INDOT, do your job
A recent article in the Indiana Daily Student about Pamela Davidson, a local Democrat who took down signs that urged people to vote Republican, got me thinking: Where did all these signs come from?
44 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
A recent article in the Indiana Daily Student about Pamela Davidson, a local Democrat who took down signs that urged people to vote Republican, got me thinking: Where did all these signs come from?
Donald and Evelyn Knapp, owners of the Hitching Post wedding chapel in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, are supposedly facing jail time and fines for refusing to marry same-sex couples.
The Indiana Charter School Board denied a charter to the Seven Oaks Classical School in Bloomington on Tuesday.
Misogyny among straight men is nothing new in our culture.
Amazon’s not just for buying 10-pound bags of diarrheal gummy bears anymore.
Imagine watching your favorite movie in black and white without ?dialogue.
A Pennsylvania teen faces two years in a juvenile facility for simulating oral sex with a statue of Jesus.
No.
Last week I was on the couch with my boyfriend watching an episode of “Will & Grace” I had seen a thousand times before when, during a commercial break, something strange caught our attention.
Superheroes have been a fixture of mainstream American culture for more than 100 years.
From David Foster Wallace to Robin Williams, we seem to be losing our artists at an alarming rate.
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>According to the Baltimore Sun, a man named Brandon Jenkins is suing a Baltimore community college, claiming he was denied admittance because he mentioned God during an interview. OK, so eschewing the inane fact that there’s a community college in Baltimore that interviews perspective students, let’s get on to everything wrong with this story. First of all, rejecting a perspective student because of his religious beliefs? This is, like, illegal, or at the very least highly unethical; therefore, it would be pretty stupid for a college to do this.So at first glance, this just sounds like some Bible-thumping moron angry that he’s too stupid to get into a community college. Also, Jenkins, in all his holiness, has a criminal record that includes drug and theft charges. So, here’s your answer: he didn’t get rejected because of his religious beliefs. It’s because he’s a criminal. Right?Wrong.Jenkins reached out for an explanation. The director of the program he was applying to, Adrienne Dougherty, sent him an email in response saying, “I understand that religion is a major part of your life ... however, this field is not the place for religion.” Go ahead and read that again. Dougherty, in her atheistic and infinite wisdom, literally admitted that Jenkins’ religion was a part of his being denied. Now, maybe religion shouldn’t be a part of the field Jenkins wanted to study — radiation therapy, FYI — but for a college spokesperson to come right out and say that is just stupid. I don’t know what else to call it. I could make a good community college joke here, but I’m going to go ahead and take the high road.In an ironic twist that probably isn’t even that ironic because we’ve already established how stupid the people at Community College of Baltimore County are, spokesperson Hope Davis, when reached for comment about the debacle, said,“We have so many people from so many different backgrounds and so many different cultures. Just to think that we would discriminate based on religion ... it’s just not something that we do.”Oh, OK, Hope. Whatever you say. The really unfortunate part about all this is that it’s going to get the Religious Right all fired up about religious freedom — as if they aren’t already constantly fired up about it.Of course, we should have the right to believe whatever we want. I just don’t want to hear conservatives bitch and moan about it any more than they already do. I’ll end on a Marx quote that I personally modified to fit this occasion: religion may be the opiate of the masses, but discrimination is far worse than any drug. zipperr@indiana.edu@rileyezipper
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In a marijuana-and-church-induced haze Sunday, you may have forgotten that something other than bong hits happened on April 20 only 15 years ago — the mass shooting at Columbine. High school students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold shot and killed 13 people and injured 24 others before turning the guns on themselves April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School in Columbine, Colo.One would assume that such a tragic event would incite annual candlelight vigils and moments of silence or at least some kinds of yearly remembrance. But in nearby Denver, as this was the first “legal” 4/20 in American history, the scene was anything but silent. Yes, things were being lit. But they weren’t candles. And nobody was remembering much of anything. Now, this is nothing against marijuana or the legal marijuana industry in Colorado, which is doing wonders for their economy. And let’s just say I wouldn’t mind Indiana following suit. For the economy, of course. Yeah, that’s it, the economy.But this speaks to something deeply troubling about American culture when it comes to gun violence. We just expect it. And after it happens, we just shrug it off.I realize it’s much worse in many other countries, but that doesn’t change the fact that we live in a society where mass shootings like this happen so often that we forget about them faster than the death of a D-list celebrity.After