Brava's Videos


Brava's Search


Monday, October 12, 2015

Gender Equality & Religion in the US

Gender Equality and Religion:

“woman's condition, would have desired too gladsome (not to say too ostentatious) a style of dress; so as not rather to go about in humble garb, and rather to affect meanness of appearance, walking about as Eve mourning and repentant, in order that by every garb of penitence she might the more fully expiate that which she derives from Eve, — the ignominy, I mean, of the first sin, and the odium (attaching to her as the cause) of human perdition. "In pains and in anxieties do you bear (children), woman; and toward your husband (is) your inclination, and he lords it over you." And do you not know that you are (each) an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealers of that (forbidden) tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account of your desert— that is, death— even the Son of God had to die.”
 -Father of Latin Christianity and the early Church- Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 240 AD)

When discussing the topic of gender equality one of the most important information in order to understand the current status quo, is to look into the history of women in the early ages, specifically the times of “Abrahamic religions”(Christianity, Islam, and Judaism), and the influences of religion in our culture.

Before this (3) religions became the most influential form of reference for culture, government, and politics, women possessed many important roles in society.

History teach us about how, before the "Abrahamic religions," there were the existences of Queens, female Warriors, Head of States, female Elders in ethnic groups, and women leaders. There were some bias but not as much as now. Regardless, women fought for equality even then.

For many centuries women held important roles and were the sources of reverence and admiration in all part of society. However; with the rapid expansion of the world and the curiosity for the unknown, humanity started to create ways and new forms of beliefs to cope with the reality.

Polytheistic religion started to fall, lost followers, and create despair and controversies. People started to question their existences and this new change gave birth to a more monotheistic view of the world and religion at large.  With the new monotheistic view and religions, humanity found a different way to answer the questions of their surroundings and to organize themselves, political, and culturally.

Unfortunately when those question arises there wasn’t any modern scientific tools to explain and
verify the answers. Because of fear of the unknown and lack of verification men invented new
forms of religion to cope with their uncertainties and curiosity. The creation of new
monotheistic religions change the way humanity look at women and they became a sources of
hate, blame, and shame.

These religions from the beginning perpetrated women as evil and
deceiving creatures who were the reason for all problems and disaster happening in the world.

The largest monotheistic, “Abrahamic religions” in chronological order of founding are:

 Judaism (1st millennium BC),
 Christianity (1st century AD),
 Islam (7th century AD).

The influences of those religion in humanity is so great that even in the 21st century there is a
54% of the world population approximately (3.8 billion) people who still follow some form of
these religions. This statistic show us that still now more than half of the current population has
some type of bias towards women, including women themselves, because of the great influence
of those religious teaching, our society still view women as immoral creatures who shouldn’t
have a voice nevertheless make decisions and/or held positions of power.

Here are some examples by religion of the view towards women in their teaching:

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to
children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”
- Genesis 3:16 Thora

“(34) Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak;
but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
(35) And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for
women to speak in the church.”
Corinthians 14:34-35 Kings James Bible

“The Prophet said, "I looked at Paradise and found poor people forming the majority of its
inhabitants; and I looked at Hell and saw that the majority of its inhabitants were women."
- Hadith 4:464 Koran

After reading those early scriptures anyone will then conclude that misogyny, hate, and unfair views of women have influence and polarized the world at large.

The United States regardless of its foundation and forefathers intention of creating a secular, unbiased, and non-religious society; has been polarize by people in power who has transform the country into a platform for religious views were women are demonized, criticized, and attack for their constant desire for equality.

Women in the US too often are deprecated if they show any signs of intelligence and power. Even women attack each other because the glass ceiling is so high everyone feels the need to step over other women to reach it. Furthermore, conservatives and religious fundamentalist still hold the beliefs that women should not have the right nor they have the intelligence to make their own decisions about their body, their political views (women were only allowed to vote after 1920), the status in society, and their religion.

The patriarchal world has a male figure as the ruler of all and women have no place in it. We can verify this finding just by looking how any women who can dare, even has the intention, or idea of holding any higher political place, is demean, belittle, criticized, and humiliated. Moreover, a male candidate is questions about his career, experiences in politics, and future views; women are question for the personal lives, sexual desires or preferences, and attitude.

