The New Jersey Senate defeated a gay marriage bill, which is a symbolic defeat. The lion's share of marriage privileges derive from the Fed, rather than the state. I was not holding my breath for gay marriage in New Jersey. It would not be worth it to me to move to New Jersey in order to get a state-recognized, but not federally recognized marriage.
The absence of gay marriage doesn't mean that gays won't continue to form monogamous unions or that couples won't stay together. It just presents an obstacle in the legal sphere, an obstacle that must be overcome by future generations. The arguments put forth by both sides have been recorded for posterity. As far as I'm concerned, it is obvious that the side in favor of gay marriage is right. An end to the ghetto is envisioned. Assimilation, rather than separation. Openness and forthrightness. If a more productive work force is desired, then gay marriage should become law.
The opposition to gay marriage seems small-minded in every sense of the word. I was particularly amused at one legislator's observation that in this time of economic distress, we cannot envision making such a sweeping social change. What better time? In good times, people want things to remain the same.
Here's another quote from the article: "gay marriage would weaken the social fabric by redefining one of society’s bedrock institutions." You know, I'd like to wash my social fabric. Is it polyester or cotton? Does it respond best to warm, hot, or cold water? Marriage isn't a bedrock, Sir, although it may make the bed rock. Actually, gay marriage would strengthen the social fabric. We could go from, say, silk, to nylon, which can stretch and remain strong.
If I could marry and obtain the crucial privileges bestowed by marriage, then it would have a huge impact upon my life in a practical sense, because my partner is from another country. We would no longer have to wrestle with immigration. Tens of thousands of dollars in lawyer's fees and government fees could go instead toward other things in life. I could work a corporate job and get coverage for my partner thereby.
I have explained this to my friends a hundred times, but here I go again. State recognition is insufficient. The Fed controls immigration rules. Today, the immigration privilege applies to heterosexual couples only. Former Sen. Bob Barr played a role in ensuring that that particular discrepancy remained when he defeated a measure that would have addressed it as far back as the Clinton administration. Bob Barr's singing a different tune on various issues, such as marijuana, so I don't know what he thinks now, but I would have preferred that he had not interfered with my life. I'm poorer today because of Bob Barr, an ironic Libertarian. The only thing I remember him being passionate about in his career was using Government to restrict the rights of the individual.
In the current environment, there is not just discrimination to contend with, but legal exclusion. The law itself is the problem, rather than just a handful of bigots here and there. I do not know of any easy solution, because the law is unyielding, and we are trapped in a systematic injustice. My current plan is to switch careers. I plan to enter the medical profession, where I can train as a skilled worker and hopefully one day immigrate to Canada, which does have gay marriage as well as universal health care. Canada is the Promised Land for gay Americans. If you are educated and experienced, it is the place to go.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Any Takers?
When I found out today how much my blog is worth, I thought, "Dayum! time to put 'er up for sale!"
Any takers?
The estimate may be just a tad on the optimistic side.
My site is worth$3,176.4Your website value?
Any takers?
The estimate may be just a tad on the optimistic side.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Cats
Between gnats and cats, I think I'd rather be a cat, a more appealing creature than a gnat. Cats are where it's at. None but a dog would refute that.
As a were-cat, I could befriend anyone worth befriending. I don't think I'd care for the diet of most house cats, though. I'd prefer to introduce myself to an old and lonely rich widow or widower, and perform tricks demonstrating superior feline intelligence. My tricks would be simple, mind you, such as standing on my hind legs and pointing up at the sky. An astonishing feat, such as communicating, would attract unwelcome notoriety, leading to scientists, confinement, experiments, x-ray machines, and dissection. As a were-cat, discretion is essential, because escape is uncertain in confined areas.
---
Cats think. They have simple minds, but they think. They are poor at using tools, only because their paws were never adapted to holding. But I have watched my cat try to open a door using the same mechanism that I use, a doorknob. He climbs up on a shelf and tries to reach the doorknob, but it is difficult to grasp, and in the end he gives up. But he often attempts to open a door from the floor-level, by reaching a paw underneath and pulling the door toward him. Sometimes he succeeds.
A cat absorbs all that is around him. He looks for routes of escape, comfortable perches, inaccessible perches and hiding places, and he remembers all those details for later reference. He keeps a mental file on every human he encounters. A human that makes a favorable impression is remembered and welcomed with much purring later. A human that makes a poor impression, most often a careless child that thinks a small creature is a toy, is feared.
