Picture
That Democrats and Republicans think differently is rather obvious to most.

But these opposing political supporters even think from different parts of the brain, a recent study found.

According to the recent (and appropriately titled) “Red Brain, Blue Brain” report, Democrats have higher activity in the left insula – the part of the brain that processes internal cues and emotions – when facing risks.

When Republicans think about risk, however, they have much higher activity in the right amygdale, the region of the brain associated with fear and exterior cues.  As a result, these conservative-leaning voters “show greater sensitivity to threatening stimuli,” the report concludes in its summary.

In other words, Democrats tend to think through challenging circumstances before responding, while Republicans are more prone to react impulsively and emotionally to outside influences.

The “Red Brain, Blue Brain” study was conducted by professors of medicine, psychology, psychiatry, biology and (of course) political science, and was released by the Public Library of Science on Feb. 13.

Eighty-two subjects who identified their political preferences participated in the research, which included MRI tests conducted as they participated in risk-taking mental exercises and games. Researchers confirmed subject party identification by voting records. 
Although the study was just released, similar ones have circulated in recent years, and it seems the Republican Party has kept up with the topic, too.

For example, a 2008 study published in Science noted that conservatives have much quicker and stronger physiological reactions to sudden noises and alarming photos than do liberal Democrats, and establishes connotation between Republicans’ knee-jerk responses and their political beliefs of increased military spending and capital punishment. 

Republican campaign platforms and political ads used that year and in following have been laden with such tactics, too. For example (and see slide show for images at the bottom of this page):

  • The McCain campaign was often criticized for using “fear factors,” such as calling opponent Obama a “terrorist” and implying racial division in 2008. 
  • Hoping to build support for offshore drilling, the GOP falsely claimed that China was drilling immediately off the coast of Cuba, threatening U.S. oil supplies. 
  • Arguments against the Affordable Care Act from 2009 and 2010 told of “death panels.”
  • Both Republican candidates and the National Rifle Association continue false claims that “Obama will take away your guns.” 
  • The “Obama is a Muslim” tactic has been continuously promoted, and at times in support of the juvenile “birth certificate” argument. 
  • In March 2010, an internal party presentation that was leaked to media showed how the Republican National Committee intended to promote the term “socialism” as a fear-inducing tactic in voter outreach and fundraising. 
  • Voters saw that fraudulent “socialism” tactic regularly used in 2012, too, and from Republican candidates for U.S. Senate and U.S. House, not to mention the presidential race
  • A tactic now known as “Medi-scare” – a false claim that the savings Obamacare produces for Medicare were actually cuts to its benefits, thus threatening the well-being of seniors – was widely used by many campaigns. 
  • And in last year’s elections, strongly religious voters were pelted with ads and other communications that frequently referred to “danger” and “threats” to “Judeo-Christian” values. Some were even told that a vote for President Obama was equivalent to “reject(ing) Jesus Christ” and would “put your own soul in jeopardy,” and were threatened with the claim that their votes would “be recorded in eternity.” (See video at bottom of this page)
Apparently, and as 2012 election results showed, the population of “blue brain” Americans seems to be dominant.

Another study associating political beliefs to specific operation of the brain was released recently, as well.

Last year, the Univ. of South Carolina released a neurological study of similar format but focusing on different areas of the brain. Similar to the “Red Brain, Blue Brain” results, this study found members of the opposing parties to have higher activity rates in different cranial areas.

Democrats have more activity in the part of the brain connected with wider social connections, such as friends and issues that affect more people and are inclusive of other parts of the world, the USC study concludes; on the other hand, Republicans are dominantly active in the brain region associated with tight social connections, such as family and their own personal properties and interests. 



 
 
Picture
(borrowed from The Literary Phoenix)
The Thanksgiving holiday holds a religious theme for many, but for some it’s in a way that seems quite the opposite of their religion.

Like yesterday’s celebration, for example. Rightwing media told a ridiculous tale of Muslim terrorists attempting to denigrate the country, and by imposing their own terrorist-like religion upon the holiday.

It started with an opinion piece written by Pamela Geller on Monday’s “American Thinker” site.

Citing a “citizen activist” as her source, Geller claimed the Butterball company, a chief provider of the turkey traditional enjoyed for Thanksgiving meals, had produced its birds to be sold in the U.S. in a halal format. (And in case you don’t know, “halal” is a dietary guideline practiced by Muslims.)

Already known to be an anti-Muslim zealot, Geller declared this to be a secretive “scandal” pulled by Butterball.  

 “Non-Muslims in America and Europe don’t deserve to have halal turkey forced upon them in this way, without their knowledge or consent,” Geller wrote.

Even worse, she implied that Butterball was attempting to sneakily convert its American consumers to the Islamic faith. “Infidel Americans are unwittingly going to be serving halal turkeys to their families this Thursday. … Halal turkey…is just the opposite of what Thanksgiving represents,” Geller claimed, calling for a boycott of Butterball products.

She even created a “Boycott Butterball Turkey” page on facebook.  And the story got taken from there all over the rightwing side of the worldwide web.

Islamophobic sites such as Jihad Watch (“You’re eating halal”), Bare Naked Islam (“WARNING!”), and Now the End Begins (“Butterball Turkeys Support Islamic Terrorism”) promoted the rumor. From there it went to conservamedia The Blaze (“Islamic Butterball?”). Two other “Boycott Butterball” pages made it to facebook, as well (1 and 2).

