Saturday, August 21, 2010

Gay Marriage

Here's a topic everyone on earth seems to have a definite opinion on. (I wonder if there are any "Don't Know's" in any of the polls.)

Most have boiled it down to "One Man; One Woman" kind of idea. I think at least that's a bit more honest in a way. That way they can at least appear as if they aren't against gays and are not bigots. (Sorry for the sarcasm.)

Of course, they claim marriage is a contract between the two parties and God and since God hates homosexuality, it can only be between heterosexual couples. They lay claim to the whole institution as though no other society on earth has or had ever thought of the idea. Some estimates of how long the religion of the one true God has been around ranges from between 6 to 12 thousand years.

Ok, however, Marriage has been around in society for many, many more thousands of years and has no real historical definition other than mating and "keeping" of a monogamous relationship.

Its fine and dandy to utilize the concept of God being involved to make it a "holy" union, however, contracts between people are the norm in our society and marriage is a contract that the church should definitely stay out of. We decided the church should stay out of government, much to the disdain of every old nosey bitty everywhere. Christians today think they should impose their value system on everyone, in church, in government, in the military and in society in general. That is exactly what the Muslims Jihad want to do to the Christians. Once more, a war between old fashioned ideas, none of which are truly good for the country.

If you can have a contract between you and your lawyer, or business partner and its legal and binding, how can you say you won't let people make a contract for love unless its just man and woman? By those standards the only way you should be able to go in to business with someone is if they are of the opposite sex! (I'm sure many women out there feel that would be best for it's success though.)

I wonder how many Christian women out there could go back in time and live like we did 500 years ago. How about 1000 years ago? How many wives would you let your husband have? Would you have been content to live in a tent doing nothing except the cooking and cleaning and weaving the tents and taking care of the kids? Would you be willing to be covered up in 120 degree heat all the time? Would you like to not be allowed to get some cash from you husband to get the groceries? That's man and boy's work.

Religion and Christianity have changed and changed and changed, just like every other society except for some of the Beduins who still practice many of the Old Testament rules though they are not Jewish but rather Muslim. They still have multiple wives, especially if the first wife only gave them daughters. They are still not considered more than property and the roles make the women feel used and unappreciated.

The man also decides whom the children should marry. One unusual guy said that he would listen to his wife on the subject, but it was definitely his decision.

Oh, they still agree that if a woman is found not to have been a virgin when married, the father is obligated to kill the girl. If a man dies, it is the obligation of the brother to take her as his wife. And no, not her choice once again. If a woman is caught unveiled in public, the husband may, at his discretion, either kill her or disfigure her face with acid.

Most of the information above was taken from a documentary and interviews with the women, men and children from the Beduin society called shifting Sands in which Dr. Ruth (I thought she was dead) interviews people from an unrecognized town of Beduin.

The main point of this article though is that by denying same sex couples the right to marry, not only are you telling them you're a bigot because even though you feel its not right, you will still force them into your way of living, but you are also denying them legal rights that everyone else has thereby proving you're a bigot and not just disapproving of them.

I can't help but feel its just like women getting the right to vote and blacks getting the right to vote. You can't tell one section of society they are human and have rights and not extend those rights to everyone.

Oh, and by the way, God didn't say homosexuality was bad, He said that MEN shouldn't lay with other men. He never said anything about women. Its the men who are in charge of religion and men who are the perverts. Should you trust them to guide your relationship with God? Not unless you are really blonde...oopppss....

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Can YOU Learn to play an instrument?

As a long time professional musician and teacher, I can tell you that without a doubt, almost anyone can learn to play an instrument well enough to please themselves, and in a relatively short period of time. Short enough to keep from getting bored and quiting anyway.

Unfortunately, some students are like religious people in the fact that they have faith. Faith that they cannot learn an instrument or that they are tone deaf, etc. Not to say that religious people are lacking in talent. On the contrary. They have some of the most beautiful singers and musicians on the planet.

The problem is with the teachers in school. The problem is also with the accepted and standard theory of music. You have to understand the principals of the society of teachers. They are trying to help you play music with other people. They teach you music that needs to be played exactly as it was written. It's the easiest way to teach large groups of people how to communicate and work together to form an orchestra and follow the conductor. If you plan to be a professional musician and you have the goals and dreams and really plan on giving it everything you've got, then first learn to play by ear for a little while, then learn music theory and to read music. It will be invaluable and it is the reason it is taught the way it is. As if every child wants to be nothing more than a musician.

It is the conductor's job to bring out the heart and soul of a piece of music by his orchestra. Teaching to play by ear is seldom ever taught, and never in school. There are as many ways to teach music as there are types of music to learn.

Now to be sure, there are people out there with bad ears. It has to do with the inner ear and how it hears tones. Some people cannot distinguish between to different tones. My experience is that most people can distinguish these tones, but have no training in how. Sufficient training can usually teach most people how.

Music is about emotion. It is also a form of communication and is certainly more effective in conveying what a person is trying to say than even a poem by itself can possibly do. It's like the difference between reading an email and watching Beyonce do her thing. She puts her whole body into the communication.

I did have one student that wanted to play so very badly. I never learned how to teach him though. He couldn't remember a single chord I ever taught him on the guitar come next lesson, even though he would show up with bloody fingers from all the practice he did. I have to admit that his IQ was barely above a chimps, but I have known seriously retarded students who learned to play with eloquences.

There was also a band member of mine one time who could never remember what we practiced the week before. I don't mean that he couldn't remember how a song went, I mean that he couldn't even remember trying to play certain songs. No recollection of the practice whatsoever.

Never let a music teacher tell you you aren't suited for learning ANYTHING. When I started a school with a music program, I decided to take band. After a week of evaluation the teacher decided to put my on the cymbals. That's only because when he told me I was too far behind and would never be able to be a good musician, I stubbornly refused his advice. He had no choice but to let me join, so he taught me the basic symbol for timing and where I was suppose to slap my cymbals together. I had already been playing guitar for two years by ear, but he thought I could not be a musician without reading music.

Well, Mr. Teacher, I went on to learn to play 11 instruments, learn them all well and in most all styles of music. I have won awards with bands I have been in (Budweiser Battle of the Bands twice), opened for several big time acts such as Sammy Kershaw, Doug Kershaw, Alan Jackson, Exile, Rhett Akins, Big House, The Bellamy Brothers, T.G. Shephard, and many others. I got to party with many of them and hear their tales of the road, and tell them a few of mine as well. (18 years on the road myself.) I have won karaoke contests, and song writer contests and have written over 300 songs myself, all because I never let some grade school teacher tell me what I could accomplish. So don't you either! If I can teach a kid with an IQ of 90 how to play some of Eddie Van Halen's solos, then you can certainly learn how too.

