McIlheran: Your Illness Is A Sin

Father Patrick McIlheran again climbs up on his podium to preach to the great unwashed masses.

The main premise of his sermon is that there has been a spike of HIV cases among black homosexual men because they are sinners.  In other words, he is saying that those people who contract HIV are only getting what they deserve.

How absolutely Pat Robertsonian of him.  If Westboro was a Catholic Church instead of a Baptist one, McIlheran would probably be applying for membership.

But to further his egregiousness, McIlheran just doesn't know when to stop and includes this:

... Most churches decry drunkenness, and isn’t that awfully mean? (Don’t even get me started on how many churches cruelly try suppressing any expression of drunkenness by offering AA chapters meeting space down in the basement hall!)
No, in fact, it isn’t mean to say drunkenness is wrong, or lying or gluttony or any of the rest. It is kind if you believe, as churches do, that sin does real and lasting damage to the sinner.

Considering that Alcohol Abuse (and Drug Abuse, for that matter) are considered to be mental illnesses, isn't it being particularly inappropriate to be condemning it?

It makes you wonder what McIlheran does during his free time.  I'd hate to think he takes field trips to the local hospital and patrol the cancer ward telling people that they are sinners.

GOP-Endorsed Senate Candidate Verifiably Insane

Ron Johnson, via Illy-T:

Remember, this is the principled First Amendment champion who was filmed with his posse tearing down the political campaign signs (i.e., "speech") of two of his Republican opponents.

[We have] good people in talk radio who will tell us the truth. Now of course liberals will try and shut these people up. They'll do everything in their power to shut these people up, so it will be our job to make sure the liberals don't succeed.*

Rupert Murdoch, Rush Limbaugh, Charlie Sykes ... those are the real victims in America, and their mighty Truths are under attack.

"Good people in talk radio who will tell us the truth?"

Such a large disconnect from reality is most definitely a symptom of schizophrenia.

Why The Squawkers Should Be For Health Care Reform

The right wing should be all for health care reform. After all, it's pretty obvious that their current coverage lacks the mental health treatment they need.

Case Study #1:

James Rowen shows us how Mark Belling is forced to keep altering his reality to be able to keep up with his unrealistic rants against health care. Unfortunately, the only thing that was real about Belling's screed was his blatant racism.

Case Study #2

Kevin Fischer, who has never been in touch with reality, shows how delusional he really is when he states that Congresswoman Gwen Moore wouldn't interact with the crowd. Fortunately, we have Zach Wisniewski who, unlike Fischer, actually gives a damn about his community, and went there and found the reality would be something to scare Fischer sober.

Belling and Fischer obviously need psychiatric care, which they apparently lack under their own coverage. Call your U.S. Representative and Senator and tell them to support health care reform, so that we are no longer exposed to the insane ramblings of these racist, delusional and schizophrenic madmen.

Sigmund McIlheran

Preview McIlheran notes that Marquette's nutty professor and occasional crusader, John McAdams, was able to twist a story of a young woman getting fired from an university-operated counseling center for refusing to treat a patient into a fantasy tale of religious persecution.

MJS's own Sigmund has a Freudian slip when he writes:

As it happens, she thinks engaging in homosexual thrills is destructive to individuals – that is, it is greatly immoral and, presumably, has eternal consequences.

If nothing else, this is a great argument for nationalized health care. After all, who wants a person like McIlheran, McAdams or the young woman deciding if you are worthy of being treated? I'd go with the equality every time, thank you very much.

As for the rest of their argument, a certain blogger who is devilishly witty and devastatingly handsome, and knows more about providing mental health services than all three of these people combined has more to say on the subject here.

Someone Needs A Hug

Low self-esteem is an aggravatingly general term that gets confused between the psychological definition and the common, everyday definition, which is exploited by pop psychology. But also because of its generality, there are many things characteristics that are common in both definitions.

Just as there are many causes for low self-esteem, it is usually caused by an incident or series of incidents that occurred in one's childhood. These things could include, but are not limited to, getting picked on by other kids, not getting enough affection from one or both parents, or just a general sense of depression.

