More details have come out concerning Mr. Bill Sparkman's death two weeks ago. The man who found his body described him as naked, bound with duct tape at the ankles and wrists, as well as his eyes covered with it.
So, there is no question any longer that he was murdered, but then again, I had no doubt to start with.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Bill Sparkman: Good Man, Government Man
The body of Census worker Bill Sparkman was found on September 12th in Clay County Kentucky. He was hanging from a tree with the word "Fed" scrawled on his chest in an as of yet unreleased method. He had been going door to door as part of his job to collect information.
The story garnered little more than a short blurb on the local news at first but last night, the story was broken to the rest of the nation.
Naturally, speculation abounds, but the facts are apparent. Bill Sparkman was the victim of a homicide, first and foremost, and the inclusion of the word "Fed" on his chest seems to indicate that the crime was perpetrated by someone with very strong anti-government feelings.
So what does this mean beyond a very unfortunate set of events for one man and his family? Well, it means quite a lot, in fact. Just last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for a cessation of violent rhetoric in the ongoing debates, and that only further increased the furor of the anti-government, anti-Obama crowds. With protesters bringing loaded assault weapons to Town Hall meetings, and even Presidential addresses, carrying signs railing against President Obama, calling for the "blood of tyrants" to water the tree of liberty and freedom, one can only guess what sort of sentiment drove the killing of Mr. Sparkman.
Since I heard the story last night, I've been encouraging others to read up on the subject as well. This is the first unfortunate example of a politicized murder in this recent debate, and hopefully (though not likely) the last.
Plain and simple, these people are out of control. Pundits like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly have poured so much gasoline over the burning coals of these dissenters that the wildfire they've started won't likely be stopped. And from the looks of things, its going to spread and burn down all of the intelligent, moderate trees in the Republican party.
Gone are the days of healthy debate, and they have been replaced with bitter partisanship and staunch opposition to any and all Democratic proposals from all members of the party, regardless of any personal opinion.
Having only been alive and politically conscious during bitter political battles between Neo-conservatives and democrats, I can't say if this is different from old politics, but it appears to me that the Republican party has no standards of their own, with the exception of being Against whatever the Democrats are For, but for me, this is just politics as usual.
I am currently taking a class in American Literature, and so far have read somewhat on the subjects which drove the American Revolution, and then several writings made after the conclusion of the war, during the reconstruction period in which our Founding Fathers were attempting to create their government. Thomas Jefferson, whom the Tea Bagging protesters have taken their "blood of tyrants" and "tree of liberty" phrases from, was an anti-federalist, but was wise enough to see that the country needed a strong central government in order to maintain control over the states, which if they had their way, would probably be individual countries today.
The American system of government is far from perfect. It is easily impacted by special interests and marred by intense bureaucracy. The legislation created by the Congress is impossible to read without a PhD in Political Law, and therefore there is a clear and deliberate separation of people and their representatives, which members of the House and Senate use to their political advantage to dupe their constituents into supporting them regardless of actual policy decisions. They throw around buzzwords and do little more than play popularity games with "he said, she said" rules.
There is no doubt about why anti-government sentiments exist, that is certain. However, distrust of the half of the government that is actually attempting to make life better for the people is just ignorant.
There was logical reason to oppose the Bush government, or any Republican government for that matter. The Republicans seem to stand for few things, but what they do stand for, they enforce swiftly and effectively whenever they achieve office. Deregulation of industries, which effectively makes their particular special interests an incredible amount of money, even if it ruins the market for the consumer, is a prime example.
Until the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (enacted by a Republican-controlled congress), it was illegal for large media companies to own too many different media outlets, which therefore provided a wider range of competition in the market for Cable outlets, Internet service providers, Television networks and radio broadcasters. AFTER, the Act was passed, the already giant conglomorate companies such as AOL (now AOL/Time Warner) and Newscorp (You may know them better as FOX) began to further expand their holdings, and today as little as 3 or 4 companies dominate all media industries.
In short, deregulation is bad. It is only through regulation of industries that the individual consumer gets the best deal for his or her dollar, or is provided the best chance at living a relatively easy life.
Naturally, you can't over-regulate industries or you end up with a "1984" scenario, but Republicans are so staunchly anti-regulation that they won't even allow simple, basic, and entirely necessary regulation of certain industries which DESPERATELY need it, such as the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries.
Up to the publishing of the environmentalist book "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson, VERY little was done in the way of protecting the environment. Republicans will often point the the republican president Teddy Roosevelt as their shining example. And while I will agree, both Roosevelt's were two of the finest Presidents of the last century, if Teddy were active in politics today, I believe he would be emphatically behind the Democratic party. His progressive policies are what initially disenfranchised him from the Republican party to start with, and they were what dominated the latter part of his life, notably his love for the wilderness and the desire to see it preserved.
Reading back a bit, I see that I've come off on a vast tangent, so I'll end this here. I leave you with a comment which I've pulled from the webpage of the story I began this note speaking of. It was left amidst a tidal wave of anti-Obama hate speech and claims that Democrats probably killed Bill Sparkman themselves... It was the one shining light I saw in my hopes for humanity amongst the seething hatred pronounced for essentially everything I believe...
"The right wing gets up in the morning and makes their coffee with safe drinking water because of government requirements, has a breakfast made with safe foods because of the FDA, breathes cleaner air as he walks to his safer car to drive on his federal highway to his government subsidized airport to fly on his safe plane controlled by government controllers until he lands in Washington DC where he takes public transportation to a federal mall where the government police protect his constitutional right to stand there and criticize the government. Someone should ask him if he wants to give up his social security and his Medicare, his VA benefits and his unemployment protection. Yes, we're all against the government, until we stop and think what would happen with out them. There is nothing wrong with having them, it takes putting together a plan and finances that big to make those things work. For god's sake people, stop and think."
I could scarcely have said it better myself...
The story garnered little more than a short blurb on the local news at first but last night, the story was broken to the rest of the nation.
Naturally, speculation abounds, but the facts are apparent. Bill Sparkman was the victim of a homicide, first and foremost, and the inclusion of the word "Fed" on his chest seems to indicate that the crime was perpetrated by someone with very strong anti-government feelings.
So what does this mean beyond a very unfortunate set of events for one man and his family? Well, it means quite a lot, in fact. Just last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for a cessation of violent rhetoric in the ongoing debates, and that only further increased the furor of the anti-government, anti-Obama crowds. With protesters bringing loaded assault weapons to Town Hall meetings, and even Presidential addresses, carrying signs railing against President Obama, calling for the "blood of tyrants" to water the tree of liberty and freedom, one can only guess what sort of sentiment drove the killing of Mr. Sparkman.
Since I heard the story last night, I've been encouraging others to read up on the subject as well. This is the first unfortunate example of a politicized murder in this recent debate, and hopefully (though not likely) the last.
Plain and simple, these people are out of control. Pundits like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly have poured so much gasoline over the burning coals of these dissenters that the wildfire they've started won't likely be stopped. And from the looks of things, its going to spread and burn down all of the intelligent, moderate trees in the Republican party.
Gone are the days of healthy debate, and they have been replaced with bitter partisanship and staunch opposition to any and all Democratic proposals from all members of the party, regardless of any personal opinion.
Having only been alive and politically conscious during bitter political battles between Neo-conservatives and democrats, I can't say if this is different from old politics, but it appears to me that the Republican party has no standards of their own, with the exception of being Against whatever the Democrats are For, but for me, this is just politics as usual.
I am currently taking a class in American Literature, and so far have read somewhat on the subjects which drove the American Revolution, and then several writings made after the conclusion of the war, during the reconstruction period in which our Founding Fathers were attempting to create their government. Thomas Jefferson, whom the Tea Bagging protesters have taken their "blood of tyrants" and "tree of liberty" phrases from, was an anti-federalist, but was wise enough to see that the country needed a strong central government in order to maintain control over the states, which if they had their way, would probably be individual countries today.
The American system of government is far from perfect. It is easily impacted by special interests and marred by intense bureaucracy. The legislation created by the Congress is impossible to read without a PhD in Political Law, and therefore there is a clear and deliberate separation of people and their representatives, which members of the House and Senate use to their political advantage to dupe their constituents into supporting them regardless of actual policy decisions. They throw around buzzwords and do little more than play popularity games with "he said, she said" rules.
There is no doubt about why anti-government sentiments exist, that is certain. However, distrust of the half of the government that is actually attempting to make life better for the people is just ignorant.
There was logical reason to oppose the Bush government, or any Republican government for that matter. The Republicans seem to stand for few things, but what they do stand for, they enforce swiftly and effectively whenever they achieve office. Deregulation of industries, which effectively makes their particular special interests an incredible amount of money, even if it ruins the market for the consumer, is a prime example.
