The Journal of Left of Center Thinking :: December 31, 2006 - January 06, 2007

Have to love Conservatives

Only a dyed in the would nut could claim that people who are concerned about creating a ‘cure’ to gayness are somehow fine with advocating aborting gay republican babies.

For the record, I am squarely against aborting babies because they might grow up to be republicans. Or gay.

Or stupid.

The Need for Identity Theft Reform

As some of you may know, I suffered from Identity theft a few months back. While it was a huge inconvenience, and still is, I was fortunate that I personally was not liable for any of the fraudulent charges.

What the process taught me, however, is that most of the credit card companies are not at all vigilant in looking for ID theft. And the credit reporting companies also are not really focused on preventing fraud. And the police, as a rule, don’t take it seriously. Here’s a glimpse of what my experience was like.

I was lucky that I tended to check my credit cards on a somewhat daily basis, and that when I first learned of the fraud I checked my credit report. I first learned of the ID fraud when I went to charge lunch and my card was rejected. I went online within the hour, to check why and found myself locked out. I called Capital One, the company, and when they tried to verify my identity, I found out that none of the information (my address, phone number) matched what they had on account.

I spent an hour with Capital One verifying that I was indeed the account holder, and learned that someone had managed to pretend to be me, change the account address and have new cards sent out. They also added a new person to the account and had a card sent to them. Capital One never verified any of these changes. They sent a confirmation of the changes, but sent them to the new address.

Now, even though I was dealing with the fraud department, they never informed me someone was added to the account. They also refused to tell me what the new address was. In fact, all of the credit card companies I ended up dealing with (four in total) would tell me – even though they all knew the address was fraudulent. (I eventually found out because my address on my credit report got changed).

Capital one sent me out new cards, but they also sent out a card to the person who was added to the account.

I contacted my other credit card company (Citibank) and found out that that account had been targeted as well, but not successfully. Still, Citibank never contacted me to inform me of the attempt. They just shut the card down. They mailed a notice, but mailed it to the fraudulent address.

I contacted the San Francisco police (I was living in SF at the time). They took a report but, even though I had an address the cards were sent to, I was informed they would only investigate if I had actually lost something – the fraudulent charges weren’t a loss unless the credit card company held me responsible for paying them (a process which takes about 3 months to resolve).

Luckily, while the person who stole my identity was aggressive, I was more so. And another police department was involved, and they actually investigated (more because a jewelry store was involved, I think).

More in Part II

First they came for the gays

Gay folk have been warning people for years that the anti-gay agenda of social conservatives was just the beginning. Well, the group behind the anti-gay amendment in Virginia, is now targeting no-fault divorce.

Of course, folks will probably be less likely to vote for a measure that will prevent them from divorcing than they were to prevent other people from marrying.

Dems in Charge

I haven’t said much about the Dems taking charge, because there’s not much to add. There plans for the 100 days are all well thought out, I think. I’m very pleased Pay-Go is coming back (lets see how many GOP ‘conservatives’ vote against it).

I’m enjoying watching the GOP pundits pick at everything. How dare Nancy say she’s the most powerful woman in Washington. How dare the Dems not give the GOP the same minority party rights the GOP themselves shot down.

Lets hope the Dems are able to focus on working for the people, and avoid the corruption that felled the GOP, and the Dems before them

dolphin said (at January 5, 2007 11:43 AM):

Great

Either Bush is claiming a new executive power in which he can open domestic mail without a warrant, or the government is already, and has been, doing it.

There’s no reason why, with mail, the Govt can’t get a warrant if they have need to search mail (there is already an exception if the mail is suspected to contain something dangerous).

Irony Alert

Romney Calls McCain ‘disingenuous’ on the gay marriage issue.

Ex-Gay Sheep?

Michael discusses a post about efforts to ‘cure’ gay sheep, and discusses the implications it could have on humans (Read the original post , which treats the whole subject as a bad joke).

