All ships?!? All ships!?!

I heard it again tonight, and I have heard several variations of it mentioned throughout several forms of media and in various conversations with liberals and conservatives alike. It is a fairly benign saying on its face, but it is a narrow-minded and classist viewpoint when applied to an aspect of our culture that we are entrenched in whether voluntary or not: economics.  A rising tide will never raise all ships. The literal and metaphorical interpretations of this statement are both wrong for the same reason. The image that we are supposed to see when introduced to this nonsense is a fleet of boats both large and small, sail and power, expensive and not, all rising together with the high tide of the full moon towards heaven. This image is a lie no matter how well meaning the evoker might be. Let us picture the ships that are hopelessly anchored to the bottom, or those that have massive holes in their hulls. Let us picture the family in the leaky life raft with man-eating sharks circling in wait of the inevitable enveloping of the surging sea. Let us picture the Titanic. The rich rowing away to safety as the third class is sucked down into the cold darkness to exist as an afterthought to James Cameron. We create policies that can either, house, or abandon human beings, and we allow those policies to be, in part, influenced by petty and nonsensical slogans that, even on their face, serve only those who can afford a strong boat in the first place.

Before any of you say that this phrasing is generally attributed to Jack Kennedy, let me assure you that I know. Let me also assure you that when a liberal says it, then it is ten times worse. Barrack Obama recently uttered a facsimile of this statement when he attempted to assure underserved communities that any gains in the economic base, would help to raise the quality of life for everyone. I doubt that he believes that this is true, which makes him both a hypocrite, and a cynic. We have seen the way that economics “trickle down” from the upper classes. We have seen the rate at which the super rich create jobs when left to their own devices. The idea of the rising tide should make us all sick given the fact that it is causing many of our brothers and sisters to sink deeper into hopelessness. We must acknowledge the pain. We must submit to the truth that the rising tide, though it raises many of the ships, it also leaves many farther and farther behind.

If we are not willing to try to fix the ships that are unable to rise, then we should be willing to drain the harbor and stand together.     

Obama is a socialist: actually, but not literally

In a Fox Nation article entitled “Perry Drops 'Socialist' Bomb on Obama”, FOX quotes Rick Perry as saying,

“No, I still believe they are socialist. Their policies prove that almost daily. Look, when all the answers emanate from Washington D.C., one size fits all, whether it’s education policy or whether it’s healthcare policy, that is, on its face, socialism.”

http://nation.foxnews.com/rick-perry/2011/09/15/perry-drops-socialist-bomb-obama

There reaches a point in a word’s history at which it has been misused so many times that it ceases to have any meaning. For proof of that, just look at what happened to the word irony. Is it not ironic that irony, while meaning the opposite of the literal meaning, has no literal meaning anymore: not really. The word literally has followed suit more recently. That word should literally be set aflame by dragons and trampled by unicorns. Anyway, it seems that the fringe right, as well as many members of the GOP, cannot get enough of bastardizing the word socialism. Socialism has grown so much in its old age. It used to mean the government ownership and control of the means of production. Now, socialism means taxes, healthcare, welfare, unemployment, and even good old-fashioned government. If government is socialism, and the antithesis of government is anarchy, does that make capitalism equivalent to anarchy? Is Rick Perry an anarchist? I literally do not think so.

When Rick Perry says that the supposed liberal socialist agenda is proven “almost daily”, I imagine that he must be talking about all the factories that are being raided and refitted by the Obama administration. The fact is that the United States does not produce enough to become socialist even if we wanted it to: and I think that some of us do. In this sense, it is important to keep healthcare in mind. A single payer system is not on its face socialist. When the government uses tax dollars to pay private hospitals and providers for universal medical coverage it is called collective bargaining. When Obama and his minions take control of these hospitals and force the providers to give all of the citizens health care; that would be socialism. Keeping that in mind, universal health care is far more capitalist than it is socialist. Universal health care is just the type of capitalism that the far right does not agree with: helping individuals rather than corporations.

Perry did not drop the “socialist bomb” on Obama; he dropped it on himself. He proves here that he fails to grasp economic principles that many Americans his age were required to learn in middle school. It seems that the only thing that he has learned is that, given the general misuse of the word, you can now claim that someone is a socialist. And while you are literally lying, you are not actually lying. 

"For The Bible Tells Me So" Documentary, 2007

A friend recommended this documentary to me. It is about the use of text from the bible to dehumanize the gay population as a whole. The main concentration is on Leviticus 18:22, which I am sure many of you know is the number one bible passage used as proof that God does not approve of homosexuality.

The film asserts that Leviticus is being either misread, misused, or misinterpreted when being applied to homosexuality. One interviewee suggests to the viewers that they read the entire chapter to make sure that they are up on the other things that are an abomination under god. Another states that leviticus was written during a time that growth of a population was critical for the survival of a civilization, and that it is not pertinent to the state of the world today. Yet another suggests that the word "abomination" itself was used differently during the time that the text was written, and that it may have meant something closer to against ritual.

The reason that I write about this film today, is that it gives the viewer a glimpse of the giant logical leap that one has to make to consider the bible to be in any way anti-homosexual. It is important to keep this in mind when listening to those who would condemn a person in the name of God for being a homosexual. 

Our nation is ideally set up to keep religion and politics separate, however this is what the debate has come to. We have one side saying that homosexuals should be able to marry because they deserve equal protection under the law, while another side is saying that they should not be able to marry because God hates homosexuals. Which side is in line with the constitution? And beyond that, is the other side even in line with the bible? The answer to the second question should not matter. The teachings of the bible should not be a matter for political debate, it should be a matter for Sunday school debate. 

J.D. Wolfe

Welcome

Hello all and welcome to Fun With Leviticus. I have designated this blog as a forum for people to comment concerning what may be a growing frustration with right-wing politics in this country. I hope to keep the posts relatively clean and without malice. I would much rather see posts regarding information that can help people to better understand the right wing agenda and its seemingly growing amount of hypocrisy.

I chose the title of this blog not to suggest that this site is purely dedicated to gay rights. I chose it because I think that the issue concerning homosexuality and the Right's misinterpretation of Leviticus does a great deal to help define a certain faction of right wing politics today.

Please do not consider this site to be an indictment on the republican party, or conservatives in general. I have many friends from both the former and the latter, and I sense their frustration with some of their party's politics as well.

Also, any hateful speech concerning anyone, either individuals or groups, will not be tolerated on this site. I know that people are angry out there. Let us use that energy to ge the word out rather than spend time with petty insults and harassment. Though I welcome the thoughts of those of you with viewpoints that counter this blog, the above mentioned goes double for all of you.

Please have a good time with this site. However, I want you to do your research, and offer quality posts that can serve to enlighten our visitors.


Yours,

J.D. Wolfe.