Columbine, we were saying “never again.” Now we’re saying “oh, that again.” Mass shootings are still devastating, most definitely, and we take notice when they happen. But our focus is more on what to do after they happen rather than preventing them from happening in the first place. We want to arm teachers and school officials — “give guns to the good guys.” Which is like putting a condom on after sex or getting a flu vaccine after you already have the flu. Of course there’s no simple solution to stop a mass shooting from happening, but don’t you think we ought to try by, I don’t know, adapting our attitudes on guns a little? Let’s stop worrying about being able to hold on to our precious AK-47s, machines that were not around when the Second Amendment was written, and start worrying about the safety of our children before it’s too late. How many more kids are going to have to get shot in the head walking to math class for us to learn? How many more grieving parents do we have to watch sobbing on television for us to see that something is wrong? I don’t have the solution. I can’t even fathom what the solution might be. Maybe it’s installing metal detectors everywhere. Maybe it’s banning all guns. Who knows. Let’s start off by recognizing 420 as a day not only for smoking insane amounts of weed but also a day for remembrance and memorial. And hope. Hope for a day when parents don’t have to worry if their child is going to live through science class. And hope for a day when the memory of something as devastating as Columbine doesn’t go — dare I say it — up in smoke. ziperr@indiana.edu@rileyezipper
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Everybody knows about the numerous antiviral medications on the market to treat HIV that allow those diagnosed with the virus to live fairly normal lives. But what about a medication that can actually prevent HIV? Enter Truvada.The FDA approved Truvada in July 2012 to treat already-diagnosed cases of HIV. Soon after, thanks to trials by Dr. Robert Grant of San Francisco, it was discovered that it could actually prevent the disease. But this has the gay community divided. Many argue that taking Truvada for prevention will cause gay men to go out and have unprotected sex, since the risk of contracting HIV is ostensibly not present. Of course, no medicine is 100-percent effective. Initial trials of Truvada indicated only a 42-percent success rate. And effective prevention requires taking the drug daily, so opponents posit it’s easy to forget to do this. However, it’s unfair to dismiss Truvada so quickly.Later tests have shown that Truvada actually has a 99-percent success rate if taken as directed. But, since 2013, only 1,400 people have started taking Truvada as a preventative measure. That then leads to questions such as why this number is so low ifthe drug is 99-percent effective.One person to thank for this is, ironically, AIDS Healthcare Foundation president Michael Weinstein. He called Truvada a “party drug” that will just give men an excuse to “not use condoms.” Well, Mr. Weinstein, I’m sorry to say this, but men already aren’t using condoms. The CDC has reported that unprotected anal sex between men has jumped almost 20 percent between 2005 and 2011. And I don’t doubt this number will continue to climb. One can’t help but see the parallel between birth control pills and Truvada.Birth control pills were invented in 1959 but didn’t see widespread use until the ’70s because of cultural stigma against sex before marriage. It takes society some time to adapt to these types of things. Today, millions of women take birth control pills, and they have every right to do so. It’s easy to forget taking those every day, too, yet we don’t see opposition to them unless you count the far-right religious kooks and Hobby Lobby.And many women take birth control in addition to other contraception, such as condoms, as an extra precaution. So men that take Truvada to prevent HIV could use condoms as well, to be extra safe. How could people be opposed to extra protection? We should welcome this with open arms. We should be passing Truvada out for free in front of gay bars! Well, maybe not that. It’s still pretty expensive. But anyway, you get the idea.Hopefully, in the future Truvada and drugs like it will be as common as birth control pills, readily available in generic form and covered by insurance.And, who knows, maybe one day HIV/AIDS will be a disease that exists only in books and movies as a bittersweet reminder of how good we really have it. zipperr@indiana.eduSo men that take Truvada to prevent HIV could use condoms as well, to be extra safe. How could people be opposed to extra protection? We should welcome this with open arms. We should be passing Truvada out for free in front of gay bars! Well, maybe not that. It’s still pretty expensive. But anyway, you get the idea.Hopefully, in the future Truvada and drugs like it will be as common as birth control pills, readily available in generic form and covered by insurance.And, who knows, maybe one day HIV/AIDS will be a disease that exists only in books and movies as a bittersweet reminder of how good we really have it. zipperr@indiana.edu