Cats communicate via body language most of all. They do not vocalize like we do. They are not large predators and have to get by upon stealth, which does not favor vocalizing. If your cat vocalizes, it may be a sign of learned behavior modeled upon its adoptive parent. My cat sometimes makes an utterance for no other reason than it feels bored and craves attention. This is not typical catlike behavior.
Cats are simple creatures, free of the intellectual noise of a human brain. They are not complex, but have a limited scope of thoughts. Their feelings, however, have a wider range. They are capable of just as many feelings as we are. I have seen my cats express jealousy of each other and envy of each other. They sometimes express loneliness, or fear of abandonment. Our cats know when we are about to leave on a vacation, and they don't like it at all. Cats dislike change of any kind. They prefer routine.
To read a cat's thoughts, examine its face and tail. The tail betrays irritation. If the tail twitches, the cat is annoyed or wants to use the litter box. The face expresses emotion. The eyes of a cat can be read in much the same way as the eyes of a human. As with us, a cat's narrowed eyes indicate suspicion, wrath, misgiving. Open, wide eyes may mean fear, especially if the rest of the body is tense, as though preparing for flight, or if it hunches down to make itself appear smaller. On the other hand, large eyes may mean happiness and affection, especially if it seems relaxed and cooperative.
Cats do love, but they are selfish and have a dim understanding and appreciation for what love means. Never expect consideration or sympathy from a cat when you are sick. However, a cat will return affection to a certain extent, in its own way and under its own terms.
Cats are not skilled at reading the thoughts of human beings. To them, we are mysterious giants with certain god-like powers, such as the power over light and darkness, but they soon discover that we are slow, unstealthy, and sometimes behave in ways beyond their comprehension. Cats prefer predictability, and humans are not always predictable. The phone may ring, and a few minutes later a human leaves the house for several days. The cat does not know why. It is bizarre, another strange human custom that cannot be explained.
Remember that a cat is a tiny guest, deserving care and consideration. If not raised under human supervision, it would fear us in the natural world by instinct due to our massive size. A tame animal must be treated with gentleness, so that it remains tame and does not learn to fear humans. Once a cat begins to fear humans, it will hide all the time under beds and tables and only come out for brief periods to feed. This makes a poor pet of little value to anyone, and the animal will not be happy about things either.
They do not understand all the reasons for why humans do what they do, but their fear of us leads them to follow certain rules, such as using the litter box, or refraining from the destruction of furniture. Other rules they may never master. It is better not to try to teach very much to a cat. If you can potty-train a cat, that should be enough.
I have never been able to break the cat of the habit of drinking out of the toilet. It will get a drink while I'm not looking, and the only way I know what it has done is by the wetness of its arms and face. The best solution I found is to leave the toilet seat cover down.
My cat comes when called by its name, but only sometimes. This was a voluntary habit that it learned as a result of my rewarding it with praise when it came. If other people are around, it will not obey. If it is too tired, it will not obey. Cats view commands as requests made by a friend, subject to refusal. That is how we should view our commands, as well.
As a were-cat, I could befriend anyone worth befriending. I don't think I'd care for the diet of most house cats, though. I'd prefer to introduce myself to an old and lonely rich widow or widower, and perform tricks demonstrating superior feline intelligence. My tricks would be simple, mind you, such as standing on my hind legs and pointing up at the sky. An astonishing feat, such as communicating, would attract unwelcome notoriety, leading to scientists, confinement, experiments, x-ray machines, and dissection. As a were-cat, discretion is essential, because escape is uncertain in confined areas.
---
Cats think. They have simple minds, but they think. They are poor at using tools, only because their paws were never adapted to holding. But I have watched my cat try to open a door using the same mechanism that I use, a doorknob. He climbs up on a shelf and tries to reach the doorknob, but it is difficult to grasp, and in the end he gives up. But he often attempts to open a door from the floor-level, by reaching a paw underneath and pulling the door toward him. Sometimes he succeeds.
A cat absorbs all that is around him. He looks for routes of escape, comfortable perches, inaccessible perches and hiding places, and he remembers all those details for later reference. He keeps a mental file on every human he encounters. A human that makes a favorable impression is remembered and welcomed with much purring later. A human that makes a poor impression, most often a careless child that thinks a small creature is a toy, is feared.
Cats communicate via body language most of all. They do not vocalize like we do. They are not large predators and have to get by upon stealth, which does not favor vocalizing. If your cat vocalizes, it may be a sign of learned behavior modeled upon its adoptive parent. My cat sometimes makes an utterance for no other reason than it feels bored and craves attention. This is not typical catlike behavior.
