On this blog a few months ago, I commented on Lance Bass coming out of the closet. As such, I suppose I should mention that T.R. Knight of Grey’s Anatomy fame just did the same.
I like two things about his revelation:
1. He doesn’t seem to want to make a big deal of it.
2. Maybe, just maybe, it’ll get the fans of Grey’s Anatomy thinking, “hey, maybe those gay people are kinda normal”.
Oh yeah, plus I have a new reason to think that T.R.’s character, “George” is adorable as all get out.
*gush*
19 October 2006
Did the President just kill Habeas Corpus?
If you blinked, you probably missed it, but President George W. Bush just suspended habeas corpus.
On Tuesday, he signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006. This bill authorizes “harsh interrogations of terror suspects” (e.g. waterboarding); while “no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus [for] an alien detained by the United States.” Thus, the detainee can not protest his imprisonment; nor can he look at or dispute the evidence that got him imprisoned in the first place.
In sum, if the US says that you’re an enemy combatant—or thinks that you might be—it can imprison you, torture you, ignore the Geneva Convention, and prevent you from pleading your innocence in a court of law. Oh, and let’s not forget that before all that happens, the US can also wiretap your phone without telling anyone. (you forgot, didn’t you?)
Now, it is true that this act was written and signed with current Guantanamo Bay detainees in mind; and it is also true that the MCA of 2006 suspends habeas corpus for “aliens.” So Mr. Joe American has nothing to worry about, right? Ha, yeah right. The government just suspended habeas corpus; if they say you’re an enemy, would they really care that you have a Social Security card? We certainly didn’t care about detaining Japanese-American citizens during WWII.
In the end, The Military Commissions Act sets a frightful precedent of suspending or ignoring longstanding rights and laws in the name of protecting the homeland.
Which law is next?
What also concerns me is that “the Supreme Court ruled in June that trying detainees in military tribunals violated U.S. and international law, so Bush urged Congress to change the law…” Just think about that: the Supreme Court said he couldn’t break the rules, so he had the rules changed.
I get the administration's stance: there is evil in the world that will go to any length to harm and kill Americans, and we must protect and defend ourselves. I agree with that statement; but while we’re trying to protect ourselves, let’s not ignore and trample on American laws and freedoms. If we do, what America are we protecting? George Orwell warned us of an all-powerful government that watches you, kidnaps you, imprisons you, and tells no one about it—that’s an America I’m sure no one wants. Yet, the administration seems to be constantly taking baby-steps in that direction.
Then again, I suppose if the terrorists hate us for our freedoms, and we give up those freedoms, they won’t hate us anymore, right?
On Tuesday, he signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006. This bill authorizes “harsh interrogations of terror suspects” (e.g. waterboarding); while “no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus [for] an alien detained by the United States.” Thus, the detainee can not protest his imprisonment; nor can he look at or dispute the evidence that got him imprisoned in the first place.
In sum, if the US says that you’re an enemy combatant—or thinks that you might be—it can imprison you, torture you, ignore the Geneva Convention, and prevent you from pleading your innocence in a court of law. Oh, and let’s not forget that before all that happens, the US can also wiretap your phone without telling anyone. (you forgot, didn’t you?)
Now, it is true that this act was written and signed with current Guantanamo Bay detainees in mind; and it is also true that the MCA of 2006 suspends habeas corpus for “aliens.” So Mr. Joe American has nothing to worry about, right? Ha, yeah right. The government just suspended habeas corpus; if they say you’re an enemy, would they really care that you have a Social Security card? We certainly didn’t care about detaining Japanese-American citizens during WWII.
In the end, The Military Commissions Act sets a frightful precedent of suspending or ignoring longstanding rights and laws in the name of protecting the homeland.
Which law is next?
What also concerns me is that “the Supreme Court ruled in June that trying detainees in military tribunals violated U.S. and international law, so Bush urged Congress to change the law…” Just think about that: the Supreme Court said he couldn’t break the rules, so he had the rules changed.
I get the administration's stance: there is evil in the world that will go to any length to harm and kill Americans, and we must protect and defend ourselves. I agree with that statement; but while we’re trying to protect ourselves, let’s not ignore and trample on American laws and freedoms. If we do, what America are we protecting? George Orwell warned us of an all-powerful government that watches you, kidnaps you, imprisons you, and tells no one about it—that’s an America I’m sure no one wants. Yet, the administration seems to be constantly taking baby-steps in that direction.
Then again, I suppose if the terrorists hate us for our freedoms, and we give up those freedoms, they won’t hate us anymore, right?
15 October 2006
trailer for "300"
Adapted from the graphic novel by Frank Miller
Wow.