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>When former Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich stepped down last week, it got me thinking about the notion of political correctness.Though not directly related to political correctness, Mozilla’s ousting of Eich is ultimately grounded in it since his donation to proponents of Proposition 8 was widely seen as bigoted. And it just goes to show you that sometimes we’re just too damn PC.First of all, the phrase “politically correct” doesn’t really make sense linguistically. Politically “correct” means different things to different people. For the right, politically correct lines up with conservative values, and for the left, liberal values.So the idea that there can be this all-encompassing notion of political correctness seems flawed. I’m not saying that we should be able to go around calling black people the “N-word” and gay people the “F-word,” but I think that it’s important to realize that being PC doesn’t always benefit society.I’m sure everyone remembers when PC-crazy whackos fought to release a new edition of “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” back in 2011, in which all 219 instances of the N-word were changed to “slave.” We’re trying so hard not to offend others that we’re actually isolating them from society. The only reason the Huck Finn thing happened in the first place was so white people could feel better about themselves.And the only reason Brendan Eich was ousted was so the straight people at Mozilla could impress the gays by saying, “We’re on your side.”This cisgendered gay male columnist thinks this is wrong.I don’t care if Brendan Eich doesn’t want me to get married to another man. It still doesn’t change the fact he invented JavaScript and cofounded Mozilla. And you know what? I’m pretty sure black people don’t perform the same pearl-clutching at a classic novel having the N-word like the people that tried to censor Huckleberry Finn. You see, political correctness is getting so very “correct” that it’s putting a damper on society. I don’t doubt that the intentions behind political correctness are good. It’s about trying as hard as we can not to offend others. But when we start chastising people because their political beliefs don’t line up with what mainstream society determines as politically correct I think we’ve gone a little too far. Mozilla’s catching a lot of flack about Eich’s resignation. But had he‘d stayed on as CEO, critics from the left would have continued to assail Mozilla. It was really a lose-lose situation for Mozilla. I think this is telling of the unnecessary damage being too PC is doing to us. We try so hard to be politically correct that the line between morally correct and incorrect is blurring. And, I swear, I don’t know how many more letters after LGBT I can handle. zipperr@indiana.edu @rileyezipper
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>It annoys me when straight people ask, “When did you know you were gay?” It also annoys me when straight people ask, “What did your parents say?” But it doesn’t matter that these questions are annoying — because they’re important.The answers to these questions themselves are important, yes, but what’s most important is the fact that they’re being asked in the first place.It can be argued that these types of questions de-normalize gays, that is, they distance us from straight people by requiring us to explain something about our lives that straight people don’t have to explain.Although we are normal, it’s obvious that we’re still different. And these types of questions not only bring awareness to the fact that we’re different — they celebrate it. It’s this sincere curiosity on the part of straight people that actually normalizes us. You see, back in the days of gay activist Harvey Milk and gay hater Anita Bryant, most straight people weren’t curious about gays. They were terrified of them. They didn’t care to know when gay people knew they were gay, or what their parents said when and if they found out. All they cared about was how to stay the hell away from them. Today, with support for same-sex marriage in the United States at an all-time high of 59 percent, straight people are more accepting than ever. And with this acceptance comes a natural curiosity. Homosexuality is nothing new, of course, but, provided you don’t count Ancient Roman bathhouses, tolerance of it is. It’s our duty as gay Americans to share our world with others in order to increase this tolerance. We need to show straight people that, yes, we are a little different, but we’re still normal. I understand it gets repetitive saying stuff like, “No, the ‘catcher’ is called the bottom. The ‘pitcher’ is called the top — cut it out with the sports analogies,” over and over again, but, if that’s what it takes for society to grow, so be it. The more of these questions we answer, the better our relationships with our straight counterparts will be. Pretty soon, that 59 percent will grow to 69 percent. Then 79, 89. Of course, 100 percent of America will probably never be supportive of same-sex marriage, but we can get close.As the old saying goes, knowledge is power. This knowledge has the power to create equality. And that’s something to be hopeful about.So the next time a new friend asks, “How did you come out?” sit them down and tell them the same story you’ve told 1,000 times with the same gusto as when you told it the first time. And when they ask you how you can tell if someone’s gay, show them a picture of Ryan Seacrest. zipperr@indiana.edu