Its a matter of how much time you practice and having the right tools to learn.

For most students, I teach this way:

First, you learn to have rhythm. Learn basic snare drum rudiments. When you've mastered several of these we move on to the piano. Learn the chords and how they're structured, plus quite a few other things. Then you move on to the instrument of your choice and play with it for a few weeks. Get to really know the thing. Then learn basic chords on it or the fingering of a solo instrument.

After that you can start learning basic songs. Maybe five or six lessons tops, and you very well might be on your way to doing something you can really be proud of. If you're lazy though, hang it up. If you get bored too easily, there are other ways of teaching that can show you how, one song at a time, to play. I don't recommend this method though, because you will learn all kinds of bad habits that will stunt your growth and keep you from ever really becoming truly great without unlearning these habits after a period of time.

If you love music, you can learn how to create it yourself with a little effort and time.

Tool Hand Luke

Monday, August 16, 2010

Can Science Dictate Morality?

I've always believed that morality ties in perfectly with science. Can science really tell you what is moral or right? I suppose that all depends on your definition of morality. I certainly wouldn't trust a secular humanist or the current Jihad movement to decide morality for me, however, science can certainly tell you what is best for humanity and beneficial to society. Don't believe me? Check out this video by Sam Harris. You might change your mind!

I think this guy has the perfect balance of logic and humanity. This video is great!

Thursday, August 12, 2010


If everyone told the truth, there wouldn't be many. People don't always know the law that pertains to them and their situation but feel taken or mistreated.

I liked the old days when judges were wise and not just educated. Most of you probably know the case in the Bible where two women came before Solomon both claiming that a child was their's and not the others.

Solomon, in his wisdom said to cut the baby in half and give half to each woman. The real mother, out of love for her child said to give the baby to the other woman rather than killing him. That's how Solomon knew who the real mother was.

Getting to the truth is even harder these days. Everyone's willing to lie to get what they want. I just watched a case on The People's Court where a repairman was being sued because he collected some of the money but didn't show up to repair the dryer for over a year.

Both claimed they called each other several times. Apparently, the repairman was waiting for parts he ordered and called when they came in. The guy never called him back so he went over and got no answer at the door. So he quit calling the guy and just forgot all about the situation.

Well, the customer says the repairman never called or came by, just took the money.

They were in court over $23 in parts and about $70 labor. First, how could you wait a year without having a clothes dryer? WHY would you?

And why, would you go to court over less than $100 which wouldn't even pay the janitor's salary, let alone the judges and the bailiff, court reporter, etc.

If I were the repairman, I would have, after several phone messages, let the guy know that if he didn't call back in a certain amount of time, the contract would be terminated and I would have refunded the money.

If I were the customer, I would have made sure I was available to the repairman and keep in contact. Just being responsible could have kept it out of court.

In Tombstone, AZ. they still settle things the old fashioned way. If a man beats on his wife, other men in the town take care of it. The wife beater simply disappears. There are hundreds of old mine shafts and miles of empty desert around. You either act responsibly and morally or else.

I'm not saying that Tombstone's way of dealing with things is right either, but in the two years I lived there, I only heard of one case of spouse abuse.

When people have a problem with each other, wouldn't it be so much more simple to admit when you're wrong and settle it like a person who has some values?

Music Remixes

As a long-time professional musician, I have oft been very upset by some of the changes in the music industry. Rap was one of them. Yes, I'm white but that had nothing really to do with it.

I spent most of my life learning to become the best musician I was capable of becoming. I learned to play 11 different instruments and did my best to not get in a rut just liking old music or just what was popular.

When Rap came on the scene, I noticed the dance-ability and beat. That was good. The problem was that there was little music to be had at all. Just jungle rhythms and rhymes. Where was the music?

Then they tried to start calling it rock and roll. That incensed me. No one called Disco rock and roll!! No one tried to call Opera rock and roll either. Rock and Roll has always had it's own sound that evolved over time.

I also noticed that people started calling The Eagles country. That was just as bad. Just because something is soft does NOT make it Country music.

The straw that broke the camels back was when Rap artists started using old songs and remixed them with rhyming crap and then called it their own.

If you don't have the talent to play your own instruments, don't have the talent to sing and can make up a rhyme but choose to use other's stuff instead, you ought to get out of the business and quite stealing other people's original works. If you did that in college you would never ever get a job in writing novels. You would be kicked out of school for starters. You're the worst kind of liar.

These same "artists" then claim that you are ruining their business and hurting them financially if you download one of their songs without paying for it. Hippocrates. No talent hacks with a feeling of entitlement.

And that's The Real Truth.

The Pit Bull Debate

Probably won't be a long debate. There's not much to debate about really.

Put bull owners try to convince the rest of the world that it's only how the animal is raised and not the breed itself that is dangerous. You would think that since so many cities and states, even in other countries ban the ownership of these dogs, one could automatically conclude the breed must be dangerous.

The owners of course will say it's a conspiracy or that it's just bad press. One bad experience makes everyone afraid and they are overreacting.

That certainly does happen. Communities get overly anxious about many things and just start banning away. Things can get bad reputations because of a few bad apples and it can have unjust consequences.

But lets look at the facts. The fact without the fear of the public or the emotional attachments or egos of those that own them.

First lets look at the majority of owners. Males, 18 to 45. Men want a big, strong, protective animal, much like they see themselves to be. A buddy. It's hard to convince most men that a poodle will make them a good buddy. A Doberman, German Shepherd, Pit Bull or Akita is more their style.

Ask a drug dealer about Pits. Why do they use them for protection? Because they're mean and will kill, not just bite when you trespass.

I've known many Pits, never gotten attacked or even bitten. Very friendly and sweet animals. Yet they have a bad rep.