Until the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (enacted by a Republican-controlled congress), it was illegal for large media companies to own too many different media outlets, which therefore provided a wider range of competition in the market for Cable outlets, Internet service providers, Television networks and radio broadcasters. AFTER, the Act was passed, the already giant conglomorate companies such as AOL (now AOL/Time Warner) and Newscorp (You may know them better as FOX) began to further expand their holdings, and today as little as 3 or 4 companies dominate all media industries.
In short, deregulation is bad. It is only through regulation of industries that the individual consumer gets the best deal for his or her dollar, or is provided the best chance at living a relatively easy life.
Naturally, you can't over-regulate industries or you end up with a "1984" scenario, but Republicans are so staunchly anti-regulation that they won't even allow simple, basic, and entirely necessary regulation of certain industries which DESPERATELY need it, such as the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries.
Up to the publishing of the environmentalist book "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson, VERY little was done in the way of protecting the environment. Republicans will often point the the republican president Teddy Roosevelt as their shining example. And while I will agree, both Roosevelt's were two of the finest Presidents of the last century, if Teddy were active in politics today, I believe he would be emphatically behind the Democratic party. His progressive policies are what initially disenfranchised him from the Republican party to start with, and they were what dominated the latter part of his life, notably his love for the wilderness and the desire to see it preserved.
Reading back a bit, I see that I've come off on a vast tangent, so I'll end this here. I leave you with a comment which I've pulled from the webpage of the story I began this note speaking of. It was left amidst a tidal wave of anti-Obama hate speech and claims that Democrats probably killed Bill Sparkman themselves... It was the one shining light I saw in my hopes for humanity amongst the seething hatred pronounced for essentially everything I believe...
"The right wing gets up in the morning and makes their coffee with safe drinking water because of government requirements, has a breakfast made with safe foods because of the FDA, breathes cleaner air as he walks to his safer car to drive on his federal highway to his government subsidized airport to fly on his safe plane controlled by government controllers until he lands in Washington DC where he takes public transportation to a federal mall where the government police protect his constitutional right to stand there and criticize the government. Someone should ask him if he wants to give up his social security and his Medicare, his VA benefits and his unemployment protection. Yes, we're all against the government, until we stop and think what would happen with out them. There is nothing wrong with having them, it takes putting together a plan and finances that big to make those things work. For god's sake people, stop and think."
I could scarcely have said it better myself...
The rising Communist threat in America, and discussion on how YOU can help.
-- This was a note I wrote on Facebook at about 5 in the morning after waking up from a nightmare.--
Sunday, 13 September 2009 at 05:28
Sunday, 13 September 2009 at 05:28
I had something horrible just occur to me in a dream, and thought it might be prudent to write it down... V.I. Lenin took power in Pre-Communist Russia by convincing the majority of Russian people (through various means such as grassroots campaigns, protests, and rallies) that his party was actually the majority (rather than an extremist fringe party who would have had no real power had the people not handed it to them after they decided to: ...) in power and then murdering the monarchy in power (Through a wonderful bit of deceit by the Czar's honor guard.)
The reason I bring this up is because the people in Czarist Russia were angry. They were tired of the aristocratic jerks pushing them around and wanted revolution, and rallied behind the first person to promise the czar's blood would run in the streets.
I will make a parallel here, and I hope you don't consider it to forward when I say that the American people are also angry. They're tired of constant bickering and of nothing ever actually being accomplished.
Now here's where I may lose some of you...
The Birthers, Tea Baggers, Wilsonites, Beckians, and O'Reilly-cons are the Bolsheviks.
Period. End of statement.
***
We are the Mensheviks, people, the majority in the "minority." Glenn Beck and the others have begun creating their blind army; an army of zombies who can do nothing but watch FOX News all day, absorbing their propaganda, processing it through the lens which FOX News gave them, and then forming their FOX-friendly opinion of it.
What's dangerous about this is that, while the opinions expressed by the FOX n' Friends crews are not those of the majority of the country, their viewers are constantly told that they are.
They show footage of gun-toting protesters calling for the blood of the President to feed their freedom tree, and then they call them heroes, champions for their cause against the evils of Liberalism, and the tyranny it brings.
Thomas Jefferson called for everyone to take up arms against a government which was no longer serving the needs of the people, and in doing so, helped start a revolution that would eventually create our great country.
But his work, our home, is in danger of the exact thing that he proposed, from people who would have lined up behind him in 1776, believing his cause to be the noblest of all time.
In what I like to consider the modern age, with information available at your fingertips constantly for anyone who wants it, there should be no worry of anyone ever having to repeat history. Most every important event has been recorded so that future generations may look back on them, study them, and learn from humanity's mistakes, but no one ever seems to do so.
Just as the masses allowed themselves to be manipulated by Lenin's propaganda in 1917, simple, uninformed masses are allowing the very same, and in the end, are calling for the same results.
Information is powerful. Misinformation is powerfully dangerous.
***
I'd like to hear your thoughts. Am I just being paranoid, or do my fears have ground to stand on? Leave comments below and we can engage each other to talk about what problems this groundswell of right-wing terrorists could provoke.
The reason I bring this up is because the people in Czarist Russia were angry. They were tired of the aristocratic jerks pushing them around and wanted revolution, and rallied behind the first person to promise the czar's blood would run in the streets.
I will make a parallel here, and I hope you don't consider it to forward when I say that the American people are also angry. They're tired of constant bickering and of nothing ever actually being accomplished.
Now here's where I may lose some of you...
The Birthers, Tea Baggers, Wilsonites, Beckians, and O'Reilly-cons are the Bolsheviks.
Period. End of statement.
***
We are the Mensheviks, people, the majority in the "minority." Glenn Beck and the others have begun creating their blind army; an army of zombies who can do nothing but watch FOX News all day, absorbing their propaganda, processing it through the lens which FOX News gave them, and then forming their FOX-friendly opinion of it.
What's dangerous about this is that, while the opinions expressed by the FOX n' Friends crews are not those of the majority of the country, their viewers are constantly told that they are.
They show footage of gun-toting protesters calling for the blood of the President to feed their freedom tree, and then they call them heroes, champions for their cause against the evils of Liberalism, and the tyranny it brings.
Thomas Jefferson called for everyone to take up arms against a government which was no longer serving the needs of the people, and in doing so, helped start a revolution that would eventually create our great country.
But his work, our home, is in danger of the exact thing that he proposed, from people who would have lined up behind him in 1776, believing his cause to be the noblest of all time.
In what I like to consider the modern age, with information available at your fingertips constantly for anyone who wants it, there should be no worry of anyone ever having to repeat history. Most every important event has been recorded so that future generations may look back on them, study them, and learn from humanity's mistakes, but no one ever seems to do so.
Just as the masses allowed themselves to be manipulated by Lenin's propaganda in 1917, simple, uninformed masses are allowing the very same, and in the end, are calling for the same results.
Information is powerful. Misinformation is powerfully dangerous.
***
I'd like to hear your thoughts. Am I just being paranoid, or do my fears have ground to stand on? Leave comments below and we can engage each other to talk about what problems this groundswell of right-wing terrorists could provoke.
A Facebook blog on Health Care Reform
Title: So two guys walk into a bar...
... And they avoid the bar fight between the douchebag hillbillies because they don't have any health insurance...
*****-----*****
As I was waking this morning, my mind for some reason drifted to the current debate being waged over implementing a more universal heath care system; My sleep-hazed mind was, even in this state, actively pursuing an answer, even a compromise to the debate.
Yes, I know I'm odd.
The conscious portion of my brain waged war with itself, my dominant side clearly being the victor, providing what I consider sound, logical reasoning, and numbers to back up why we should have a more socialized system.
It occurred to me that most people must not have this sort of rational debate going on in their own heads, even at their most attentive state, which, I considered, must make me some sort of superhuman to have been having it in a near sleeping state.
So here I am, writing this note to at least make some attempt to bridge a gap between the two sides of this debate. Now I realize it won't make much of a difference what I write on here, since very few people who would be friends with me on facebook would be the sort who would be against a reformed health care system anyway, but we'll see. I always enjoy lively debate, and would most certainly accept any criticism in the form of logical and rational debate, rather than instant demonization of the subject matter (which has become the primary form of opposition to a Socialized system).
So let's start at the top, or rather the bottom. Those without Health Insurance of any kind. The numbers floated around during last year's campaign said something like 40 million Americans have no health insurance. I don't think much needs to be said beyond that. They don't have it, we can give it to them, so why shouldn't we? OH! Because you don't want to pay more money to make someone else's life easier, right? That's not self-serving at all.