Michael takes issue with the comparison of curing gayness with curing deafness or blindness. The difference, which the original poster missed, is that – while there is assuredly some social stigma attached with being deaf or blind, the primary issue is with the actual deafness or blindness. On the other hand, the ‘problem’ of being gay is 100% the problem of societal attitude towards it. There is no disadvantage to being gay that isn’t created by the narrow-mindedness of others – be that neighbor, government, or church. (I challenge anyone to come up with a non-societal induced disadvantage to being gay).

While one might struggle to find an ‘upside’ to being gay (Laugh at more jokes while watching Will and Grace?) – once again requiring gays to do offer proof not required of straights (As Michael points out, and I paraphrase, ‘what’s the upside of being straight other than it means your not gay’?)

The original poster also brings up the specter of the question -asked on all National Coming Out panels ever held: If you could, today, take a pill that would ‘cure’ your being gay, would you? Having been on many gay-issues panels during college, I have been asked that question many times, and my answer is still the same: No. Being gay is part of who I am, and I wouldn’t kill off part of me simply to avoid the disapproving stares I sometimes get. Otherwise, being gay has not been a disadvantage to me (with the possible exception of taxes). I’m in a 10 year relationship, I have good relationship with my family, and I have a beautiful daughter. What would change if I suddenly weren’t gay? Now, others might choose to take the pill, obviously. My view on that is simple: If we ever get to a point where people can be gay free of societal disapproval – where being gay or straight is as meaningless as being blue eyed or green eyed, and someone still wanted to take a pill to be straight – then more power to them. The fact that, today, there are people unhappy with being gay is, again, more a symptom of societal silliness than a valid dissatisfaction due to limitations inherent in homosexuality.

And, speaking of silliness, comparing the curing of gay sheep to the curing of gay people is even less applicable than comparing curing gayness to curing deafness. With few exceptions, sheep are far less complex beings than people. While the whole ‘nature vs nurture’ argument still goes on, I think most people instinctually understand that being gay is both. It is biological, sociological, and ingrained into our species. Sheep work almost purely on instinct, people don’t.

Also, if you assume gayness is – at least in part – biological, then you’re talking about altering the brain chemistry of your child. Who knows what else would be altered. You would be, in effect, destroying a child’s personality, a child’s being, and replacing it with one you felt was more appropriate. That’s a far cry from getting two male sheep to stop humping one another.

Update: Not unsurprisingly, some people don’t get the point.

Frumming

David responds to a Washington Post Article on Sperm banks and the effect it has on ‘the children’.

This woman’s mother choose to have a child by herself using anonymous sperm. The author decries how this is allowed without any consideration of how the children will feel. Now, while this woman is free to feel whatever, what she accuses her mom of doing is no different than the millions of other people who choose to have kids.

How many kids are born to abusive parents, and would prefer not to have been? How many kids are born to poor parents, and prefer to have been born rich. This is the same tired argument used against gay parents: The situation is not the ‘ideal’, and thus should not be allowed. Which, of course, is silly. There are plenty of less than ideal families that nobody would think of questioning the right for the parent(s) to have children.

Frum, in his usual manner, leaps on this woman’s dissatisfaction to justify his views.

I find it so odd, that a conservative like Frum seems to be suggesting the Government should examine every planned birth, to make sure that the family will be ideal. Also, I’m not sure how he would distinguish his problems with ‘sperm donation’ from adoption. It’s the same issue – parents giving up their parental rights, and also being relieved of any support issues. The difference is merely that one occurs pre-conception, the other post.

Mass Hatecrime?

Six people were hurt in a shooting that appears to be a homophobic attack. The statements of some of the ‘neighbors’, is very telling. Said Kevin Carter, 18:

The nerve of gays. Looking at people.

Across the Pond

Let’s compare the Royal Air Force’s treatment of gays, with the US Air Force.

Which country is the beacon for freedom and democracy?

Scary

This is not a parody. This is an actual NRA publication called “Freedom in Peril”. It’s alarming.

For those of you who care, the Second Amendment is much wordier than the NRA would have you believe:

It’s unclear if this is intended to be a blanket statement for unfettered gun ownership, or a more nuanced statement about each state being able to maintain a militia. The SCOTUS has taken both sides in early decisions, and has not bothered to clarify.