I Cannot Stop Watching This

The Pamphlet of Hate

As the GR was walking around campus, I saw some people waving flags. Needless to say if there are big flags going crazy, I gots to check it out.

These people were dressed nicely and handing out this hilarious pamphlet. I call it the Pamphlet of Hate but its real name is The 10 Reasons: Why Homosexual “Marriage” is Harmful and Must be Opposed. This should be fun!!!!:

Reason 1: It is not marriage. Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of spouses…It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.

That is your leading argument. Marriage has not always been a covenant between one man and one woman? Marriage used to be an institution of property transfer and you got someone to have your kids as well. It was not odd for a man to have many wives at the same time.

Reason 2: It Violates Natural Law. …[Marriage] is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law…By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him.

If this were true, everyone would pray to the same God using the same religion. We would not need laws or mores to live our life. Everything would be perfect and we would naturally know what to do. It is natural, however, for a person to feel lust and even anger. So when a person cheats on his or her spouse out of lust that is acceptable. When someone kills another in anger that is also acceptable. All natural!

Reason 3: It always denies a child either a father or a mother. Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.

It is really hard growing up without a father. It limits your goals in life and you could never do really great things like become President… The child’s best interest is to be in a home that is full of love and support. These two things can come from a heterosexual couple, a homosexual couple, a single parent or the bum on the corner.

Reason 4: It validates and promotes the homosexual lifestyle…Civil laws are structuring principles of man’s life in society.

I cannot even answer to the main point of this argument. What is wrong with homosexual lifestyle? To respond to the second point, civil laws are created by humans in order to structure society as they see fit, not the other way around. We can always change laws. Especially those pesky laws that uphold slavery. They annoy me.

Reason 5: It turns a moral wrong into a civil right.

Why is it a moral wrong? This is the argument that has never been fully addressed to me. How can homosexual marriage be wrong? Letting two people who love each other marry is just so wrong depending on who it is…

Reason 6: It does not create a family but a naturally sterile union.

This is as dumb as the one before. What about heterosexual couples who are sterile? Can they not marry? What about older couples? Do their marriages run out?

Reason 7: It defeats the state’s purpose of benefiting marriages.

Last time I checked the state likes stability and that is the reason they “benefit” marriage. Why is a marriage based on love not a stable marriage? A harder question for you to answer is why the state should benefit anyone’s lifestyle choice over the other. Wrap your head around that one and tell me it is not discriminatory.

Reason 8: It imposes its acceptance on all society…rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as tenants.

Aww shucks! You mean if we allow same-sex marriage, we cannot discriminate against them?

Reason 9: It is the cutting edge of the sexual revolution.

…so… What is sad is that many homosexual men retreated into the monastic life to escape the social stigma that would have come from them not marrying. These same preachers are getting older now and just cannot resist little boys. Why not let people be who they are and be who they want to be. It is not as if gay people are running around having sex wherever they can. What people do in the bedroom is their business.

Reason 10: It offends God…Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it.

I was wondering when the G-man was going to make an appearance. God never says anything about same-sex marriage. Never. He rarely even talks last time I checked. Jesus has a noteworthy quote though- Matthew 22-“Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God the things that are Gods.” If you do not want gay marriages then do not get one. You are to not use the state to advance your biblical views. That is what Jesus would do.

Who would give out this pamphlet, you ask? Now what hate group you ask is giving out this discriminatory and illogical propaganda? Catholics.

::GR Out::

Petido Orejudo

Get me a plane ticket, a camera, someone to hold the camera and a nine. We are going to South America!

General Guemes, in Salta, Argentina to be exact. Apparently, there is a gnome that “terrorizes” people out late at night on the streets. There be some videos for you to see:

Now this story seems bogus (like La Llorona). Here is why:

• There are only teens
• They are videotaping stupid stuff for no reason but to waste tape/space
• This thing never seems to actually attack or do anything but walk around
• They do not try to make contact with the thing coming at them
• The scream at the end of both videos seems the same
• The thing is moving slow and is 10 yards away and they start to run

Both incidents were covered by The Sun (1 and 2) and it reports that the mayor and police have known about the “gnome” for 20 years. Is it just me or does this reek of parents not wanting kids out on the streets late at night.

There are about four or five teen boys in each of these videos and this is staged or all of them are chicken shit. I know the dynamics of young boy groups, one of them has to go figure out what the thing is. None of them seems to get close to this thing and it does not seem to be aggressive. On top of this, the thing moves slow enough that you could run up and see the face maybe even take his hat and be gone.