I apologize for the acerbic sarcasm, but when you add everything up, the only real answer to opposition to universal health coverage is simply this: Greed.
Now, it is most certainly not the average voter's greed, so don't take offense unless you're the President of Aetna or Pfizer...
I'm going to go into the realm of hypotheticals now, so stay with me. Suppose you are a middle class white male, approximately 43 years of age, who smokes, but has no other life impacting illnesses. You're a manager of a store, so you have a decent salary of roughly $48,000 a year. This puts you at bringing home just under a thousand dollars a week. Your company health insurance plan has your premiums (this week, might be different next week, who knows...) at about $1200 a month. Seems pricey, I know, but it's a great policy! You've never been denied a claim... so far.
Now, the current tax rate on people in this income bracket is 25%, so of that thousand dollars, the government is already taking a mandatory $250 of it each week, plus the stipend paid to your social security, the money the company takes to pay their part of your health insurance, as well as any other taxes and expenses removed before you get your check each month, leaves you with roughly $2,000 a month for car payments, house payments, food, gas, utilities, AND your insurance premiums. It's just a peachy keen system, ain't it? Luckily, your wife brings home the real bacon, so you don't have to worry about it. ;-)
So let's try something else, eh?
Let's take this same person, increase his taxes by, say 5% to cover his government funded health insurance. Without the company automatically taking a certain percentage from your check every month, you're now bringing home just under $2,000 for the month, but you at least don't have to spend over half of it on insurance. Sounds mighty fine to me.
So now we have nothing taken out of the check to cover health insurance from the company, no premium to pay to the company directly, no co-pay at any doctor you go to see, simply 5 extra percent taken from your check and whatever ghastly large amount you now have to pay to get any prescriptions you may need from our monster giant pharmaceutical companies, which now have to hike prices since they no longer have total control of every hospital and private practice doctor in the country.
Sounds better than that first way to me, except for that last bit, eh?
Which brings me back to Greed.
Let's take a look at someone... a little higher up the food chain. Say, a CEO of some kind. For, let's say, a giant pharmaceutical conglomerate.
I can only guess at the kind of insane pay those fellows receive, but let's put it in the ballpark of $2,000,000 a year (which is probably an understatement with all the gifts and bonuses they receive from their companies). Our CEO friend is probably 55+ with such fantastic medical coverage, his claims adjuster may as well be Jesus Christ himself. Now, he pays a bit more for this care, his premiums totaling a whopping $10,000, but, you see, after taxes, our friend the CEO brings home roughly $100,000 a month. (He is, of course, in a higher tax bracket than we are, and has 35% taken from his checks.)
Ten thousand out of a hundred thousand seems a little less daunting than twelve hundred from two thousand, eh?
But the debate simply goes beyond personal greed, and personal income.
If socialized insurance is accepted, it wouldn't be long before small businesses all converted their work staff to it, since it would most certainly be cheaper than continuing to have it provided by a company like Blue Cross and Blue Shield, since they would no longer be responsible for-
(I want to pause here and just say that as I was writing this piece, my Grandma called out for some assistance and has now had to be taken to the hospital for a third time after her recent gall bladder surgery last month. I believe the commentary speaks for itself...)
their employee's health insurance, and that money can instead go towards expanding the business itself, or hiring new employees, or simply buying extra stock to sell. As it stands, this system would benefit the small businessman much more than our current system.
Who it does NOT benefit is obvious, though. The thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of workers who are currently employed by the private sector insurance companies, and a large portion of people working as salesmen in the pharmaceutical industry. Those people may very well find themselves without employment, and it may persist that way for some time until they can either learn new workplace skills or find restitution within another similar workplace, such as the ninth circle of hell.
I jest, but in all seriousness, socializing health care would cause these losses, yes, but can create so many more jobs in all forms of the medical field. Nurses, Doctors, yes, but administrative assistants for new hospitals, janitorial services will be needed, hospice care and private nurses, even nannies for mothers returning home after a hospital visit, to help them adjust to life with a baby.
So the myth of massive job losses has its truths and its falsehoods, but that isn't even the largest problem the anti-UHC movement boasts. They constantly speak of a government run system putting bureaucrats between you and your doctor. This rumor is constantly being shot down by reputable sources, but the opposition doesn't seem to listen, care, or even break their stride, so I'm going to propose this:
Have you ever tried to get treatment that isn't specifically covered by your HMO to be paid for by your current insurance company?
Our current system is DESIGNED for profit, and therefore, will outright refuse costly procedures if it means they might go in "the red" for the current quarter. The system is corrupt and greedy, and has been so for over 35 years, thanks in part to Richard Milhouse Nixon, who encouraged the populous to purchase health insurance from large companies in 1971 and solidified their dominance with the HMO Act of '73.**
So why do people still oppose universal health care of any kind? The answer seems simple to me, but I'll go ahead and lay it right out for you, feel free to disagree: Gullibility and Fear. The right-wing smear machine is well-versed in tactics designed to make you scared of change, and to fool you into thinking that what we have is the best system in the world and fuck anyone who disagrees, cause this is America GOD DAMN IT! But what we need now is an educated populous who has the amazing ability to ask questions and demand accountability for mistakes, and provide new alternate solutions to problems we've had for countless decades. We need Innovation, new blood, and an end to polarization in modern politics. Yes if you go to far to the left you get trouble, but we've been doing it the wrong way (the RIGHT way) for 40 years, maybe its time to give something else a chance.
If you made it this far, thank you, and feel free to leave comments and criticism.
--Chris
** And this is on a completely unrelated note, but if you're still worried about how we would pay for this sort of socialized system, then legalize, regulate and tax the shit out of weed. The jobs and products created from that process alone should be more than enough...
Erin Ashley Hall:
I happen to agree wholeheartedly since an added benefit of socialized health care would be that there could be more entrepreneurs. Without the fear of rejection for coverage for diseases that one may have, but had no control over (Diabetes, Addison's Disease, Heart Defects, etc), there would be many who would love to start businesses who cannot because they *must* work for someone who provides it for them... This inhibits freedom, and even worse for the conservatives, it inhibits our economy.
Kathryn Gerringer:
I think that 5% might be a little low. It might do us well to look at others who have already walked down this road and assess whether or not it has indeed worked for them. Norway for instance is a prime example of government run health care.
As for greed...if I recall correctly our economic system depends on it. So while it is not a good character trait...
Anyway just some things to consider.
My response to Kathryn:
Yes, I agree that we need to take leaves from other successful government run systems, but the moment you bring up other countries' systems, that is when the ethnocentrics pipe up and "defend america" with bogus and defamatory statements. Canada, France and Great Britain all have government run systems, that aren't perfect, but they work in many ways leaps and bounds better than ours, but if one tries to explain this in a calm and sensible manner, they are met with nothing but stern opposition and no real ideas on anything better. So it may yet behoove us to try and find our own way to make our system work.
As far as 5% being too little, I expect you're right, but as I am merely a theorist, and not a logistical engineer, I was producing a hypothetical situation to illustrate my point. I am not nearly trained enough to begin to create a balanced tax system using our current set of guidelines. Like all men of vision, I leave that to someone else! (Hah, a little joke)
In all seriousness, though, a 5% tax increase (conservatives already cringing in their seats) while not really being a substantial increase in the amount taken, if spread across the board (by which I mean to all tax brackets), could yield a very large amount of return of capital to the government, which could easily be used, if not for the new health care system, then for other government programs which drastically need to be better funded. (Education, for one, though that is more of a necessary redistribution of funds, rather than addition, though an addition could serve it well also.)
This obviously could raise the question of how to balance the budget and that is an entirely different argument.
And finally, to the point of Greed...
You admit yourself it isn't a good character trait, and yet you defend it as sound business practice?
Unacceptable.
That is the kind of fundamental, laissez-faire, Capitalist-centered idea system that has put us in our current state. Trapped in a maelstrom, constantly being pulled inexorably down into the depths of debt and consumerism. And it is exactly the sort of thought that needs to be suppressed if we are to pull ourselves from the grasp of Greed itself.
The first step is to stop being self-centered, thinking only of how to make the best for oneself, and damn anyone who gets in your way. I'm sure you've heard the old phrase, "It is easier for a camel to walk through the head of a pin than for a rich man to walk through the gates of heaven."
Anyone who knows me knows I am in almost no way religious, but Jesus was a brilliant theorist, and I like to think that the way our system is run is a complete antithesis to what he would propose.
My first real MySpace blog...
