No SOPA For You…
Yesterday I was “on strike” to support the anti-SOPA movement by blacking out my websites and staying off the Internet during traditional work hours (no not a full 24 hrs due to the social nature of my personal time online). In fact, I wrote this blog entry on a notebook app for my Kindle Fire with my wireless still turned off.
I happen to be the kind of person that true anti-piracy laws should be designed to protect, as I have several published works that bring in royalties. I also write music, though not professionally, that requires protection in a world where it is all too easy to rip off “the little guy”. I have had to spend a great deal of time and effort going after blog farms and radio station websites that have ripped off my articles.
However, there are already plenty of laws on the books that protect me. SOPA, as it is written, does not strengthen these laws or even provide additional protection for me or any freelance intellectual property owners. SOPA, at its heart, only gives power to attempt to stop access to foreign websites accused of copyright violation. The worst part is that it puts the burden of proof on the defendant, not the accuser or prosecutor. This goes against the purpose of our American way of justice! Because of this, a potential abuse of the rights granted from SOPA could allow any competitor to shut down any site without any proof, leaving the defendant to have to challenge this in court while their site has been shut down. Only wealthy entities could afford a lengthy court battle while essentially being unable to make any money during this process.
Also, the terribly vague language within SOPA goes against its own purpose of protection against foreign site that are not under American law by allowing interpretations of SOPA to affect US websites that share links without proper permission. This could end social media as we know it. Youtube? Gone. News aggregators? Gone. The simple act of linking to fun websites or LoLcats for your Facebook friends? Gone.
Piracy is already illegal. I have had no problem in following the proper procedures required to get those who have stolen my intellectual property to cease and desist… and I don’t have a team of lawyers… I don’t a lawyer at all. The current laws would be protection enough without having to add a terrible over-reaching bill on top of them when the problem exists because current laws are sometimes difficult, but not impossible, to prosecute. The risks that SOPA creates in terms of censorship and abuses afforded by large corporations make this act of legislation dangerous to our American way of life. Our Freedom is under attack!
Thankfully today’s attempt at raising awareness has already delayed this bill that had been expected to sail right through to passing. This has been a true populist win, though not yet a complete victory until the bill has been killed completely.
The people DO have a voice! We may not have lobbyists on our bankroll. We may not have the power of money behind us. But we have the constitution on our side as well as the numbers when we all truly stand up together. I am proud of this fight against SOPA. A sleeping giant has been awakened and we cannot be silenced when we work together like this.
Lets show this ineffective Congress that we are mad as hell and are not gonna take it anymore!
Hele mei hoohiwahiwa Mahu a me Mahu's la male’ana
HONOLULU - Hawaii is a step closer to joining a small group of other states in allowing same-sex civil unions.
In a move that still needs the governor's signature to become law, the House of Representatives Thursday night approved a measure that has drawn some of the state's biggest protest rallies.
Republican Gov. Linda Lingle hasn't said whether she'll reject it or sign it into law but her office said later that she will carefully review the bill.
The House voted 31-20 in favor of the legislation, which had been stalled but was unexpectedly revived on the last day of this year's legislative session. The Senate passed it in January.
The measure would grant gay and lesbian couples the same rights and benefits that the state provides to married couples.
If approved, Hawaii will become one of six states — along with California, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington — to grant essentially all the rights of marriage to same-sex couples without authorizing marriage itself.
Five other states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage: Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Connecticut.
The Aloha State has been a battleground in the gay rights movement since the early 1990s.
A 1993 Hawaii Supreme Court ruling nearly made Hawaii the first state to legalize same-sex marriage before voters in the state overwhelmingly approved the nation's first "defense of marriage" constitutional amendment in 1998.
The measure gave the Legislature the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples. It resulted in a law banning gay marriage in Hawaii but left the door open for civil unions.
This year the issue has proven divisive in Hawaii with religious groups arguing that civil unions are a step toward legalizing same-sex marriage. During one of the biggest ever state rallies, several thousand people protesting the measure rode buses to the Hawaii Capitol last year following Sunday church services.
The gay and lesbian community urged lawmakers to act on their principles rather than back down in the face of public pressure from opponents threatening to vote them out of office.
Civil-union supporters wearing rainbow-colored leis, or flower necklaces, jumped and screamed for joy outside the House chamber following the vote.
"Hawaii is the Aloha State, and this vote shows that the greater community has love and acceptance for everyone," said supporter Van Law.
Disappointed civil union opponents wearing red "iVote" buttons as a warning to legislators this election season quickly departed the Hawaii Capitol, with only a few lagging behind.
"Civil unions are a step down the very slippery slope toward legalizing same-sex marriage," said Rachel Nakasaki, a Christian who believes traditional marriage between a man and a woman should be preserved.
