A researcher at Cornell University discovered that men made to feel insecure about their masculinity expressed more support for the war in Iraq, were more willing to purchase an SUV, and expressed more hate for homos. You can read the press release here. (Hat tip to Americablog.)
-posted by Dan.
A reader weighs in on Cindy Sheehan, the mother who lost a son in Iraq and is now camped outside Crawford, Texas, demanding to meet with George W. Bush…
In response to the quote from the reader about the mother asking for a meeting with Bush…I remember the State of the Union, when Bush paraded out parents who had just lost their son in Iraq and when he talked about the war, the cameras panning to them crying softly in their seats. Why was there no criticism of Bush using the death of soldiers for his own political purposes? I think that Sheehan has much more right to “use” her own son for this cause that he died for than Bush using the parents during an event like the state of the union. In fact, she is honoring his sacrifice by using it for a greater purpose than just being killed by a roadside bomb. Judy C.
-posted by Dan.
“…NASA planned to bring the spacecraft down Tuesday in Florida, California or possibly even New Mexico.”- The Washington Post
Here’s hoping that the Space Shuttle doesn’t land in Florida, California AND New Mexico.
-posted by Dan.
I can’t even sign off for the night without screwing things up.
One more story worth linking to this evening… Army Specialist Jeff Howe, 32 years old, served two tours of duty in Iraq. He’s not in the Army anymore, though. An investigation into Howe’s private life-launched after he posted a photo of a vehicle that had blown up by a rocket on a blog (a blog that the Army asked him to create)-uncovered an Internet personal ad that Howe had written. He did not come out willingly. He did not “tell.”
A bit from the story up now at PlanetOut.com (via Rex Wockner):
Howe, 32, enlisted in the Army after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, taking a leave of absence from his job in corporate marketing. He was already open with family and friends about his sexuality, but his desire to help his country exceeded his concern about the military’s gay ban.
“Going back in the closet was a trade-off I could make briefly,” Howe said in an interview with the PlanetOut Network.
Aren’t we having a manpower crisis? Don’t we need all the patriotic soldiers-gay or not, closeted or not-that we can lay our hands on? (Er, pardon the expression.) Howe will be fine; he can return to the job he left in marketing now that he’s been kicked out of the Army. I worry, however, about a nation that seems to hate its gay citizens so much more than it values its own security. Pathetic.
-posted by Dan
We’ll let a reader have the last word today…
I have boundless sympathy for a mother whose son has been killed in any way, let alone one who has given his life in a war. But I’m sorry, this woman is riding this situation for partisan political ends. Bush HAS met with her in the past; several members of his administration have met with her; she continues to slam Bush, and promote Democratic websites, at every opportunity. I don’t believe Drudge is smearing her; she has injected herself into the political scene, and warrants the same scrutiny as anyone else involved in that game; we can’t just let her use her poor son as an all-purpose shield out of sentimentality. There comes a point when her using this for political point-scoring dishonors her son’s patriotic sacrifice.
A reader,ML
That’s all for today. Unless Andrew comes to his senses and changes the passwords this evening, I’ll be back with you tomorrow.
-posted by Dan
I believe I was-correct me if I’m wrong-the only professional sex advice columnist in the United States, if not the world, to come out in favor of the invasion of Iraq. I have some thoughts on the current state of things over there (and the through-the-looking glass moment when I realized I was to the right of Ann “Batshitcrazy” Coulter on this issue), and I intend to share them… just not this minute. I’ve been blogging away most of the day, but I’ve got a paper to edit… so… I promise to sit down late tonight and collect my thoughts on Iraq and post them here.
In the meantime…
The mother of a soldier who died in Iraq wants to meet with Bush so she can ask him to pull the troops out. She wants to meet with Bush so badly that she’s-hey, if you’re in Andrew’s readership you know this already right? She drove to Crawford, where the President of France takes his annual month-long August holiday, to meet with him. She was stopped by the police a few miles from the ranch and is now camped out by the side of the road, insisting that she’s not leaving until she meets with Bush. Cindy Sheehan has now been told that if she’s not gone by Thursday-when Rummy and Condi are scheduled to show up the ranch (perhaps for a little mountain biking)-she will be arrested.