--Created May 02, 2007. This particular entry was the first one I did on MySpace that I really enjoyed. I got many comments and it turned into a rather large discussion on religion with a (few) person(s) I fundamentally disagreed with, even though they were trying to be polite about the way they disagreed. Much of the information is now outdated, but I'm going to include it based on the interesting discussion that was generated. Have fun! --
It has been QUITE some time since I last decided to post anything on here. Not because there hasn't been anything to get all militant and PO'd about, but I'm just too fucking lazy to sit down and bitch about it. So, I guess I'll start with some "current" events.
1. Don Imus - By now we've all heard the story. Radio douchebag makes a joke about a college ladies basketball team and gets the shaft. I guess I'll start by stating that I hate basketball, and douchebag DJ's, so I don't take sides based on either of those parameters. That being said, Imus probably didn't deserve to be fired, but will probably come back with an even more popular show on Sirius sattelite radio... I mean, I've heard way worse every day on the radio station I listen to everyday up here in KC. The whole situation is ridiculous and over-publicized. Which brings me to my next one...
2. Apologizing to a race through its "Leader" - Ie. Don Imus apologizing to Al Sharpton on behalf of the african americans... Or Michael Richards to Jesse Jackson... Or Imus again to Oprah( for AA's AND women this time...) I can see its a faster way of getting the point that you're sorry you said something dumb-shitty about a person of color, but do it in a more original way. I'm tired of reading news stories about dumb-shit people who do dumb-shit things and then apologize to Al Sharpton for it. I mean, yeah, he's a Reverend, but that doesn't mean he can absolve EVERYONE of all their problems and mistakes. Sometimes people say mean things that they really do mean, but apologize and try to take it back and act all sorry to save face in the public eye. Well, maybe some people should just speak their minds and say "Fuck the public! This is how I feel!" Very few people of "celebrity" status want to lose that position, though... So it ain't gonna happen.
3. American Idol - In general... I just really hate American Idol... Besides, I think they're running out of clout. Is it just me or are NONE of the contestants any good this year... It's ridiculous...
4. Michael Bublé - I'm probably gonna get rude comments about this one, but Michael is overrated... He is a mediocre vocalist who has no original music as of yet. He's not very attractive either... But, then again, I am neither gay nor a woman, so I guess I can't judge attractiveness of males that well... I'll tell you though, the man can swing, I'll give him that. Whenever I listen to him, he's so far behind the beat, I can't really tell where it is. That's a helluva swing. Whether it's really talent, or his inability to stay in time is a mystery, though...
5. Republicans - Again, in general, I just don't like republicans... Being the millitant liberal that I am, I have a great many reasons for my dislike, so I won't go into that. I started thinking about that Bush quote earlier today, y'know the one where he was giving a speech at some White House banquet and he's like, "I'd like ta say welcome to all my friends. The Have's... and the Have-More's. Eh-heh-heh-heh." and I thought to myself (for the hundred millionth time) "What a douchebag..."
6. Religious people - Another one I'd probably get rude comments about if anyone read this... I'm really, really starting to hate religious people. Christians, mostly. The hypocracy and hot air coming from the Christian leaders in this country is apalling. I was in a pseudo-dream the other night and I started thinking, What if I was to go to Cornerstone church and preach there, what would I have to say to those people? I think it would go something like this...:
Me: All right now, I want everyone in this room to think about something. Leviticus, Chapter (blahdeeblah), Verse (scoobily doo) [EDIT: I watched South Park and learned that it was Lev. 18. 22] , the one that everyone quotes when speaking out against homosexuals. Who believes that this statement means that God is against homosexuality, and that it is a sin?
*Waits for people to raise hands, picks out one who does*
Me: All right, you there, come here. *Waits for the person to come up on stage* All right, sir/ma'am, you raised your hand. That means you take this verse of leviticus to be the Word of God, am I correct?
*Person nods or says "Hell yeah! Let's go four-wheelin'!" or some retarded thing*
Me: All right then. I'm going to read a list and you tell me whether you have ever committed that act, or not. Do you understand?
Person: *wakes up and wipes drool from face* Uh huh!
Me: Okay then... Have you ever...
Slept with an animal? Person: "No way! That's gross!!!"
Slept with another man as you would your wife? Person: "Eww! You're fuckin nasty!"
Eaten shellfish or any other creature from the sea that would be deemed unclean? Person: *hesitates* "Like shrimp?"
Me: Yes, like shrimp, or Crab or Lobster?
Person: Uh... Yeah
Me: *Picks up a large rock and throws it into the persons skull*
Person: *falls to the ground and twitches*
Me: Now then... *points to another person* You had your hand up. Do you still think that everything the Bible says has to be God's Word, and the Absolute Truth?
Other Person: (If intelligent) No sir!
Other Person: (If not... Repeat process until I find something that they've done which constitues breaking Holy Doctrine then stone them into submission...)
*End pseudo-dream*
And then I thought, that might be a really effective wy of dealing with stupid hypocratic Christians and gay-bashers.
In all seriousness, though, I don't think I've seen or heard a Christian, or any religious person for that matter, do anything really world changing and truly meaningful with their religion in some time. All they seem to do is slow the progression of science and mankind in general by sticking to ancient and outdated dogma which literally does not apply to society anymore at all. I may have become on of those Ultra-Atheists in my time away from church, but so it must be. Christianity is ruining this world, as is Islam and Judaism, and Scientolgy. I've looked at myself, and the only religion I could even remotely see myself following is Buddhism, but I still don't see that happening.
7. (or is it 8 now.. I've lost count and it's too much to scroll back through...) The Bell Curve - FUCK the bell curve! According to the bell curve, I am above average in just about everything, and I am doomed to forever be plagued by morons for the rest of my natural life! That's so depressing! I mean, seriously! I heard the other day that the scientists in charge of the bell curve were thinking of lowering the average I.Q. by 10 points, to better suit the population. If that's true, then I really envy the dead geniuses of the past, because they are really the smartest men to have ever lived on this shithole of a planet. Which brings me to my next one...
8. (or 9) - Gliese 581 c (The new "Super-Earth") - If you haven't heard about this yet, you should look it up. This one isn't so much a rant-about thing, as a "you need to check this out" thing. Apparently, scientists have finally got off their asses and found a planet which may or may not be able to support habitable conditions for sustaining human life. Which is pretty fucking cool. It's approx. 1.5x Earth's size, and waaaay closer to it's solar body than we are to our sun. It is still possible for it to have a temperate climate due to the fact that its sun is smaller and less intense.
Pretty fucking cool, eh?
Anyway, I think that's about enough bitching for now. Comment if you please. Good or bad, I'll have a friendly insult wating for you either way. :-D
Seeya'll later!
--Chris
From Shelley Dubber: Wow, Chris!
You are truely a whiny little guy. When you have so many issues with the society in which you live, it's time to quit complaining and do something. Your quabbing about religion, conservative views, etc. sounds like you're just trying to convince yourself that that is what you believe. After all, your little college freinds all believe it,too. And you want to fit in, not stick out.
Let me guess. You come from a conservative family, but they're not cool, so you must dis them. You're not very cool, so you hate everyone who is. You are marginally smart, so you think that you know it all. Sadly, you might just know more than most of your contemporaries. But you come across as a crabby little whiner who's way too full of himself. For your sake, I hope you can get over it and be a productive member of society.
Have a nice day!
My response: Wow, Shelley!
You are truely(Which, incidentally, is not how you spell the word "Truly") a sad excuse for a psychologist. As it so happens, my family is almost entirely liberal, save for the ones I never spend any time around, and I love everyone in my family very dearly, and respect them to the utmost extent. I have a select group of friends who I decide to spend my time with, and I have more than enough self esteem to compensate for any shortcomings the general public may think I have. So no, I don't hate everyone who is "cool" I hate everyone who doesn't have a mind of their own, and just goes with the flow because it's the flow. I am marginally intelligent, I'll give you that, but no, I definitely do not know everything. In fact, I practice Socratic thought, and feel that I won't ever truly know everything. So, darn it, wrong again! Yes I do know more than most of my "contemporaries" but that's not because of my natural intelligence. It is simply because I raise my head and look the world in the face rather than stare at the ground. I read the paper or watch the news, every now and then. I choose to formulate my OWN ways of thought, rather than listening and blindly following the opinion of my A. Parents, or B. Religious Leader, or C. Some random psychologist who decided to make blind accusations about my personality based on a very poor psychoanalysis, and did a pretty shitty job of it.
I recommend a change of job, since you obviously cannot do your own. And in the future, when you think you "know" someone well enough to make wild accusations concerning their disposition and background, you can take those assumptions and shove them right up your ass, because it's pretty likely that that will be the only use for them in the end anyway.
