There is a word for the thing the llama is doing. It is the best possible word for this phenomenon. When an animal moves by moving all four feet like this at once it’s called… PRONKING.
I can’t make stuff like this up.
Okay. I’ve seen various antelope do this. I had NO idea llamas did, too!
I half expected that llama to jump on top of the other one.
"Yay, I’m a llama again!…..wait…."
Oh my llama
Everyone is in a tizzy over Phil Robertson, yet no one has bothered with the facts. People are failing to mention his degrading comments on race. Also, can we unite to be up in arms about other things as well? Like CAR or institutionalization? Duck Dynasty has been trending on Twitter for days and reporters are having a field day. It is incredibly frustrating that a.) homophobia is still so widely accepted, b.) racism is cut out of the discussion, and c.) there are people being slaughtered in other countries and our general public is neither aware nor concerned with events beyond the reinstatement of an offensive man to a ridiculous reality show.
Earlier this week, Phil Robertson, star of the hit reality show Duck Dynasty, and a homophobe, made homophobic remarks that upset many people who consider homophobia to be a bad thing.
However, many who consider homophobia to be a perfectly acceptable mode of discourse and belief in the 21st century have voiced outrage at A&E suspending Robertson.
"Being a homophobic piece of shit is a completely okay thing to do," said Rush Limbaugh, a devout homophobe. "It’s 1951, for fuck’s sake!" An adviser then came on, and informed Limbaugh the year was actually 2013. "Wait, what the fuck?" Limbaugh then exclaimed. "It’s not 1951? What the…. what the fuck?"
Fox News reporter Megyn Kelly, known for her extremely well-educated and insightful views, said, “This is an absolute travesty. What kind of country is it where a man can’t express his disdain for homosexuals? What next? Demonizing people for decrying the negro menace? Where does it stop? What happened to freedom of speech?”
When reached for comment, the Constitution of the United States had this to say: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
The Constitution then went on to say, “This doesn’t have shit to do with free speech. All I said was that the government can’t prohibit your free speech. They can’t throw you in jail for having an opinion. This had literally fuck-all to do with the government. If some homophobic dude wants to be a homophobe and share his homophobia with the world, he totally can. But I never said shit about TV companies not being allowed to fire bigots. They can fire him if he says something they don’t like, and it’s not like they’re discriminating. He wasn’t fired for his race, his gender, his sexual orientation, not even his religion. He wasn’t fired for being a Christian. He was fired for being a fucking twit. If you take a shit on your boss’s desk, and he fires you for taking a shit on his desk, you can’t cry that you were punished for expressing your opinion. You just fucking can’t. Jesus fucking Christ America, what did they teach you in 8th grade American history?”
Homophobes Jump To The Defense Of Fellow Homophobe
The Wishwashington Post(via thewishwashingtonpost)
I love sarcasm
His comments about gays are offensive, but his vision of the Jim Crow South is shocking—and his conservative defenders and liberal assailants are mostly ignoring it.
Read more. [Image: A&E]
I slightly touched on his comments in my blog post, but this is a real issue that deserves more discussion.
So, after a long day of exciting news (Harry Potter West End Play, Richard Simmons having a Twitter) and horrible finals (sentence diagramming, really??), I logged on to Facebook before getting ready to go to bed. BIG mistake. My extended family (all of whom grew up (and many of which stayed living) in an extremely rural area) decided to voice their opinions on the recent remarks made by Phil Robertson. If you do not know what I am talking about, you can read the full interview here, but here are some of the more jaw-dropping quotes:
- “It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”
- “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men, don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
- “For the sake of the Gospel, it was worth it,” Phil tells me. “All you have to do is look at any society where there is no Jesus. I’ll give you four: Nazis, no Jesus. Look at their record. Uh, Shintos? They started this thing in Pearl Harbor. Any Jesus among them? None. Communists? None. Islamists? Zero. That’s eighty years of ideologies that have popped up where no Jesus was allowed among those four groups. Just look at the records as far as murder goes among those four groups.”
And that’s not even getting into the racist remarks he made about the happiness of pre-civil rights African Americans. Shocked? So was I, as well as sickened, ashamed, and downright disgusted. So when I saw the following status update by a family member (which has been liked 44 times so far), I became upset. Revision: I was incensed.
"It doesn’t bother me if a man loves man or a women loves a women. I’m ok with. However it is so ridiculous if someone disagrees with that idea they are scrutinized and ridiculed for just saying what they believe in. People use to have the right to there opinion. Remember this: The politically correct crowd is tolerant of all viewpoints, except those they disagree with."
There are a few things wrong with this statement (not including grammatical issues). First of all, Phil Robertson was representing A&E, a network with a revenue of $1250M+ and a reputation to uphold. In private, Robertson can hold on to his opinions, but in the media he is contractually obliged to represent A&E in a positive way. A&E was supportive and showcased the Robertson family’s religion on air, but drew the line at offensive comments. Gay-bashing is clearly not an image the cable network wishes to have.