Cats are simple creatures, free of the intellectual noise of a human brain. They are not complex, but have a limited scope of thoughts. Their feelings, however, have a wider range. They are capable of just as many feelings as we are. I have seen my cats express jealousy of each other and envy of each other. They sometimes express loneliness, or fear of abandonment. Our cats know when we are about to leave on a vacation, and they don't like it at all. Cats dislike change of any kind. They prefer routine.
To read a cat's thoughts, examine its face and tail. The tail betrays irritation. If the tail twitches, the cat is annoyed or wants to use the litter box. The face expresses emotion. The eyes of a cat can be read in much the same way as the eyes of a human. As with us, a cat's narrowed eyes indicate suspicion, wrath, misgiving. Open, wide eyes may mean fear, especially if the rest of the body is tense, as though preparing for flight, or if it hunches down to make itself appear smaller. On the other hand, large eyes may mean happiness and affection, especially if it seems relaxed and cooperative.
Cats do love, but they are selfish and have a dim understanding and appreciation for what love means. Never expect consideration or sympathy from a cat when you are sick. However, a cat will return affection to a certain extent, in its own way and under its own terms.
Cats are not skilled at reading the thoughts of human beings. To them, we are mysterious giants with certain god-like powers, such as the power over light and darkness, but they soon discover that we are slow, unstealthy, and sometimes behave in ways beyond their comprehension. Cats prefer predictability, and humans are not always predictable. The phone may ring, and a few minutes later a human leaves the house for several days. The cat does not know why. It is bizarre, another strange human custom that cannot be explained.
Remember that a cat is a tiny guest, deserving care and consideration. If not raised under human supervision, it would fear us in the natural world by instinct due to our massive size. A tame animal must be treated with gentleness, so that it remains tame and does not learn to fear humans. Once a cat begins to fear humans, it will hide all the time under beds and tables and only come out for brief periods to feed. This makes a poor pet of little value to anyone, and the animal will not be happy about things either.
They do not understand all the reasons for why humans do what they do, but their fear of us leads them to follow certain rules, such as using the litter box, or refraining from the destruction of furniture. Other rules they may never master. It is better not to try to teach very much to a cat. If you can potty-train a cat, that should be enough.
I have never been able to break the cat of the habit of drinking out of the toilet. It will get a drink while I'm not looking, and the only way I know what it has done is by the wetness of its arms and face. The best solution I found is to leave the toilet seat cover down.
My cat comes when called by its name, but only sometimes. This was a voluntary habit that it learned as a result of my rewarding it with praise when it came. If other people are around, it will not obey. If it is too tired, it will not obey. Cats view commands as requests made by a friend, subject to refusal. That is how we should view our commands, as well.
Gnats
I have an infestation of gnats in my study. They are attracted to my LCD monitor, where I swat them. I'm as fast with my hands as a frog with his tongue. Well, maybe not quite that fast, but close.
I'm in awe of frogs. How can they remain stock still for hours on end, only to launch a lightening-fast attack? I hope to watch a documentary one day about frogs that explains all. About gnats, I have less interest. I understand that most of their body is composed of their jaw (or is that the flea? I don't recall).
---
Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to retain all my brains, such as they are, and assume the form of a gnat. I could observe all the details of other people's lives without their being aware.
I prefer to imagine not being swatted, sprayed with insecticide, or being seized by a Venus Flytrap. Upon reflection, there are many hazards attending the life of a gnat. The sole advantage is espionage.
If I could be a gnat for a day, visit the headquarters of the rich and powerful, and then fly back home and resume the form of a human being, then I could put whatever information I obtained to good use. Maybe I could uncover scandals or crimes of great importance to the public. Or maybe I would learn of a certain stock to buy or sell at great profit, the same sort of behavior that sent Martha Stewart to prison.
I wonder if I would prove equal to the ethical challenges of being a were-gnat. I hope that I would be a good were-gnat and try to make the world a better place, rather than just enriching myself at the expense of others, as so many other lycanthropes do.
---
Spell to Surrender to Sleep
A fear that enforces wakefulness may seem large and threatening, but it is a gnat in need of swatting. You are more powerful than that which you fear. Remember that life and death are not serious alternatives, but only seem so for a brief span of time. Power surrounds you and nourishes you even in the darkness. Though your ears remain alert for the approach of danger, sleep, sleep, sleep and dream, just as your ancestors did in the wilderness long ago, and remember your dreams, for they will guide you.