A man who is assertive is view as a leader a woman who dares to be powerful is portrait like a bitch.

There are many examples of how misogynistic our society is:
In a very racist society it was easy for the public to allow a black man to held the higher office of the land (President Barack Hussein Obama 2008 - 2016), than even consider a woman to run (Hillary Rodham Clinton – Primary contender-2008).

Sarah Palin (2008 vice-presidential nominee- Republican Party), was a vivid example of the hate that our society held towards women. Regardless of the facts that after many interviews and checking her records it was concluded that she was not educated and/or ready for the position the attacks were directed at her personal life and family.

Currently in the future presidential run for the white house the percentage of women is minimal at best. Carly Fiorina (Republican) and Hillary Clinton (Democrat) are the only women seeking the nomination in the primaries to run for the presidency.

Leaving aside the fact that many of us may not agree with the political views of neither candidate, the truth is we can easily see how the media is attacking, hating and destroying the reputation of both women. It is appalling to see the disgrace and disrespectful way many people use when referring to either candidate.  Almost no one question their strategies, political intentions, and future ideas to run the country. The media criticized their personal views, political mistakes, personal lives, religious views, and ethics.

This current situation is a clear representation of how The United States has to become more secular and view women for what they really are; intelligent, powerful, kind, entrepreneurs, capable of doing the same job men created for themselves.

We live in a Patriarchal, misogynistic, religious fundamentalist society who will need a great change, re-education, starting with us women, to then embrace the capabilities and power of women.

"Life is the result of our choices" -Brava <3 p="">

Saturday, June 6, 2015

El tiempo de la Mujer - Globalmente...

 "...Ha llegado la hora de la mujer que comparte una causa pública y ha muerto la hora de la mujer como valor inerte y numérico dentro de la sociedad. Ha llegado la hora de la mujer que piensa, juzga, rechaza o acepta, y ha muerto la hora de la mujer que asiste, atada e impotente, a la caprichosa elaboración política de los destinos de su país, que es, en definitiva, el destino de su hogar. Ha llegado la hora de la mujer, integramente mujer en el goce paralelo de deberes y derechos comunes a todo ser humano que trabaja, y ha muerto la hora de la mujer compañera ocasional y colaboradora ínfima. Ha llegado, en síntesis, la hora de la mujer redimida del tutelaje social, y ha muerto la hora de la mujer relegada a la más precaria tangencia con el verdadero mundo dinámico de la vida moderna." -Eva Perón ("Evita" 12 de marzo de 1947).

"Life is the result of our choices" -Brava

Friday, May 1, 2015

Out of the Shadows with Immigration Reform

Out of the Shadow with Immigration Reform

As an immigrant in the United States, the topic of immigration reform is critical and unequivocally of the most importance. I will provide the information necessary to form a constructive and educated opinion in regards to such a controversial topic. There will be an extensive explanation of the history of immigration in the United States, the most recent reforms (DACA and DAPA), how the reforms became an executive order, the blocking and opposition, and the advantage of implementing such executive order.

My report will include verified data, experts’ opinions, and information on possible outcomes and benefit of an immigration reform. The report is intended to educate and provide an honest and personal opinion.


(This disquisition is intended to answer the question of the controversial topic of immigration reform by providing compelling data of the history of immigration in the United States, and the political debate that comes from those in favor and those against it. It will discuss the positive consequences of a new executive order signed by President Barack Obama, how the executive order has been blocked by a Texas Judge, the definition of such laws (DACA and DAPA), the people in favor, or in opposition, blocking the law, and the possible future of United States after the law is executed.

Immigration is a subject matter that affects us all, regardless of our status (legal or illegal), and if the public is not educated, and a solution reached, it will become a new civil right conflict.)
According to the oxford dictionary; Immigration is defined as” The action of coming to live permanently in a foreign country “

Regardless of the specific circumstances in which people arrive to such country there is not a definite way to determine if those people arriving are recognized as being legal or illegal. However, the word immigrant does not in any way imply legality or status.

Continue reading @ Link
"Life is the result of our choices"-Brava

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

The rights' made-up God: How bigots invented a white supremacist Jesus///by professorcrunk.