Now let’s look at the following statement: “the politically correct crowd is tolerant of all viewpoints, except those they disagree with.” The “politically correct crowd”? And by that you mean the crowd who refuses to accept gay-bashing, correct?
I read a Tweet by Maureen Johnson earlier today linking to a post she made on the topic. In her entry, she said,
"To all those who are saying, “Tolerance goes both ways…” …this isn’t tolerance. If you think this looks like tolerance, you do not know what tolerance looks like. You have confused tolerance with non-tolerance and that is actually a pretty big mistake. When you call any group of people the root of sin, you’re not being tolerant. You’re being a bigot. You assume moral authority where you have none. You would FREAK OUT if someone did this to you, but you expect the people you are addressing (and make no mistake, you address some of your friends and loved ones) to roll over and take it. Take the blow to their pride and personhood and psychological state. Tolerance! No. This is not tolerance, so stop throwing the word around like a boomerang, because that thing is headed back to you and is about to hit you square between the eyes.”
I was immediately thrown by the response Maureen got from her followers. Several people replied saying that they would unfollow her because of the statements she made in her post, yet her article was completely well-spoken and not at all offensive. Did she stick up for the LGBTQ community? Of course, but did she do it in a way that also encompassed religion? I believe she did.
So after reading a stream of comments on my family member’s post (and becoming increasingly upset), I decided that instead of saying something directly, I would link to Maureen’s post. Do you think anyone read it?
That would be a no. In fact, several minutes after I linked the blog post, another family member contributed this lovely remark to the conversation:
"It seems as though Christians are surely getting discriminated against…but people such as Miley Cyrus can do perverse and ugly things and become more famous for it. UGH! I guess I did not consider anything [Robertson] said to be "HATE SPEECH." To each their own. But I as a Christian, am deeply offended anytime we are unable to voice our Christian opinion or quote the Bible. EVERYONE is entitled to their opinions and Freedom of Speech. So many of our rights are being taken from us. America is sadly declining…and whether you agree with me or not…Christians are constantly losing their rights."
This is when I truly lost it. To hear my family, albeit my extended family, talk like this made me feel so disheartened. I don’t believe in generation gaps. I believe in knowledge and empathy gaps. I decided I could not remain quiet. Hoping I would not overload the comment system, I wrote a lengthy reply:
"I really did not want to get into this, but what Phil Robertson said was not appropriate for the setting. He was representing A&E, which is why they chose to let him go. Now, I do think religion is extremely important and those who practice or believe have valid thoughts and opinions, but we also need to consider that the Bible says a lot of things that are no longer valid or are outright ridiculous because it the text was written over a vast amount of time, starting approximately 3500 years ago, by innumerable parties. Consider these eleven outdated/ridiculous things that do not apply to modern society:
Round haircuts. (so I guess that means no Beatles?):
Leviticus 19:27 reads “You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.”
Classic football, bacon, etc:
Leviticus 11:8, which is discussing pigs, reads “You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.”
Leviticus 19:31 reads “Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.”
The penalty for that? Check Leviticus 20:6:
“As for the person who turns to mediums and to spiritists, to play the harlot after them, I will also set My face against that person and will cut him off from among his people.”
Genesis 38:9-10: “Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord; so He took his life also.”
Leviticus 19:28 reads, “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.”
Polyester, or any other fabric blends:
Leviticus 19:19 reads, “You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.”
Divorce, because when you marry someone, according to Mark 10:8, you “are no longer two, but one flesh.” And:
Mark 10:9 reads, “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
Mark 10:11-12, “And He said to them, ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.’”
Deuteronomy 23:1 reads “A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord.”
Babies out of wedlock:
Deuteronomy 23:2 reads, “No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord.”
1 Timothy 2:9 :
“Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments.”
The majority of food:
Leviticus 11:10 reads, “But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you.”
Leviticus 11 bans a TON of animals from being eaten (it’s THE basis for Kosher law); beyond shellfish and pig, it also says you can’t eat camel, rock badger, rabbit, eagle, vulture, buzzard, falcon, raven, crow, ostrich, owl, seagull, hawk, pelican, stork, heron, bat, winged insects that walk on four legs unless they have joints to jump with like grasshoppers (?), bear, mole, mouse, lizard, gecko, crocodile, chameleon and snail.
Your wife defending your life in a fight by grabbing your attacker’s genitals:
Deuteronomy 25:11-12. “If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.”
So yes, everyone is prone to have an opinion, but if those opinions are voiced aloud and bash another’s lifestyle or belief system, then should they be welcomed? no matter what the Bible says, hate is hate and love is love. It really upsets me when I hear people say incredibly cruel remarks, and what Phil Robertson said (on television, no less) was cruel and hurtful to hundreds of thousands of people.”
My families response? Zip. Nada. Nothing. I got one reply restating what had already been said, and was written off. The best part of the whole experience? NOT ONE OF THEM HAD ACTUALLY WATCHED THE SHOW OR READ THE ORIGINAL INTERVIEW. How is that for an informed opinion?
And this is why I will no longer be checking my Facebook before bed.