Daily Kos and Americablog are all over it. Drudge, of course, is doing his part, smearing this woman whose son gave his life for his country. You would think Bush could give her ten minutes of his time. Now that Bush doesn’t have to face the voters again, you might also think he could risk a giving a little facetime to someone who hasn’t signed a loyalty oath. Just, you know, buried her son.
-posted by Dan
Mark writes…
But I don’t think the quote you cited shows a particular animus to gay adoption. I’ve done volunteer work for many years with foster kids, a number of whom have been placed for adoption. You’re absolutely right, of course, that there aren’t enough homes out there for all the available kids. But all else being equal–which it rarely is–I agree that “preference” should be given to married-mom-and-dad if that option is available. I’m divorced and have thought about adoption myself–my own kids are almost grown–but a single person like myself should an alternate choice for a kid, only if a married-mom-and-dad is unavailable. The THIRD choice actually–I think two parents are always better than one so committed gay couples should be considered well before single parents, in my opinion.
The other critical part of the NCfA statement is “consistent with the child’s best interests.” That’s what I’m supposed to do as a volunteer Court Appointed Special Advocate–look out for the child’s best interest. To me and I think, most people involved in foster care and adoption, that would mean that if a child had (say) a gay uncle he’s always known, and the uncle and his partner wanted to adopt, they would get preference over married-mom-and-dad strangers….
I very much disagreed with that Florida decision, and maybe the NCfA IS against gay adoption. I just don’t see it in that quote.
Sorry, Mark, but the context of NCFA’s statement reveals the group’s animus to gay adoption. (“Gay adoption” is such an awkward term! My boyfriend and I didn’t do a “gay adoption,” we adopted, just like any straight couple might, and we didn’t adopt a “gay.” Our son is seven and we’re pretty sure he’s going to be straight when he grows up.) Go here to read NCFA’s statement about Florida’s ban on gays and lesbians adopting children. The NCFA statement clearly supports the ban. Florida doesn’t give “preference” to heterosexual couples and place kids with gay couples only if no straight parents can be found. Florida refuses to allow gay couples to adopt-period.
Amazingly enough, however, Florida does allow gay couples to serve as foster parents. This has put the state of Florida in the position of refusing to allow gay couples to adopt children they have fostered parented for years, some since infancy. To read about one case, and for lots of good background on gay parents, go here.
By no conceivable measure is this in the “child’s best interests.”
Shame on the NCFA.
-posted by Dan
First, I’m hoping-“hope” is what we atheists do, since we can’t pray-that the pawns NASA sent up on the Space Shuttle get safely back to Earth. Second, I can’t be the only one out there who was shocked to learn that the Space Shuttle depends on ceramic pot holders and steel wool tea towels to protect it from burning up on re-entry.
-posted by Dan
Tim Robbins, Justin Timberlake, Kate Hudson, Simon Le Bon, Mel Gibson, Catherine Zeta Jones-Page Six in the New York Post? Nope: Today’s posts on National Review’s group blog, “The Corner.”
-posted by Dan
Patrick at the Universität Bielefeld has the drop on the NCfA: “The NCfA seems to be against adoption by homosexuals,” he writes, “considering its statement on the Surreme Court Ruling on the ban in Florida and its Adoption First Principles, stating that ‘Consistent with the child’s best interests, preference in adoption placements should be given to families that offer married mother-and-father parenting.'”
The NCfA has its no doubt well-intentioned head up its well-intentioned ass. That’s too bad. If that is their position, then NCfA is actively promoting one the Big Lies tossed around by opponents of same-sex couples adopting children-namely, that for every child waiting to be adopted there’s a straight couple out there who wants to adopt. That simply isn’t the case. There are more children waiting to be adopted than there are couples-straight and gay-willing to adopt. Even if someone believes, against all evidence, that gay or lesbian parents are less desirable than straight parents, surely everyone agrees it is better for a child to have parents than not have parents. Only people who hate kids-people like, say, the fine folks in Florida-would choose foster care, the system, and parentless kids over placing kids in qualified, loving homes headed by same-sex couples.
-posted by Dan
The Dish 