Dangerous Dog Breed Statistics

Analyzing a sampling of press accounts from Canada and the USA during 1982-2007, researchers pinpointed the dog breeds that are most likely to cause death or serious injury. This research study concluded that, unlike any other breed of dog, Pitbulls attacked adults almost as often as they attacked children. The researchers found that Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, and Wolf-Dog Hybrids combined to account for:
  • 77% of attacks that caused bodily harm to the injured dog bite victims.
  • 73% of attacks that harmed children.
  • 83% of attacks that injured adults.
  • 70% of attacks that resulted in death.
  • 77% of attacks that maimed the dog attack victims.
Another study looked at data obtained from incidents where victims were mauled by dogs during 1982-2006 and found that Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Perro de Presa Canario, and their mixes caused 65% of the dog bite deaths during that time period in the United States.
Some sources claim that the six types of dogs commonly identified as the most dangerous or vicious dog breeds are Akitas, Chow-Chows, Doberman Pinschers, Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, and Wolf-Dog Hybrids.
Another study looked at a selection of 88 dog attacks from 2006-2008 in the United States, with results ranging from recoverable injuries to death. Of those incidents, it was found that:
  • Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, and American Bulldogs were responsible for 77% of all deaths.
  • Pit Bulls were responsible for 59% of all deaths.
  • Pit Bulls killed more adults than children.
If that weren't enough, Pits were responsible for more mauling of children than any other breed when gotten loose and run with other dogs in the neighborhood.

The Real Truth is that most people who own these dogs know this, but feel if they admit it, it says that they themselves aren't responsible, good people.

Some just don't care and feel it's for protection and therefore acceptable. At least with guns, it's the owner that pulls the trigger instead of some animal they cannot control when faced with a protective situation.

Case closed?

Selfishness, Self-Absorption and Greed-The Anarchy of the New World

Today I thought I would talk about Anarchy. The idea of complete autonomy in society.

The anarchists think there should be no laws whatsoever. That everyone is totally separate from everyone else and should rule themselves with no responsibility to anyone else. That is my paraphrasing and not from the dictionary, however I think it sums up the idea pretty well.

When I was growing up, it was a very important part of the raising of any child-sharing. Hence the phrase, does not work well with others. We were expected to share and become a responsible part of society. Caring for your friends and neighbors was integral to being respected. Not going to prison and getting initiated into a gang to get respect.

Street cred then would have made you a thug. A person whom no one could trust. A perfect example of what  not to be. It worked well. Communities took care of each other and people cared. You could count on your family and friends. They didn't marry you then turn you out to be hookers. You never heard of a teen putting her baby in a dumpster or getting her boyfriend to kill her whole family just because they had put a curfew of 10 pm into effect when she turned 16.

You never saw 9 year old girls dirty dancing on TV or at school plays.

I'm not saying the world was perfect, but it certainly was better. Before you go thinking I'm 90 years old, i'm not. I'm 44 at present and these changes have only been happening for a couple decades. Of course racism was even worse. Homophobia was worse.

The changes in the world hasn't been all bad. Technology and communication is amazing these days and I wouldn't change that for anything. Knowledge is not only power, but enlightening and makes everyone a better person.

In my immediate now I am most concerned with greed, selfishness and the idea that the individual is the only thing that matters.

Well, let me give you some insight on how to make your own life better. Care about others. It's that simple, but to try and prove that I will try and explain why caring for others makes your life better.

Gaining personal wealth and respect is certainly good for most people. Makes them feel important and accomplished. A sense of security in an insecure world. Having goals and accomplishing those goals keeps a person alive and vibrant. No one wants a person with just drama and trouble in their life. No one wants to hang around a person with low self esteem who doesn't care about them-self.

But who wants to live in a world where you can't walk down the street without fear that the next anarchist you meet will rob you or worse? The problem with selfishness is that it makes people take what they want instead of working for it. If you steal what you want, there's no goal accomplished except to make you more cynical and less caring.

The closest thing an anarchist will ever get to love or family is joining a gang. What a wonderful life. Full of death and loss, drugs and fighting.

I realize my saying it out loud does little if any good. Yet there has to be someone out there to say it.

Corporations are anarchists. Republicans are anarchists. Gangs and street thugs are anarchists. It's not just for teenagers anymore.

If every cell in your body suddenly decided to prescribe to the theory of being individuals first then being part of the body, you would explode.

Our world of people is a body of like organisms that need each other to survive. What's good for the whole is good for the survival of the individual. It make the whole body healthy. Less susceptible to disease. Better immune systems.

On a larger scale, taking care of our earth prolongs our health and wellbeing also.

Taking care of your family instead of spending all your energies trying to get away from it makes you stronger, less stressed and healthier.

A football or basketball team can't win if each person is playing against every other player, including their own teammates.

In entertainment, you can't be the popular rich guy if you don't get the rest of the world to love you. It's a cooperative effort. People don't seem to see that these days.

In politics, conservatives have become the rich and the corporate empires. That alone should tell you something about how greed changes people. Republicans want less government and taxes on the rich, while totally ignoring the middle and poor classes. They don't want welfare and food stamp programs. They fight against the legislation that will put regulations back on Wall Street. They fight for the very things that tanked our economy in the first place. They scream. "free market!" saying that competition is the only way to a successful economy. It only works on low levels. A free market allows for cornering markets and price setting and fraud to run rampant. Deregulation. Of course greedy people like deregulation. Anarchy without law.

Conservatives and the religious love war, all the while Jesus spoke of loving your neighbor as yourself. Surf the internet on any topic involving politics and you will hit a sea of hateful, angry, incomprehensible, uninformed and generally livid people, 90% of which get's facts from sources like Fox News and from religious views. Most of which are incorrect and at the least, not full of the love and charity Christ told them to have.

Instead of turning the other cheek, they bomb abortion clinics, give death threats to liberal offices, beat up gays, hang witches, disown family who chooses different religions, their clergy abuses children, are the leaders in cheating scandals and attract all the racists and Aryans to their party. They fight to keep health care from anyone who can't afford it, talk about fraud in welfare, yet are the party of the Wall Street deregulation that allowed Bernie and others take billions from the rest of us that are just trying to have a decent retirement when we finally get there.

The new "Name it and claim it" Christians are the liars and cheaters and abusers and greedy and selfish not to mention ignorant. Their no better than their gang counterparts, just less in your face about it. No, I take that back. Their definitely more vocal than their peace loving counterparts.

Greed blinds you to love and decency.

Factoid-Did you know that people in Blue states are healthier and live longer than in the Red states?

Wednesday, August 11, 2010


Unlike my last post on abortion, I have some definite views on this subject. most can be backed up by science and not backed up by religion. Religion and science should never be at odds. If God made this world, we're just trying to figure out how it works. There is a definite science in the world that is just as accurate and definitive as the spiritual is and they would never counteract or contradict each other. God didn't make the world just to confound scientists, rather the opposite. It's not a concept that religious people can simply carve to their own liking because of some book they have that they consider "the way".

Homosexuality is an abnormality in the human genome and is in most cases not the result of a conscious choice on the part of the person who experiences it. It's not a an abomination other than the fact that is isn't part of the normal genome sequence. This is an area where science definitely has the upper hand in the debate.