The right's made-up God: How bigots invented a white supremacist Jesus

 Michele Bachmann, Mike Pence, Mike Huckabee (Credit: AP/Reuters/Susan Walsh/Michael Conroy/Joe Skipper/Photo montage by Salon)

"As Indiana peddles its "religious freedom" garbage, it's time to call the religious right's trash what it really is"-Brittney Cooper

Just in time for Holy Week, the State of Indiana has passed a new Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The law explicitly permits for-profit corporations from practicing the “free exercise of religion” and it allows them to use the “exercise of religion” as a defense against any lawsuits whether from the government or from private entities. The primary narrative against this law has been about the potential ways that small businesses owned by Christians could invoke it as a defense against having to, for instance, sell flowers to a gay couple for their wedding.

Any time right-wing conservatives declare that they are trying to restore or reclaim something, we should all be very afraid. Usually, this means the country or, in this case, the state of Indiana is about to be treated to another round of backward time travel, to the supposedly idyllic environs of the 1950s, wherein women, and gays, and blacks knew their respective places and stayed in them. While the unspoken religious subtext of this law is rooted in conservative anxieties over the legalization of same-sex marriage in Indiana, Black people and women, and all the intersections thereof (for instance Black lesbians) should be very afraid of what this new law portends.

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled in the Hobby Lobby decision that corporations could exercise religious freedom, which means that corporations can deny insurance coverage for birth control. Now this same logic is being used to curtail and abridge the right of gay people to enjoy the same freedoms and legal protections that heterosexual citizens enjoy.

And given our current anti-Black racial climate, there is no reason to trust that these laws won’t be eventually used for acts of racially inflected religious discrimination, perhaps against Black Muslims or Muslims of Arab descent, for instance. Surely this kind of law in this political climate sanctions the exercise of Islamophobia.

As a practicing Christian, I am deeply incensed by these calls for restoration and reclamation in the name of religious freedom. This kind of legislation is largely driven by conservative Christian men and women, who hold political views that are antagonistic to every single group of people who are not white, male, Christian, cisgender, straight and middle-class. Jesus, a brown, working-class, Jew, doesn’t even meet all the qualifications.

Nothing about the cultural and moral regime of the religious right in this country signals any kind of freedom. In fact, this kind of legislation is rooted in a politics that gives white people the authority to police and terrorize people of color, queer people and poor women. That means these people don’t represent any kind of Christianity that looks anything like the kind that I practice.

To be clear, because I’m an academic, I get static often from folks who wonder how I could dare ally myself in name and religious affiliation with the kind of morally misguided, politically violent people who think it reasonable to force women to have babies they do not want and who think their opinions about whom and how others should marry matters even a little bit.

I often ask myself whether I really do worship the same God of white religious conservatives. On this Holy Week, when I reflect on the Christian story of Christ crucified, it is a story to me of a man who came, radically served his community, challenged the unjust show of state power, embraced children, working-class men and promiscuous women and sexual minorities (eunuchs). Of the many things Jesus preached about, he never found time to even mention gay people, let alone condemn them. His message of radical inclusivity was so threatening that the state lynched him for fear that he was fomenting a cultural and political rebellion. They viewed such acts as criminal acts and they treated Jesus as a criminal. And all who followed him were marked for death.

This is why I identify with the story of Jesus. And frankly, it is the only story there really is. This white, blond-haired, blue-eyed, gun-toting, Bible-quoting Jesus of the religious right is a god of their own making. I call this god, the god of white supremacy and patriarchy. There is nothing about their god that speaks to me as a Black woman of working-class background living in a country where police routinely murder black men and beat the hell out of black women, where the rich get richer while politicians find ever more reasons to extract from the poor, and where the lives the church imagines for women still center around marriage and motherhood, and no sex if you’re single.

This God isn’t the God that I serve. There is nothing holy, loving, righteous, inclusive, liberatory or theologically sound about him. He might be “biblical” but he’s also an asshole.
The Jesus I know, love, talk about and choose to retain was a radical, freedom-loving, justice-seeking, potentially queer (because he was either asexual or a priest married to a prostitute), feminist healer, unimpressed by scripture-quoters and religious law-keepers,  seduced neither by power nor evil.
That’s the story I choose to reflect on this Holy Week. The Christian lawmakers seeking to use the law to discriminate against gay people are indicative of every violent, unrighteous, immoral impulse that organized religion continues to represent in this country. I have said elsewhere recently that it is a problem to treat racism as if it will simply go extinct. But as I watch the religious right engineer pain and obstacles for queer people in America’s heartland, I find myself wishing that this particularly violent and vicious breed of Christianity would die off.