Hawaii's civil union legislation appeared to be dead in January, when the House didn't take a vote on the measure and postponed it indefinitely out of fears that Lingle would veto.
The issue was revived Thursday after every other bill introduced this year had been acted on. Democratic House Majority Leader Blake Oshiro made the motion to reconsider the bill, although the House fell three votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to override the governor.
The bill was written so that civil unions would be available to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples to avoid claims of discrimination.
"Equality feels really good," said Suzanne King, who said Hawaii would recognize her Massachusetts marriage to her partner as a civil union if the bill becomes law. "It allows us to strengthen our family."
If Lingle vetoes the bill, it's unlikely lawmakers would return to the Capitol to try to override her. They lack enough votes, and it's an election year where legislators are hesitant to take stands on contentious social issues unless they're forced to, as they were during Thursday's roll-call vote.
"I'm looking forward to not coming back," said Democratic Speaker of the House Calvin Say.
The World is Now Changing…
There is something historically significant occurring today... the disastrous oil rig explosion that led to what is looking like to be the worst environmental oil disaster of all time comes during a significant debate between leftist environmental concerns and the right "Drill Baby, Drill!" rhetoric. Environment vs. Profit. In this age of economic turmoil existing parallel to global climate change concerns we seem now, through immediate concerns instead of ideologies, at an important crossroads to which a decision will dramatically impact not only our immediate future but also any long term realities as well.
Our leaders now make decisions that will very importantly change each and every citizen's lives and lifestyles. Shouldn't we be a bit more concerned about all of this?
'Microchips like little beepers that the Government puts into your vaginal-rectal area'
from Political Insider:
Delusions, the Legislature and an implanted microchip
We often say that insanity reigns at the state Capitol.
But when we do, we do not literally accuse the people inside of letting their grip on reality slip. We simply mean that our ability to fathom their motives, or their ability to express them, has fallen short.
Referring to a politician as delusional is simply entertaining hyperbole. But it is something that becomes much less funny when a truly tortured soul bears her torment.
Last Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee entertained SB 235, the bill sponsored by Sen. Chip Pearson (R-Dawsonville) to prohibit the involuntary implantation of microchips in human beings.
In Gov. Roy Barnes’ stump speech, the bill has become a routine example of the Republican tendency to attack problems that don’t exist, and ignore the ones that do. Besides, Barnes argues, if someone holds him down to insert a microchip in his head, “it should be more than a damned misdemeanor.”
Three states have instituted bans, and others have considered the legislation. In Virginia, a bill supporter declared microchips to be the “666″ mark of the beast referred to in the Book of Revelation.
Pearson has said his motivation isn’t biblical or religious – that he is simply working in advance of technology’s next assault on personal privacy. Not unlike limiting the uses of DNA testing by health insurance companies, he argues.
At the House hearing, state Rep. Ed Setzler (R-Kennesaw), who is shouldering the legislation in the House, spoke earnestly for better than a half hour on microchips as a literal invasion of privacy.
He was followed by a hefty woman who described herself as a resident of DeKalb County. “I’m also one of the people in Georgia who has a microchip,” the woman said. Slowly, she began to lead the assembled lawmakers down a path they didn’t want to take.
Microchips, the woman began, “infringe on issues that are fundamental to our very existence. Our rights to privacy, our rights to bodily integrity, the right to say no to foreign objects being put in our body.”
She spoke of the “right to work without being tortured by co-workers who are activating these microchips by using their cell phones and other electronic devices.”
She continued. “Microchips are like little beepers. Just imagine, if you will, having a beeper in your rectum or genital area, the most sensitive area of your body. And your beeper numbers displayed on billboards throughout the city. All done without your permission,” she said.
It was not funny, and no one laughed.
“Ma’am, did you say you have a microchip?” asked state Rep. Tom Weldon (R-Ringgold).
“Yes, I do. This microchip was put in my vaginal-rectum area,” she replied. Setzler, the sponsoring lawmaker, sat next to the witness – his head bowed.
“You’re saying this was involuntary?” Weldon continued.
The woman said she had been pushing a court case through the system for the last eight years to have the device removed.
Wendell Willard (R-Atlanta), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, picked up the questioning.
“Who implanted this in you?” he asked.
“Researchers with the federal government,” she said.
“And who in the federal government implanted it?” Willard asked.
“The Department of Defense.”
“Thank you, ma’am.”
The woman was allowed to go about her business, and the House Judiciary Committee approved passage of SB 235.
About the Wordherder
I am a 33 yr old freelance writer, website developer, perpetual student, arbiter of silliness, aficionado of cheese, and proud owner of a beautiful mini-dachshund named Carrera.
Categories
- Articles
- Blog
- Current Projects
- Misc.
- News
- Novel Excerpts
- Poetry
- Politics
- Ramblings
- Snagged from Fark.com
- Uncategorized
- Writing