10% of any population has this abnormality. 10% weather you go back 10 years or 5000 years and in any social environment or religious community. The only difference in the statistics are when the stigma is so bad that no one can admit that they are homosexual.

This will be a long post, so sit back and relax.

Science has already found the genes that not only control your sexual preference, but weather you will have male or female parts and the problem is that some people are born with opposites in that respect. A female that prefers women. A man that prefers men. Regardless of what the bible may say or what any religion might say, there are genetics behind homosexuality.

Do you really think that a butch lesbian can look the way she does simply by getting a haircut and wearing men's clothing? Really??? If there are physical aspects that are involved, why is it so hard to understand that physics rely on genes to tell the body what to look like and what parts we are born with? Do you call a child born with 6 toes instead of 5 an abomination to God? Probably not. The same applies to homosexuals.

Sure, there are and have been thousands who have chosen the lifestyle of same sex relationships. Many of whom were abused by either a family member as a child or by a mate or other decisions.

Did you know that a large percentage of female dancers (strippers) are in lesbian relationships? Did you know that a majority of those women were sexually abused by their fathers? Some in the industry are lesbians because they chose women over men after all the time spent doing their jobs for men. Men sicken them. They choose to be involved otherwise.

Here's another way to look at it.

If, in the beginning, it is as the Bible says it is, we were made perfect. Then Lucifer temped Eve and she convinced Adam to partake of the forbidden fruit which in turn God knew about and threw them out of the Garden of Eden.

Lets just put it in plain language instead of using parables to make it easy for the Christians to understand.
One decision that goes against the most beneficial and best way to do things eventually gets in the DNA and changes the way future generations will do things. This is what Christians call sin. In the original writings, there were 7 different meaning for the word sin. They ranged from a "mistake" to something Unforgivable.

Once a perfect gene mutates either through human decision or through radiation changes or other environmental causes, that imperfection will always show up, sometimes skipping generations and sometimes not at all. Physical genetic homosexuality has nothing at all to do with sin or with choices and cannot be made different by trying to say it's sin. All you accomplish is making that person feel they are not worthy of God's love because they are all screwed up and it must be their own fault. Look up the word "abomination". It's not a replacement for the word sin.

Is that what God really wants? For you to make the person with 12 toes feel that God hate's them because they don't fit in with your idea of perfect? Preposterous.

Homosexuality may be an abnormality, (certainly) but does not make that person any more human or at fault than your car has at deciding weather to be red or blue. If you would stop and listen to them, ask them! Did they always know they were attracted to the same sex or was it a choice? Just because they're gay doesn't mean they are going to lie to you.

And what about transsexuals? Do you even know what that is? Put yourself in their shoes for a few moments. They were born with tits and a penis, or other combinations of organs. Usually the doctors decide what to do, and in many cases never tell the parents. Then the child starts growing up as a girl, but feels like a boy. Its tragic what doctors decide for the parents. They think they have the right to make all decisions and know better than anyone else what's best for everyone.

The soul doesn't have a "sex". You are not a man nor a woman. Only your body is. What if you were born with both sex's' parts? What makes you a boy or a girl? Is it the parts that make you who you are or the hormones in your body? I can tell you right now, it's the hormones. Whatever your body produces is what determines your attraction to either male or female. So how can you call homosexuality an abomination to God? It's just a confused body at work and not the work of the Devil trying to corrupt your child or someone else's.

If I have offended any person out there that is homosexual, I apologize. In my effort to explain things to the "phobes" I may have inadvertently used language that is inappropriate for your situation. My intent is solely to inform and help dispel rumor and the endless debate. At least maybe one reader will see the truth behind what is and never should have ever been, a moral issue.

Are you part of the crowd that goes out and beats up gays? Well, be forewarned. In my next life I plan on coming back as your father (sexual abuse intended) and making sure you turn out gay and/or really confused and abused like you do to others.

The Border Debate

It's sad this even has to be a topic of discussion. Open borders, or lock them down.

I'm quite sure that if not for racism and crime we wouldn't be having this debate. Of course, there is the issue of prosperity too. Poor people from other places want to have economic security just like the rest of us. Most just want enough food on the table. Some come for freedom from oppressive governments and social atrocities. Some just want to use our borders for selling illegal drugs and increasing their empires. Some people come here for love. I myself have a Canadian wife and after 6 months of being in love with someone I had never met, she came here for a while. (We're working on the legality of her being able to come live here permanently.)

So you can see, I have a vested interest in an open border. That doesn't negate the realities of keeping out the riff-raff. What? You say we have enough riff-raff already here? So true.

The problem with that is that much of our own drug cartels and large gangs are run from prison. We already have them locked up, but that does not one bit of good. So I wonder if locking down the borders will really accomplish a darned thing. Sure, it may stop some drug importing, but that won't stop them from increasing production here in the states instead.

The problem with borders is that it's just a territorial viewpoint. Racist in the fact that if you weren't born here we don't want you here. Now they're trying to pass legislation that if your parents weren't born here and you were, we still don't want you here. What next? Do we pass a law that says if your parents weren't American Indian you have to leave?

Here's my opinion. We are all humans and every human is just as valuable as any other human. That is what our forefathers said when they started this new country. That is the principal we have to value if we want to call ourselves American. All souls have the same value in God's eyes, after all.

Why do we insist on sequestering ourselves away from all other humans? Greed partly. We conquer lands to keep for ourselves because no one will be nice enough to leave us in peace. We have borders partly because if we don't, someone will come and take it from us just like we took it from them. Commit the same atrocities we committed to the Indians while trying to get away from the British. What you take by force, you must defend.

No one alive today can be judged to have been part of America's nasty past. We are the descendants and while not blameless entirely, for the most part we don't try and make the rest of the world part of the United States. We only strive to force them to believe as we do.

The Christians have long fought against the idea of a world government. I sometimes wonder exactly where the fear comes from. I know all about Revelations and how the Anti-Christ is supposed to have a leader that brings all nations together. Sometimes the Bible is just a tool to keep people afraid of being of one mind. (I'm reminded of the tower of Babel.) It would seem that while God loves everyone equally, he doesn't want us to get too close to each other and become God. At the tower of Babel the nations started building a tower that would reach to the sky and reach God. Then they would become as God. He made them unable to understand each other. Gave them all different languages so they could not work as one. What a ridiculous explanation! The Germans and us speak different languages, yet they both had the same root and we can easily learn each others language with a little effort. Trying to tell me that the tower of Babel would just be forgotten as an endeavor just because of a language barrier? I just don't believe it.