If the movie is as good as it looks, we may have a 180-minute dose of theatrical LSD on our hands.
Wow.
If the movie is as good as it looks, we may have a 180-minute dose of theatrical LSD on our hands.
13 October 2006
Church
Boy, my Duke University Divinity School friends are weird! I mean, they study obscure Biblical passages, have a more than a pedestrian understanding of Christian dogma (according to some, the Holy Spirit is a person…yeah, I don’t know either), make jokes about Martin Luther and Methodism, and have rants about the state the Christian Church.
However, the weirdest (and coolest) thing about having Divinity school friends is that they give sermons. Yeah, seeing the guy you hung out with on Saturday night stand at the pulpit on Sunday morning and led an entire congregation in worship is kinda mind-blowing.
So, a couple of Sundays ago, I went to a Sunday service at the church where my friend Chris works. And as expected, Chris stood at the pulpit, read from “the word of the Lord,” helped prepare the bread and wine for the Eucharist, and did other associate-pastoral duties.
However, what was more interesting than my buddy Chris being all pastoral-like was the congregation of the church. It was small.
Really small. I’m talking 12-16 people in the church, including me, the pastor, Chris, and his girlfriend Kelly.
Thus, during the announcements and prayer requests, I saw the hidden magic of a small congregation—it was less like a collection of worshippers and more like tight-knit community. When referring to church members who were not present, the congregation simply used first names; and there was no need to fully explain the members’ situation, everyone already knew what was going on. There was even a touching moment when the congregation expressed joy that one of the member’s health had improved to the point that he could attend service again. Members would also talk out of turn, sometimes interrupting the pastor mid-sentence—but no one cared, not even the pastor.
The congregation reminded me of what the early Church must have been like—or was supposed to be like.
This church (North Chapel Hill Baptist Church), was more than the current monolithic impersonal mega-churches, more than the hip new church with the snazzy commercial and rock concert-ish service, more to than the church going through a schism because the church elders don’t like tambourines, and more than any “Christian” church that rejects and rebukes potential members based on the most superficial and skin-deep criteria (Catholic Church and your stance on homosexuality, I’m looking at you); North Chapel Hill Baptist Church gets it.
So why didn’t I sign up? Why am I not a member of NCHBC? It’s so sad to say, but I need people my own age at a church. At this particular service, NCHBC had 3 kids of high school age, me and my two mid-20s friends, then a sudden jump to the 50’s and on up. And we’re talking up.
But at least I’ve seen what a church is supposed to be like, what a church can be like, and what I’ll be looking for in the future.
However, the weirdest (and coolest) thing about having Divinity school friends is that they give sermons. Yeah, seeing the guy you hung out with on Saturday night stand at the pulpit on Sunday morning and led an entire congregation in worship is kinda mind-blowing.
So, a couple of Sundays ago, I went to a Sunday service at the church where my friend Chris works. And as expected, Chris stood at the pulpit, read from “the word of the Lord,” helped prepare the bread and wine for the Eucharist, and did other associate-pastoral duties.
However, what was more interesting than my buddy Chris being all pastoral-like was the congregation of the church. It was small.
Really small. I’m talking 12-16 people in the church, including me, the pastor, Chris, and his girlfriend Kelly.
Thus, during the announcements and prayer requests, I saw the hidden magic of a small congregation—it was less like a collection of worshippers and more like tight-knit community. When referring to church members who were not present, the congregation simply used first names; and there was no need to fully explain the members’ situation, everyone already knew what was going on. There was even a touching moment when the congregation expressed joy that one of the member’s health had improved to the point that he could attend service again. Members would also talk out of turn, sometimes interrupting the pastor mid-sentence—but no one cared, not even the pastor.
The congregation reminded me of what the early Church must have been like—or was supposed to be like.
This church (North Chapel Hill Baptist Church), was more than the current monolithic impersonal mega-churches, more than the hip new church with the snazzy commercial and rock concert-ish service, more to than the church going through a schism because the church elders don’t like tambourines, and more than any “Christian” church that rejects and rebukes potential members based on the most superficial and skin-deep criteria (Catholic Church and your stance on homosexuality, I’m looking at you); North Chapel Hill Baptist Church gets it.
So why didn’t I sign up? Why am I not a member of NCHBC? It’s so sad to say, but I need people my own age at a church. At this particular service, NCHBC had 3 kids of high school age, me and my two mid-20s friends, then a sudden jump to the 50’s and on up. And we’re talking up.
But at least I’ve seen what a church is supposed to be like, what a church can be like, and what I’ll be looking for in the future.
11 October 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)