In reality I think it is just a small adult who tries to get kids to stay indoors late at night so they will not start some shit.

My proposal: We go to South America, find this thing, and try to make contact. Say hello. Talk about the weather. Something. If it does not respond to verbal commands, then maybe it is something crazy and that is what my foot to its face is for or ultimately the nine.


::GR Ready for action::
those who educate children well are more to be honored than parents, for these only gave life, those the art of living well. -aristotle.

"40 Ounces of Malt Liquor Make Me Want To Tell You Something"

I have a problem when people tell me what they need to go to the bathroom to do. They say things like “I need to go pee/take a piss.” I do not care. We have an all-inclusive phrase to say where someone is going and we do not need to know what you are going to do there, we can assume that part.

Girls love to be cute about this phrase and say things like I need to go pee. Or the endearing I need to piddle. I do not care what you are going to do in the bathroom. Do your human function to expel waste, check your make-up, cry. I do not want to know what you are doing in the bathroom.

Guys are not any better about this problem. They make up dipshit euphemisms for urinating such as “I need to drain the lizard” or “snake” or some other animal that also needs draining. Sir, why are you draining a lizard? PETA would be ashamed. On top of this, why would you want to characterize you penis as something scaly or slimy that eats bugs and small rodents?

Both sexes are guilty (in my opinion women more than men are). If someone were to tell you they were “going to go eat,” what is the next logical question? Where? Stop telling me what you are going to do and tell me where you are going first. If I want to know what you are going to do at that place then you can answer the follow-up. Next time someone says one of the above mentioned phrases ask them where. Better yet, try to guess where. Your interaction should lead you to something like this:

Man: I need to take a piss.
You: Oh where? On a young girl? Okay R. Kelly! Make sure you get that little lady a towel after.

::GR Out::
fortunately for themselves and for the world, nearly all men are cowards and dare not act on what they believe. nearly all our disasters come of a few fools having the "courage of their convictions. ~coventry patmore~

Spend A Decade Or Two Shooting

What would you do if you were immortal? While it would probably be great to start out when your friends and family die you would be very lonely. We see immortals in the movies and most of the time they fight crime or are vampires. The two I have in mind are Blade and the chick from Underworld.

Now after I have read all the classics and learned every language I would probably turn to fighting crime. Now if I were going to fight crime (or other vampires or werewolves) I would spend some time, some decades, learning to shoot to perfection. Whenever Blade or leather chick starts shooting, they just spray bullets randomly no better than I could right now.

Now if you had all the time in the world I would take some time to shoot the bad people. They seem to be weapons experts and know how to fight but when they actually pull the trigger, they just spray and pray.

Another thing I do not get is that someone like Blade wants to help the human race or some other immortal. Why doesn’t he set out to cure cancer or some other ill? He would never age and he could learn all the science necessary and more. He could solve all the world’s problems. Why can’t smart people be immortal?

::Waiting For A Vamp::

my interest is in the future because i am going to spend the rest of my life there.~charles f. kettering~

Too perfect

I was going to talk about Rocky today but this was too good not to share:

::GR Out::
don't talk unless you can improve the silence. -proverb

Flag the Molecules?

::GR Ou...Confused::
god doesn't discriminate...only religions do. -unknown

Tupac vs. Biggie

I’ve had this discussion a number of times with various people and the same response (save for one) was correct: Who was more street The Notorious B.I.G. or Tupac?

Most people respond that Tupac was more street. Wrong.

Tupac was raised by a single mother, like Big, who was a Black Panther. Tupac attended the Baltimore School for the Arts, where he studied acting, poetry, jazz, and ballet. Big on the other hand dropped out of school at the age of 17 and got more involved in crime, including selling crack, a practice he continued all the way up to the release of his first album.

Big grew up largely on the streets and rapped from experience. Tupac on the other hand rapped in a more poetic style and defended his lyrics by appealing to a high meaning such as “the problems facing young black males.” This isn’t a critique of the rappers themselves as I think most agree the poetic and message driven songs of Tupac is completely different from the style of the Notorious B.I.G.

In order to up his cred, Tupac took to starting a feud with B.I.G. for apparently recording a song in the same studio Tupac was in when he was recording. Tupac started shit with everyone, does not mean he was more street. His attacks include Jay-Z, the Fugees, and Nas, all legends of Hip-Hop and rap.

