Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Info on my Facebook business, Twitter, and Tumblr pages

Here's the URL to my Facebook business page. I update it fairly regularly, but still haven't put forth a great deal of effort yet in researching matters and attempting to make the most out of it. In any case, it can be perused here:

http://www.facebook.com/AuthorCraigRozniecki?ref=hl


Up next is my Twitter page. I'm still not 100% certain what I'm doing on there yet, but feel I'm gradually getting the hang of it and am up to 11.2 K followers. I update it daily with many of my own tweets, but also by retweeting some others'. It can be found here:

https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki


Lastly, here's my Tumblr page, which I've neglected quite a bit recently, but if you're at all curious, you can find it at the following link:

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/rozzy81

Weekly update of my book information

For new readers (and regular ones, I suppose), here's some information pertaining to my books.

All twelve of my books can be purchased in paperback form at the following site (and others):

http://www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?type=&keyWords=craig+rozniecki&x=7&y=5&sitesearch=lulu.com&q=

The ten books I've written and released in the past 3 years (yes, I've been on a roll) can be purchased for much cheaper in Kindle form at the following link:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_22?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=craig%20rozniecki%20kindle&sprefix=craig+rozniecki+kindle%2Caps%2C228&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Acraig%20rozniecki%20kindle

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to ask me by either commenting on this blog or e-mailing me at CRozniecki@gmail.com. Unless I'm out of town, I'm typically very good at responding rather quickly.

Monday, July 21, 2014

Guess what? Republicans like Obamacare!

Remember how much money conservative groups spent on "Obamacare" attack ads? How much time Republican candidates spent telling potential voters they were going to repeal the healthcare law? How many times far-right Congressional Republicans claimed that the Affordable Care Act was going to destroy the fabric of this country? Well, strangely enough, the world didn't end, and according to a new Commonwealth Fund poll, the attack ads and hyperbolic rhetoric were only effective for a limited period of time.

According to this new poll, 73% of people whom bought health plans were either somewhat or very satisfied with their new insurance. This includes 87% whom signed up for Medicaid and were at least somewhat satisfied. Not only that, but 74% of newly insured Republicans liked their plans.

With numbers like these, it makes the Tea Party/Ted Cruz-led government shutdown look even more ridiculous.

Cruz: "I'm going to stand up for the people, the Constitution, and all the hard-working conservative Republicans out there by saying no to Obamacare and yes to freedom! This is for all of you!"

Three-fourths of newly insured Republicans: "But we like our new plans..."

Cruz: "Screw you guys! I'm standing up for that other quarter, and am, in essence, standing up for all of you! You'll thank me one of these days."

Three-fourths of newly insured Republicans: "But..."

Cruz: "But, nothing! Now let's get down to business, and support me while I try to take away your healthcare, end jobs, waste money, and ruin lives! You're welcome!"

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/07/10/3458577/even-republicans-are-satisfied-with-the-new-obamacare-coverage-poll-finds/

How Americans see Jesus...

It amazes me that approximately 95% of the people seem to believe that their beliefs coincide with a higher power's. Since no two people's opinions are exactly the same, this creates a bit of a dilemma. It also amazes me that while many people may see Jesus as being omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent, they appear to believe he's an uber-capitalist whom would be anything but benevolent if he were growing up in the United States today.

The non-partisan organization YouGov just released poll results with regard to how Americans feel about certain contemporary political issues and where they feel Jesus would line up on those same issues. Here were the results:

Legal abortion: 48% support it/36% oppose (net +12%), 20% believe Jesus would support it/52% oppose (net -32%)

Gay marriage: 48% support it/40% oppose (net +8%), 32% believe Jesus would support it/45% oppose (net -13%)

Death penalty: 58% support it/23% oppose (net +35%), 34% believe Jesus would support it/41% oppose (net -7%)

High taxes on wealthy: 56% support it/28% oppose (net +28%), 45% believe Jesus would support it/23% oppose (net +22%)

Stricter gun laws: 51% support it/36% oppose (net +15%), 46% believe Jesus would support it/25% oppose (net +21%)

Reducing carbon emissions: 64% support it/17% oppose (net +47%), 52% believe Jesus would support it/13% oppose (net +39%)

