Tag Archive: personal


A new documentary by Michael Webber has been getting a lot of attention at film festivals this year. The Elephant in the Living Room brings the issue of privately owned lions and tigers and bears (and reptiles and other wild animals) to the big screen.

In an interview with CityBeat, Webber said exotic pet ownership may be shocking, but it’s not an obscure phenomenon. “I started paying attention and that’s when I realized this was the elephant in the living room. This big, enormous thing that’s going on in our country and no one is really recognizing it.”

Until now.

It’s no coincidence that the Dayton, Ohio, filmmaker aimed the camera at his own state. Ohio has some of the weakest exotic animal laws in the country, a flaw which gained national attention this summer when a bear killed his caretaker. Despite obvious and repeated negligence on the part of the bear’s owner, Sam Mazzola, authorities’ hands were tied because you can pretty much own whatever you want in Ohio. And Mazzola isn’t the only one whose choice of pets has caused problems.

View Full Article »

You might think that more water would be the last thing a flood victim would want to see, but gaining access to clean drinking water can mean the difference between life and death after a devastating deluge.

Floods not only hold the devastating potential to displace thousands of people from their homes, and kill or injure those in its path, but the surges often cut off large populations of people from food, medical supplies and potable water. Without access to these vital resources, health risks and fatalities can multiply exponentially in a matter of days or even hours.

In many cases these horrible circumstances are compounded by the fact that for those who were homeless before a flood, gaining access to clean water was already an enormous challenge. As Change.org blogger Steven Samra pointed out earlier this year, when massive floods swept through Nashville in May, residents of the city’s largest homeless encampment not only lost all their personal possessions, but also lacked the social safety net available to those who had been previously housed. Unable to access local, state or federal aid, without the assistance of housed friends and family, and dislocated from what limited resources (food, water, etc.) they may have had before the flood, many peoples’ situation went from bad to worse.

View Full Article »

The United States must change its immigration policies to exclude sociopaths.

Sociopaths are dangerous to society. Not all of them want to do violence, but all of them lack empathy for others and so cannot help themselves but to take advantage of non-sociopaths wherever they go.

This does not refer to some “extreme” or “radical” form of sociopaths. Common, everyday sociopaths can wreak destruction in the personal lives of those they know.

When sociopaths move into any country, a certain percentage of them start doing horrible things.

There may be plenty of sociopaths who reject their own inherent destructive nature, but we have no way to determine who does and who does not. We could ask them on their immigration application, but we cannot trust their answers. They have no emotional motivation to tell the truth.

We should not take the chance, at least until we find some way to determine which sociopaths reject their own destructive tendencies.

Does this seem extreme? It’s not as unreasonable as it might seem. We already choose who can immigrate and who cannot. We make the rules. This is our country, after all. We are not under any obligation to allow anyone to immigrate just because they want to. They do it with our blessing or they don’t do it.

So this policy would simply add a new distinction to the already-existing immigration criteria.

The first criticism of this policy will probably be, “It is supremacist.” It is saying that we, the non-sociopaths, are better than sociopaths. But sociopaths are dangerous to non-sociopaths, so this proposed policy is nothing more than informed, reasonable self-preservation. If there is a group of any kind with an established intent to harm others, it would be self-destructive to grant entry to their members.

Let us do the smart thing and stop sociopaths from immigrating to the United States. Join with us and sign this petition. And then urge everyone you know to sign it.
Stop Sociopaths From Immigrating to the United States

It isn’t often that straight people are affected by laws preventing same-sex marriages. But Manhattan borough president Scott Stringer is letting same-sex marriage laws affect his straight marriage. Stringer will marry his fiancé Elyse Buxbaum in Connecticut, instead of New York, as a form of protest against New York’s ban on gay marriages. The couple will obtain their marriage license at a civil ceremony in Connecticut before returning to New York for their religious wedding.

Scott and Elyse are taking their marriage elsewhere as a way of taking personal responsibility and setting an example for others. Stringer explained that “If enough people who have somewhat of a profile — not just politicians, but artists and business leaders — start going into Massachusetts or Connecticut and show New York how embarrassing it is that you can’t get a marriage license for same-sex couples, then we will change things.”

Seven months ago, the New York State Senate killed a bill allowing same-sex marriage in a 38-to-24 vote. Many local politicians have expressed disappointment and anger that the bill didn’t pass but Stringer is the first to publicly boycott the institution in response.

View Full Article »

As third richest person on the planet, Warren Buffett’s no stranger to making headlines. In 2006, he pledged to give away 99 percent of his money to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In 2008, he became, for a brief time, the world’s richest man, dethroning the illustrious Gates himself. Now, with $47 billion at his disposal, Buffett’s at it again.

In a letter to Fortune this morning, the legendary investor admitted that the source of his mind-blowing wealth wasn’t a lifetime of grueling labor or sacrifice. Instead, he attributed his larger-than-life bank account to “a combination of living in America, some lucky genes, and compound interest” — along with a volatile economic system.

“My luck,” Buffett explained, “was accentuated by my living in a market system that sometimes produces distorted results, though overall it serves our country well.” (That caveat could certainly be debated, especially in the midst of a crippling recession, but his overall message is well-appreciated.)

Buffett’s exposition of America’s capitalist system flies in the face of conventional, meritocratic wisdom: “I’ve worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions,” he wrote. “In short, fate’s distribution of long straws is wildly capricious.”

In a seeming effort to pay penance for reaping the benefits of this unfair economic system, Buffett and Bill Gates recently launched “The Giving Pledge,” an unprecedented effort to encourage hundreds of other billionaires to donate at least 50 percent of their wealth to charity.

View Full Article »

Powered by WordPress. Theme: Motion by 85ideas.