In a persons lifetime, they will do many things. Some good, some bad, some of no mention. Our religion does not matter, our political affiliations don't matter, our legacy is always defined the same. Mother Teresa is not known for being Catholic, though she was. She is known for helping the poor and suffering. While the fact that she questioned her faith tarnish her legacy? Surely not, her deeds remain. People remember Elvis Presley because of his singing. The fact that he did drugs and died on the toilet make no difference. Nixon is defined by Watergate, Lincoln by the Civil War, and Truman by the Atomic Bomb. Our legacy is the sum of our lives, divided by the events that made a difference, for better or worse.
The reason why this is important is that I see so many people on forums and blogs that take their words lightly. They will quickly and easily say things about people that are hurtful and harmful just because the can't see them face to face. As well, they don't take that treatment back lightly. Feelings get hurt and people leave over what? Over ideas. Ideas are powerful, strong and compelling, with the power to change nations over night! But ideas can be used to harm others. Ideas, used properly, can hurt feelings and destroy self worth. Ideas are the things nations are built on, and empires are destroyed. Ideas with unbridled passion are as dangerous as any bomb.
I encourage people to speak their mind, but do so with deference towards other people. I speak to my self as well here. I have often said things in haste and typed them down and wish I hadn't later. That type of temper and action are what can mold ideas into a weapon of great force for wrong doing. Words must be typed and written thoughtfully, lest we destroy our fellow man. Words have the ability to knock people down and prevent them from getting back up. As fellow human beings, words should be used carefully, with purpose, with thoughtfulness, to maximize their impact, but minimize their damage. Remember that next time someone disagrees with you and hurls an insult at you. It is our moral duty to take the moral high ground and defend other and abstain from insulting others. Its difficult, and something I fail at often. But it is something I want to strive for. For ultimately, when we die, words and deeds are what define our lives. We are the sum of all our words, and all our actions. Both should be handled with care.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Finding Perspective
I am a forum junkie, and as such, love to find a good forum discussion. I find that people in forums often like to talk allot but don't always know allot. Whats worse, people tend to simply ridicule what they don't understand. Ridicule is reserved for those who no longer have any arguments worth giving, yet they insist on fighting. Usually this battle has long been over, they just can't see it. Well recently, I was discussing religion with one such person on a local Paper forum. While I was completely incensed by her complete ignorance and worse, lack of knowledge that she was ignorant, a rather benign comment is what really shocked me.
Someone else popped in and made some comment to the like of not arguing with people like me because we don't see through discussion what they can clearly see already. He was essentially upset that I required evidence for what he believed through faith. Whats more, he believed in god because there were things he couldn't understand. So he immediately attached it to something super natural. But the idea that something is clear to them and should be to others show a complete lose of perspective and signs that someone has lost touch with reality.
The fact is that unless you were raised to think other wise, you would never attach other worldly causes to unknown events. And to think that others should do the same instantly is rather silly. What he is essentially saying is "can't you see the invisible super hero saved the day? The evidence is right in front of you, but invisible!" This may seem silly, but its the exact mentality of religionists. Unfortunately, when you see ghosts every where, its easy to ascribe any number of events to them. If you believe god answers your prayers, then you pray for more money, work hard, and get more money, then who is the cause, you or god? Well, oddly enough, its always god. Then theres, god helps those that helps them selves. Well, if I get help by doing something for myself then where does god come in at all? What point would that serve? A god who only helps those who help themselves is the same as no god at all.
Besides, none of that explains why atheists have the exact same luck, but they never pray. Why would god help an atheist, or a Muslim? Oddly enough, rich oil tycoons that are Muslim, give Allah the same glory. So who is right in this case? Well, thats easy enough. Take all gods out of the picture, throw in some blasphemy, some cursing of the holy spirit and see if you still do well for yourself when you work hard. I have done that for years and am doing fabulous. So the answer is obvious, having god around to pray to is the same as having no god at all. Only one of us knows where to go to thank the person who made their lives better. Atheists have only to walk to the mirror, no kneeling required.
Someone else popped in and made some comment to the like of not arguing with people like me because we don't see through discussion what they can clearly see already. He was essentially upset that I required evidence for what he believed through faith. Whats more, he believed in god because there were things he couldn't understand. So he immediately attached it to something super natural. But the idea that something is clear to them and should be to others show a complete lose of perspective and signs that someone has lost touch with reality.