Look at the world now. We have computers to immediately translate anything we see on the screen. We are working together more than at anytime in history and God hasn't decided to change all our shit around so that we can't do anything intelligent or make progress in science. We know more know that we ever have with no end in sight.

I'm not saying God isn't real, but I am saying that God would have had to use those types of fairy tales just to get his people to understand the simplest of things. They wouldn't have been able to understand that language differences occurred naturally over time. People come up with new words for things in their environment, accents change over time and things become unrecognizable in the ensuing centuries.

All people are valuable and racism keeps us apart. We should have no borders with our neighbors and peace should reign if there were any real justice in the world.

As long as there's religion, racism and greed, war will always be a part of our world.


How does one decide what to believe? Everyone with an opinion has a valid point. Is there a way to combine everyones opinion and find what The Real Truth is?

I'm going to try and tackle this issue in my own way.

First let me say that anytime I have brought this up in conversation, even if it was just to ask a woman how she feels about the subject, I get the same response: Extreme anger and the opinion that because I'm a man, I don't have the right to an opinion because I couldn't possibly understand the idea or the situation.

Ok, I'm fine with that. I am aware that I could never understand how a woman might feel about this. I can, however, understand how a human could feel about it.

Specific things that women go through I could not begin to understand, of that much I'm sure. Still, I am an intelligent, caring, empathic person who really wants to know the truth about every situation, not just my own.

In my years past, I was pro-life. The more horror stories I heard, the more I started having feelings of empathy for the raped, the medically incapable and the ignorant.

I never did find the middle ground that tells me exactly what is the truth is on this topic. I think that anyone who truly tries to find the real truth will might feel the same.

On the one hand you value life as being the most precious thing we have. On the other, the injustice of some asshole doing something so dastardly as rape. Many times the mother ends up hating the child and couldn't possibly raise it and can't see them self carrying it for 9 months and having to think about the rape every day for almost a year. Then ending up with an adoption instead of the love of a child. Then there's the science of it. Regardless of what Christians, Dems or Catholics believe, there is another side to this.

All I can do is give my own experiences along with some information that may help you to decide this issue yourself. I will not present my own opinions as to the morality of it, because I am still deciding myself and I may never know how to feel on the issue truly.

Catholics and Christians alike believe that the soul enters the body at conception. That part of the equation is not yet provable by science or any other rationality, including the religious one. There is no religion that can say when conception actually occurs because there's no reference to it in religious texts. (at least not that I am aware of.)

That doesn't mean that it doesn't, just that there's no documentation I can find for them to think that it does. Their argument depends somewhat on that premise. The courts decided after looking at the available science that about three months was when the fetus was formed enough to have a nervous system and could feel pain and after that, it would be a person. At least that's the way I remember the situation. If there are any out there with facts disputing any of this, please let me know. It's my opinion that the courts tried to be kind and still stay within scientific guidelines about this.

So it's not murder if it has a soul. Taking the chance on murder depending on when the soul enters the body is the main topic I guess. So the safe bet is to assume as soon as the sperm finds its way into the egg, God sends down a soul. Their argument is a pretty good one, I must say.

To continue with the Christian argument, the majority of women who have abortions experience between some remorse, and extreme remorse. I would imagine that would depend on their moral views on the subject, but that isn't very clear in statistics. Just an supposition. I can imagine the regret of never knowing your child, the guilt of not truly knowing if what you did was wrong, or the  belief that you know it's wrong. The destruction to your internal organs, maybe never being able to have a child in the future because of the procedure.

There is one aspect that I can't avoid when discussing this topic. The morality of killing anyone. Not just killing a fetus, but capital punishment or in war or even in defense of family. If you can kill to protect your home and belongings with lethal force, why can't you kill for emotional reasons? Some women get off the hook when killing their husbands when they are PMS'ing. In some states it's legal to kill an intruder. There are some laws still on the books that allow duals.

What we can get from this is that the law and what is moral are two separate things entirely. The law tends to be what is good for a society, but not necessarily what is considered moral. Every state has different laws concerning what is acceptable or not acceptable.

We know how Christians believe, we know how the girl who was raped feels. What does science say and how can it bridge the gap between the two? And how do we decide when the child will be born with a terrible and painful disease and maybe not live very long, but the birth would put the mother at risk?

We know how the husband might decide, but what would the mother want? Doesn't the husband have any say in the matter of his own offspring? Many women feel he doesn't. The reality is that while it's her body that carries they child, it is his child too and his seed. He does have legal rights in the decision in most states.

From a mere science standpoint, as well as simply human, one would argue that as long as the development of the nervous system hasn't developed to the point where the fetus would feel any pain if aborted, it would be acceptable and not cruel to a living form of life.

Science should really not have a moral objection at any point at all except that scientists are still humans and it's that humanity that keeps them from being moral monsters, with feeling for what other go through or feel.

You can never put yourself in the place of a woman raped. There is nothing that can top the torture and the feeling of being slaved and demoralized. Physical torture in other fashions don't compare. The loss of self and self esteem, the guilt and the fear. There's very little on this earth I can think of worse than rape. To be reminded of it for 20+ years after trying to raise the child of a rapist can never be ok to have to live with.
The only thing worse than raping a woman would be the rape or destruction of a child's innocence. Maybe.

So you bomb clinics that offer abortions. You kill to make your point that its not ok to kill. You say its murder and make a raped woman feel even worse after all she's already had to live through. Shame on you. You are just as bad as the original rapist.

Not all abortions are a consequence of rape. Probably most aren't. (Don't tag me on statistics, it's not the point here). Mother's who disallow their children the benefit of sex education in our schools, but never educate their own children on the topic are just as much to blame as the young woman is at being careless. The one instance where I do not believe abortions should be allowed to take place is just for the stupidity and carelessness of the person who got pregnant. Now days, girls are getting pregnant just because they want to.

I heard of a woman (child) getting pregnant because she had a friend who told her she could lose weight this way. The friend didn't happen to mention that this was because of postpartum depression. Now she has to live with the decision and frankly, I wish she would have been sterilized instead of being allowed to add to the gene pool. Do I agree with abortions under these types of circumstances? I still don't know. I would hate to think this teenager would be raising a child. I cringe at the thought of what the child would have to go through just to end up another gang shot dead child or end up with life in prison, never having experienced any of the wonders life can be or bring.

Then again, what the hell did the child ever do to deserve such an ass for a mother? Might it live a full, meaningful life? Not likely but that's not my decision to make and neither should it be the courts nor the churches until one side can prove completely that they are right. It's an individual issue. Make up your own mind and don't let anyone sway you until you have all the facts you feel you need to make an informed, logical and moral decision.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Witchcraft and You

Here's another rant about the Churches and oppression of those they disagree with.