Next are their respective run-ins with the law. Tupac went to jail for allegedly gang rapping some girl. Big got in trouble but was never sent to prison once for breaking a window, pulling a guy out and beating him, and another time for weapons and possession charges.

As time went on, Tupac started to embrace the street lifestyle more than Big who had grown up there. It is easy to see where the misconception comes from. Now you might ask why this matters? It does not. Just thought some people should know the history a bit.

::GR Out::
to love is to place our happiness in the happiness of another. ~gottfried wilhelm von leibnitz~

Why you should vote for Obama- Final Part of Election Series

Here is the third installment of the election series.

Economy-

It just makes sense to start here. From the first post (Part 1) of the election series, it is easy to see that Obama benefits more of the country with his tax cuts. Many people claim that he will need to raise taxes to implement his plans but in reality, he is obtaining a lot of his money from the billion-dollar sinkhole that is Iraq. His tax benefits favor the lower and middle class

Some like to claim that the “trickle down” effect is what we should go after which is why the millionaires should have tax breaks. This past week has been a very good indicator of what happens with that trickle down effect. Obama favors more regulation of the economy, which most would agree would have prevented some of the economic crisis we are currently experiencing.

It is also interesting to note this survey of economists that reported that when it comes to economic factors, most favor Obama on most issues. (Linkage)

Healthcare-

Barack Obama has stepped up his attack of John McCain on this point the last couple of days in a very valid attack. McCain’s plan is to privatize and essentially deregulate healthcare. Given the problems of the current economic crisis, John McCain is asking Americans to support a plan to do the same with their healthcare. Obama plans to move the United States of America into a universal healthcare plan, something I feel many Americans should agree with.

Rights-

I believe that my rights will be better protected under an Obama administration. He was a constitutional lawyer for 10 years and knows what is allowed and what is not. He believes in submitting Supreme Court judges that hold to the long held view that the court is to interpret the constitution to our current year and not hold it to what the founders wanted. When asked about this point on the view, John McCain stated that he believes the constitution should not be interpreted any way the founders would not have agreed with (much like current justice Scalia). Whoopie Goldberg had an excellent retort that it would lead black people back into slavery. The constitution has to live and breathe and grow as America does.

Choice making

This is where Obama succeeds heads above John McCain, even to his detriment some times. He wants to obtain the complete picture and not narrow his focus like the current administration by only listening to people that agree with him. He invites disagreement from his classroom to his rallies where he allows for open discourse. This can even be evidenced by his attending Bill O’Reilly’s interview, something John McCain and especially Sarah Palin would never do (could you imagine McCain vs. Olbermann or Palin vs. Maddow?).

Overall

As I have said from the beginning there are some very narrow issues that if you agree with John McCain on (such as abortion) and that is the only thing that determines your vote then vote for John McCain. I guarantee you however that the background and future of plans of Barack Obama benefit at least 60% of this country and probably more if really looked at. If you have a concern then comment and I will answer you and show how Obama will better protect you than John McCain. If this world poll of countries of the world is any indication, we should be overwhelmingly for Obama. The poll came out to 49% Obama to John McCain’s 12% (Linkage). I hope that we have learned our lesson and can vote accordingly this time.

::GR Out::

every man is guilty of all the good he didn't do. ~voltaire~

Deplorable

Bush and the republicans by politicizing many of our government institutions have left a crack in it for our Native American population. Here's the story:

The two candiates have outlined what they want to do with FEMA:

Obama wants to take FEMA out of DHS and make it a free-standing agency, the way it was until DHS was created. "Obama will professionalize and depoliticize the appointment of FEMA's director," says Moira Mack, Obama's campaign spokeswoman. "Like the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the FEMA director will have a fixed term of office to insulate him or her from politics." The FEMA director would report directly to the president, serve a six-year term and would have professional emergency management experience, she adds.

McCain has also been critical of FEMA and its actions after Hurricane Katrina, but opposes taking the agency away from DHS. "FEMA is broken," he said during a campaign event earlier this year. "We're going to fix it." McCain's approach would be to rely on private enterprises that have experience distributing goods, services and supplies. "We're going to hire them," McCain said. "Don't rely on some federal bureaucrat."(linkage)

As you can see Obama seems to have an outline to start from whereas McCain just says we need to fix it. Who isn't ready to lead on Day 1? McCain's plan seems to rely too heavily on the private sector which we can see the effects of when it comes to Iraq and Blackwater.

::GR Out::
the more you know the less you need to say. -jim rohn