Universal healthcare: 56% support it/30% oppose (net +26%), 55% believe Jesus would support it/19% oppose (net +36%)

So, according to these numbers, even though it's believed that Jesus was a lover of all, stood up for the poor, was Mr. Anti-Violence himself, and is responsible for the world being what it is, less than 1 in 3 believe he'd support gays' rights, slightly more than 1 in 3 believe he'd support the death penalty, less than half believe he'd support high taxes on the rich and stricter gun laws, and slightly more than half believe he'd support reducing carbon emissions and universal healthcare. Fascinating...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/16/jesus-american-issues_n_5592215.html

http://today.yougov.com/news/2014/07/07/what-would-jesus-do/

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/bpuzgpfb2b/tabs_OPI_wwjd_20140702.pdf

Vikings special teams coach Mike Priefer - "Nuke the gays!"

In January, former Minnesota Vikings punter and LGBT rights activist Chris Kluwe published an article on Deadspin where he made the claim that special teams coach Mike Priefer one time told him, "We should round up all the gays, send them to an island, and then nuke it until it glows."

This led to the Vikings launching an independent investigation, with the summary of the results being released this past Friday. The report concluded that Priefer did indeed make the comment about nuking gays, and he has since been suspended for the first three games of the season. The team also plans on donating $100,000 to an LGBT organization.

Humorously enough, the team's lawyers said that even though Priefer made the nuke-the-gays comment, he has otherwise been very respectful of the LGBT community, saying that, "...other than Kluwe's allegations, there is no support in the record of Priefer made any additional statements of this nature."

Let's review the comment again, shall we?

Priefer: "We should round up all the gays, send them to an island, and then nuke it until it glows."

Lawyers' defense: "Other than this comment, Priefer has been very respectful of the LGBT community."


Translation:

Priefer: "All gays should be killed at once, and as soon as possible!"

Lawyers' defense: "Outside of Priefer saying all gays deserve to die, he's been very respectful of them."


On that note, I can just imagine Priefer engaging in the following conversation with a gay man:

Samuel Noyoudint: "Aren't you that Vikings coach? Preffer, or something like that?"

Mike Priefer: "Yes, that's me. Mike Priefer - special teams coach for the Minnesota Vikings."

Noyoudint: "I read that Deadspin article, and as a gay man, I have to say I was horribly offended by your comments."

Priefer: "Comment"

Noyoudint: "What?"

Priefer: "I just made that one comment. Other than that, I've been all about the gays."

Noyoudint: "You said we should all be nuked!"

Priefer: "Yeah, so?"

Noyoudint: "So, did you really mean that?"

Priefer: "I wouldn't have said it if I didn't mean it."

Noyoudint: "So, you think me and all of the other gays should die?"

Priefer: "Yeah, but let's not blow this thing out of proportion here. Sure, I think you should all be killed at once, but besides that, I'm all for queers' rights."

Noyoudint: "If we were all dead, we wouldn't have any rights..."

Priefer: "Don't twist my words any more than the liberal media already has. Do I think all gays should die? Yes. However, do I think they should be given the right to marry after they're dead? Yes."

Noyoudint: "What?"

Priefer: "Surprised, aren't you? You see? I told you I was on your side."

Noyoudint: "Ugh!" ::storms off::

Priefer: "What the hell was his problem? You see? You try to be nice, decent, and even politically correct, and this happens. Geez..."

http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2014/07/19/3462027/vikings-admit-coach-said-nukeall-the-gays-insist-he-was-otherwise-completely-respectful-of-lgbt-advocates/

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Kentucky-isms

What is it with the poor, bad, or "redneck" parts of a state being nicknamed after Kentucky? It seems to be a national trend. Regardless of where in the country a person is, chances are he or she will hear a resident of the area utter something negative about a place they refer to as "-tucky." When I lived in Omaha, Nebraska, about 20 minutes east of where I lived was Council Bluffs, Iowa. What did most Omaha residents refer to Council Bluffs as? Counciltucky, of course. So, in light of this, I thought I'd have some fun with the word "Kentucky" and nickname certain parts of every state after it. Here we go...