SO
Thank YOU, and have a nice day!
P.S. Say Hi to my brother Taelon for me.
His response: Chris,
You should practice your own preaching. You have blindly judged conservatives based on what, your first hand knowledge of them? Time for a little self evaluation, bud. You turned around and judged me, not even based on a blog, only a response to yours. Hmmm. You're a cute kid. Your brothers are both very nice, as are your parents, Aunt and Uncle (who live by me) and your cute little cousin is pretty great, too. So, I have some basis of understanding of your family. I've only met you once, you seemed nice and so did your girl friend.
My objections are to your blog. Everything I said was based on how you come across. If that's how you want to sound, it's your business. When you post a public blog, you're subjecting yourself to their scrutiny. Your ideas are as original as oatmeal. You sound like 75% of college students. Few have had two original thoughts ever. Maybe you'll be different. I hope so. You actually do sound intelligent. Look deeper than your text books and MTV.
Have a blessed day.
Shelley
My response: Well, I'm sorry my ideas aren't as original as they could be, but I figure, hey, why not try to fix the easy problems first? I dunno about you, but I typically think all men are created equal. Call me crazy! So imagine things from my perspective: Everyday, my homosexual friends have to either hide their true identities, or face the ridicule of people who claim to be Christian, and who "love everyone." If your God truly loved everyone, and gave you the free will that you think you have, why do you choose to hate those who are different from you?
Now, I don't really know you personally, so I can't say if you think along those same lines, but I imagine that you probably do, since based on MY psychoanalysis of you, you run along the lines of a moderate conservative who likes to rock the boat. You like to inspire critical thinking in your students/others who you preach to, but you would still rather them follow the same beliefs as you, so that everyone could go to "heaven." This, I must say, is very noble of you, but you can stop. Everyone who is gonna be converted to your religion through nonviolent means has already been converted, and Violence never solves anything.
Now, as it so happens, I absolutely loathe MTV, and I typically don't read my textbooks, so I wonder... Where do YOU think I get my crazy ideas of universal equality and brotherhood among all people? It's not gonna be from Christianity, because clearly, Christians don't want that. I've not read very much on the subject of other religions either, so it's likely none of them... Do you think it could possibly be that I naturally, really, truly want to help people? No way! That's ludicrous! I'm just a dumb college student who blindly follows whatever anyone tells me! I have no mind of my own! I'm a robot!
Oh wait! That's you! My mistake...
By the way, I am usually very nice to most people I meet, and I apologize if in my attempts to get across the point that I am not the way you see me, I have insulted you or your faith. I whole-heartedly believe in the free practice of all religions, by all nations of people, of all races and creeds. It just seems to me that in today's society, religion is the primary cause of strife and hate in this world. From Islamic Fundamentalists, to Abortion-Clinic-Bombing Christian radicals, to the Jews who, to this day, are still persecuted in israel, and are locked in a near-constant struggle with Pakistan, to crazy-ass Tom Cruise and his Scientology buddies. I realize that as long as more than one interpretation of how this world, or our people, were created, there will be bitter rivalries over religion, but surely we can put aside our differences for the sake of humanity in general.
The decision won't be made by my kind, the non-religious. It's up to YOU to help create a society where Christians don't hate. Where they really do "love everyone."
Ah, if only...
His response: Chris,
You are absolutely right about most of the wars on the planet being perpetuated in the name of one god or another. But I don't see you bashing the Secular Humanists, or Islamists. Just Christians. Huh. Anyway, I don't go around inciting violence. I have friends of EVERY ethniticity, actually, I have Koreans, Germans, BLacks, Native Americans in my immediate family. Oh, and I am of Jewish descent. I am what is termed a Messianic Jew.
My children (I'm really quite old, like in my thirties!) have mostly non-white friends, we do live in El Paso. I have been friends with both gays and straights. They're all people, that's the main thing.
You mentioned that Jesus didn't discriminate. That's true, so why do you dis him? A lot of people say they follow him, but it's blatantly obvious that they don't. Please do not judge me by Fred Phelps, he's already judged me himself. Find out who he is and use your fervor against him. You're in KC right? He makes the news there. Just look for him at the funeral of any vet or homosexual. He's there with his picket signs. He is the kind of 'christian' who gives the real ones a bad name.
The saddest thing here, is that you and I would probably get along. It's just your stereo-typing of 'my kind' that is offensive. The upside of it is that you are getting a bit of attention from your blog, so good for you.
I hope you're enjoying this and I really hope you check out Fred Phelps, he runs for office there a lot.
Shelley
My response: Fred Phelps is a horrible person, and his entire family is about as evil as can possibly be. He is a vile human being and everything he believes in about homosexuals is comparable to the holocaust.
Anyway, I suggest you read my reply to Kayla's comment, because some of it will apply to my conversation with you.
From Kayla, a student at the school Shelley worked at: Well it would be very unfriendly not to introduce myself so hi my name is Kayla, nice to meet you. Well, cutting to the chase I think it's messed up what you think about Christians because some of us aren't the way you portray ALL Christians to be. You contradict yourself way too much and you need to check some of the things you say becasue you're always saying one thing but meaning another. Next to that you talk about how judgemental Christians are...LOOK AT YOURSELF!!! All you do is stereotype us and think we don't "love everyone." Yeah, some Christians don't, but there are some that do, you know. I have a couple of homosexual friends and ppl who take drugs, drink, and have sex but it's not like I don't love them with all my heart. Yes, I disapprove of the things they do but I still love them and tolerate them the way they are and I pray for God toi help them out. One thing you really need to do as well, is look up what the word tolerance means by actual definition. And I must ask, why do you pick on Christians so much when their really are religions out there that do teach ppl to hate other religions, races, and etc? It would be nice if you would actually reply this time.
My response: From Dictionary.com
"tol·er·ance
–noun
1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3. interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint."
You guys have a point... Sometimes I choose not to give Christians the benefit of the doubt, but here's why. The overwhelming majority of Christians that I have met, conversed with personally, and have had the "benefit" of learning what they think and feel about Jesus and what "he" thinks about homosexuality, premarital sex, abortion, stem cell research, etc, have been as I have portrayed them in my writing. I hereby apologize to the Christians who are like yourself, but I have to insist that you are a minority in your religion.
However, I disagree with you in that you think I am not tolerant. I can bitch, whine, moan and curse the actions of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Scientologists, Buddhists, and Hinduists, as well as probably a hundred others, but I would NEVER ever, under any circumstances, try to hurt another person because of their religious beliefs, or try to legislate MY God into their everyday lives, or force someone who doesn't believe in my God to do so. Christians (as well as many, if not most of the other religions out there) have done this in the past. It is certainly not common practice anymore, but everyday, I still hear about anti-abortion groups, anti-gay groups, etc who are doing just that. They, whether they will admit it or not, are doing exactly that: Forcing their beliefs onto everyone else.
Now, I'm not trying to convert anyone over to the Pro-choice or pro-gay rights agendas, but I do personally think that they are the most fair, balanced, and truly tolerant ways of thinking. And if YOU people were truly tolerant, which you have insisted that you are, then you must think the same way I do, yes? If not, then you should reevaluate your life by taking a step back away from your life, and then just watch yourself. Self-evaluation is one of the hardest things to do in this world. One cannot truly look at oneself from an entirely objective point of view. It's just not possible. But you have to try.
Most people really don't want to be tolerant in this day and age. It's just a simple fact. Everyone had prejudices, regardless of whatever they claim. Everyone wants to have something to dislike, otherwise life would be boring. So if you examine your life, and you realize that you enjoy being intolerant, then go right ahead. I can't stop you. However, if you find that you don't like being a prejudiced bigot, then by all means, change! (Once again, I don't want this to seem like I'm saying it to you personally, Kayla, it's just an in general 'you')
Now, this I do have to ask you. You pray to God to help them out. That is very noble of you, but did they ask you to? Do they want God to help them? Do your prayers do any physical help for them? Does it take the needle out of their arm? Does it put a condom on their penises? Or, if you're totally against premarital sex, does it keep their penises away from vagina's by way of a tangible barrier? I don't mean to sound like your run-of-the-mill cynical atheist, but the thought of prayer often perplexes me. I have heard from numerous sources (and I'm sure you will have your own opinion) that prayer really does have a healing power. I mean, realistically, it has no physical purpose, other than to calm your own mind, because unless you believe in the power of positive psychic energy, nothing is happening when you talk to yourself. You can claim that God is listening, but (I hate to say this...) you have no proof! (Ugh, I feel like Richard Dawkins...) If God is listening, does he decide whose prayers to listen to? Does he grant everyone's prayers/wishes? Does he only work miracles for his favorites? Or does he sort them into varying degrees of severity? "This girl had her legs torn off by a bear!" "Oh, well, this girl was raped by her father and got pregnant. Then she had a miscarriage, and the dead baby made it so she can never have her own children in the future!"
