Humans: The REAL Bully Breed

It's time for me to come clean about something: my name is Andrea, and I am a cat lady.  Wow...it feels so good to get that off my chest!  For all of you pet owners, there are few things better than coming home from work and seeing the face (or faces) of your beloved furry "children" as soon as you walk in the door.  In my case, my girls (Sawyer and Finn) follow me from room to room until I finally sit on the couch, where they both make themselves comfortable and ensure that I will not be going anywhere for quite some time:

 

I adopted these two when they were twelve weeks old from a local shelter, and it was the best decision of my life (although Sawyer's tendency to turn into Little Kitty Pee-Alot sometimes is costing a substantial amount of money in new mattresses and bedding).  I've always been an animal lover, and having been raised with pets ranging from cats and rabbits, and even a blind goose that my mother rescued (fun fact: rescuing a blind goose and putting it in your daughter's bathtub while you call Animal Control, yet failing to tell you daughter about said goose before she goes to use the bathroom is a GREAT way to ensure your daughter develops a lifelong fear of geese).  I have absolutely no tolerance for any kind of animal cruelty or abuse, but I find it sickening that there are so many cities and states that still don't have very strict animal cruelty laws, and some have no laws at all.

For the sake of time, I'm going to focus on one issue that is extremely near and dear to my heart, and that is dog fighting and the misconception that pitbulls are "dangerous dogs."  One town in Illinois (about 20 minutes from me) called Elgin tried to pass a law that made it illegal to have pitbulls and other allegedly violent breeds as pets.  Anyone who had one of these dogs for a pet prior to the law would be able to keep their animal, but no one would be able to bring a new one into the city, and those who did have them for pets would have to pay hefty licensing fees (up to $500) and maintain a fence of SIX FEET around their property to secure their dog, or else the dog would be seized by the state, and probably euthanized.  THANK GOD, Elgin did not pass this law, but the fact that it would even get to the level where people were voting on it is disgusting in its own right.  

What I find so mind boggling about this whole thing is that the people who are saying that the dogs are violent of their own accord are the SAME people who say, "guns don't kill people...people kill people."  Those two trains of thought seem hypocritical, don't you think?  An animal should not be stereotyped as "dangerous," simply because some assholes decided that it would be fun to train their dogs and make bets on whose dog could kill the other dog first.  Yes, there are pitbulls out there with genetically violent traits.  But there are also pitbulls out there who are perfectly loving and wonderful.  Labeling these dogs as dangerous because of a few incidents is like labeling all humans as "psychotic" and "unstable," just because of a couple of schizophrenic nutbags (I'm looking at you, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin).  

Now, before you label me as some kind of bleeding heart liberal vegan, who would sooner drive my car into a tree than risk hitting a squirrel, let me clarify: I am not a vegan, or even a vegetarian.  It's called Panda Express Orange Chicken...no sane person can be expected to give up meat while that delicious food exists on this planet.  I wouldn't choose to kill myself over hitting an animal that jumps out into the road (unless it was one of my cats, in which case, I wouldn't think twice).  But I don't think you need to necessarily abide by every one of these lifestyle choices to be considered an animal rights activist, and I'm pretty sure I can care just as strongly about these issues and still enjoy a tasty burger.

But dog fighting and pitbull stereotypes are something I care deeply about, mainly because my father (who is 63 years old and looks like Mike Ditka...not your typical animal rights person) adopted a pitbull about 5 years ago, and this dog was rescued from a dog fighting ring in Detroit and rehabbed by a rescuer before being adopted.  When Keno (the dog) first came home with my dad, we were all a little nervous...I mean, the dog had visible scars on his head from previous fights, and I did have the mindset that most people have, which was that he could snap at any time and rip my throat out.  

Well, it turns out that I'm an idiot.  Right before I met Keno for the first time, I had visions of a snarling and aggressive dog, who would sooner rip out my heart than look at me.  However, this is the dog that I actually met that day:

I know, right?  SUPER SCARY.  It turns out that Keno, like many other pitbulls and similar "violent" animals, had no interest in eating me, attacking me, mauling me, etc.  He had a great deal of interest in drooling on my lap while I scratched behind his ears, and he had a great deal of interest in stealing my food (while I was eating it, I might add), but absolutely no interest in physically hurting me.  It's almost like...he's not innately violent simply because he's a pitbull!