1. Alabama: Kentuckabama

2. Alaska: Kentuska

3. Arizona: Kentuckizona

4. Arkansas: Arkansucky

5. California: Calitucky

6. Colorado: Kentuckorado

7. Connecticut: Connectitucky

8. Delaware: Kentuckaware

9. Florida: Floritucky

10. Georgia: Georgitucky

11. Hawaii: Kentuckawaii

12. Idaho: Kentuckaho

13. Illinois: Illitucky

14. Indiana: Kentuckiana

15. Iowa: Kentuckowa

16. Kansas: Kansasucky

17. Kentucky: Kentuckyucky

18. Louisiana: Louisiucky

19. Maine: Mainetucky

20. Maryland: Marytucky

21. Massachusetts: Kentuckachusetts

22. Michigan: Kentuckigan

23. Minnesota: Minnesucky

24. Mississippi: Mississucky

25. Missouri: Kentuckouri

26. Montana: Montanucky

27. Nebraska: Nebrasucky

28. Nevada: Kentuckada

29. New Hamsphire: New Hamsucky

30. New Jersey: New Jersucky

31. New Mexico: New Kentuckxico

32. New York: New Yorkucky

33. North Carolina: North Kentuckolina

34. North Dakota: North Dakotucky

35. Ohio: Okentuckio

36. Oklahoma: Kentuckahoma

37. Oregon: Kentuckegon

38. Pennsylvania: Pennsyltucky

39. Rhode Island: Rhodetucky Island

40. South Carolina: South Kentuckolina

41. South Dakota: South Dakotucky

42. Tennessee: Tennessucky

43. Texas: Kentuckxas

44. Utah: Utuckyah

45. Vermont: Vermonucky

46. Virginia: Virgintucky

47. Washington: Washingtucky

48. West Virginia: West Virgintucky

49. Wisconsin: Wisconsucky

50. Wyoming: Wyotucky

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Info on my Facebook business, Twitter, and Tumblr pages

Here's the URL to my Facebook business page. I update it fairly regularly, but still haven't put forth a great deal of effort yet in researching matters and attempting to make the most out of it. In any case, it can be perused here:

http://www.facebook.com/AuthorCraigRozniecki?ref=hl


Up next is my Twitter page. I'm still not 100% certain what I'm doing on there yet, but feel I'm gradually getting the hang of it and am up to 11 K followers. I update it daily with many of my own tweets, but also by retweeting some others'. It can be found here:

https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki


Lastly, here's my Tumblr page, which I've neglected quite a bit recently, but if you're at all curious, you can find it at the following link:

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/rozzy81

Weekly update of my book information

For new readers (and regular ones, I suppose), here's some information pertaining to my books.

All twelve of my books can be purchased in paperback form at the following site (and others):

http://www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?type=&keyWords=craig+rozniecki&x=7&y=5&sitesearch=lulu.com&q=

The ten books I've written and released in the past 3 years (yes, I've been on a roll) can be purchased for much cheaper in Kindle form at the following link:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_22?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=craig%20rozniecki%20kindle&sprefix=craig+rozniecki+kindle%2Caps%2C228&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Acraig%20rozniecki%20kindle

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to ask me by either commenting on this blog or e-mailing me at CRozniecki@gmail.com. Unless I'm out of town, I'm typically very good at responding rather quickly.

Tuesday, July 8, 2014

Taking a break

Unfortunately, due to an incident which occurred this past weekend which I can't get into, I think I'll have to take a break from writing. I'm not sure how long this break will be. However, I've been shaky ever since the incident, have had trouble eating and sleeping, have suffered from nightmares/night-terrors, have gotten slightly paranoid about even stepping outside of the house, seem to be suffering from short-term memory loss, have felt a constant sense of nausea and heartache (along with fatigue and weakness), and have at least temporarily lost the focus necessary to get much work done. I sincerely hope these feelings subside, and sooner rather than later, so I can get back to doing what I love - which is writing. But I can't make any guarantees at this juncture. I just ask for your thoughts and prayers during this difficult time. Thanks.

