Canadian Content Laws

In a previous blog entry, I gave details about Adam Buckley, a Canadian radio personality. I usually think of Canada as a better place to live than the USA, despite being up north with the harsh winters that come with that location. This is mainly due to it having a more socialist economy and no “Tea Party” insanity to screw up elections.  But there is one thing about Canada I absolutely hate:  its “Canadian content” laws which force radio stations to broadcast a certain percentage of music by Canadian artists. I did not even know they existed before learning about them from Buckley! While Canada has produced some great rock bands such as Rush, Loverboy and Nickleback, it has also produced……..Justin Bieber. And there are others far worse than him in Canada who do not deserve a hearing, but get one because the system is rigged in their favor. That in essence is  cheating.

Watch this video:

Need I remind you that we Americans have a First Amendment for a reason? If freedom means anything in a society, a government should not be telling radio stations what to play!

Canadian content laws do not protect Canadian culture, they degrade it! Inferior artists from Canada that would never make a dent in American music markets are enabled to become fairly successful in their home country because of their government. This creates a false impression of what Canadian musical culture is about, that Canadians themselves in general are inferior people. Eventually, Canada will be the laughingstock of the rest of the world as more and more people learn of this nonsense. No one admires cheaters.

I hope most Canadian radio DJs form a union and rebel against these laws en masse, practicing civil disobedience in order to force Canada to repeal those laws, or lose most of its radio broadcasting.

Michael Shermer, TRAITOR!

Take a look at this outrageous letter:

BxQuxvfCYAAiitS.png largeDinesh D’Souza was just convicted of a crime and he is also a conservative and Christian bigot and a supposed leader of skepticism is DEFENDING him by calling him honest and fair?! What next, Michael Shermer claiming the Earth is really flat and at the center of the universe?! D’Souza’s lawyer can defend him, so he does not need Shermer. And Shermer did not need to do this and make himself look like a backstabber of most of his fellow skeptics, including ME!!!

How NOT to rape someone

Here are some rules for men who do not want to be accused of raping a woman:

1. ALWAYS ask the women directly during a date in a private setting, “Do you want to have sex with me?”   If her response is anything other than, “Yes,” drop the issue and do not bring it up again until she does.

2. Never talk about the experience of having sex with anyone other than a licensed therapist, your parents or other guardians (if you are underaged), or a clergyperson in a counseling session. PRIVATE MATTERS MUST REMAIN PRIVATE. Other men do not need to know how you “banged that hot chick last night”.

3. The claim that women claim to be raped because they regret having sex with a man long after the fact is simply self-serving bullshit. Do not repeat that claim, ever.

4. Even if you use protection or any form of birth control, PROMISE the woman that if she gets pregnant, you will either support the child or pay for an abortion, whichever she decides.

5. Do not merely be a woman’s sex partner…..be her LOVER. Be willing to share in anything she does or is involved in or ask her to share in things you enjoy. If you do not want a complete relationship with a woman, you can always masturbate by yourself.

6. Unless your partner is a porn star, you do not need to take or possess nude pics of her. And NEVER post them online!

That is all for now.  If I think of more, or if you have your own suggestions for rules, this list will be added to.

Child Support Abuse

Read this article:

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2014/09/02/arizona-statutory-rape-victim-forced-pay-child-support/14951737/

Arizona statutory rape victim forced to pay child support

Nick Olivas became a father at 14, a fact he wouldn’t learn for eight years.

While in high school, Olivas had sex with a 20-year-old woman. As he sees it now, she took advantage of a lonely kid going through a rough patch at home.

State law says a child younger than 15 cannot consent with an adult under any circumstance, making Olivas a rape victim. But Olivas didn’t press charges and says he didn’t realize at the time that it was even something to consider.

The two went their separate ways. Olivas graduated from high school, went to college and became a medical assistant.

Then two years ago, the state served him with papers demanding child support. That’s how he found out he had a then-6-year-old daughter.

“It was a shock,” he said. “I was living my life and enjoying being young. To find out you have a 6-year-old? It’s unexplainable. It freaked me out.”

He said he panicked, ignored the legal documents and never got the required paternity test. The state eventually tracked him down.

Olivas, a 24-year-old Phoenix resident, said he now owes about $15,000 in back child support and medical bills going back to the child’s birth, plus 10 percent interest. The state seized money from his bank account and is now garnisheeing his wages at $380 a month.

He has become one of the state’s 153,000 active child-support cases, according to the Arizona Department of Economic Security division of Child Support Services.

In May alone, payments were not made in 49 percent of those cases, according to the agency.

Olivas’ fear has turned to frustration.

He wants to be in his daughter’s life and is willing to pay child support going forward. But he doesn’t think it’s right for the state to charge him for fees incurred when he was still a child himself or for the years he didn’t know the girl existed.

“Anything I do as an adult, I should be responsible for,” he said. “But as a teenager? I don’t think so.”

I have already made my opposition to the concept of statutory rape clear. The state of Arizona, and every other state that has such a concept, must make a choice: Either discard the concept, or never charge the underage fathers that result from such acts as being financially responsible for the babies that are later born. Actually, I think they should do both.

On the one hand, I do not think there was a “rape”, since Olivas clearly consented to having sex with the older woman. But because what they did was illegal, OF COURSE she kept the relationship and the paternity of the baby secret…..until the boy had grown up and had started a lucrative career that she could take advantage of! Indeed,I have to wonder…..why hasn’t the woman been arrested and charged with rape? If a 20 year old man had gotten a 14 year old girl pregnant, wouldn’t the expected actions of the state against the man be obvious?

In the case of a boy so young he could not even hold down a full time job at the time the baby was born, the issue is obvious; he should be released from paying any child support, no matter how many years have passed and the state should NOT charge him for back child support! If an older woman is stupid enough to have a child by an underaged boy, she alone should care physically and financially for that child, period. Or if she cannot due to lack of child support payments, she should not have custody of the baby.  Even if Nick Olivas was not a rape victim of the mother of his child, he currently IS a victim of a state that has trapped itself in a contradiction resulting from “pro-family” values not based on practical reality, which should forever be the ONLY basis for laws and procedures of any government!