I cannot stand in a church and worship on Sunday alongside those who on the very next Monday co-sign every kind of legislation that devalues the lives of Black people, women and gay people. I am a firm believer that our theology implicates our politics. If your politics are rooted in the contemporary anti-Black, misogynist, homophobic conservatism, then we are not serving the same God. Period.

And more of us who love Jesus, despite our ambivalence about Christianity, the Church or organized religion, need to stand up and begin to do some reclamation of our own.

I am heartened to say that there is a generation of young people of faith rising up, spurred on by the Ferguson events of last summer. A group of young seminarians at Union Theology Seminary in New York City have been at the fore of effort to #ReclaimHolyWeek. I spoke with one of the organizers, Candace Simpson, who told me that, “#ReclaimHolyWeek is a way for us to challenge and disrupt the sanitized stories we share during Holy Week. We refuse to pretend as though the main story of Jesus’ resurrection was that he ‘died for our sins.’ We need to be better in discussing the ways Jesus represented a threat to his empire, that his teachings disrupt power structures. We pretend that we would be mourning at his tomb, but it is clear in the ways we blame victims of the system that we are not as moral as we pretend to be.” They will spend this week protesting various forms of state-sanctioned violence against Black and Brown people.

What this vocal contingent of the religious right is seeking to restore is not religious freedom but a sense of safety in expressing and imposing dangerous, retrograde and discriminatory ideas in the name of religion. I continue to support the free and unimpeded expression of religion. And I am hopeful that Indiana Gov. Mike Pence’s call for “clarification of the law” amid a massive backlash will actually force the Legislature to explicitly ban discrimination based on gender and sexual orientation. Then perhaps the law could do what some legal scholars claim it was meant to do, namely, protect freedom of religious expression for religious minorities in the U.S.

Alongside that, I maintain that another kind of reclamation needs to occur. We need to reclaim the narrative of Jesus’ life and death from the evangelical right. They have not been good stewards over the narrative. They have pimped Jesus’ death to support the global spread of American empire vis-à-vis war, “missions,” and “free trade,” the abuse of native peoples, the continued subjugation of Black people, and the regulation of the sexual lives of women and gay people. Let us mark this Holy Week by declaring the death to the unholy trinity of white supremacist, capitalist, hetero-patriarchy. And once these systems die, may they die once and for all, never to be resurrected.
Brittney Cooper Brittney Cooper is a contributing writer at Salon, and teaches Women's and Gender Studies and Africana Studies at Rutgers.

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

I'm going to Hell! - Voy a ir al Infierno! con Isabel Serrato


 I'm going to hell!

I’ll announce, will go to hell

with the women that do what they say

and say what they think,

to women’s hell Maverick

and her politically incorrectness 

to unbalanced women's hell

and the misfits,

the hell of the ones that

despite torture

could not fail to be authentic ...

I'm going to hell!

with people madly in love with life

and not ashamed of it,

with people living without contracts


with the lovers

with the ill for freedom

and the lonely.

I'm going to hell!

with those who fight everyday

with the ones without limits (and will never have them).

I'm going to hell!

with feminist

with poets

with independent

with dissidents,

with the ones that never found their place

-in the celestial sphere-

with the lost

the outcasts

the orphan

the experienced

with the strong

with the hippies

and destitute.

I'm going to hell!

and if by chance,

I do not ...

Please, take me!

® Isabel Serrato 
Poet & Author- Seville Spain

Voy a ir al infierno!

Lo anuncio, voy a ir al infierno

con las que hacen lo que dicen

y dicen lo que piensan,

al infierno de las inconformistas

y las políticamente incorrectas,

al infierno de las desequilibradas

y las inadaptadas,

al infierno de las que

a pesar de la tortura

no pudieron dejar de ser auténticas...

Voy a ir al infierno!

con la gente que ama locamente la vida

y no se averguenza de ello,

con la gente que vive sin contratos

sin papeles,

con las amantes

con las enfermas de libertad

y las solitarias.