One might think that I am angry with Christianity and God, but nothing could be farther from the truth. I am a spiritual person, just not the kind that thinks there's only one path to God. No, I'm not a witch either, but used to play around with the idea and for a while got quite an education in the process that I never would have gotten from the Christian sources I was involved with previously.

I knew what the Church had to say about it but felt there was something wrong with "Suffereth not a witch to live" and other fears the church had concerning them. Seemed out of place in the book of the Bible it was in and the overall context of most of the other passages. So I started researching Wicca and witchcraft in general.

I have to admit I was a young buck and had heard that witches were mostly women and they danced naked and had sex rituals. What red blooded young man wouldn't want to know more about this! I knew I did, but was severely disappointed in the reality. Yes, there were some really odd things and strange people. It seemed that Wicca mostly drew the people who were drawn by oddities and the idea of magic and even many mentally ill people.

Mostly it was just young girls trying to earn their independence and piss off their parents. I learned some very startling things though in my research that you won't learn in church, and it was no glory to the precepts that Christianity was supposed to hold.

Like the fact that originally witches were nothing more than midwives in early Europe. They learned healing herbs and delivered babies and were the wise ones of the small villages. If the passages in the Bible that spoke of witches were written as early as they are supposed to have been written, they wouldn't likely have been there at all because the term "witch" didn't even come about until much later. Yet Christians today still hold that there were never any mistranslations in the Bible. That the word of God is perfect and complete, infallible-yet they forget sometimes that the rulers of the day indeed did change some things, and those changes still persist today.

Please don't mistake my vehemency on subjects like these for anger or resentment. I do feel betrayed sometimes by the things I learned that I later learned was completely false, but I don't harbor resentment. I do however feel that the record should be set straight and that they will be judged. Judged by their own lies and corruption in front of God. There's no excuse for the two-faced, pretenders. I'm not mad at God, I'm mad at his followers.

How about the fact that when the church came to Europe and saw the harvest dances, the Christians thought they were riding brooms. Indeed there were brooms, part of the ritual festival for crop fertility, which was just as superstitious as Christians thinking they were actually doing magick and riding brooms. 

Another factoid, There were only three witches burnt at the stake in the U.S.. At least two of those happened in Boston. Most were hung or drowned, and it was by the thousands by Christians in Europe. Christians killed more people for being witches than all of the jihad Muslims combined-(9 Million according to some sources) then you can also throw in all the Jews Hitler killed and you still wouldn't have the total number of witches killed by Christians. Betcha won't get that information in Bible school, the accuracy of which I can't personally attest to.

For those uninitiated with the topic, The Wiccan Rede is not much different from the Golden Rule; An it harm none, do what thou will.

There is no Satanism in Wicca (witchcraft), no sacrifices of humans or animals (Jews and Christians did) and no wars started over the precepts and beliefs. They were simply slaughtered and had to use folklore and stories mostly to give future generations their knowledge, lest they be found out and hung.

The old Catholic church used to tear down their pagan places of worship and build the church on the ruins of the old ways. They, much of the time, had to use local stonemasons and workers for labor which turned out to be kind of funny because right under the noses of the Catholic church, the masons and stone workers added in their own deities and symbolic icons and were forced to go to church. The Catholics didn't realize they were still praying to their own gods and goddesses while in the Church.

Pagan witches ended up making their own languages, secret symbols used to write texts and they kept these texts well hidden. It was called the book of shadows. Shadows, because it had to be hidden away on pain of death. Witches were no more "magic" than an average person could walk on water. Spells abound, superstitions of healing and powers, attributed to the Goddess and God. But no more strange than any other pagan beliefs.

They did get a few things right by developing their intuitive powers. The Tarot is one of them. Many believe that the symbolism on the cards are things just like our road signs today. If you see 3 wavy lines one over the other, you know that means water.

The same type of symbolism in most older cultures including most American Indian and Egyptian hieroglyphs. Things that have been symbols from the beginning or our cultures first writings. Using these symbols helps the user "tune" in the the super-conscious or the mind of God, giving the user the ability to shuffle the cards and pick ones that are relevant to the readee.

I used to be very proficient with the cards myself. There was never any of the Romanian tricks associated with Gypsies. Just straight forward intuition and many times, a literal interpretation of the cards as the instruction books say. I have successfully predicted the pregnancy of a woman who didn't yet know she was pregnant, and many, many other things. I wasn't calling on any demons, nor using otherworldly powers, I was just using my intuition in a controlled, more intense fashion than I would do at any other time or situation.

One piece of advice, never take seriously anyone who would charge you for the service. Does a Christian in church with a revelation tell you that you must give them 10 bucks to tell you what God told them to tell you? Of course not. How priests can tell you you have to pay to get out of purgatory is simply evil. (sorry, it's just my opinion.) The greed of the Church.

I'm not talking about tithe. Tithe is a perfectly acceptable way to support those who are your spiritual leaders and moral shepherds. (If you like being sheep.) Most of them spend all their time helping the flock and doing everything they can for humanity, at least those who aren't molesting children.

Money always gets in the way of real spiritual gifts given to anyone. There are many things out there that are only evil if you believe they are. ESP is a prime example. Christians think that being together for years and knowing if the other is going to call is from God. When non-Christians can hear each other's thoughts they think the Devil plays some part, since it's a "power". Nonsense, and don't you believe them for a second. It's a talent of the human brain-some much more than others, able to send and recieve energy. It's not a "gift" and it's not a being or God sending the messages for you. It's just you doing what millennial of survival has imparted to us through learning and changing DNA.

How God could allow the passage "Suffereth not a witch to live", is beyond my understanding.

Oh, and by the way, real Satanists do not believe in Satan, nor do they believe in any God at all. They believe they are god themselves. They are basically just atheists with a bad attitude. I've known 2 of them myself and what they seem to have in common is pessimism and disdain for anything happy or pure. They do not, however, sacrifice virgins or hold midnight seances.

I believe in all paths to God. That means that if a person is seeking the light, he or she will find it if they are thirsty enough for it. You can be a Wiccan, a Buddhist, Taoist, or any number of things and still find God and still find peace. I have searched for the truth, and for becoming a better person, and for inner peace all my life and have found it in a number of places, all enriching my soul more and more. I have even found peace and fulfillment in science and the amazement of what can be here on earth, not just in heaven. I'm not scared to die, and know I will give a good accounting when I do.

No Wiccan has ever even hurt my feelings, let alone make me feel as betrayed as my Christian brethren. Let your fear and loathing of those you don't understand go, and find that love is long-suffering and kind. Like Jesus intended.