Now look, I'm not an idiot: regardless of the fact that any dog can act out violently, regardless of breed, I will say that I like my chances of survival if attacked by a dachshund, versus being attacked by a pitbull.  But that's my point in this situation: punishing pitbulls because they can do more damage than a pocket dog, is like charging fat people more money to ride on the same plane as skinny people.  Fat people take up more space, but if I'm going to spend the entire flight with someone's elbow in my ribcage, I'd prefer that there be a little meat on those bony things.  You can't place ALL of the blame on an animal, just because its owner is a dick and trained it to be a little killing machine.  My best friend Andrew's cat is a douchebag to me, but I'm not going to kill the damn thing just because Andrew used to rough house with it.

So, in the infinite vein of "Americans need to stop blaming every problem on something else and take some goddamn responsibility for their own fucking actions," let's stop hating an animal just because it had the misfortune of being raised by someone who shouldn't even be allowed outside of the house without a helmet on.  Guess what, everyone?  Maybe it's not the fault of the Muslims, liberals, 2012 apocalypse theories, Obama, pitbulls, etc.  MAYBE we're to blame for a couple of these problems also.  Did I just blow your mind?  I'll give you some time to digest the concept that we are not the pinnacle of civilization, despite what we might want to think.

Please don't euthanize me for saying that.

~Andrea

One Nation Under God...But Which One?

Well, well, well...looks like some political groups may need to brush up on their United States history:

The Treaty of Tripoli, Ratified Unanimously by Congress in 1796

Read Article 11, and if you can't read, let me fill you in on what it says:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Yeah...suck on that.  It seems that the Founding Fathers NOT ONLY wanted to make sure that it was unquestionably clear that the United States WERE NOT founded as a nation with a specific religious affiliation (i.e. I don't care if the Bible says that marriage is between a man and a hunk of cheese, you can't use it as an argument against gay marriage because we were not founded as a Christian nation); but these Founding Fathers also had the psychic foresight to make sure that we also should NEVER use religious differences, specifically those between our country and nations founded on Islam, as a reason to disturb or impede their way of life, just as they shouldn't use those to obstruct ours.

Now, let me state this on record: I am not an atheist, nor do I have any hatred for organized religions OF ANY KIND.  I was born and raised Methodist, but I don't practice any specific religion as a personal choice.  I did see the Dalai Lama speak last October as part of the Interfaith Summit on Happiness at Emory University in Atlanta (expect an entirely separate post about how life-changing that was), and if you told me that you would shoot my cats if I didn't declare a religious affiliation, I would align my beliefs more with Buddhism than anything else.  However, my reasons for not going to church or actively practicing a specific religion are two-fold: one, I honestly find it difficult to have blind faith in God without some kind of concrete proof; and two, I refuse to align myself with any kind of religious faith that is so horribly distorted by any group of people who seek to act upon their own disgusting prejudices, while using that religion as their justification so they don't have to take accountability for their own pathetic and evil methods of suppression (I'm looking at you, Westboro Baptist Church). 

The fact is, I don't care what you believe, and I absolutely support your right to believe in it.  In fact, I will stand next to you and argue for your right to believe whatever the fuck you want.  However, I will not support, endorse, or even stand idly by and watch you use those religious beliefs as a way to moderate how people live their lives.  These new "witch trials" that were sparked by New York Representative Peter King's sad little delusion that all Muslims are terrorists, or know terrorists, or think about being terrorists and therefore must be tried for crimes that they might (but probably won't) commit, is the frightening result of our nation's inability to live and let live.  Think of it this way: King wants to bring all of the Muslims in New York in for questioning because there were a few completely sick and evil individuals who committed a massive act of terrorism in the name of their religion.  How is that any different from the United States Military bringing every single Christian (or anyone who has even been to a Christian church, because you never know) for questioning because of the offensive and terrorist-like acts of the Westboro Baptist Church (and yes, I will use the word "terrorism," because if picketing a FUNERAL and using a family's pain and mourning as a platform for your absolutely FUCKED UP beliefs definitely qualifies a terrorist act).