The fact is that unless you were raised to think other wise, you would never attach other worldly causes to unknown events. And to think that others should do the same instantly is rather silly. What he is essentially saying is "can't you see the invisible super hero saved the day? The evidence is right in front of you, but invisible!" This may seem silly, but its the exact mentality of religionists. Unfortunately, when you see ghosts every where, its easy to ascribe any number of events to them. If you believe god answers your prayers, then you pray for more money, work hard, and get more money, then who is the cause, you or god? Well, oddly enough, its always god. Then theres, god helps those that helps them selves. Well, if I get help by doing something for myself then where does god come in at all? What point would that serve? A god who only helps those who help themselves is the same as no god at all.
Besides, none of that explains why atheists have the exact same luck, but they never pray. Why would god help an atheist, or a Muslim? Oddly enough, rich oil tycoons that are Muslim, give Allah the same glory. So who is right in this case? Well, thats easy enough. Take all gods out of the picture, throw in some blasphemy, some cursing of the holy spirit and see if you still do well for yourself when you work hard. I have done that for years and am doing fabulous. So the answer is obvious, having god around to pray to is the same as having no god at all. Only one of us knows where to go to thank the person who made their lives better. Atheists have only to walk to the mirror, no kneeling required.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Fred Phelps is Gay!
It is standard for Christians to believe things that normally upset non-Christian people. However, there is one group that manages to piss off even the most pious of Christians. Westboro Baptist Church, run by Fred Phelps and his family, has made a name for themselves by claiming that god hates fags. But not only that, god hates America because American has embraced "fags". To take their beliefs to an extreme, the members of the church manage to picket soldiers funerals, picket anything possibly gay related, and picket even other churchs. They blame 9/11 on our "embrace" of homosexuality in the United States and say that every soldier who dies in Iraq deserves to die as punishment for America's homosexuality. They believe that most girls in this country are whores, they are happy that natural disasters happen to the world, and they give thanks when people die in this world. Some call them hate mongers, some call them crazy, and some agree with them.
However, this sect of Christianity is one of the worst. They castigate every single person they disagree with. They associate anything they disagree with as a faggot. But past that, they change perfectly good songs to indicate that god has some kind of hate for people. They of course can't seem to understand the entire idea of "god is love" as they completely ignore the entire idea of it. They say Billy Graham is going to hell, they call Princess Di a whore, and teach their kids to hate nearly all people. This is the worst part of all this, is that he teaches his kids and grand kids to hate like he does. They follow the so call "Reverend" Phelps and believe he is a prophet of god. They prevent dating, they believe it teaches fornication. They raise their kids to be walking talking picket signs.
They get upset that people call their belief weird, but I say its not weird. I say its immoral. But further, Fred Phelps is incredibly hypocritical. The reason for this is because there are so many cases that show those so against homosexual like this are usually this way because they hate themselves. They hate themselves because they themselves are gay. Obviously this doesn't apply to those who are brainwashed, but only to the creator of such. Fred Phelps, being so obviously hateful, would be a good candidate to be gay. I believe in my heart that he cannot have that kind of hate if he loves himself. Of course, the bible says to love others as you love yourself, so he can't love others since he doesn't love himself. He sees homosexuals, and he craves them, loves them, wants them yet his faith won't allow him to indulge who he is inside. That breeds hate for what he wants but can't have. Its a shame, because those of us who find nothing wrong with being gay and believe they are born that way and aren't gay, like myself, live a much happier life.
For this reason, I feel and incredible sadness for those he has touched. To see such inhumanity in one person in the belief of being righteous, it tears me apart. Such children of this hate have nothing left in life but hate. They will be little less than tools of hate mongering and nothing beneficial to themselves or other. Fred Phelps is an ignorant homosexual who hates himself and everyone else around him. Perhaps if he was not so ignorant and ridiculous in his beliefs and the way her portraits himself and his church, then maybe he would not die so miserable. Come out of the closet Fred, free your mind, and your desire, enjoy life, life isn't about hate, its about living and loving.
However, this sect of Christianity is one of the worst. They castigate every single person they disagree with. They associate anything they disagree with as a faggot. But past that, they change perfectly good songs to indicate that god has some kind of hate for people. They of course can't seem to understand the entire idea of "god is love" as they completely ignore the entire idea of it. They say Billy Graham is going to hell, they call Princess Di a whore, and teach their kids to hate nearly all people. This is the worst part of all this, is that he teaches his kids and grand kids to hate like he does. They follow the so call "Reverend" Phelps and believe he is a prophet of god. They prevent dating, they believe it teaches fornication. They raise their kids to be walking talking picket signs.
