Racist Kansas Half Staff Flag

So interesting. Governor Sam Brownback, of Kansas, has ordered that flags be flown at half staff in memory of the victims of the mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, but did not do the same when Dylann Roof waltzed into a South Carolina church and shot nine people at a Bible study. Both incidents were unexpected, both incidents were unjustified, both incidents resulted in untimely death, and both incidents resulted in terror, and could therefore be labeled "terrorism". Why would Brownback care about one set of victims, but not the other? Here's a guess: Dylann Roof's victims were black, while the people shot in San Bernardino were mostly white. Yep. Brownback and most of Kansas appear to have double standards. 

 

May all of the victims of both mass shootings rest in peace.

And One Ring To Bind Them

Just when I think I've heard it all, a kid from Texas gets suspended from school because he told another kid he had a magic ring and would use it make the other kid invisible! Where the hell is the eye-rolley where I need it?! A fourth grader named Aiden Steward, who recently watched one of the movies based on J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord Of The Rings trilogy, took a ring to school and told another fourth grader that it was forged in Middle Earth, and had the power to make people invisible. Later, that same day, young Aiden's parents got a call from the school to tell him that Aiden had been suspended for making "threats of terrorism".

In an ongoing climate of "zero tolerance", this little boy was persecuted for wearing a piece of jewelry and for using his imagination. It's definitely harassment of an intelligent and precocious child, but another idea that occurred to me is that the teacher of this fourth grade class may not be as well read as her students, and not understand literary references when she hears them. Also, being a midwestern teacher in a midwestern school, the teacher might think she is justified to punish children whose parents are Pagan or Wiccan. If a christian whose IQ is in the typical range of IQ's for Christians (around 96) thinks she can get away with humiliating and harassing a child who discusses Pagan ideas by having him suspended for "terrorism", you can bet your bottom dollar the midwestern teacher will do it. This teacher and her administration may be trying to drive Aiden's parents out of the school district. The trend among christian churches these days is to be as intolerant, threatening, and as unmessianic as possible, in hopes of gaining brownie points with God. Also, how come all these "zero tolerance" schools still have bullies?

Above is Aiden, our little would-be Frodo, holding his newborn brother. When I think of terrorists, this is not what comes to mind. Indeed, Aiden's father commented, "I  assure you, my son lacks the magical powers necessary to threaten his friend's existence."

While modern public schools make empty claims about their "zero tolerance" policies, yours truly does not suffer fools gladly. If any of the readers, fans, or trolls of this blog share this sentiment, following is the contact information in order to call and politely ask the ringwraiths who run the school to kindly insist upon teachers who know the difference between reality and fantasy.

Ms. Roxane Greer, Elementary Principal
601 S. Poplar, Kermit, Texas, 79745
432-586-1020
rgreer@kisd.esc18.net

Gays Always Want Cakes Baked For Them

Pat Robertson has spoken....yet again! He, once again, has found a new way to twist the words of the Constitution and the doctrines of the Christian religion to fit a new and deranged formula only beknown to his own subconscious. Gay men and women are now terrorists if they order cakes for their weddings and other special occasions......Only white, christian heterosexual types can enter bakeries or visit caterers and have events planned and catered! If anyone else does this, it's clearly a sign of terrorism.......(eye-rolley here)

Reverend Robertson has his panties in a bunch because the Kansas senate refused to pass House Bill 2453 earlier this year.The bill would have allowed any business or government agency, including but not limited to public schools and hospitals, to refuse service to anyone whose demeanor, jewelry, tattoos, skin color, accent, or surname posed a "religious conflict" for the employee or gatekeeper providing customer service. The reason it did not pass the senate, besides it's insane content and stupid language, is that such a bill, were it to become law, is at obvious cross purposes with the Constitution and federal law. It seems Robertson is disappointed that members of the senate were uninterested in fighting terrorism by instigating bigotry and unlawful discrimination. How the pastor links ordering a cake from a bakery to terrorism is still a mystery, though.

If all those terrorists, regardless of sexual preference, only want cakes baked for them, the solution seems simple enough; just give Betty Crocker a call.

A Little Friendly Terrorism?

Terry Loewen not only had an effect on criminal law in Kansas when he attempted to bomb an airport in Wichita this past December; he also changed civil law. As a result of his antics, the House Corrections and Juvenile Justice Committee will hear a bill that will, if it becomes law, allow victims to sue convicted terrorists for damages in civil court. It will enable victims to recover up to three times their losses, or ten thousand dollars, whichever is greater. The definition of "terrorism" still appears to be a bit vague, however. It's a word that gets thrown around a lot, these days.