When a person with low self-esteem grows up, they tend to develop ways to cover up their feelings of inadequacy or insecurity that often mislead other people.

For example, some people might try to make themselves feel better by trying to intimidate others, say by using an expanded vocabulary, even if it means alienating those you are trying to communicate with. This gives the person a false sense of superiority.

Another problem with low self-esteem is the way to work through it. Say a person feels down about themselves because they are fat. Obviously, the solution would be a regimen of diet and exercise, but that requires self-discipline, self-motivation and dedication to the goal, which is something that most people with self-esteem lack. So instead of changing their lifestyle, and building themselves up in healthy ways, the turn to the easier, but unhealthy pattern of trying to tear other people down.

In the more extreme cases, they will do this to the point of being almost libelous, disregarding whether their attacks are even based on reality, which they often aren't.

Probably the most damaging is when the person with low self-esteem starts to use drugs, alcohol and/or food to try to alleviate their bad feelings. It only works for a short while and does nothing to alleviate the problem in the long run.

As it said in the article I linked to at the beginning of this post:

People with low self-esteem also have problems getting close to others. They are not comfortable with intimacy and create barriers to prevent people from coming close to them. They don't like to open up to people and to reveal their innermost thoughts. They may be nursing some old bad experience with someone who caused them a lot of pain or who let them down when they were most vulnerable. By forcing themselves to live in a world of self-denial they are doing a great damage to themselves. They fail to benefit from the company of others, and keep entrenching themselves deeper and deeper into their negative world. They may ultimately reach a stage where they may be declared beyond salvage.

But this is not good for society. People with low self-esteem must be helped. Their symptoms must be diagnosed, and help provided if they have to be turned into useful members of society. This help can be given by family members, friends, teachers or by trained psychologists.

If you feel that you have low self-esteem, or know someone who does, please seek help.

Sykes: Off His Meds

Would someone please explain what Charlie Sykes is trying to say in this post:

MORE REASON TO TAKE FISH OIL...even if you (by which I mean I) do occasionally drop them into your coffee in the morning. They're very good for mice.

What is he saying? Does he drop the fish oil in his coffee? Or is he dropping mice into his coffee?

If I put anything in my coffee, it would be just a little bit of cream and sugar, definitely not fish or mice.

I guess the only real lesson is this: Conservatism will eventually rot your mind.

James Stays Classy

James T. must be missing his fifteen minutes of fame when he was promoted nationally as the fool he is.

In a desperate effort to regain national attention, he gives us this:

Well, now we get to deal with a couple of new firsts. First black President, first black presidential flub up of the Presidential oath. First President to acknowledge non-believers as a religious group.

This can’t be good. How do we know they used a Bible at the do-over and not a Koran? Hey, I’m just asking!

Update: Obama didn’t use the Bible or the Koran! Oh shiggedy! Another first? Which swearing in should count? The one with the Bible or the one without?

First of all, would someone kindly point out to James that John Roberts is the white Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, not a black president?

Secondly, would someone please tell me how Obama can be a Muslim, which reject the teachings of Christ, and at the same time, have gone to one of those hateful Christian churches for 20 some years? It's one or the other, unless your schizophrenic. Then you can believe in both, I guess.

Dolt29

Dolt29 put up a post today about coathanger abortions. I'm sure he felt it was a strong argument against coat hangers or something, else he wouldn't post it. What he did do, whatever his intent may be, is prove himself to be capable of great insensitivity, and a general misunderstanding of women, and of mental health issues.

It's not the first time his insensitivity has shown through. He made the assertion that women in the military were being raped because they were women in the military. This the same miscreant that also seemed OK with a Christian cult in Texas to groom young girls to be sexually abused by much older men. Seems to be like a rationalization for misogyny, using the Church. But I digress.

He cites some site named "CosmoLiturgy" which makes the presumptuous claim that coathanger abortions are a myth, and the symbology of it was used by those dang liberals to justify abortion. I won't get into the whole abortion issue in this post, but it needs to be pointed out that the fabled folkbum proved that the assertion that coathanger abortions are a reality, whether or not the right wants to admit it.