They get upset that people call their belief weird, but I say its not weird. I say its immoral. But further, Fred Phelps is incredibly hypocritical. The reason for this is because there are so many cases that show those so against homosexual like this are usually this way because they hate themselves. They hate themselves because they themselves are gay. Obviously this doesn't apply to those who are brainwashed, but only to the creator of such. Fred Phelps, being so obviously hateful, would be a good candidate to be gay. I believe in my heart that he cannot have that kind of hate if he loves himself. Of course, the bible says to love others as you love yourself, so he can't love others since he doesn't love himself. He sees homosexuals, and he craves them, loves them, wants them yet his faith won't allow him to indulge who he is inside. That breeds hate for what he wants but can't have. Its a shame, because those of us who find nothing wrong with being gay and believe they are born that way and aren't gay, like myself, live a much happier life.
For this reason, I feel and incredible sadness for those he has touched. To see such inhumanity in one person in the belief of being righteous, it tears me apart. Such children of this hate have nothing left in life but hate. They will be little less than tools of hate mongering and nothing beneficial to themselves or other. Fred Phelps is an ignorant homosexual who hates himself and everyone else around him. Perhaps if he was not so ignorant and ridiculous in his beliefs and the way her portraits himself and his church, then maybe he would not die so miserable. Come out of the closet Fred, free your mind, and your desire, enjoy life, life isn't about hate, its about living and loving.
Hillary Clinton
Probably the most controversial candidate, Hillary is attempting to become the first woman president in the history of the united states.
The Bad
Hillary Clinton is still a congressional crony. She still never read the Patriot Act before signing it, or looked further into the Iraq war before voting for it. This is either a horrible lack of judgment or simply voting to look good at the time. There were very few people who knew what they were signing when approving the war and the Patriot Act and I prefer a president that knows to read something before signing it.
Hillary Clinton says she supports the middle class, yet she is a classical democrat when it comes to economics. She would not provide the relief to middle class, such as tax cuts, but would likely raise taxes to help balance the budget. Unfortunately, no one, not even the democrats, will support the Fair Tax initiative, save a view mavericks. Hillary is against the Fair Tax bill in congress with out a great answer for doing so. One can only guess as to the reason.
The Ugly
The biggest and nastiest thing I have against Clinton is that she buys into long term occupation of Iraq. While she spouts the claims to wanting to end the war in Iraq, she has already said that we will have to keep troops there a long time. She supports essentially the same thing as Bush, a large remnant force similar to what remains in Korea so many years later.
She says she wants to renew our image with the rest of the world, yet she lacks to basic understanding of why they hate us around the world. She buys into to the same old crap of "they hate us for our freedom" when its completely obvious to scholars and historians that they hate us because we have 725 bases around the world in over 80 countries. Its the fact that we won't go away and leave well enough alone that they hate us, but she doesn't have that level of understanding of the world. Neither does Bush. But our next president needs to understand that just being there makes them hate us.
Hillary Rodham Clinton, born October 26, 1947, in Illinois, U.S. Senator from New York and former First Lady of the United States. Clinton announced the formation of her exploratory committee on 20 January 2007, with a post on her website.[58] She has delivered several speeches which analysts say are intended to reach out to moderates. She has also been holding fundraising meetings, including meeting with women from Massachusetts, a key constituency of potential rival and 2004 nominee John Kerry; however, these activities are consistent with the lead up to a campaign for re-election to her Senate seat in 2006. Many Republicans appear to be hoping that Senator Clinton will run for President, presumably believing her to be a polarizing figure.[59][60] If elected, Clinton would be the first female president. Clinton announced on January 20, 2007, that she will run in 2008 (the same day she announced the formation of an exploratory committee). She has filed the official paperwork for an exploratory committee.
The Good
Hillary is has possibly the most fiscally sound universal health care plan of all the candidates. She defies all nay sayers as she continues to show how it could work and surpass even the best universal health care systems in the world. As a champion for women and children, she is acutely aware that the ones most suffering from no or poor health care coverage are the women and the children. As a champion for both, a universal health care plan would ensure that no child would go without the shots, medicine, and checks ups they need.
The Bad
Hillary Clinton is still a congressional crony. She still never read the Patriot Act before signing it, or looked further into the Iraq war before voting for it. This is either a horrible lack of judgment or simply voting to look good at the time. There were very few people who knew what they were signing when approving the war and the Patriot Act and I prefer a president that knows to read something before signing it.
