thus, the will of the father regarding his daughter IS the will of God. So I really am “Daddy’s girl.” And no man can approach me as an independent agent because I am not my own, but belong, until my marriage, to my father. At the time of my marriage, my father gives me away to my husband and there is a lawful change of ownership.

Now the next time you hear a fundamentalist conservative Christian say they want to see their version of “moral family values” enacted into the laws of government, you’ll know exactly what they mean: half of you out there are slave owners, and the other half of you are property.

We’re in the process of designing a new area, called Irregular Wires, that will act as a clearinghouse for headlines of liberal news and opinions from a variety of interesting progressive blogs.

We’ve got a beta version up and functioning for the main page, but we’ve got a lot to add. We’ll eventually add entire pages showcasing headlines from blogs about religion, war and peace, legislation, the environment, democrats, republicans, science, the media, and sexual politics.

Here’s where you come in… what are your favorite progressive blogs, both generally and having to do with the subareas named above?