Info on my Facebook business, Twitter, and Tumblr pages

Here's the URL to my Facebook business page. I update it fairly regularly, but still haven't put forth a great deal of effort yet in researching matters and attempting to make the most out of it. In any case, it can be perused here:

http://www.facebook.com/AuthorCraigRozniecki?ref=hl


Up next is my Twitter page. I'm still not 100% certain what I'm doing on there yet, but feel I'm gradually getting the hang of it and am up to 10.8 K followers. I update it daily with many of my own tweets, but also by retweeting some others'. It can be found here:

https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki


Lastly, here's my Tumblr page, which I've neglected quite a bit recently, but if you're at all curious, you can find it at the following link:

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/rozzy81

Weekly update of my book information

For new readers (and regular ones, I suppose), here's some information pertaining to my books.

All twelve of my books can be purchased in paperback form at the following site (and others):

http://www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?type=&keyWords=craig+rozniecki&x=7&y=5&sitesearch=lulu.com&q=

The ten books I've written and released in the past 3 years (yes, I've been on a roll) can be purchased for much cheaper in Kindle form at the following link:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_22?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=craig%20rozniecki%20kindle&sprefix=craig+rozniecki+kindle%2Caps%2C228&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Acraig%20rozniecki%20kindle

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to ask me by either commenting on this blog or e-mailing me at CRozniecki@gmail.com. Unless I'm out of town, I'm typically very good at responding rather quickly.

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

The Declaration of Independence needs an update

In light of the Supreme Court's Citizen's United ruling, as well as their recent Hobby Lobby ruling (and other such decisions), and as we're about to celebrate Independence Day, I think it's about time we update our Declaration of Independence so that it's a more accurate reflection of contemporary society. Here is how the most well known portion should probably read:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all corporations are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Yeah, that sounds more like it...

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/

The Fifty Shades phenomenon...

When it comes to the odd mix of commercial success and negative reviews, Fifty Shades of Grey is like an Adam Sandler comedy. While critics may claim it's the worst film of the year, it does well at the box office. For example, the 2013 film Grown Ups 2 earned almost $134 million at the box office, while being approved by just 7% of critics. From that perspective, Fifty Shades... isn't much different. To this point, the series has sold over 70 million copies worldwide, all while receiving negative reviews like Seattle receives rain. Here are just some such quotes:

Sir Salman Rushdie: "I've never read anything so badly written that got published. It made 'Twilight' look like 'War and Peace.'"

Maureen Dowd (The New York Times): "[It was] like a Bronte devoid of talent," and "[It was] dull and poorly written."

Jesse Kornbluth (The Huffington Post): "As a reading experience, Fifty Shades... is a sad joke, puny of plot."

Metro News Canada: "...suffering through 500 pages of this heroine's inner dialogue was torturous, and not in the intended, sexy kind of way."

Jessica Reeves (Chicago Tribune): "[The] book's source material isn't great literature," "[The novel] is sprinkled liberally and repeatedly with asinine phrases," and "[It was] depressing."

Yes, like how many film critics wonder why people keep going to see Sandler's films, many book critics are wondering why people are reading Fifty Shades of Grey.

While the biggest controversy surrounding the book(s) among film critics is the quality of it (or lack there of), the biggest controversy according to psychologists is with regard to the sexually explicit content of the book - intimate partner violence, in particular.

According to a study conducted by psychologists at the universities of Michigan State and Ohio State, and published by the Journal of Women's Health last year, the following was concluded:

"Analyzing the naughty novel, psychologists at Michigan State University and Ohio State University concluded that its characters' behaviors are consistent with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's official definition of intimate partner violence - and that the book perpetuates dangerous abuse patterns."

Lead author of the report - Ohio State University researcher Amy Bonomi - added that in the novel, intimate partner violence can be found "occurring in nearly every interaction" between its lead characters.

According to federal agency guidelines, here's a breakdown of how different types of abuse are defined:

Intimate partner violence: "Physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse."

Physical violence: "Acts such as slapping and choking"

Sexual violence: "Forced sex acts, often induced through the use of alcohol or other drugs"

Psychological/emotional abuse: "Can involve humiliation, social isolation and stalking"

When looking at these guidelines, Bonomi said that "the book depicts multiple elements of such abuse."

She added that Anastasia (the lead female character in the novel) "suffers reactions typical of abused women."

One example is Anastasia often times either doesn't tell Christian (the other lead character) about plans she's made, or she avoids going out altogether, so she doesn't potentially upset him.

