So, I had the horror of reading a few essays on Queer Nationalism (I know what you’re thinking… wiki it), and then I magically stumbled upon New Atheism.

You learn so much these days. The former is something asked for by people who oppose the “normalization” of the LGBT subculture. In other words, these are the anti-gay marriage gays, the anti-gay marriage gays, those that feel that things like Queer as Folk exploited all the sufferance felt by gays over the years for profit. Pretty much the same way Black culture got exploited by capitalism, you know. (Even though I think we can agree that gay isn’t the new black)

They’re like, anti-Zionist Jews. They’re just pointless. Supposedly, these want me to stop saying “queer” as it’s too politically charged, and that more or less conformist gays shouldn’t label themselves as queer… Um. Personally, I use it queer as another way of saying LGBT. It’s all-encompassing, but really, I don’t care, they’re pointless. They might have been the first ones to use that word, but I have as much of a right to use the q-word as they do.

And then there’s a certain Murkan GOP site (no it’s not WND, CFWA, or FOX “News”) that is totally happy talking about New Atheism.

Yeah. Because, them Elephants totally know about atheism. Even I don’t know enough about it, and, I’m supposedly an atheist myself. A few of their libertarians might know about it, but probably nothing more than Genesis According to Rand.

The thing is, what’s New Atheism, anyway? Was there an old atheism? I thought atheism was just about not believing in a god, or believing in no god.

And now it’s supposedly more complex than that?

Intolerance of ignorance, myth and superstition; disregard for the tolerance of religion.
Indoctrination of logic, reason and the advancement of a naturalistic worldview.

Isn’t that intolerant, disrespectful, and authoritarian? Now, I’m rarely someone to oppose secularism, or to favor religion, but, religious freedom is underrated. Honestly, I’d rather live in a country with a state religion that has more or less some tolerance for other religions – as well as irreligion – than in an atheist state. (Note that an atheist state isn’t the same as a secular state, despite what the Pope suggested)

Because, really. Sometimes, religion is needed. And restricting religion just because it seems to be better for the public good to be all-rational and awesome-ish and smart isn’t necessarily a smart thing to do. But being like Iran or Saudia on the other hand isn’t schnieke either.

I guess being “stuck in the middle” isn’t always that bad. Screw you, queer separatists, or New Atheists. I just declared my independence from you, you stupid internet meme phenomenas, you.

Oh, wait, no. That’s ED.

Heath Ledger’s possible cause of death.

I like to stop by CWFA every once in awhile.  I like to see what topics have those ladies so concerned.  What, I wonder, is plaguing the steadfast souls of the devout women of America today?

Sometimes their pet issues are valid ones, such as sex trafficking.  Few people actively and consistently work to raise awareness of the plight of foreign (and sometimes local) women forced into prostitution.  That’s a serious issue that I (and hopefully many others) can get behind. 

However, most of the women’s (and one man’s) concerns are frivolous and petty.  The website consistently attempts to wage war on things it cannot (and should not) defeat – birth control, Planned Parenthood, homosexuality, anal sex, etc.  However, social politics are often complex, and vehemently defended by those who devote themselves to them. 

When you have a pet issue, you’ll promote it any cost. 

For CWFA, one of those pet issues is pre-marital sex.  It ruins lives, they argue.  It contributes not only to societal decay, but to disease, depression and, well, failure at life.  It’s something spoken about with sad eyes and pursed lips.  A ”sad shame” - much like poverty. 

Apparently, one writer theorizes, it may have been one of the many straws that broke the camel’s back and led to Heath Ledger’s shocking and sudden death.  Heath was obviously depressed because he was unmarried and sexually active.  His heart, too fragile to withstand the horrid strain of giving his body to women outside of the matrimonial boudoir, withered away to nothing. 

If only – if only! – he’d said “no” to sex and “yes” to traditional, conservative family values.  As if the only time one’s heart can be broken is if he/she engages in pre-marital sex with his/her partner.  As if no one has ever been hurt - deeply and irreversibly – by platonic friends, relatives and non-sexual romantic partners.  As if depression isn’t about a great hopelessness or sadness caused by a vast number of factors. 

Mental illness is not directly related to sexual activity, though irresponsible or unsafe sex can become a symptom. 

Oh, if only every broken man or woman had just kept their pants on.  If only they drank less and went to church more. 

Depression and anxiety can plague even the purest of virgins.  They can manifest themselves in God-fearing, sermon-attending folk with nice spouses and beautiful children.  They affect the wealthy, the successful and the beautiful.  Broken relationships – be they sexual or non-sexual – damage people.  Abandonment hurts, regardless of how much sex was involved. 

Depression is bigger than sex.  It is bigger than personal politics.

Yes, it’s a terrible shame that severe sadness (and perhaps associated excess) caused the death of a young, promising actor with a blooming career and two-year old daughter.  What’s a worse shame is using a tragedy to push a puritanical political agenda.  The death of a troubled man is just that – the death of a troubled man.  It is probably not the result of indiscriminate fornication or a “liberal” lifestyle. 

A lot of people live liberally, and not all of them are found dead in their friend’s apartments before the age of 30.  A lot of people have various sexual partners, and find happiness still.  A lot of people have few to no sexual partners, and experience crippling sadness and depression. 

Hopelessness transcends personal politics. 

No one will ever know exactly what killed Heath Ledger.  Perhaps it was a broken heart.  Perhaps the break-up of his relationship with his fiance left him devastated.  However, that relationship was anything but “casual.”  I’m sure that, upon learning that his girlfriend was leaving him, Heath’s first thought wasn’t, “I feel so cheap and used because we had sex several times before marriage.”

Broken emotional bonds can be devastating.  Broken hearts are hard – impossible, at times – to deal with.  Like any physical injury, they require healing. 

However, there are most likely many contributing factors to Ledger’s reliance on prescription drugs.  It’s simplistic and disrespectful to throw “pre-marital sex” into the mix.  These concerned ladies – like most of us - did not know Ledger.  They cannot know what pain he endured, emotional or otherwise.  It was unwise, callous and irresponsible to atttibute his untimely demise to something as vague and personal as sexual choice.  It was merely a way to say, “see, see – sex kills talented people with great potential!”

I can’t say I’m surprised.  Forcing their politics into stranger’s personal lives is what conservative think-tanks like them do best.