Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta freedom in USA. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta freedom in USA. Mostrar todas las entradas

miércoles, 13 de junio de 2012

Food Nazis' Rampage on New York

Health panel talks about wider food ban - New York News | New York Breaking News | NYC Headlines: "The New York City Board of Health showed support for limiting sizes of sugary drinks at a Tuesday meeting in Queens. They agreed to start the process to formalize the large-drink ban by agreeing to start a six-week public comment period.

At the meeting, some of the members of board said they should be considering other limits on high-calorie foods."


Progressivism must believe in personal freedom, not in patronizing. These NYC measures against the sell of junk food may be well intentioned, but reek up to high heaven of facism.

I didn't knew I would see the creation of a junk food black market in New York, but it looks like I will. Major Bloomber knows already that the Big Apple is facing major economic problems and he is even considering the legalization of gambling; so that we don't know if this junk food ban issue is a huge distraction.

But we already know that the common sense ban in NYC is in full effect already.

sábado, 25 de junio de 2011

Note to Chicken Little: Gay Marriage was approved in NY and STILL the sky isn’t falling at all

It’s another day of joy for the Finch, a/k/a the Progressive Hero, but first and most of all for the LGTB community in New York, of course. The Senate just recognized in the last hours of yesterday by a 33-29 margin, the right for same – sex couples to marry.

Another step in the long and excruciating way to achieve equality under the law for the LGBT population everywhere and I offer right here my heartiest congratulations to those who relentlessly fought for this accomplishment.

I’m not that into the sipmac team’s political orientation (as you may have noticed), but I need to quote Ms. Cynthia Yockey and Gay Patriot about the historical decision:
Prof. Reynolds, unalienable rights that are opposed by a majority are going to have to be imposed by courts. It is not acceptable to gays to be fully human in one state and not in another. It is antithetical to the concept of unalienable rights. Such a checkerboard also is a source of economic and social stagnation.

Cynthia Yockey
With the success in New York, it’s time (well, it’s long past time) to move the debate from the courts to the legislatures, as has happened in that state. And once it’s gone through the legislatures, indeed, even as it’s going through the messy process of law-making in other jurisdictions, it’s important we consider state-recognized marriage as more than just personal validation, more than a trophy in the culture wars, but also as an ancient and honorable institution which imposes duties on those who seek its protections and gain privileges from the state.

Gay Patriot

Chicken Little, the sky’s not gonna fall at all. Just let it go for good.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Es otro día de alegría para el Fincho, a/k/a el Prócer Progresista, pero más y primero que todo para la comunidad LGTB en Nueva York, por supuesto. El Senado acaba de reconocer en las últimas horas de ayer por un margen de 33-29, el derecho a las parejas del mismo sexo a contraer matrimonio.

Otro paso en el camino más largo y terrible para lograr la igualdad ante la ley para la población LGBT en todas partes y les ofrezco aquí mis más sinceras felicitaciones a los que lucharon incansablemente por este logro.

Yo no comparto la misma orientación política que predomina en el equipo sipmac (como se habrán dado cuenta), pero tengo que citar a la Sra. Cynthia Yockey y a Gay Patriot sobre esta decisión histórica:
Prof. Reynolds, los derechos inalienables que son opuestos por una mayoría van a tener que ser impuestos por los tribunales. No es aceptable que se les dé a los gays el derecho a ser plenamente humanos en un estado y en otros no. Esta la antítesis del concepto de derechos inalienables. Esta partida de ajedrez también es una fuente de estancamiento económico y social.

Cynthia Yockey
Con el éxito en Nueva York, es el momento (bueno, ya era más que hora) para mover el debate de los tribunales a las legislaturas, como ha ocurrido en ese estado. Y una vez que se ha pasado a través de las legislaturas, de hecho, incluso cuando se está pasando por el proceso complicado de elaboración de leyes en otras jurisdicciones, es importante considerar que el Estado reconoce al matrimonio como algo más que una validación personal, y más que un trofeo en las “guerras culturales”, sino también como una institución antigua y honorable que impone deberes a los que buscan su protección y obtener privilegios del Estado.