With regard to that, Bonomi said, "That is exactly what we see in women in abusive relationships. The abuser is very good at controlling social connections by intimidating the victim."

The lead author of the study also said she had nothing against BDSM relationships, generally speaking, saying, "Consenting BDSM relationships are fine. But the relationship we see between Christian and Anastasia is different. What we see in them is a clear pattern of abuse."

Cris Sullivan - researcher of gender-based violence at Michigan State University - agreed with Bonomi, saying, "[Anastasia is in the relationship] not because she enjoys it, but because she's trying to keep the man. ... That's not a message we want to keep sending women or men. I'm hoping [the study] will lead people to talk and think about the book a little more critically than just a hot little summer read."

So, is Fifty Shades of Grey a harmless read? A guilty pleasure perhaps? Or could it negatively impact some people's views of sex and abuse, where some men come to believe that women are sexually aroused through certain forms of abuse, and where some women come to believe that they deserve such treatment and will lose a man if they don't allow themselves to be subjected to it?

I think I agree with the authors of the study, in saying that there's nothing wrong with a consenting BDSM relationship, but there's also a fine line between that and an abusive relationship. In a consenting BDSM relationship, one person voluntarily gives themselves up for sexual pleasure. It fulfills a fantasy and illustrates their trust for one another. However, in an abusive relationship, like the one depicted in Fifty Shades of Grey, a person gives another total control due to their fear of pain, fear of rejection, and fear of being alone. Due to this, I find it rather disturbing that so many women like this book (series) so much. Has sexism in our culture made it so that many women feel wrong about taking control in a relationship, especially when it concerns things of a sexual nature? Has sexism made it so some women feel they deserve such abusive treatment? Has sexism made it so some women are okay with being seen and treated as sex objects and nothing more? On the flip-side, I find it disturbing some men would like this book as well. How can such a person find genuine love when he's so busy attempting to seize total control over a partner's being, he negates the true her from ever making her presence known and felt? Sure, it's just a "fantasy," but an abusive fantasy is a pretty sick one to have, and no one deserves to be subjected to such treatment.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/13/science/la-sci-sn-fifty-shades-of-grey-sexual-emotional-abuse-20130812

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifty_Shades_of_Grey#Reception

President Obama speaks up about paid maternity leave

Recently, President Obama came forward in support of government-mandated paid maternity leave in this country (you know, like other industrialized countries). In response to this, a Facebook acquaintance of mine shared the following thoughts:

"Love the thought of paid maternity leave (and it already exists)....but if this jackass thinks only women care for newborn children he is sorely mistaken. Maybe at his house, but not in the bulk of homes. Perhaps lazy men like him should do their job as a spouse and parent.

Sounds to me like Obama is one of those old fashioned men that think it is solely the woman's job to care for the child...sick"

and

"I'm of the old mindset that if you can't afford to miss work for maternity/paternity leave you probably can't afford to have a child....and therefore, should not conceive one."

First off, this "friend's" comments were with regard to President Obama's following statement: "The United States is the only developed country in the world without paid maternity leave."

The Politifact verdict of this statement is "mostly true," before elaborating on the ruling with this:

"Obama said, 'The United States is the only developed country in the world without paid maternity leave.' The United States does not mandate cash benefits to workers on maternity leave at the federal level, and just a small fraction of its citizens live in states that require it or work for companies that provide it. In that regard, the United States is very different than the rest of the developed world, where at least some paid benefits exist in every country.

It's worth nothing, however, that paid maternity leave is far from a universal benefit in many developed countries. In some, as many as one-third of workers aren't actually covered for cash benefits, and six countries don't meet all of the International Labor Organizations guidelines for providing benefits.

We rate Obama's statement Mostly True."