"God works in mysterious ways." I'm almost certain that someone will say this to me in a reply. Well then, to that, I have to reply, "God is one fucked up little piglet then." If situations like the one I described above can happen to good, honest, god-fearing individuals like yourself (and I assure you, it has, and will continue), what is the point in praying, or believing in God in general?
I think I've waxed rhetoric for long enough... I just want you to think about what I've said. And I mean really think about it. You don't have to change your mind about any of your own beliefs, but I want you to consider what it would mean if I am right. You and everyone else like you would be wasting your lives. I won't say that you are, because no one can say that for certain, but the thought should really strike some kind of chord with you. Have you ever really thought about it? Could my God not exist? Could there be no God at all? If you haven't ever asked yourself these questions, then you will never live a full life. Every true believer has a crisis of faith, because if they come through it and still believe the same things, then their belief will never waver in the future.
Also, I'd like you to reevaluate me as well. Am I still as judgmental as you think I am? Do you really think that I am the intolerant one? After you answer that, you need to ask yourself, "What do I REALLY think about Gays, Abortion, and the state of other religions in this world?" Depending on the answer you give yourself, you may be surprised, and possibly disturbed. Then once you have that answer, and you are completely confident that it is what you TRULY feel, send me an email or something and let me know what it is, because if I really am the intolerant one, I'd like to know.
Take it easy.
--Chris
A response from Shelley to this: Chris,
I am so sorry that you have been so hurt to be this defensive. It must have been pretty bad, I really am sorry. I know it can't really help much, but just so you know.
You still come across as tolerant to only the people who think the way you do. Why would you care if people pray for you or anybody else, if it's only talking to themselves? I'd think you wouldn't care one way or another. It'd be like if a fly is buzzing in someone else's house. You wouldn't care, right?
I don't have the time to reply to your blogs more than once a day. For-that-matter, this takes time away from the rest of my life. I don't want to keep arguing with you. You're hurt by people, most probably Christians, and that puts your back up. I'd say, "I'll pray for you," but that'd offend you and you've been offended enough. So, what I'll do is offer to dialogue with you if you'd like. You have no proof for your disbelief in God, and I can't show you His physical form. So I doubt that this is a place we could meet. I can show you that I, as a Christian, can be a decent, productive contributor to society who is tolerant. You may choose to discount this, it depends on what you're willing to see.
What I am unwilling to do is keep fueling this quazi debate. I just don't feel like kicking your dead horse, what's the point? So, should you desire real conversation about a subject drop me a comment. If you're not interested, that's cool, too.
Oh, by-the-way, when I say "Have a nice day" I mean it. It's not a clever way of saying to shove it. We can disagree and not wish harm on one another.
Shelley
Input from my cousin Dennis: Oh wow, I guess I was a little late to the game on this one... Too bad really, these kinds of debates are my bread and butter. A lot of this shit boils down to the fact the Christian right will always line up behind whatever their GOP leaders and the media present as the issue of the day, and healthcare is next in line.
The Christian voting block will oppose universal healthcare because the GOP will oppose universal healthcare because BlueCross Blueshield will oppose universal healthare.
They are simply a very easily manipulated segment of the population. Really nothing more then a blank check in the backpocket of the GOP. Provided that you crack down on bullshit like gay marriage, you can fast track gross inequality and start as many wars as the country can handle, and then some.
Dont let these people accuse you of calling the kettle black. They are the ones opposing gay rights. They are the ones preaching intolerance. And they are the ones trying to turn their own personal beliefs into legislation. You are simply putting these observations down on paper. Yes, those observations tend to make them look bad. However, instead of defending their statements with a real counterpoint of any kind, they can only try to undermine the ground you stand on. I think our boy Shelly said something to the effect of "When you put your opinions out in the world, you have to be prepared to be judged"... All too often Christians do and say stupid shit and then they get judged... Well, who's the hypocrite now?
1. Don Imus - By now we've all heard the story. Radio douchebag makes a joke about a college ladies basketball team and gets the shaft. I guess I'll start by stating that I hate basketball, and douchebag DJ's, so I don't take sides based on either of those parameters. That being said, Imus probably didn't deserve to be fired, but will probably come back with an even more popular show on Sirius sattelite radio... I mean, I've heard way worse every day on the radio station I listen to everyday up here in KC. The whole situation is ridiculous and over-publicized. Which brings me to my next one...
2. Apologizing to a race through its "Leader" - Ie. Don Imus apologizing to Al Sharpton on behalf of the african americans... Or Michael Richards to Jesse Jackson... Or Imus again to Oprah( for AA's AND women this time...) I can see its a faster way of getting the point that you're sorry you said something dumb-shitty about a person of color, but do it in a more original way. I'm tired of reading news stories about dumb-shit people who do dumb-shit things and then apologize to Al Sharpton for it. I mean, yeah, he's a Reverend, but that doesn't mean he can absolve EVERYONE of all their problems and mistakes. Sometimes people say mean things that they really do mean, but apologize and try to take it back and act all sorry to save face in the public eye. Well, maybe some people should just speak their minds and say "Fuck the public! This is how I feel!" Very few people of "celebrity" status want to lose that position, though... So it ain't gonna happen.
3. American Idol - In general... I just really hate American Idol... Besides, I think they're running out of clout. Is it just me or are NONE of the contestants any good this year... It's ridiculous...
4. Michael Bublé - I'm probably gonna get rude comments about this one, but Michael is overrated... He is a mediocre vocalist who has no original music as of yet. He's not very attractive either... But, then again, I am neither gay nor a woman, so I guess I can't judge attractiveness of males that well... I'll tell you though, the man can swing, I'll give him that. Whenever I listen to him, he's so far behind the beat, I can't really tell where it is. That's a helluva swing. Whether it's really talent, or his inability to stay in time is a mystery, though...
5. Republicans - Again, in general, I just don't like republicans... Being the millitant liberal that I am, I have a great many reasons for my dislike, so I won't go into that. I started thinking about that Bush quote earlier today, y'know the one where he was giving a speech at some White House banquet and he's like, "I'd like ta say welcome to all my friends. The Have's... and the Have-More's. Eh-heh-heh-heh." and I thought to myself (for the hundred millionth time) "What a douchebag..."
6. Religious people - Another one I'd probably get rude comments about if anyone read this... I'm really, really starting to hate religious people. Christians, mostly. The hypocracy and hot air coming from the Christian leaders in this country is apalling. I was in a pseudo-dream the other night and I started thinking, What if I was to go to Cornerstone church and preach there, what would I have to say to those people? I think it would go something like this...:
Me: All right now, I want everyone in this room to think about something. Leviticus, Chapter (blahdeeblah), Verse (scoobily doo) [EDIT: I watched South Park and learned that it was Lev. 18. 22] , the one that everyone quotes when speaking out against homosexuals. Who believes that this statement means that God is against homosexuality, and that it is a sin?
*Waits for people to raise hands, picks out one who does*
Me: All right, you there, come here. *Waits for the person to come up on stage* All right, sir/ma'am, you raised your hand. That means you take this verse of leviticus to be the Word of God, am I correct?
*Person nods or says "Hell yeah! Let's go four-wheelin'!" or some retarded thing*
Me: All right then. I'm going to read a list and you tell me whether you have ever committed that act, or not. Do you understand?
Person: *wakes up and wipes drool from face* Uh huh!
Me: Okay then... Have you ever...
Slept with an animal? Person: "No way! That's gross!!!"
Slept with another man as you would your wife? Person: "Eww! You're fuckin nasty!"
Eaten shellfish or any other creature from the sea that would be deemed unclean? Person: *hesitates* "Like shrimp?"
Me: Yes, like shrimp, or Crab or Lobster?
Person: Uh... Yeah
Me: *Picks up a large rock and throws it into the persons skull*
Person: *falls to the ground and twitches*
Me: Now then... *points to another person* You had your hand up. Do you still think that everything the Bible says has to be God's Word, and the Absolute Truth?
Other Person: (If intelligent) No sir!
Other Person: (If not... Repeat process until I find something that they've done which constitues breaking Holy Doctrine then stone them into submission...)
*End pseudo-dream*
And then I thought, that might be a really effective wy of dealing with stupid hypocratic Christians and gay-bashers.