Gay Patriot

Chicken Little, el cielo no se va a caer, deja el tema de una buena vez.

martes, 22 de marzo de 2011

Michael Moore Says Obama Should Return Nobel Peace Prize

As U.S. Strikes Libya Michael Moore Says Obama Should Return Nobel Peace Prize Nailing it once does not mean you'll be always right - or consistent. Mickey, it is not Obama nor a lone cowboy - it's the frigging United Nations that made a frigging resolution declaring a no-fly zone, authorizing military means to enforce it - a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians from the brutality of their own undemocratic rulers. It's the international community acting in consensus! It's the rule of international law. Capisci? What's wrong with all that? What's wrong with you? Maybe you should return your cherished Academy Award since you can't make your mind up and side with victims and not the victimizer.



Stupid white man.

jueves, 14 de octubre de 2010

Nos faltan agallas / We lack courage

Demasiado blando...
Tan sencillo como eso. En el blog Prócer Progresista me apropié de una acertada frase de un desafortunado personaje de la vida nacional, famoso por su sesgo y su intolerancia: hay que llorar por ambos ojos. Mi visión de las cosas no está para ignorar los excesos de nadie. Constantemente pedimos tolerancia y respeto a la diferencia, pero somos (y aquí me refiero a quienes somos de pensamiento liberal) sumamente selectivos para dirigir estas peticiones: normalmente las hacemos a quienes a base de razonamiento y una cultura común estarían más cerca de cumplirlas que aquellos quienes ignoran por completo y a punta de barbarie nos atemorizan pero no nos atrevemos a admitirlo.

El que sentencia una causa sin oír la parte opuesta, aunque sentencie lo justo es injusta esa sentencia.
Una cita de Jorge Eliécer Gaitán que es prácticamente un lugar común, una frase de cajón, una verdad tan evidente que termina por volverse insubstancial. Pero, ¿alguien escuchó acaso a Bibi Aisha en Afganistán? ¿Su marido la vería como a un ser humano o como a ganado que habla? El honor del infeliz quedó "reparado" de la manera más barbárica e inhumana de que se tenga noticia. ¿El crimen? Aisha intentó abandonarlo por los maltratos y vejámenes sufridos. ¿Su actual refugio? En Occidente, en el vilipendiado Estados Unidos.
Es repugnante lo que le hicieron
Así como la Dirección de Impuestos y Aduanas Nacionales prefiere investigar a quienes desean cumplir con la ley, así como los periodistas prefieren ensañarse con los humildes, antes que denunciar a los poderosos y sus abusos, de la misma forma nos hace falta exigirles más tolerancia y respeto para los más intolerantes e irrespetuosos. Si de verdad estamos contra la violencia de género, es hora de denunciar el apartheid cultural que se está implantando silenciosamente en el país. No hay consideración cultural milenaria que valga; es hora de recordar que la tolerancia también tiene un límite.

Sí, es posible coexistir, pero primero que aprendan a coexistir los más recalcitrantes.

That's more I like it!
As simple as that. I decided to use at Progressive Hero blog an aphorism coined by an unfortunate character, better know for its bias and intolerance: we must cry with both eyes. My view of things is not to ignore and condone the excesses of anyone. We constantly ask for tolerance and demand respect for the difference, but we (and here I refer to those who are liberal-minded) are highly selective to address these requests, normally present these demands to those that, based on reasoning and a common culture would be closer to fulfill them, instead of those who like to ignore them completely and frighten us but we dare not admit it.
Those who give a sentence in a case without hearing the other side, no matter how fair is that sentence, becomes unfair because of this.
An aphorism by Jorge Eliecer Gaitan that is practically a cliche, a platitude, a truth so obvious that it ends up becoming insubstantial. But, did perhaps someone heard Aisha Bibi in Afghanistan? Did her husband consider her as a human being or as talking cattle? The honor of the unfortunate was "repaired" in the most barbaric and inhumane way by using an uncivilized law to enforce punishment. Which was that crime? Aisha tried to leave her husband because of the abuse and humiliation suffered. Where lies her current shelter? In the West, in the much-maligned United States of America.

If I were her, I wish I've never made the cover of Time
Just as the Tax Enforcement and Customs prefer to pick on those who want to fully comply with the law, as well as the journalists prefer picking on the humble and leave the powerful alone, it's just the same when don't demand more tolerance and respect to the most intolerant and disrespectful out of fear. If you really are against violence against women, it is time to denounce the cultural apartheid is being implemented quietly and swiftly in this country. No ancient culture should be taken into consideration to condone anything, and it is time to remember that tolerance also has its limits.

Yes, it is possible to coexist, but first the most recalcitrant ones must learn to coexist with the most tolerant ones.
Enhanced by Zemanta
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...