Voy a ir al infierno!

con las que luchan todos los días

con las que no tienen límites (y no piensan ponérselos).

Voy a ir al infierno!

con las feministas

con las poetas

con las independientes

con las disidentes

con las que nunca encontraron su sitio
-en la esfera celeste-

con las perdidas

con las parias

con las huérfanas

con las experimentadas

con las fuertes

con las hippies

y las indigentes.

Voy a ir al infierno!

y si por un casual,

no voy...

¡Por favor, llévenme!

® Isabel Serrato
Poet & Author- Seville Spain

"Life is the result of our choices" -Brava

Thursday, March 5, 2015

Victoria speaks to Brava about Women Equality.

 “It is in vain to say human beings ought to be satisfied with tranquility: they must have action; and they will make it if they cannot find it. Millions are condemned to a stiller doom than mine, and millions are in silent revolt against their lot. Nobody knows how many rebellions besides political rebellions ferment in the masses of life which people earth. Women are supposed to be very calm generally: but women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties, and a field for their efforts, as much as their brothers do; they suffer from too rigid a restraint, to absolute a stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow-creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making puddings and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano and embroidering bags. It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for their sex.”
Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre

"Life is the result of our choices" -Brava

Saturday, February 28, 2015

Science vs beliefs

You Can Believe the Senator With a Snowball or Every Major American Scie...:

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Is cognitive dissonance the reason believers get angry at atheist?

 “Imperialism leaves behind germs of rot which we must clinically detect and remove from our land but from our minds as well.”
Frantz Fanon

"Life is the result of our choices"-Brava

Thursday, December 4, 2014

Es la enseñanza religiosa-Abuso infantil?

Fue en una conferencia en Dublín en la que el profesor Richard Dawkins declaró que el adoctrinamiento de niños es "peor que el abuso sexual". La declaración causó estupor, y aprobación unánime de los asistentes que suspiraron frente a alguien que por fin se atrevía a decir lo que todos saben. El profesor Dawkins siempre cita este hecho en sus variadas intervenciones para dejar en claro que amplios sectores de la opinión pública la enseñanza religiosa es vista como algo atroz.

Denme al niño los primeros años de su vida, y yo les devolveré un hombre, decía uno de los fundadores de una secta crística en la Edad Oscura. Así como el marxismo necesita adoctrinar niños para preservar su sistema, la religión también hace lo mismo. Esto explica por qué subsiste en los países menos educados, donde no hay libertad educacional, sino que los pocos colegios son propiedad de las entidades mitológicas.

Lejos de ser un detalle, lo anterior explica por qué la religiosidad se transmite de generación en generación. El niño normalmente obedece a sus padres, es un mecanismo biológico que permite la preservación de la especie. "No te acerques a la baranda", dice la mamá, y el niño hace caso, porque estamos programados para obedecer a nuestros padres. Es en la tierna infancia cuando las experiencias dejan una marca indeleble. Es aquí cuando el cerebro de un niño se contamina con las doctrinas religiosas. Al no tener capacidad de discernimiento, la religiosidad infecta la mente y el daño perdura hasta la adultez. 

A todos nos causaría horror que un padre diga "mi hijo Pedrito, de 5 años, es marxista", o "mi nieta Paulita, de 7 años, ya es monetarista", o "Juanito ya a los 4 años se sabe al revés y al derecho las enseñanzas de Keynes". Un niño no está preparado para comprender estas cosas.

Del mismo modo, registrar a los bebés en las iglesias debe considerarse una forma de agresión, intelectual en este caso, y aquí se aplica el principio del daño de John Stuart Mill: en una sociedad civilizada, es legítimo actuar en contra de un individuo para evitar que dañe a otros. Un padre que azota y da de puñetes a su hijo debe ser sancionado. Una familia que expone a temprana edad a sus hijos a teorías abstrusas o decididamente sanguinarias, como por ejemplo, que matar a Jesús nos absuelve de un pecado cometido antes de que naciéramos.

 Los creyentes son sujetos que sufren de delirio, un cuadro psicológico incubado en la infancia. Esta es su definición:

Todos hemos visto a un creyente afirmando que una Virgen se aparece, y argumentan que sí es posible, de hecho, están completamente seguros. Es necesario proteger a los pequeños y mantenerlos alejados de los promotores del cristianismo. Los niños son incapaces de protegerse por sí mismos, ¿no es acaso una forma de abuso infantil?