In all seriousness, though, I don't think I've seen or heard a Christian, or any religious person for that matter, do anything really world changing and truly meaningful with their religion in some time. All they seem to do is slow the progression of science and mankind in general by sticking to ancient and outdated dogma which literally does not apply to society anymore at all. I may have become on of those Ultra-Atheists in my time away from church, but so it must be. Christianity is ruining this world, as is Islam and Judaism, and Scientolgy. I've looked at myself, and the only religion I could even remotely see myself following is Buddhism, but I still don't see that happening.
7. (or is it 8 now.. I've lost count and it's too much to scroll back through...) The Bell Curve - FUCK the bell curve! According to the bell curve, I am above average in just about everything, and I am doomed to forever be plagued by morons for the rest of my natural life! That's so depressing! I mean, seriously! I heard the other day that the scientists in charge of the bell curve were thinking of lowering the average I.Q. by 10 points, to better suit the population. If that's true, then I really envy the dead geniuses of the past, because they are really the smartest men to have ever lived on this shithole of a planet. Which brings me to my next one...
8. (or 9) - Gliese 581 c (The new "Super-Earth") - If you haven't heard about this yet, you should look it up. This one isn't so much a rant-about thing, as a "you need to check this out" thing. Apparently, scientists have finally got off their asses and found a planet which may or may not be able to support habitable conditions for sustaining human life. Which is pretty fucking cool. It's approx. 1.5x Earth's size, and waaaay closer to it's solar body than we are to our sun. It is still possible for it to have a temperate climate due to the fact that its sun is smaller and less intense.
Pretty fucking cool, eh?
Anyway, I think that's about enough bitching for now. Comment if you please. Good or bad, I'll have a friendly insult wating for you either way. :-D
Seeya'll later!
--Chris
From Shelley Dubber: Wow, Chris!
You are truely a whiny little guy. When you have so many issues with the society in which you live, it's time to quit complaining and do something. Your quabbing about religion, conservative views, etc. sounds like you're just trying to convince yourself that that is what you believe. After all, your little college freinds all believe it,too. And you want to fit in, not stick out.
Let me guess. You come from a conservative family, but they're not cool, so you must dis them. You're not very cool, so you hate everyone who is. You are marginally smart, so you think that you know it all. Sadly, you might just know more than most of your contemporaries. But you come across as a crabby little whiner who's way too full of himself. For your sake, I hope you can get over it and be a productive member of society.
Have a nice day!
My response: Wow, Shelley!
You are truely(Which, incidentally, is not how you spell the word "Truly") a sad excuse for a psychologist. As it so happens, my family is almost entirely liberal, save for the ones I never spend any time around, and I love everyone in my family very dearly, and respect them to the utmost extent. I have a select group of friends who I decide to spend my time with, and I have more than enough self esteem to compensate for any shortcomings the general public may think I have. So no, I don't hate everyone who is "cool" I hate everyone who doesn't have a mind of their own, and just goes with the flow because it's the flow. I am marginally intelligent, I'll give you that, but no, I definitely do not know everything. In fact, I practice Socratic thought, and feel that I won't ever truly know everything. So, darn it, wrong again! Yes I do know more than most of my "contemporaries" but that's not because of my natural intelligence. It is simply because I raise my head and look the world in the face rather than stare at the ground. I read the paper or watch the news, every now and then. I choose to formulate my OWN ways of thought, rather than listening and blindly following the opinion of my A. Parents, or B. Religious Leader, or C. Some random psychologist who decided to make blind accusations about my personality based on a very poor psychoanalysis, and did a pretty shitty job of it.
I recommend a change of job, since you obviously cannot do your own. And in the future, when you think you "know" someone well enough to make wild accusations concerning their disposition and background, you can take those assumptions and shove them right up your ass, because it's pretty likely that that will be the only use for them in the end anyway.
SO
Thank YOU, and have a nice day!
P.S. Say Hi to my brother Taelon for me.
His response: Chris,
You should practice your own preaching. You have blindly judged conservatives based on what, your first hand knowledge of them? Time for a little self evaluation, bud. You turned around and judged me, not even based on a blog, only a response to yours. Hmmm. You're a cute kid. Your brothers are both very nice, as are your parents, Aunt and Uncle (who live by me) and your cute little cousin is pretty great, too. So, I have some basis of understanding of your family. I've only met you once, you seemed nice and so did your girl friend.
My objections are to your blog. Everything I said was based on how you come across. If that's how you want to sound, it's your business. When you post a public blog, you're subjecting yourself to their scrutiny. Your ideas are as original as oatmeal. You sound like 75% of college students. Few have had two original thoughts ever. Maybe you'll be different. I hope so. You actually do sound intelligent. Look deeper than your text books and MTV.
Have a blessed day.
Shelley
My response: Well, I'm sorry my ideas aren't as original as they could be, but I figure, hey, why not try to fix the easy problems first? I dunno about you, but I typically think all men are created equal. Call me crazy! So imagine things from my perspective: Everyday, my homosexual friends have to either hide their true identities, or face the ridicule of people who claim to be Christian, and who "love everyone." If your God truly loved everyone, and gave you the free will that you think you have, why do you choose to hate those who are different from you?
Now, I don't really know you personally, so I can't say if you think along those same lines, but I imagine that you probably do, since based on MY psychoanalysis of you, you run along the lines of a moderate conservative who likes to rock the boat. You like to inspire critical thinking in your students/others who you preach to, but you would still rather them follow the same beliefs as you, so that everyone could go to "heaven." This, I must say, is very noble of you, but you can stop. Everyone who is gonna be converted to your religion through nonviolent means has already been converted, and Violence never solves anything.
Now, as it so happens, I absolutely loathe MTV, and I typically don't read my textbooks, so I wonder... Where do YOU think I get my crazy ideas of universal equality and brotherhood among all people? It's not gonna be from Christianity, because clearly, Christians don't want that. I've not read very much on the subject of other religions either, so it's likely none of them... Do you think it could possibly be that I naturally, really, truly want to help people? No way! That's ludicrous! I'm just a dumb college student who blindly follows whatever anyone tells me! I have no mind of my own! I'm a robot!
Oh wait! That's you! My mistake...
By the way, I am usually very nice to most people I meet, and I apologize if in my attempts to get across the point that I am not the way you see me, I have insulted you or your faith. I whole-heartedly believe in the free practice of all religions, by all nations of people, of all races and creeds. It just seems to me that in today's society, religion is the primary cause of strife and hate in this world. From Islamic Fundamentalists, to Abortion-Clinic-Bombing Christian radicals, to the Jews who, to this day, are still persecuted in israel, and are locked in a near-constant struggle with Pakistan, to crazy-ass Tom Cruise and his Scientology buddies. I realize that as long as more than one interpretation of how this world, or our people, were created, there will be bitter rivalries over religion, but surely we can put aside our differences for the sake of humanity in general.
The decision won't be made by my kind, the non-religious. It's up to YOU to help create a society where Christians don't hate. Where they really do "love everyone."
Ah, if only...
His response: Chris,
You are absolutely right about most of the wars on the planet being perpetuated in the name of one god or another. But I don't see you bashing the Secular Humanists, or Islamists. Just Christians. Huh. Anyway, I don't go around inciting violence. I have friends of EVERY ethniticity, actually, I have Koreans, Germans, BLacks, Native Americans in my immediate family. Oh, and I am of Jewish descent. I am what is termed a Messianic Jew.
My children (I'm really quite old, like in my thirties!) have mostly non-white friends, we do live in El Paso. I have been friends with both gays and straights. They're all people, that's the main thing.
You mentioned that Jesus didn't discriminate. That's true, so why do you dis him? A lot of people say they follow him, but it's blatantly obvious that they don't. Please do not judge me by Fred Phelps, he's already judged me himself. Find out who he is and use your fervor against him. You're in KC right? He makes the news there. Just look for him at the funeral of any vet or homosexual. He's there with his picket signs. He is the kind of 'christian' who gives the real ones a bad name.
The saddest thing here, is that you and I would probably get along. It's just your stereo-typing of 'my kind' that is offensive. The upside of it is that you are getting a bit of attention from your blog, so good for you.
I hope you're enjoying this and I really hope you check out Fred Phelps, he runs for office there a lot.
Shelley
My response: Fred Phelps is a horrible person, and his entire family is about as evil as can possibly be. He is a vile human being and everything he believes in about homosexuals is comparable to the holocaust.
Anyway, I suggest you read my reply to Kayla's comment, because some of it will apply to my conversation with you.