To garner a better perspective of just how different the U.S. is from other developed countries, here's a more in-depth breakdown:

Sweden: 56 weeks paid maternity leave (80% of wages paid), up to 13 additional weeks (a fixed rate)

Croatia: 24 weeks paid maternity leave (100% of wages paid), up to 34 additional weeks (a fixed rate)

Canada: 50 weeks paid maternity leave (55% of wages paid)

Italy: 20 weeks paid maternity leave (80% of wages paid), up to 24 additional weeks (30% of wages paid)

England: 6 weeks paid maternity leave (90% of wages paid), up to 33 additional weeks (a fixed rate)

Slovakia: 28 weeks paid maternity leave (55% of wages paid)

Hungary: 24 weeks paid maternity leave (70% of wages paid)

Chile: 18 weeks paid maternity leave (100% of wages paid)

France: 16 weeks paid maternity leave (100% of wages paid)

Mali: 14 weeks paid maternity leave (100% of wages paid)

Paraguay: 9 weeks paid maternity leave (50% of wages paid)

U.S.: 0 weeks paid maternity leave (0% of wages paid)

Not only that, but some countries have benefits for both parents to share paid leave:

Canada: 35 weeks

Sweden: 34 weeks

Croatia: 34 weeks

Slovakia: 28 weeks

England: 26 weeks

Italy: 24 weeks

France: 2 weeks

Hungary: 1 week

To sum up, the United States is one of only four countries which doesn't require a mandated paid leave. The other three are: Liberia, Swaziland, and Papua New Guinea. In other words, my Facebook comrade was wrong about mandated-paid maternity leave existing in the U.S.

Also, especially in contemporary society, most families can't afford to live off one income. A growing number of women work, not only for themselves, but for the health and well-being of their families. So, it's pretty naive to believe that most healthy two-income families would be able to fully afford a child unless one (or both) parent(s) received paid leave - that or they both went right back to work following the birth of their child. Yes, after carrying a baby around for 9 months, the mother might be a bit drained. She may also want to provide milk for and feed the baby. It also might be extra difficult for her to let go and go back to work right away, especially with postpartum depression being a possibility. But, forget the mother's and child's health and needs. The mother shouldn't be allowed to take any time off work. Heck, she should be working while in labor. As for the child, he'll need to learn how to take care of himself one of these days - why not at a day or two old? How about if we shrink the pay gap between social classes (and genders) so a single mother or a family will be more able to financially afford a child without paid leave?

What I really found to be ironic about the before-mentioned individual's Facebook comments was that he attempted to come across as being in favor of women's rights (and power), yet at the end of the day, it's just the opposite. He doesn't believe in a woman's right to have an abortion. He doesn't believe employers should cover contraception in women's healthcare plans. He also doesn't believe in paid maternity leave. In other words, ladies, even if a man rapes you, according to this guy, you shouldn't be covered by your employer for the morning-after pill; if you get pregnant, you shouldn't be able to have an abortion; and if you have the child, you shouldn't get paid while taking time off work to take care of the baby. If that's not "pro-women's rights," I don't know what is...

http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article602644.html

http://womenandtech.com/infographic-paid-maternity-leave/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jun/24/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-us-differs-developed-world-paid-/

What Hobby Lobby supporters are missing...

In light of the Supreme Court's ruling on the Hobby Lobby contraception-mandate case, it seems that the far-right's defense to liberals' commentary about women's rights being limited is, "They (Hobby Lobby) still cover(s) 16 of 20 contraceptives. They just don't cover the abortion ones."

First off, to me, that reads, "They still cover 80% of contraceptive options. That's 20% less than most such companies, but still, it's better than nothing. That'd be a solid B- in a college course. So, they'd carry with them a 3.00 or a 2.67 GPA, depending on the school they attended. So, yeah - far out, right on, and stuff."

Secondly, they'd be scientifically inaccurate with the latter portion of the statement. The four contraceptives in question (Plan B, ella, and IUDs) do not cause abortions. Even leading medical authorities, such as the National Institute of Health and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, say as much. With regard to the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive mandate, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists made the following statement:

"Emergency contraception will not disrupt an established pregnancy. Women often are exposed to exogenous hormones in early pregnancy without adverse outcome. Some women undergoing assisted reproductive technology procedures to achieve pregnancy are routinely prescribed progesterone to support the pregnancy. It is also a common occurrence to interview patients in early pregnancy who were not aware that their missed pills had resulted in contraceptive failure and who thus had continued taking pills."

Susan Wood, professor of health policy at George Washington University and former assistant commissioner for women's health at the FDA, had this to say about the far-right's egregious claims:

"It is not only factually incorrect, it is downright misleading. These products are not abortifacients. And their only connection to abortion is that they can prevent the need for one."