Humans and Computers (The correlation)

There are certainly no shortage of opinions on the subject but I find most of them to be somewhat too specific and less of an overview than I would like to see.

Unless you're an avid science fiction fan, you may not have really thought about how computers and humans really are alike or what spiritual topics and controversy it really can drum up.

If you equate us being made in the image of God and therefor us having a need to create in our own image you start to see the "Genesis" of this discussion.

We have a great desire to make and invent things that not only serve us and make our lives easier, but we seem to want a companion of our own creation.

A.I. or Artificial Intelligence has been a topic of serious debate and discussion as long as we've had computers and science fiction. Being an avid reader of sci-fi myself, I've read literally hundreds of them. The one thing they have most in common is the machines turning against us. A bit less common is when they become self aware and still like us. I think that's because as humans, we instinctively understand that we're actually parasites struggling to find justification for our destructive ways and fear that our own creations, because they will know us implicitly, will in fact come to realize this and decide that we don't deserve to live.

After all the warning from the greatest minds our planet has ever produced, still science follows after science fiction like a dog at a butcher's shop. We are getting Sooooo close to bio-computing technology that its really getting scary. We keep making robots and yearn for the day when they can make their own decisions and think for themselves. I wonder if God went through the same process?

Did he work for a couple millennia to come up with the perfect being, only to find that it thought for itself and therefore messed everything up? Is that what our creations will do as well? Are we nothing more than software programmed to believe that everything we do is real? Hmmmmmmmmm

When you start realizing that matter can actually exist in two places in space at the same exact moment, it gives you pause as to the reality of our world. For a better and easier way to understand particle physics, try This great site.  It really shows you how particles can be in two places at once and blows your whole theory about the universe.

If that didn't totally blow your mind, then you're in the wrong place and more advanced than I and I tip my hat. I have always been amazed that science comes to pass a few or more years after someone writes it down in a book. You have to wonder if the science fiction writer is giving him/herself over the the collective consciousness/pool of knowledge/mathematical probabilities/God and seeing into the future. Its certainly easier to think that science people love science fiction and follow like sheep towards a social goal, however, I don't believe that's entirely the case.

As far as regular science is concerned, you can only accomplish what mathematics can prove. In other words, You can't make 5 from 2+1. Things can only be what their sum amounts to in whatever combinations are possible and so on.

Believing we could follow Star Trek principals and come up with a transporter would have been thought ridiculous to most all scientists other than Einstein and a few select others at the time. But the time has come and physicists have certainly proved that its not only possible but have transported atoms (?) a few feet. Not only that but combining particle physics with transportation theory, I can see being able to not only transport an item, but also leave a copy at the point of origination someday in the future.

And if a particle can be in two places at once, it would wipe out hunger if we could replicate (another Star Trek Principle) food. If a person could replicate anything, it would destroy the economy as we understand it now. There would be no way to tell between currency and counterfeit. No one would need a loan for a home or for tools of their trade. I realize things never turn out quite the way the writers tell it and my ideas may never come to pass in the way I am speaking, however, we would have to be colonizing planets by that time to keep some countries from replicating nukes and wiping everyone out. Will God step in at some point and stop us? Or will we eventually prove that God is nothing more than the active imagination of the ignorant? Or maybe that we should have stayed ignorant in the Garden of Eden and kept our mouths shut?

Politics and Religion

This site really isn't religious or political, however, I do have to speak my mind on the subjects and hopefully you will find the truth in it and not just be defensive. Let me explain.

When my wife and I first got together we used to have some really serious arguments. At first I couldn't understand why she would be so vehement about being right. With most other women i'd known, if you kept at a "who's right and who's wrong" type conversation long enough, they would simply say, "Whatever!" at some point and the conversation would be over. But not her. As long as she thought she was right she would not give up and after a dozen or so of these, I started noticing a pattern; I found myself wrong sometimes. (Ok, half the time or more.)

It made me question my memory as well as my views. At first I felt taken down a notch or three. I felt like she didn't really respect my or my views. I was the man of the house and dammit, I should be listened to! As it turned out, she didn't think of me as the man of the house but as a partner in life. As one person and she was not going to allow me (as part of her) to be wrong or misinformed because that reflected on her as well.

Once I quit feeling sorry for myself I had a revelation. Why would I want to be wrong about anything?? For prides sake? You can be a lot more proud of knowing the truth than in being wrong.

We still argued about who was right or wrong, but it took on a new hue. Now we were arguing to find out what the truth was. She also got to where she realized (and it was a shock to her) that she was wrong sometimes also. We started looking things up and doing research. We started arguing kinder with each other and even feeling a sense of accomplishment if we found ourselves to be wrong.

When you find out you're wrong, feel happy that you finally got that bit of incorrect information out of you instead of feeling foolish and defensive. That is my point.

As I said in my last article, "I'm not afraid to tell the truth" I've never found a single group of people who are so willing to lie to get what they want as Republicans. Many are simply being vehement about their views because they hate to be wrong and they follow whatever sources they have and use for information because it fits their was of thinking instead of taking the harder route and finding these things out on their own.

They listen to Fox News or the hellfire attitudes of their preachers or pretend to be with the early settlers of America who needed their guns and the right to do anything they want, whenever they want.

The truth is that the Republican part is now the greedy party, not the Christian party. The Republicans have chosen the side of big business and greed instead of truth and caring about the small guy. It's also the racist party. It's the party the Skinheads choose. You won't find any Democrat racist or Skinhead. They choose industry over nature.

Before you even go there, of course not all Republicans aren't racist or Nazis. No one with any brains would make such a claim. I hear there's even a few of them who are nice...LOL

Still, how does it feel to know that that's the type of people who only flock to the Republic party? There are more racist homophobes in small town, conservative America than anywhere else. And why can't conservatives see that homophobia is racism? You don't have to agree with the lifestyle, but you don't have to go around beating them up. That's what the Aryans do. The Republicans are so busy comparing our President to Hitler and saying he's Socialist and a Nazi, all the while being racist themselves and more closely aligned to old Germany than the Jews.

You don't think beating up gays is anything more than religious terrorism? You want them dead, the Muslim extremists want YOU dead. You are the same as they are. Wrong. One would think from reading the Bible and Christs attitudes and precepts that Christians would be the kindest, most loving, tolerant people on earth. The meek. But as with all religions, instead people use it to make them feel good about themselves by putting others down and being at war with people of other religions and beliefs.

This is why I align myself with science instead of religion. (No, not Scientology.)