Por favor ver los siguientes clips con niños siendo sicológicamente violentados por adultos. Imágenes de la película "Jesus Camp". 

Abuso infantil en doctrinas religiosas 
 Brava <3 br="">
Life is the result of our choices

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

The XL Pipeline bill fails to pass and Native Americans chant in celebration

The controversial “Keystone XL pipeline bill” failed to pass on Tuesday after the U. S. Senate defeated the bill with 59 Yea and 41 Nay. 
The bill, a measure introduced by the House of Representatives, needed a 60 vote count to pass.  All 45 Republicans and 14 Democrats voted in favor but it was not enough for the bill to pass.  In a recent speech President Barack Obama rejected the bill and it was believed that had the bill passed, he would had vetoed it.

The bill would have allowed TransCanada, A multibillion dollar oil corporation, to construct a US$8 billion dollar pipeline to transport crude oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.

Environmentalists and Native Americans were protesting the bill since it was first introduced to the House of Representatives and were outside the Senate when the announcement was made that the Keystone Vote failed.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) was presiding over the Senate, and was asking the Senate to move to executive session was interrupted by one protester, who was later identified by the Washington Post as Greg Graycloud of the Lakota Tribe in South Dakota.
The Native American chant was heard throughout the floor and it was a symbol of celebration.
According to the environmentalist group, Friends of Earth, the construction of a pipeline would had been disastrous for our planet. 
In an article on their website the group listed some of the alarming reasons why this bill could have damaged the planet:  

Dirty tar sands oil
Pollution from tar sands oil greatly eclipses that of conventional oil. During tar sands oil production alone, levels of carbon dioxide emissions are three to four times higher than those of conventional oil, due to more energy-intensive extraction and refining processes. The Keystone XL pipeline would have carried 830,000 barrels of dirty tar sands oil into the United States daily, and resulted in climate-damaging emissions equal to adding more than 5.6 million new cars to U.S. roads.
                                          Water waste and pollution
During the tar sands oil extraction process, vast amounts of heat, water and chemicals are needed to separate the tarry substance (known as bitumen) from sand, silt, and clay and to flow up the pipeline. The water used in the process comes from rivers and underground aquifers. It takes three barrels of water to extract each single barrel of oil. Ninety-five percent of the water used to extract the oil, which is about 2.4 million barrels per day, is so polluted that the water must be stored in large human-made pools, known as tailing ponds. As the heavy bitumen sinks to the bottom of these ponds, the toxic sludge, full of harmful substances like cyanide and ammonia, works its way into neighboring clean water supplies.
                                                Forest Destruction
The tar sands oil are underneath the world’s largest intact ecosystem, the Boreal forests of Alberta. The forests not only serve as an important carbon sink, but its biodiversity and unspoiled bodies of water support large populations of many different species. They are a buffer against climate change, as well as food and water shortages. However, in the process of digging up tar sands oil, the forests are destroyed. This valuable forest and its endangered caribou are both threatened by the pipeline.
                                                Indigenous populations

Northern Alberta, the region where tar sands oil is extracted, is home to many indigenous populations. Important parts of their cultural traditions and livelihood are coming under attack because of tar sands operations. Not only have indigenous communities been forced off of their land, but also those living downstream from tailing ponds have seen spikes in rates of rare cancers, renal failure, lupus, and hyperthyroidism. In the lakeside village of Fort Chipewyan, for example, 100 of the town’s 1,200 residents have died from cancer.

These problems will only get worse, unless tar sands production is halted. Investing in a new pipeline would increase the rate of production, while decreasing the quality of life for indigenous populations.
Pipeline spills
The Keystone XL pipeline would traverse six U.S. states and cross major rivers, including the Missouri River, Yellowstone, and Red Rivers, as well as key sources of drinking and agricultural water, such as the Ogallala Aquifer which supplies water to more than one fourth of America’s irrigated land and provides drinking water for two million Americans.

            In the end, the celebration comes from the heart of those who believe the planet is in state of emergency, and the vote rejecting the Keystone pipeline gives environmentalist a new hope that our country is moving towards oil independence and a greener environment.
Brava :)