Hillary Clinton says she supports the middle class, yet she is a classical democrat when it comes to economics. She would not provide the relief to middle class, such as tax cuts, but would likely raise taxes to help balance the budget. Unfortunately, no one, not even the democrats, will support the Fair Tax initiative, save a view mavericks. Hillary is against the Fair Tax bill in congress with out a great answer for doing so. One can only guess as to the reason.
The Ugly
The biggest and nastiest thing I have against Clinton is that she buys into long term occupation of Iraq. While she spouts the claims to wanting to end the war in Iraq, she has already said that we will have to keep troops there a long time. She supports essentially the same thing as Bush, a large remnant force similar to what remains in Korea so many years later.
She says she wants to renew our image with the rest of the world, yet she lacks to basic understanding of why they hate us around the world. She buys into to the same old crap of "they hate us for our freedom" when its completely obvious to scholars and historians that they hate us because we have 725 bases around the world in over 80 countries. Its the fact that we won't go away and leave well enough alone that they hate us, but she doesn't have that level of understanding of the world. Neither does Bush. But our next president needs to understand that just being there makes them hate us.
Rudy Giuliani
Rudy Giuliani has staked his claim to the presidency by reminding everyone that he was mayor during 9/11. Here is his profile:
Rudy Giuliani, born May 28, 1944, in New York, former mayor of New York City. Giuliani said on October 2, 2005, that he would look at the possibility of running for President. On November 13, 2006, he announced that he was forming an exploratory committee. He has led several state and nationwide polls for the Republican nomination and the general election, and has been mentioned by many media sources as a possible candidate since the 9/11 attacks and a speech to the 2004 Republican Convention.[28] (See polls below) Giuliani is pro-choice, and supports a type of civil union between same sex couples and agrees for legal and medical reasons that same sex relationships should get the same rights under the law. He also believes in strong restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms and agrees with harsh punishment for illegal weapons or non permitted weapons. While opinions differ, some think that these positions could help him, should he secure the nomination, in the general election; others question whether the Republican base would support a nominee with Giuliani's social positions. On February 5, 2007, Giuliani unofficially entered the race for the 2008 US presidential election by filing a "statement of candidacy" with the Federal Election Commission, but legally keeping him at the same level as he was while running an exploratory committee.[29] On February 15, Giuliani officially announced that he was running on CNN's Larry King Live show.[30] If elected, Giuliani would be the first Italian-American to hold the office of president, the second Roman Catholic, following John Kennedy.
The Good
Rudy is a fiscal conservative, no doubt. He understands that the line between conservative and democrat is not so clear cut. He has formed his opinions based on what he believes, regardless of party politics or what others think about it. There have been many decisions he has made that have made him unpopular among conservatives many including being pro-choice, supporting equal protection for gays under the laws, and has improved New York City by lowering crime nearly 66% and raising adoption nearly 66%. Clearly, Rudy Giuliani knows how to mix both conservative and liberal policies in a way that few have been able to. He has found ways to do what works while openly defying die hard conservatives and die hard liberals. Few candidates can say that they govern by their own beliefs instead of their parties beliefs.
It needs also to be noted that he has not denied his families issues. He has stood his ground admitting there are issues but refusing to discuss it based on the fact that family issues should be resolved outside public view.
The Bad
Giuliani claims that he is not an advocate of gun control, but thats exactly what he did in New York. While its true that crime was out of control and that gun control worked, using that on a national level will be disastrous to his presidency. No self respecting conservative will vote for that. Gun control may ultimately be the reason that he will not win the presidency. But with a city crime rate lowered to buttress his beliefs, there would be little else to discuss if a democratic congress gave him a bill to take guns out of the hands of citizens. However, he would be likely as well to sign a bill that banned automatic weapons and increase wait times on weapons for back ground checks. These are good things but he is a prime candidate to go to far.
Rudy has also been known to go over board because of his views on terrorism. He is not against CIA secret prisons or the use of torture if the suspect is a terrorist suspect. This is a human rights issue that Giuliani fails on. Either torture is okay or its not. He seems happy with the use of such tactics as long as he doesn't see it.
The Ugly
Giuliani's history with terrorism has made him blind to reality. He backs up all of Bush's "tools" for "keeping america safe". While he has taken the 9/11 commissions suggestions to heart, he still believes that secret prisons, domestic spying, and breaking the laws in the name of "safety" are okay. This is clearly not a democratic value.
