From: TKeske@Comcast.net   
      
   A few people may have noticed a strange coincidence   
   that occurred last month, involving a nuclear plant.   
      
   On Feb 20, 2006, there was a 4-hour nuclear emergency   
   at LaSalle nuclear power plant in Seneca, Illinois,   
   involving a malfunction of control rods.   
      
   On the previous evening, Feb 19, 2006, I had posted   
   a poem called "Grandma Dora's Curtain Rods", that,   
   among other things, alluded to malfunctions of control   
   rods of nuclear reactors.   
      
   On Feb 12, 2006, I had also posted something called   
   "O-Ring, O-No", that had specifically alluded to   
   malfunctions at the LaSalle nuclear reactor.   
      
   The posts, and the dates and times, are referenced   
   below for anyone who might want to verify them [1].   
      
   Both poems had suggestive themes concerning   
   sabotage of nuclear reactors.   
      
   I suppose that to the observant reader, these   
   coincidences might pose a bit of concern, or   
   might provoke a bit of paranoia.   
      
   I would like to allay those fears to a certain   
   degree by saying that I have no literal involvement   
   of any kind in conspiracies to sabotage reactors.   
      
   I have friends an relatives in Chicago, where   
   LaSalle reactor is near.  I am fond of the city.   
      
   The coincidences do, however, make food-for-thought   
   concerning "what-if" scenarios.  The fears would   
   be wise, to a degree, because they reflect real-world   
   possibilities that might otherwise be overlooked.   
      
   It is much more difficult, for example, to be fond   
   of Toledo, in my native Ohio, where a Christian   
   fundamentalist is running for Congress, and openly   
   advocating death penalty for gays.   
      
   As I understand, the reaction to this had been tepid.   
   The Christian Far-Right has for years been getting   
   nearly a free ticket, getting courted no matter   
   how deep and malignant their hatreds may actually be.   
      
   This is not isolated.  The Secretary of State   
   for Ohio in the past year made a reference,   
   comparing gays to farm animals.   
      
   Conservative legislators in the state have   
   introduced legislation trying to bar adoptions   
   to heterosexual families who so much as have   
   a gay teen living in the same household.   
      
   Growing up in small-town Ohio was very much   
   like being a Jew in a Nazis country.  The only   
   teaching that I had, concerning homosexuals,   
   was that they were "moral monsters".  There was   
   no such thing as an openly gay person.  The   
   isolation was total.  Teachers and professors,   
   without the slightest hestitation, would refer   
   to homosexuality as "ugly" and to homosexuals   
   as "freaks".   These attitudes were nearly   
   universal.   
      
   When contempt for gays is nearly universal, how   
   excited will people become, even at rhetoric   
   as outrageous as to advocate death?   
      
   Where is their motivation, to get off their behinds,   
   to say something, to take it seriously?   
      
   At any rate, what motivation will they have,   
   if no one is waving nuclear destruction under their   
   noses?   
      
   It is a bad habit and a natural consequence,   
   when a group of human beings is regarded   
   essentially as a "blemish" on society, that   
   there is a desire to remove the blemish.  That   
   effects the psychology of nearly everyone, not   
   just the extreme haters.   
      
   That is exactly how nightmares happen- the   
   extreme hate of a relative few, the extreme   
   apathy of the great many.   
      
   The real "sin" of gays has been merely the   
   sin of small numbers.  If we were a dominating   
   voting bloc, the same politicians who cynically   
   scapegoat us would instead come courting us.   
      
   A small minority has little reason to accept   
   this state of affairs as something "natural"   
   and therefore "right".  The virtues of majority   
   rule are not so obvious, when your role is   
   to be the majority's sacrificial goat   
   and the plaything of sadists.   
      
   Sometimes, a minority can swing the balance   
   by having larger families and reproducing faster   
   than the controlling majority.   
      
   If a minority does not do that, then there is   
   little means to persuade a self-interested   
   majority to behave decently.   The cynicism   
   of power can be nearly all-consuming.  That applies   
   to majority power as much as it applies to   
   dictators.   
      
   Democratic process is not necessarily the definition   
   of "uplifting". It also can become a callous pandering   
   to the lowest common denominator and have a spirit   
   that is little more uplifting than that of   
   a lynch mob.   All that matters is votes,   
   money, and power.   
      
   Except, that is, until a small minority   
   rebels and provides a reminder as to how   
   destructive it can be, to make a   
   confrontation inevitable.   
      
   The haters of society would be equally   
   eager for confrontation, assuming that they   
   would smash the minority, once and for all,   
   should they dare to demand an equal place at   
   the table.   
      
   What they forget is the wildcard for weapons   
   of mass destruction.   Where they lack perspective   
   is in the naive fantasy that is possible even   
   for a powerful government to gain total control   
   over everyone, by sinking low enough   
   into a police state.   
      
   That is tragic bravado and wishful thinking.   
   The odds are heavily against being able to defend   
   everything, all the time, against everyone.   
      
   The only real safety is in not making   
   deadly enemies, not getting too cynical   
   in the pursuit of self-interest, and not   
   becoming  too needlnessly petty in the indulgence   
   of one's hatreds.   
      
   Most human morality is rooted in the fear   
   of consequences for behaving otherwise.  With   
   the issue of near-universal contempt for gays,   
   there has been little historical fear of   
   consequences.   Gays have been too brow-beaten   
   to show their faces, much less to organize   
   and fight back, much less to do so with   
   credible, overwhelming force.   
      
   What if there were underground groups of gays   
   who decided to make war against global oppression,   
   to infiltrate into positions that would give   
   them the option for the ultimate in destructive   
   power?   
      
   Why should anyone think that gays would not have   
   motive to do exactly what aggrieved Muslim militants   
   are commonly known to desire?   
      
   Who is more aggrieved?  In Muslim countries, gays are   
   treated 100% as criminals.  They are jailed, if they   
   are not tortured an killed.  In what country on earth   
   would Muslims face a similar level of institutionalized,   
   oppression?   Certainly not even in their much-resented   
   Israel.   
      
   The grievances of other minorities seem more   
   significant and more legitimate only because   
   the grievances of gays are so completely   
   censored, minimized and trivialized.   
      
   I have little doubt that a lot of gays, probably   
   even a majority, would be quite hateful of any   
   true militants among their number would be willing   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)