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In the first three months of the year, three Christian-themed films have been released or are being released in the next week — “Son of God,” “God’s Not Dead” and “Noah.” These aren’t some B movies that are shown to like 30 people in a church youth group. These are wide-released films that have made quite a bit of money.So far, “Son of God,” released Feb. 28, has grossed over $55 million. And “God’s Not Dead,” released Friday, was the fifth-highest grossing film of the weekend, raking in $8.5 million. “Noah” will be out Friday, and with a name like Darren Aronofsky attached to it, expect it to pull in some big numbers.Mainstream society is becoming more secular than ever — one wouldn’t expect this sudden sacrament in Hollywood, a fairly liberal institution. In my opinion, the reason for this out-of-nowhere surge of Christian movies is because mainstream society is becoming so secular. People aren’t going to church as often as they used to, simple as that. According to a Hartford Institute of Religion Research study, 40 percent of Americans say they attend church every week, but statistics indicate that only 20 percent actually do. This means that many Americans who claim to believe in God just don’t go to church that often for a variety of reasons. And people love movies. Going to see the $22 million dollar production “Son of God” is a whole lot more fun than going to church. Plus, Diogo Morgado, who plays Jesus, is downright gorgeous. My theory is that Christian filmmakers know that church attendance is down and that society is secularizing at unprecedented rates, but they still want to spread the word of God, so they make Christian-themed movies. The movies could also be parables for Millenials. The plot of “Son of God” is your standard New Testament story, the story of Jesus from birth to Crucifixion. And the eponymous “Noah” tells the story of Noah’s Arc. But the plot of “God’s Not Dead” is interesting in that it’s indicative of the struggles of many Christians, especially those of Millenial Christians and their parents.It’s the story of college student Josh Wheaton, whose faith is challenged by a philosophy professor who doesn’t believe God exists. This is a direct parallel to what’s happening in society today. Young adults just don’t believe in God with the same vigor that their parents do. With professors, peers, the Internet, etc. — faith is being challenged. When you’re 20 years old, especially if you’re in college — surrounded by empirical and concrete knowledge — it gets harder and harder to have literally blind faith.I’ll let you decide if these modern parables for the Information Generation really teach anything. But they’re not going anywhere anytime soon — except to a theater near you. ziperr@indiana.edu@rileyezipper
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Late February, a new drug known as Zohydro was approved by the FDA and is expected to hit the market later this month. Zohydro is a hydrocodone bitartrate, also known as an opiod. You’ve probably taken it in the form of Lortab, Norco, Vicodin, etc., if you’ve had, say, wisdom tooth surgery.But there’s a key difference in Zohydro that distinguishes it from those other drugs — the absence of acetaminophen, also known as Tylenol. This is important because acetaminophen in these combination opiods allows for less hydrocodone to be present in the pill and, most importantly, discourages abuse. Acetaminophen will ruin your liver if taken in high doses over an extended period of time. If you’ve taken any opiod, you also probably know that the effects feel pretty damn good. This causes abuse, and dependence can occur rather rapidly. The approval of Zohydro by the FDA concerns critics in the medical field.Zohydro is an extended-release capsule that can be up to 10 times as potent as Vicodin and those other drugs. The capsules are meant to deliver around-the-clock relief like OxyContin. But what has everyone most worried is the capsule can be easily crushed for insufflation, unlike OxyContin. The highest dose of Zohydro is 50 milligrams, five to 10 times as potent as Vicodin, which contains five milligrams of hydrocodone and 325 milligrams of acetaminophen. Crushing up one capsule and getting 50 milligrams of hydrocodone at one time will, for lack of a better phrase, knock you on your ass. This will, of course, cause every junkie in the country to line up for a taste. Inevitably, many will overdose.And, sure, maybe you don’t care about junkies. But hopefully you care about children. “This is now putting a new drug on the market where one pill could kill a child,” said Dr. Jim Keany of St. Joseph’s Hospital in Orange County, Calif. In the past 15 years, prescriptions for opiod painkillers have skyrocketed. This increase in prescriptions has caused an equally-as-huge increase in overdoses. In the same time period, opiod overdose deaths increased by 415 percent in women and 265 percent in men. Doctors are overprescribing painkillers, simple as that. Contrary to popular belief, most abusers don’t get these drugs from dealers. A recent government study revealed that as low as 15 percent of opiod abusers actually purchase them from dealers.According to the study, about 25 percent of abusers doctor shop, meaning they hunt down multiple doctors to write prescriptions. Another 25 percent get the pills for free from friends and family. So the fact of the matter is: we don’t need another opiod painkiller on the market. Especially one with the potential, rather, the inevitability, to be as dangerous as Zohydro. ziperr@indiana.edu