And on Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, it wound up on Bryan Fischer’s radio show on the American Family Network. (See video)

Director of Issues Analysis for the American Family Association, Fischer stoked the phobic flame a lot higher.  “Every single, solitary Butterball turkey in the United States of America has been sacrificed to Allah,” he repeated several times. The poultry was “ritually slaughtered, as according to Islamic practices, and has had an Islamic prayer prayed over that bird while it’s being slaughtered.” 

In other words, these sources were claiming that Butterball was forcing Americans to practice rites of a religion they declare to be an enemy of the U.S., as well as an enemy of the Christian faith. Thus, it was implied, Butterball itself must be some Muslim extremist.

But this story about Butterball turkeys amounts to chicken feed, it turns out. It’s not true.
Picture
“Our domestic products are not halal certified,” the company told MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show” in a formal written statement. 

Anything it sells overseas to countries with halal guidelines is prepared in halal format (which, as you’ll read about just further down, doesn’t require any bizarre rituals), but that’s to allow those particular birds to be sold there and there alone.

“(O)nly turkeys exported to specific countries are certified halal.”

Wrong once again, rightwing media.

They weren’t just assaulting Butterball, either. It was avenue for them to launch attack on the whole Islamic faith, somehow using dietary restrictions as examples of religious terrorism.

Doing so, though, only reveals the ignorance of these rightwing sects. There are other faiths, including Christian churches, that practice dietary restrictions, too, after all.

Take Catholics, for example. During the season of Lent right before Easter Sunday, Catholics are to avoid eating any meat on Fridays. (This restriction was once to be held throughout the 40-day period, by the way, and not just on Fridays alone; as a Catholic myself, I’m glad to have entered the world after that was changed.)

Mormons don’t stay away from meat, but are to have it in limited quantities, though. They also refrain from caffeine and alcohol.

Seventh Day Adventists steer clear of alcohol, avoid caffeine for the most part, and don’t eat pork or shellfish. Many of this faith are strict vegetarians, even.

The halal dietary recommendations practiced by Muslims are very, very similar to the kosher practiced by those of the Jewish faith, too. No pork or birds of prey, the slaughter of animals to be consumed should follow a routine of sorts, and any blood is to be rejected and disposed.  Jews also avoid shellfish, and can’t consume any grape products made by non-Jews.

Many Native American and Meso-American tribes were historically vegetarian in their faiths, like the Choctaws, Cherokees, Aztecs and Mayans.  Meat was only eaten in circumstances when other foods were not readily available (such as during the winter following a bad harvest season), and only after rituals thanking the animals, and the supreme being who created them, for their sacrifice.

Add in the dietary restrictions of Hindus, Sikhs and many other religions (even Rastafarians), and you’ll see that such practices – even if they vary somewhat from faith to faith – are all quite similar in both purpose and format.

Simply put, these dietary practices are goals that everyone receives proper nutrition, refuses things that could have negative health effects, avoids things that could steer one away from faith, and shows some respect and appreciation for the living things we slay for our own consumption.

And how is the halal requirement of Muslims employed in the case of a turkey? Well, in a method known as “dhabihah,” you’re supposed to use a sharp knife to get the job done quickly and with as little pain upon the animal as possible. Hit both arteries but avoid the spinal cord.

No songs or dance or chants or religious rituals are required, unlike what those rightwingers want you to believe. Out of sympathy for the animal (one of God’s creatures, you know), it’s recommended you just get it over with fast. That’s it.

So what’s wrong with it? In fact, this method seems quite humane, doesn’t it? Sort of Christian, even.

And that’s a key point that these so-called Christian rightwingers should keep in mind before they start their next anti-Muslim campaign with no foundation.

After all, when they engage in these silly attacks on that faith, they are actually attacking their own faith, too.

Islam is a format of faith adapted to and delving from specific culture, much like the Greek Orthodox, Mormon and Lutheran Churches are within the wide range of Christian faiths. (Shoot, even voodoo is Christian, developed within the Caribbean culture of long ago.)

And these rightwingers need to take a quick peek at the Koran used in the Islamic faith before they throw it into the fire at their next burning.

It mentions Christ by name over two dozen times – more times than Mohammed, even. (And no matter what the right-wing zealots say, Mohammed is only listed to be a human prophet in the Koran and not a god himself).

Our one God chose the Virgin Mary to give birth to Jesus, it reads.

The Koran says Christ performed miracles while on earth.

And, according to the Koran, Christ holds the throne in the Kingdom of Heaven, and will return to earth in a second coming on the Day of Reckoning.

Sounds like what you learned in your Christian Sunday School, don’t it?

(The Koran also tells the tales of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Joseph, David, Solomon and many others you’ll find in both the Christian Old Testament and Jewish Torah.)

Just like belief in these holy principles is required of all Christians, Muslims are required to believe them and believe in Christ, too.

And like Christianity adapted directly from Judaism, growing mainly in western cultures, and includes the Jewish Torah in its bible (the Old Testament), so too did Islam develop directly from Christianity, this time in Middle Eastern cultures, and with tales of Jesus in the Koran.

But unlike Christianity, which is very separate from the faith from which it originates by declaring the One God in a separate, new and three-fold format, Islam maintains belief in the icon from which it developed. It recognizes Jesus very close to the ways all Christian churches do – the miracle-performing Son of God who will rise again.

All told, it seems quite clear that these so-called Christians who took antagonistic stabs, using an argument without any foundation that they accelerated with unfounded, unproven and completely made-up claims, only wound up rather non-Christian in their rightwing zealotry.

Lying is a sin, after all.