Science holds no grudge that the Christians think human kind has only been around for 6 thousand years, it just knows better. It sees race and color as exposure to different levels of UV rays over thousands of years in different climates and it knows that we all came from Africa originally, from one race and the DNA is there to prove it and can trace your lineage back through Europe and Asia and the Middle East and then to Africa.
You may be a white supremest, yet you are just as African as the blackest Nairobi who never left Africa.

The only financially successful Republican U.S. President was Ronald Reagan, or so I'm told. If this is the case, why doesn't the Republican party change it's policies some? I have to admit that Bush was finally starting to see the light a bit towards the end and started the bail out process. But if we weren't chasing oil across the middle east, war after war with the pretext of a war on terror, we wouldn't have gotten in this shape in the first place.

As we speak we are getting ready to go after Iran when North Korea is making more threats, is more unstable and has done more against the freedom and rights of humanity than even the Middle East has. So why is that? There's no oil in North Korea (comparatively). They both have made threats against the States (nuclear) and have comparatively unstable governments.

I know it's an old argument. Republicans and their oil interests. Why have they tried so hard to block everything the President has tried to accomplish? Hell, they're blocking even the things they wanted to do themselves, but because the Dems are trying to get it done they just naturally have to stand in the way.

Republicans deregulated Wall Street. We all know how that turned out. Free market only goes so far towards economic stability. After a point of deregulation, the greedy and criminal gets a foothold and after they have taken what they can, they leave the rest of the nation in shambles and they don't care. That's what government is FOR. We have laws for a reason. We have government and regulations for very good reasons.

Here an excerpt from a respected source on new of the stock market, Stocks and News, the week in review-from the article, "Wall Street History".

“First, the era of laissez-faire economics has ended. For 30 years, the Anglo-Saxon model of free-market capitalism spread across the globe. The role of the state was diminishing, and deregulation, privatization, and the openness of borders to capital and trade were rising. Much of central and eastern Europe adopted this model, as did swaths of East Asia and diverse nations from Ireland to Mexico. 
“This movement reflected the economic primacy of the United States. Its growth, soaring standards of living, and conservative economic policies were widely admired. Countless societies preferred this model and supported governments that espoused it. The state-centered models, such as the French and German ones, were in retreat. 
“Now, a page has been turned. The Anglo-Saxon financial system is seen as having failed. The global downturn, and all its human devastation, is being attributed to that failure. Throughout the world, including in the United States, this has turned the political tide in a new direction. The role of the state is expanding again, together with a reregulation of markets. This is evident in the United States, where President Obama has moved toward more activist and bigger government. The quasi nationalization of the banking and automotive industries, as well as the pending reform of the financial system, makes this clear. It is also clear in Ireland, the United Kingdom, and elsewhere, where nationalizations have gone even further. And it is clear in statements made by such leaders as French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who recently celebrated ‘the return of the state’ and ‘the end of the ideology of public powerlessness.’ 
“Second, globalization is in retreat, both in concept and in practice. Much of the world now sees it as harmful. Those nations, especially developing ones, that embraced increased capital flows and open trade have been particularly injured. Those that insulated themselves, such as India, have been less scarred. The global spread of goods, capital, and jobs is reversing. Global exports are falling sharply. The World Bank reports that exports from China, Japan, Mexico, Russia, and the United States fell by 25 percent or more in the year leading up to February 2009. Capital flows are plunging, too. Emerging markets are projected to receive only $165 billion in net positive capital inflows this year, down from $461 billion in 2008. Furthermore, financial and trade protectionism are spreading…. 
“Third, the world may be entering a new global phase marked by less leadership, less coordination, and less coherence….The United States has turned inward, preoccupied with severe unemployment and fiscal pressures…"

The greedy get rich. The rich don't want us to stop them from getting richer. The richer take without thought to the people who have not and ruin our overall economy. The government steps in and says, "Hey! Enough's enough!" The Republicans fight for small government and deregulation. Republicans=Greed. Greed breeds lying and morally reprehensible behavior. Of course God said that, yet the greed party is the Christian party.

When will they listen to their own God instead of money? Never.


I am not scared to tell the truth.

I know. It sounds like I'm bracing for a fight or confrontation. Maybe I am.

There are so many things to say about the world. There are so many people just ready to fight about anything online. Maybe that's why. So many people with so many opinions without anything real to back it up.

Moreover, so many people who use "faith" to explain things that don't work in the real world, even scientists as well as the religious or the political.

While some of my opinions may only work for me in some instances because the world I live in is one I prefer, still there are many things that people just want to believe and use God or personal beliefs to justify and even in the face of real facts they still refuse to be reasonable.

Do you know there are still thousands of Christians out there that still believe humans have only been on earth for 6000 years? My father was one. My father chose to believe that carbon dating was a hoax rather than change his views when faced with new information. He also thought digging a ditch was preferable to using the mind. I used to tell him to work smarter, not harder.

And just like that instance, there are people who choose not to believe overwhelming evidence.

An example? Global warming. While humans may not really be the actual cause, the earth is warming up, we aren't doing much to stop our own contribution to the effect and the effect is surely real and instead of arguing about whether humans are the root cause or not, how about simply realizing the fact that the poor earth is truly changing and to try to help minimize our contribution to it?

I viewed a comic strip yesterday about a couple scientists talking about global warming. One said, "If it's a hoax, we made the world a better place for nothing!"

Isn't that sad?

Instead of all of us trying to make the world a better place just for the sake of it, we spend our time arguing over the science and the necessity of doing so. I heard a joke I just loved the other day.

A Democrat and a Republican were in a bar. (Why the republican was there I'll never know.) The Republican turned and called the Democrat a tree hugger, The democrat turned  to the Republican and simply said, "So, what are you? A puppy kicker, or do you work for BP?"

(By the way, just so some of you are aware, the scientists have quit talking about the likelihood of global warming. Now they just say it's here. This is the warmest year since we have been keeping records.)

It's my personal experience with almost any subject that only people who haven't spent a lot of time studying a subject argues against it. Furthermore, those who study subjects from only biased sources will never have the real facts. (Fox News doesn't count as a source of any kind!)

This is just an introductory article to give the readers a chance to get to know me better. I don't abide flamers, trolls, Republicans, mean people, sport hunters, flaky or superficial, greedy people.

One would think I'm a democrat by the way I talk about the Republicans. I don't align myself with any party. I used to be Republican when I was a young man. But they have always embarrassed me. They are supposed to be the "Christian" party. I've been watching them for 44 years now and let me tell you, I've never seen more lies or scandal in any other group of people in my life.

That's another article though.

Next article: Politics and Christianity