To back Professor Wood's claims, there's now definitive research which shows that the only way for Plan B (the morning-after pill) to work is by "preventing ovulation, and therefore, fertilization."

Diana Blithe, biochemist and contraceptive researcher at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, made similar comments with regard to ella, citing studies which showcase that the drug doesn't prevent pregnancy if a woman has already ovulated. She also noted that, "Women who took the drug after ovulation got pregnant at the same rate as those who took nothing at all." In other words, like with Plan B, ella has no effect on blocking implantation.

With regard to IUDs, Irving Smith - senior associate in the council's Center for Biomedical Research - wrote the following in a Population Council publication:

"Prevalent social myth holds that IUDs are abortifacients. Even U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, in dissent from the majority opinion in Webster v Reproductive Health Services, subscribed to this belief. Scientists, including developers of IUDs, have believed it. The key element underlying this myth is that IUDs act only at the uterine level, either to prevent implantation or to destroy developing embryos in the uterus before implantation. Today, however, the weight of scientific evidence indicates that IUDs act as contraceptives. They prevent fertilization, diminishing the number of sperm that reach the oviduct and incapacitating them."

Lastly, it appears that these Hobby Lobby supporters are missing the big picture on a number of levels. This isn't about Hobby Lobby offering 16 out of 20 contraceptives for women. This isn't about one store. This isn't even about Hobby Lobby. It's about the potential precedent this decision sets for companies and their female employees in the future. It's about the loophole companies may now have in limiting women's reproductive rights on religious grounds. It's about the other routes such companies may be able to travel in limiting people's rights due to religious beliefs - perhaps members of the LGBT community. It's about women still playing catch-up with men in terms of equality, continually fighting for equal rights and respect, getting pushed down a notch or two by men, and then being determined to fight again. The ultimate sad irony about Hobby Lobby's policy (and possibly other such stores in the future) is that if a male employee of theirs happened to be on Viagra and raped a female employee, while the Viagra would have been covered by the company's plan, the morning-after pill would not have been, and the woman would have to worry about pregnancy and need to purchase the drug herself. The owners of Hobby Lobby, and other such stores, are free to believe as they so choose, but that doesn't give them the right to force those beliefs on their employees, and hinder them in the process. It's really a wonder what these Hobby Lobby supporters would say if the Supreme Court made a similar ruling in support of a Muslim-owned company...

http://ec.princeton.edu/questions/ecabt.html

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/02/22/172595689/morning-after-pills-dont-cause-abortion-studies-say

http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-ra-craziest-thing-about-hobby-lobby-20140630-column.html

Tuesday, July 1, 2014

"The greatest deception in the history of mankind..."

According to Louisiana State Representative Lenar Whitney (yes, a Republican), global-warming/climate-change is "perhaps the greatest deception in the history of mankind."

Yes, even though the Arctic sea ice is still melting, winters have been continually getting warmer (this past one excluded), and carbon dioxide concentrations have been continuing to rise, global-warming is "perhaps the greatest deception in the history of mankind."

What really makes me laugh about these global-warming deniers is the fact many of them are ardent believers in the Bible.

Representative Whitney, what do you have to say about global-warming, and the fact temperatures have been rising and arctic ice has been melting?

"It is perhaps the greatest deception in the history of mankind."

Representative Whitney, what do you have to say about the Bible, and the belief that a virgin gave birth to a perfect being, and this perfect being sacrificed himself on a cross to save mankind from their sins, only to rise from the dead three days later?

"That's 100% true!"

It's at that point where even Jesus strikes the facepalm pose...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/lenar-whitney-global-warming_n_5543598.html

A lovely Hobby Lobby Facebook discussion

After posting an article which discussed the irony of Hobby Lobby refusing to cover such contraception as the morning-after pill for women, all the while covering things such as Viagra and vasectomies for men, I received the following comment in return:

"There is a huge difference between an erectile dysfunction pill and an abortion pill. An erectile dysfunction pill can help create life. A morning after pill ends life. Comparing the two is flat out ignorant. This author should be embarrassed.

What the uninformed do not know (and articles like this don't care to publish) is that Hobby Lobby still covers 16 of the 20 birth control methods that other companies have to cover. The only 4 that it doesn't cover are birth terminations, not control methods."