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>More than a month ago I wrote a mediocre and overly sarcastic column criticizing the unashamed self-congratulatory nature of the Academy Awards. They’re still unashamedly self-congratulatory and narcissistic, but this year I noticed a couple of acceptance speeches that renewed my hope in true sincerity and humility.Jared Leto, Cate Blanchett and even “all right, all right, all right” Matthew McConaughey gave moving speeches.Leto paid touching tribute to his mother. Blanchett implored Hollywood to make more films with female protagonists, McConaughey cited God and (of course) himself in 10 years as his heroes.But the best speech of the night was obviously that of “12 Years a Slave” star Lupita Nyong’o. The grace and sincerity of the first-time nominee and practically first-time actress was unparalleled by any speech I’ve seen in recent years. Nyong’o looked positively radiant in her baby-blue gown, and she literally beamed as she said probably the most beautiful thing I’ve ever heard on an Oscar stage: “It doesn’t escape me for one moment that so much joy in my life is thanks to so much pain in someone else’s.” This of course was alluding to the fact that this film and her role wouldn’t have even existed if not for the actual reality of slavery.I’ve never heard this much humility and selflessness on a stage at any awards show. She didn’t fail to recognize the true heroes of the story in “12 Years a Slave”: the slaves themselves. Not one sign of narcissism or ego was on that stage with her. And I know all the winners make a big effort to look like they’re humble and thankful and un-pretentious, but for Nyong’o this graciousness came just as naturally as her elegance. But the most touching moment came after the speech during a quick shot backstage right before commercial. Nyong’o was cradling her statuette like an infant, and it was evident that she had been crying. She smiled at the statue then looked up and noticed that she was being filmed and gave a huge “look at me mom!” grin to the camera and looked like she was tearing up again. Something about this simple moment of unapologetic elation was so moving to me. Maybe I do have a heart. Damnit. The public is sick of egomaniacal celebrities whose every word is rife with narcissism and insincerity. That stuff isn’t funny or cute anymore. It’s just fodder for eye rolls and hateful tweets. And everybody knows that whatever’s said on the Internet is law. And, of course, whatever I say in my columns overrides that law.Celebrities need to take a hint from Nyong’o that sincerity and humility will always beat out sarcasm and ego. Hell, everybody needs to take that hint. But one thing’s for sure. I’m definitely taking out the penis jokes from my Oscar acceptance speech. zipperr@indiana.edu@rileyezipper
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>New Jim Crow-style anti-gay legislation introduced in Kansas, Idaho, Oregon, Tennessee and other states this month has proved how the GOP doesn’t realize how out of touch it is. Bills in the states listed above and in numerous others mimic a Kansas bill killed after public backlash. The bill would have allowed anyone to refuse to do business with same-sex couples by citing religious beliefs.In states such as Arizona, Hawaii and Oklahoma, the legislation takes it one step further by allowing people to refuse services or even employment to same-sex individuals — provided, of course, that they insist their religious beliefs are the cause. It’s important to mention that in most cases, the legislation covers both private business and individuals, including government employees. Essentially, these bills would legalize discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Now, to me, this sounds like pre-Civil Rights Movement stuff, the stuff that we thought we’d never have to deal with again after Martin Luther King Jr. said he had a dream. It’s not really clear why the GOP is set on being as far-removed from mainstream culture as possible. That’s not how you win voters over, especially the critical Millennial demographic that’s arguably the most liberal generation ever. Coming from a political party with the platform of becoming as rich as possible, legislation like this is ironic because it isolates a rapidly growing customer base — gays, lesbians and transgender individuals. “Gay” money has just as much value as “straight” money.This generalizes Republicans. They aren’t all bad. But the real irony here is that this legislation is coming from the religious right. Christian political leaders who have apparently forgotten the basis of the very religion they think they’re upholding. It has been awhile since I’ve been to church, but I think I have an idea of what Christianity is about and what Jesus allegedly taught. We should love one other and treat each other equally. But, here’s the thing — I’ve never been denied admittance to church because of my sexuality.I realize many churchgoers might think differently than I do about homosexuality, but I’ve always been allowed to worship if I please. The religious right is using Christianity as a political tool rather than as dogma. They’re using it to justify outlandish legislation that denies basic human rights. Adam Smith, the father of modern-day economics, said the government should not have to be involved in the free market. He argued that the market should be able to govern itself. Of course, this has been proven untrue because of greed and political collusion and many other factors. So the government has to get involved and regulate the market. Anti-discrimination laws should continue to be a part of this regulation.Thanks to the Tea Party and the religious right, the GOP is shooting themselves in the foot. Young voters aren’t going to elect bigots. And because the bad apples stand out most, it seems like the entire party is full of bigots, even though that’s not true. And finally, dear homophobic and presumably “religious,” business owners — we don’t wanna buy your garbage anyway. zipperr@indiana.edu @rileyezipper