Giuliani has also jumped, feet first, into the war on terror circus. He now believes Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and fully believes in the purpose and intent of Bush's war in Iraq. Evidence has been ignored as he simply accepts that we need to be there and uses the same fear mongering techniques as the Bush administration has to continue this war and the domestic programs. Giuliani's disgust towards Muslim countries is noticeable. Should he become president, you can expect more wars, more domestic programs that barter away our liberties to the CIA and FBI, and an increased spending for the "war on terror". While Rudy is a fiscal conservative by nature, his disgust for terrorism has misplaced his better judgment and clouded his sight. He will continue to drive up the spending for more war until the United States is bankrupt. If you don't think the current administration has handle terror or the war in Iraq well, Rudy is more of the same.
Rudy Giuliani, born May 28, 1944, in New York, former mayor of New York City. Giuliani said on October 2, 2005, that he would look at the possibility of running for President. On November 13, 2006, he announced that he was forming an exploratory committee. He has led several state and nationwide polls for the Republican nomination and the general election, and has been mentioned by many media sources as a possible candidate since the 9/11 attacks and a speech to the 2004 Republican Convention.[28] (See polls below) Giuliani is pro-choice, and supports a type of civil union between same sex couples and agrees for legal and medical reasons that same sex relationships should get the same rights under the law. He also believes in strong restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms and agrees with harsh punishment for illegal weapons or non permitted weapons. While opinions differ, some think that these positions could help him, should he secure the nomination, in the general election; others question whether the Republican base would support a nominee with Giuliani's social positions. On February 5, 2007, Giuliani unofficially entered the race for the 2008 US presidential election by filing a "statement of candidacy" with the Federal Election Commission, but legally keeping him at the same level as he was while running an exploratory committee.[29] On February 15, Giuliani officially announced that he was running on CNN's Larry King Live show.[30] If elected, Giuliani would be the first Italian-American to hold the office of president, the second Roman Catholic, following John Kennedy.
The Good
Rudy is a fiscal conservative, no doubt. He understands that the line between conservative and democrat is not so clear cut. He has formed his opinions based on what he believes, regardless of party politics or what others think about it. There have been many decisions he has made that have made him unpopular among conservatives many including being pro-choice, supporting equal protection for gays under the laws, and has improved New York City by lowering crime nearly 66% and raising adoption nearly 66%. Clearly, Rudy Giuliani knows how to mix both conservative and liberal policies in a way that few have been able to. He has found ways to do what works while openly defying die hard conservatives and die hard liberals. Few candidates can say that they govern by their own beliefs instead of their parties beliefs.
It needs also to be noted that he has not denied his families issues. He has stood his ground admitting there are issues but refusing to discuss it based on the fact that family issues should be resolved outside public view.
The Bad
Giuliani claims that he is not an advocate of gun control, but thats exactly what he did in New York. While its true that crime was out of control and that gun control worked, using that on a national level will be disastrous to his presidency. No self respecting conservative will vote for that. Gun control may ultimately be the reason that he will not win the presidency. But with a city crime rate lowered to buttress his beliefs, there would be little else to discuss if a democratic congress gave him a bill to take guns out of the hands of citizens. However, he would be likely as well to sign a bill that banned automatic weapons and increase wait times on weapons for back ground checks. These are good things but he is a prime candidate to go to far.
Rudy has also been known to go over board because of his views on terrorism. He is not against CIA secret prisons or the use of torture if the suspect is a terrorist suspect. This is a human rights issue that Giuliani fails on. Either torture is okay or its not. He seems happy with the use of such tactics as long as he doesn't see it.
The Ugly
Giuliani's history with terrorism has made him blind to reality. He backs up all of Bush's "tools" for "keeping america safe". While he has taken the 9/11 commissions suggestions to heart, he still believes that secret prisons, domestic spying, and breaking the laws in the name of "safety" are okay. This is clearly not a democratic value.
Giuliani has also jumped, feet first, into the war on terror circus. He now believes Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and fully believes in the purpose and intent of Bush's war in Iraq. Evidence has been ignored as he simply accepts that we need to be there and uses the same fear mongering techniques as the Bush administration has to continue this war and the domestic programs. Giuliani's disgust towards Muslim countries is noticeable. Should he become president, you can expect more wars, more domestic programs that barter away our liberties to the CIA and FBI, and an increased spending for the "war on terror". While Rudy is a fiscal conservative by nature, his disgust for terrorism has misplaced his better judgment and clouded his sight. He will continue to drive up the spending for more war until the United States is bankrupt. If you don't think the current administration has handle terror or the war in Iraq well, Rudy is more of the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