What is equally as bad, if not worse, is the way he miscontstrues a serious psychiatric illness. He quotes the cited source:

Those who develop a Borderline Personality Disorder are predominately angry women (with histories of sexual abuse) who are consciously or subconsciously driven to deliver a hurtful revenge onto others. They typically have poor self images and are consequently highly sensitive to rejection and constantly haunted by the fear of being abandoned. As a result, they are willing to take drastic measures to avoid loneliness and solitude, which can often include self mutilation, suicide threats and attempts.

He then adds his own little quip:

It's a grown-up version of the 2-year-old's temper tantrum (albeit for
those who were abused, it is differently-caused.)

First of all, Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a serious illness, with its own set of diagnostic criteria set forth by the DSM-IV. It can be caused not only by being sexually abused, but also by genetics and natural chemical imbalances in the brain. It also has many symptoms besides self-mutilation. These can include:

• Impulsive and risky behavior, such as risky driving, unsafe sex, gambling sprees or taking illicit drugs
• Strong emotions that wax and wane frequently
• Intense but short episodes of anxiety or depression
• Inappropriate anger, sometimes escalating into physical confrontations
• Difficulty controlling emotions or impulses
• Suicidal behavior
• Fear of being alone

As you can see, nothing to be trifled with, and definitely more than a "temper tantrum". Most of the people with BPD that I've worked with did the cutting not only for attention, but to remind themselves that they are real, else they become too disconnected from the real world. Another reason was that they found the physical pain easier to deal with than the emotional suffering they are experiencing.

On a sidenote: I can find no indication that "Caenis Syndrome" is even a formally recognized psychiatric diagnosis.

As I said earlier, I am not going into the whole abortion issue. He thinks it's wrong, and I can respect that. I don't personally necessarily disagree with that view, but that's for another time, another place.

What I do resent, and will not allow to pass, is when someone feels the need to minimize people with mental illnesses, of any sort, to justify their inexplicable need to oppress women, children, or anyone else. No matter their ulterior motives may be.

Dad, I don't know what your issues are, or if it's just some part of the Catholic indoctrination, or what, but you really ought to knock the crap off, before someone calls you "Dipshit29".

Oops, too late.

Fischer: Totally Clueless And Classless

Fischer has no sense of decency, and has as much tact as a doorknob.

He puts up a post today that I'm sure he feels is a prime example of the supposed liberal bias of the media (which is a joke anyway, since he is part of the media, and is in no way a liberal).

The story is about a Massachusett's state senator, J. James Marzilli Jr., who is in trouble for inappropriately touching women. From the Boston.com article:

Yesterday, Marzilli's lawyer, Terrence W. Kennedy of Everett, said that Marzilli
had checked into McLean, a psychiatric hospital in Belmont, "for treatment of an
undisclosed illness."

Now, being in the field, I know that many people will try to malinger, or fake a mental illness to try to get out of trouble. If that is the case, Mr. Marzilli deserves to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and punished accordingly. If Mr. Marzilli is truly mentally ill, then he can be charged, but not to punish, but to enforce that he receives treatment. If the court in Virginia had done that, the VT tragedy may not have occurred. But this man's mental health status is for the court, and the court's experts, to decide. Not me. And definitely not Fischer.

But was does he write about Mr. Marzilli? He writes this tripe (emphasis mine):

What reaction did you have, other than the guy's a pervert?

Now, since one is presumed innocent until proven guilty, why should someone with a mental health issue be labeled a pervert? For all I know, he might be. But until an evaluation is completed, there is no way of knowing.

That is why I had chosen not to write, until now, about Fischer's three DWI charges. First of all, for all I know, Fischer may be an alcoholic, and a recovering one. If so, I support him in his efforts. But I do know for a fact that he still drinks alcohol. But without knowing whether or not he was an alcoholic, it would be irresponsible for me to call him just a cheap drunk, wouldn't it?

Sanity Versus Delusional Thinking

Patrick links to a Gallup poll that claims that Republicans report that they have mental health.

Instead of coming up with the unrealistic conclusion that McIlheran makes, this poll only goes to raise another question:

Are Republicans suffering from delusional thinking or is it that they are compulsive liars?