Here is my response to that:

So, let me get this straight... You've told me before that you're against abortion, are against contraception coverage for women in employer-based healthcare plans (especially with regard to the four you label as being birth-terminators), are against paid maternity leave, but think it's perfectly fine for employers to cover things such as Viagra and vasectomies for men's healthcare plans, because unlike the morning-after pill (and the like), Viagra is a life-creator. Is that right?

First off, it's a tad ironic that you label those whom disagree with you on the matter as "uninformed," because the science and health-based communities overwhelmingly disagree with you on the four before-mentioned forms of contraception as being "birth-terminators":

"Emergency contraceptive pills work before pregnancy begins. According to leading medical authorities – such as the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists – pregnancy begins when the fertilized egg implants in the lining of a woman's uterus. Implantation begins five to seven days after sperm fertilizes the egg, and the process is completed several days later. Emergency contraception will not work if a woman is already pregnant."

In other words, while emergency contraception may make it more difficult for a woman to get pregnant, it will not terminate her pregnancy. So, according to a large majority of scientists and healthcare professionals, emergency contraception is a definite form of birth control. So, for Hobby Lobby to cover one of the ultimate forms of birth control in vasectomies for men and refuse to cover some forms of birth control for women, it comes across as a bit hypocritical. It'd be the ultimate sad irony if a male Hobby Lobby employee on Viagra raped a female Hobby Lobby employee, since the man's "life-creator" would have been covered by the company, whereas the woman's emergency contraception wouldn't have been.

Emergency contraception helps prevent unwanted pregnancies and through that, helps to prevent abortions, so why are so many die-hard anti-abortionists adamantly opposed to emergency contraception? Again, ironically, most scientists and healthcare professionals would likely say it's because they're simply "uninformed."

No matter how much we may try, men will never fully understand what it is women go through during pregnancy. We'll never know what it feels to have a being growing inside of us for 9 months. We'll never know what it would feel like to get raped and fear being pregnant as a result. We'll never know what it feels like to have a being growing inside of us for 3/4 of the year, to not get paid when taking time off work thereafter, and then to have to leave the child when heading back to work a few weeks later. We'll never know what it feels like to have the opposite sex see and treat us like sex objects, all the while they attempt to decrease our reproductive rights, before running when word has it that we're pregnant. Perhaps it's time men stop trying to control women's bodies and lives, and trust the science and healthcare professionals to do their jobs in order to better the odds of us having healthy women/mothers, healthy kids, and healthy families. Whatever label one wants to put on that, I'll call that being "pro-life" tenfold over inaccurately decrying a form of birth-control of terminating pregnancies.

http://ec.princeton.edu/questions/ecabt.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/hobby-lobby-viagra_n_5543916.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-christian_n_5545618.html

Info on my Facebook business, Twitter, and Tumblr pages

Here's the URL to my Facebook business page. I update it fairly regularly, but still haven't put forth a great deal of effort yet in researching matters and attempting to make the most out of it. In any case, it can be perused here:

http://www.facebook.com/AuthorCraigRozniecki?ref=hl


Up next is my Twitter page. I'm still not 100% certain what I'm doing on there yet, but feel I'm gradually getting the hang of it and am up to 10.6 K followers. I update it daily with many of my own tweets, but also by retweeting some others'. It can be found here:

https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki


Lastly, here's my Tumblr page, which I've neglected quite a bit recently, but if you're at all curious, you can find it at the following link:

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/rozzy81

Weekly update of my book information

For new readers (and regular ones, I suppose), here's some information pertaining to my books.

All twelve of my books can be purchased in paperback form at the following site (and others):

http://www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?type=&keyWords=craig+rozniecki&x=7&y=5&sitesearch=lulu.com&q=

The ten books I've written and released in the past 3 years (yes, I've been on a roll) can be purchased for much cheaper in Kindle form at the following link:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_22?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=craig%20rozniecki%20kindle&sprefix=craig+rozniecki+kindle%2Caps%2C228&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Acraig%20rozniecki%20kindle

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to ask me by either commenting on this blog or e-mailing me at CRozniecki@gmail.com. Unless I'm out of town, I'm typically very good at responding rather quickly.