Yes, the Treaty of Tripoli is no longer considered to be an active law in our country (though, side note, it was officially made a law on June 10, 1797, which just happens to be the same month and day as MY birthday, thank you), but the truth of this treaty is undeniable: our founding fathers had their shit together.  The United States were founded upon "unalienable" rights, not "rights that might vary depending on the current political and religious powerhouses currently dominating the country."  Our government and our society cannot pick and choose only the parts of history that serve to advance their personal agenda, but yet we continue to allow this to happen over and over because everyone in Washington D.C. is far too concerned with being politically-correct and maintaining "freedom of speech" to step in and say, "okay, that's a little fucked up."  Freedom of speech is fine...freedom to harass and intimidate people into buying into your conservative and inhumane political agenda under the guise of "religion" is different.  You can say whatever you want, but keep your religious and social beliefs out of my government.

I want to end this on a quote from Chicago's (my hometown) outgoing mayor, Richard M. Daley, which he said in response to a question regarding how he thinks we need to restore the nation.  Is it blunt?  Yes.  It is dead-on accurate?  Yes yes yes.  America...man up, grow a pair, and stop placating every single whiny bitch religious and social group because you don't want to offend anyone.  My mom always says, you know it's a compromise when both parties leave unhappy.  Well, I'm pissed as hell right now, so let's see you concede something too, m'kay?  Thanks.

“I think we have to have confidence. We have become a country of whiners...We started whining about the Japanese – ‘The Japanese are going to take us over! We thought we defeated them in the Second World War, rebuilt it – they’re taking us over in the 1970s. What’s going to happen to America? They’re going to own our country! That’s it! We’re all out of jobs! Then we start whining about the Mexicans. ‘We’re losing all the manufacturing to Mexico! Look what’s taking place! We cannot compete, we can’t do this! We can’t do this!’ Now we forgot about the Mexicans. Now we’re whining about the Chinese and the Indians. We’re a country of whiners. That’s what we are...We should have enough confidence that we can compete with people if we all sacrifice a little bit for the common good."

~Andrea

Indiana: Home of Scare Tactics and Questionable Science

Now, I enjoy an unfounded and controversial scientific theory as much as the next person, but this is just a little ridiculous:

Indiana Bill Would Force Doctors To Tell Woman That Having An Abortion Could Lead To Breast Cancer

Now, let's all be honest here: America may be many things (Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, Birthplace of Carrot Top, etc.), but one thing that America prides itself on is that it is NOT above using any means necessary to push through its own political agendas.  For example, take this nonsense in Wisconsin: the only way that the Republicans were able to push their own political agenda through and take most collective bargaining rights away from the unions, was to find a tiny loophole in their bylaws that would allow them to have a vote WITHOUT having to wait for the Democrats, who were still M.I.A. at this point.  That's a pretty handy loophole to have in place, but I guess I wonder why it was never used before or even brought up before this moment.  Hmm...

But I digress.  Requiring doctors to inform women that abortions could lead to breast cancer is going to prove to be an ineffective mandate, mostly because we are a nation of people who really don't put much stock in health and safety warnings, particularly when we really want/need to do the thing we're being warned about.  Let me put it this way: I smoke 1-2 packs of Camel Lights a day (I'm sorry, Camel BLUES...apparently the name was changed so people wouldn't think that smoking lights was healthier than smoking regulars, which is an entirely new level of stupidity altogether), and I am well aware that smoking causes cancer, and it's bad for you, and Satan will come and rape my soul if I light even one more cigarette.  However, I really don't give a shit, because if I want a smoke, you bet your ass I'm going to have one.  I could be the healthiest person on the planet, and get hit by a bus one day.  At least this way, I get to pick my death.

When it comes to abortion, the threat of cancer is not going to be a huge deterrent, especially since it seems that EVERYTHING causes cancer these days.  However, I have a suggestion for Indiana: do you know why a lot of my friends have quit smoking?  It has nothing to do with the health risks or social stigma...we live in Chicago, which is in Cook County, IL, and a pack of cigarettes costs (on average) $9.00 A PACK after taxes.  No one can afford that!  You want to push your agenda through and effectively brand "Property of Indiana" on every woman's uterus?  Stop throwing mediocre facts and scare tactics at society, and do what Republicans do best: tax the shit out of everyone.

However, an even better idea is this: stop passing laws regarding my uterus, because I'm pretty sure my uterus isn't legally allowed to vote, so I'm pretty sure you can't make a law about if it doesn't have a political voice.  And for the record, conservative Republicans and right-wing assholes like this are a prime example of why we NEED to keep abortion legal and available.  Think about it.

~Andrea