From Kayla, a student at the school Shelley worked at: Well it would be very unfriendly not to introduce myself so hi my name is Kayla, nice to meet you. Well, cutting to the chase I think it's messed up what you think about Christians because some of us aren't the way you portray ALL Christians to be. You contradict yourself way too much and you need to check some of the things you say becasue you're always saying one thing but meaning another. Next to that you talk about how judgemental Christians are...LOOK AT YOURSELF!!! All you do is stereotype us and think we don't "love everyone." Yeah, some Christians don't, but there are some that do, you know. I have a couple of homosexual friends and ppl who take drugs, drink, and have sex but it's not like I don't love them with all my heart. Yes, I disapprove of the things they do but I still love them and tolerate them the way they are and I pray for God toi help them out. One thing you really need to do as well, is look up what the word tolerance means by actual definition. And I must ask, why do you pick on Christians so much when their really are religions out there that do teach ppl to hate other religions, races, and etc? It would be nice if you would actually reply this time.
My response: From Dictionary.com
"tol·er·ance
–noun
1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3. interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint."
You guys have a point... Sometimes I choose not to give Christians the benefit of the doubt, but here's why. The overwhelming majority of Christians that I have met, conversed with personally, and have had the "benefit" of learning what they think and feel about Jesus and what "he" thinks about homosexuality, premarital sex, abortion, stem cell research, etc, have been as I have portrayed them in my writing. I hereby apologize to the Christians who are like yourself, but I have to insist that you are a minority in your religion.
However, I disagree with you in that you think I am not tolerant. I can bitch, whine, moan and curse the actions of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Scientologists, Buddhists, and Hinduists, as well as probably a hundred others, but I would NEVER ever, under any circumstances, try to hurt another person because of their religious beliefs, or try to legislate MY God into their everyday lives, or force someone who doesn't believe in my God to do so. Christians (as well as many, if not most of the other religions out there) have done this in the past. It is certainly not common practice anymore, but everyday, I still hear about anti-abortion groups, anti-gay groups, etc who are doing just that. They, whether they will admit it or not, are doing exactly that: Forcing their beliefs onto everyone else.
Now, I'm not trying to convert anyone over to the Pro-choice or pro-gay rights agendas, but I do personally think that they are the most fair, balanced, and truly tolerant ways of thinking. And if YOU people were truly tolerant, which you have insisted that you are, then you must think the same way I do, yes? If not, then you should reevaluate your life by taking a step back away from your life, and then just watch yourself. Self-evaluation is one of the hardest things to do in this world. One cannot truly look at oneself from an entirely objective point of view. It's just not possible. But you have to try.
Most people really don't want to be tolerant in this day and age. It's just a simple fact. Everyone had prejudices, regardless of whatever they claim. Everyone wants to have something to dislike, otherwise life would be boring. So if you examine your life, and you realize that you enjoy being intolerant, then go right ahead. I can't stop you. However, if you find that you don't like being a prejudiced bigot, then by all means, change! (Once again, I don't want this to seem like I'm saying it to you personally, Kayla, it's just an in general 'you')
Now, this I do have to ask you. You pray to God to help them out. That is very noble of you, but did they ask you to? Do they want God to help them? Do your prayers do any physical help for them? Does it take the needle out of their arm? Does it put a condom on their penises? Or, if you're totally against premarital sex, does it keep their penises away from vagina's by way of a tangible barrier? I don't mean to sound like your run-of-the-mill cynical atheist, but the thought of prayer often perplexes me. I have heard from numerous sources (and I'm sure you will have your own opinion) that prayer really does have a healing power. I mean, realistically, it has no physical purpose, other than to calm your own mind, because unless you believe in the power of positive psychic energy, nothing is happening when you talk to yourself. You can claim that God is listening, but (I hate to say this...) you have no proof! (Ugh, I feel like Richard Dawkins...) If God is listening, does he decide whose prayers to listen to? Does he grant everyone's prayers/wishes? Does he only work miracles for his favorites? Or does he sort them into varying degrees of severity? "This girl had her legs torn off by a bear!" "Oh, well, this girl was raped by her father and got pregnant. Then she had a miscarriage, and the dead baby made it so she can never have her own children in the future!"
"God works in mysterious ways." I'm almost certain that someone will say this to me in a reply. Well then, to that, I have to reply, "God is one fucked up little piglet then." If situations like the one I described above can happen to good, honest, god-fearing individuals like yourself (and I assure you, it has, and will continue), what is the point in praying, or believing in God in general?
I think I've waxed rhetoric for long enough... I just want you to think about what I've said. And I mean really think about it. You don't have to change your mind about any of your own beliefs, but I want you to consider what it would mean if I am right. You and everyone else like you would be wasting your lives. I won't say that you are, because no one can say that for certain, but the thought should really strike some kind of chord with you. Have you ever really thought about it? Could my God not exist? Could there be no God at all? If you haven't ever asked yourself these questions, then you will never live a full life. Every true believer has a crisis of faith, because if they come through it and still believe the same things, then their belief will never waver in the future.
Also, I'd like you to reevaluate me as well. Am I still as judgmental as you think I am? Do you really think that I am the intolerant one? After you answer that, you need to ask yourself, "What do I REALLY think about Gays, Abortion, and the state of other religions in this world?" Depending on the answer you give yourself, you may be surprised, and possibly disturbed. Then once you have that answer, and you are completely confident that it is what you TRULY feel, send me an email or something and let me know what it is, because if I really am the intolerant one, I'd like to know.
Take it easy.
--Chris
A response from Shelley to this: Chris,
I am so sorry that you have been so hurt to be this defensive. It must have been pretty bad, I really am sorry. I know it can't really help much, but just so you know.
You still come across as tolerant to only the people who think the way you do. Why would you care if people pray for you or anybody else, if it's only talking to themselves? I'd think you wouldn't care one way or another. It'd be like if a fly is buzzing in someone else's house. You wouldn't care, right?
I don't have the time to reply to your blogs more than once a day. For-that-matter, this takes time away from the rest of my life. I don't want to keep arguing with you. You're hurt by people, most probably Christians, and that puts your back up. I'd say, "I'll pray for you," but that'd offend you and you've been offended enough. So, what I'll do is offer to dialogue with you if you'd like. You have no proof for your disbelief in God, and I can't show you His physical form. So I doubt that this is a place we could meet. I can show you that I, as a Christian, can be a decent, productive contributor to society who is tolerant. You may choose to discount this, it depends on what you're willing to see.
What I am unwilling to do is keep fueling this quazi debate. I just don't feel like kicking your dead horse, what's the point? So, should you desire real conversation about a subject drop me a comment. If you're not interested, that's cool, too.
Oh, by-the-way, when I say "Have a nice day" I mean it. It's not a clever way of saying to shove it. We can disagree and not wish harm on one another.
Shelley
Input from my cousin Dennis: Oh wow, I guess I was a little late to the game on this one... Too bad really, these kinds of debates are my bread and butter. A lot of this shit boils down to the fact the Christian right will always line up behind whatever their GOP leaders and the media present as the issue of the day, and healthcare is next in line.
The Christian voting block will oppose universal healthcare because the GOP will oppose universal healthcare because BlueCross Blueshield will oppose universal healthare.
They are simply a very easily manipulated segment of the population. Really nothing more then a blank check in the backpocket of the GOP. Provided that you crack down on bullshit like gay marriage, you can fast track gross inequality and start as many wars as the country can handle, and then some.
Dont let these people accuse you of calling the kettle black. They are the ones opposing gay rights. They are the ones preaching intolerance. And they are the ones trying to turn their own personal beliefs into legislation. You are simply putting these observations down on paper. Yes, those observations tend to make them look bad. However, instead of defending their statements with a real counterpoint of any kind, they can only try to undermine the ground you stand on. I think our boy Shelly said something to the effect of "When you put your opinions out in the world, you have to be prepared to be judged"... All too often Christians do and say stupid shit and then they get judged... Well, who's the hypocrite now?
Older Blog Entries from other sources...
.. that I have written will be transferred to this web site soon so that progressive ideas and opinions I have had in the past will be preserved for the future.
With them I shall include the original date they were written, as well as any pertinent comments and replies which I made at the time. Stay tuned!
With them I shall include the original date they were written, as well as any pertinent comments and replies which I made at the time. Stay tuned!
A new day has dawned!
And yea, on this, the twenty-fourth day of the month of September, in this, the year of the Judeo-Christian Lord two thousand and nine, a blog was created which would spring forth nothing of a Conservative nature, but would devote itself to the ideas of the liberal, socialist agenda, providing the masses with fine, progressive opinions, backed by little more than opinion and facts as they have been interpreted by others multiple times, continuing through a line until they have been misrepresented and mean precisely the opposite of their true nature!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