The mother of a boy at Frankfort High School, in Kansas, got very angry with yours truly, once upon a time, for refusing to allow her sons to spend time alone with my daughters in a bedroom of their house. The Pagan discipline followed by my family

embraces the making of careful choices in sexual relationships and contrasts rather sharply with the Midwestern Christian open acceptance of sexual exploitation among high school students. The mother rightfully felt ashamed of the way she had brought up her sons, yet she could not bring herself to simply admit it. Instead, she waited until she had a moment alone with my oldest daughter, (this took place at the school.....a conversation with an adult that should NOT have taken place at school with my daughter) and told her that I am a "terrorist", because she "felt terrorized" when I informed her of what local young people do in her house behind her back. The conversation she and I had did not take place at either of our homes, and was caught on surveillance, so my daughter was able to see that I did not "terrorize" anyone, and was actually quite subdued about the whole exchange, given the matter at hand. The faithful member of Annunciation Catholic Church in Frankfort Kansas was merely attempting to harm the relationship between my daughter and myself. How very Christian.

A few months later, those very boys drove an SUV on my lawn, grazed my porch, and proceeded into the neighbor's lawn, almost driving through her picture window into her living room. They did this multiple times. Law enforcement was unconcerned until they nearly hit two small children. Each time, my lawn was where the vandalism was focused. It finally resulted in a formal "no trespass" order for these two Christian young men; they will be arrested if they return. The use of a vehicle to scare my family and tear up lawns and porches was definitely meant to frighten and "terrorize". Would this be the intent recognized by the local court? Probably not, as police almost didn't bother with the problem. Yet, when the mother of these two monsters "felt terrorized" after a simple conversation, she howled and cried about it to my daughter, and a whole town is supposed to feel sorry for her because she was "terrorized" by someone who is not a Christian!

Meanwhile, lawns, gardens, trees, bushes, windows, bricks, siding, doors, ect., can all add up, monetarily. Ten thousand dollars may only be a mere drop in a bucket. The suit for "terrorism damages" would probably have to be filed separately from the suit for all the other damages. The damage done to my children by this woman's unfortunate mouth cannot be tallied, sadly, as cannot the loss of human life, should the Catholic Christian mother never get around to teaching her sons not to terrorize others.

Private Message

 

Here's is the definition of "terrorism", according to your current state and mine,

 

"21-5421. Terrorism. (a) Terrorism is the commission of, the attempt to commit, the conspiracy to commit, or the criminal solicitation to commit any felony with the intent to:

(1) Intimidate or coerce the civilian population;

(2) influence government policy by intimidation or coercion; or

(3) affect the operation of any unit of government.

(b) Terrorism or attempt, conspiracy or criminal solicitation to commit terrorism is an off-grid person felony.

(c) The provisions of subsection (c) of K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 21-5301, and amendments thereto, shall not apply to a violation of attempting to commit the crime of terrorism pursuant to this section. The provisions of subsection (c) of K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 21-5302, and amendments thereto, shall not apply to a violation of conspiracy to commit the crime of terrorism pursuant to this section. The provisions of subsection (d) of K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 21-5303, and amendments thereto, shall not apply to a violation of criminal solicitation to commit the crime of terrorism pursuant to this section."

The next time you open your big, fat mouth and accuse me of something, especially to my children, be ready to validate your statements in reality. In fact, no one terrorized your silly ass. All anyone did was ask you to supervise your children and stop allowing your home to be used as a brothel.

 

By the way, here is how Kansas defines stalking:

 

"21-5427. Stalking. (a) Stalking is:

(1) Recklessly engaging in a course of conduct targeted at a specific person which would cause a reasonable person in the circumstances of the targeted person to fear for such person's safety, or the safety of a member of such person's immediate family and the targeted person is actually placed in such fear;

(2) engaging in a course of conduct targeted at a specific person with knowledge that the course of conduct will place the targeted person in fear for such person's safety or the safety of a member of such person's immediate family; or

(3) after being served with, or otherwise provided notice of, any protective order included in K.S.A. 21-3843, prior to its repeal or K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 21-5924, and amendments thereto, that prohibits contact with a targeted person, recklessly engaging in at least one act listed in subsection (f)(1) that violates the provisions of the order and would cause a reasonable person to fear for such person's safety, or the safety of a member of such person's immediate family and the targeted person is actually placed in such fear."

 

Remember that the next time you decide to follow me around in your car.