I'm in awe of frogs. How can they remain stock still for hours on end, only to launch a lightening-fast attack? I hope to watch a documentary one day about frogs that explains all. About gnats, I have less interest. I understand that most of their body is composed of their jaw (or is that the flea? I don't recall).
---
Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to retain all my brains, such as they are, and assume the form of a gnat. I could observe all the details of other people's lives without their being aware.
I prefer to imagine not being swatted, sprayed with insecticide, or being seized by a Venus Flytrap. Upon reflection, there are many hazards attending the life of a gnat. The sole advantage is espionage.
If I could be a gnat for a day, visit the headquarters of the rich and powerful, and then fly back home and resume the form of a human being, then I could put whatever information I obtained to good use. Maybe I could uncover scandals or crimes of great importance to the public. Or maybe I would learn of a certain stock to buy or sell at great profit, the same sort of behavior that sent Martha Stewart to prison.
I wonder if I would prove equal to the ethical challenges of being a were-gnat. I hope that I would be a good were-gnat and try to make the world a better place, rather than just enriching myself at the expense of others, as so many other lycanthropes do.
---
Spell to Surrender to Sleep
A fear that enforces wakefulness may seem large and threatening, but it is a gnat in need of swatting. You are more powerful than that which you fear. Remember that life and death are not serious alternatives, but only seem so for a brief span of time. Power surrounds you and nourishes you even in the darkness. Though your ears remain alert for the approach of danger, sleep, sleep, sleep and dream, just as your ancestors did in the wilderness long ago, and remember your dreams, for they will guide you.
The First Time I Came Out
Time for a stroll down Memory Lane! This time, I'm wearing rose-tinted glasses to see what is good, disguising what was not. If the memories are altered, then so be it! I've grown weary of drama. What I want is a feel-good story.
---
[A long battle with Writer's Block took place here at this spot.]
---
Now I have the title. Getting the title is nine-tenths of the battle. The rest comes easy.
"The First Time I Came Out."
My brother was the first to tell me that there was a gay bar in town. I was seventeen at the time. I didn't believe him. I lived in a small Southern city in the 1980's, and homosexuality just wasn't discussed by anyone I knew, save in derogatory terms of horror, contempt and curiosity. But my brother saw the exterior of the gay bar in his travels around town. All he knew was that it had a sign out front that stated, in all capital letters (don't worry, reader, I will spare you the caps), "This is a gay bar. Do not enter the premises unless you are a homosexual." He thought the sign was funny, and so did I, but I imagine it was designed to defuse potential conflicts and misunderstandings. When I asked him where it was located, he looked at me with suspicion, and asked why I wanted to know. I looked away, made excuses and resolved never to bring the subject up again. Except I did. More than once or twice. Eventually it transpired that he had forgotten the location, or else he felt it unwise to share such dangerous information with a young and impressionable mind such as mine. Undeterred, I examined the phone book, looking for nightclubs or bars with a gay-sounding name, without success. After that, I made a couple of trips around the city, looking for the sign that my brother had described, but I never found it.
Two years later, I was taken to all of the gay bars in town in one night by an older man that I had met on my own, in the wild, so to speak. Stepping into a gay bar for the first time, as a gay man, is difficult to describe to those who are not gay, but I will try. Imagine that you are an American living in China, and you step into a bar filled with Americans. They greet you, their fellow countryman, with a smile. That is the best analogy that I can make.
I was too young to drink, and so I drank Coca-Cola. My companion had a smile as wide as mine, because he was showing me off, while I was coming to terms with not being the only one, ever again. I shook hands with many men, but remember little of what was said. It was in the line of good humor and advice to the new initiate. I did not remember the names of anyone I was introduced to. I felt happiness as well as sensory overload.
There was a good-looking black man of twenty-five or so standing beside a video game machine, and he said the only words that I remembered from the whole experience. We only looked at each other, and as if in response to the question he read in my eyes, he said, "Yes, you are beautiful." I thanked him and paid him a compliment in return. Emboldened, he asked me what my name was, and I made something up that sounded appropriate. I should have given him my number, but felt loyalty to the one who had brought me and paid my way.
---
[A long battle with Writer's Block took place here at this spot.]
---
Now I have the title. Getting the title is nine-tenths of the battle. The rest comes easy.
"The First Time I Came Out."
My brother was the first to tell me that there was a gay bar in town. I was seventeen at the time. I didn't believe him. I lived in a small Southern city in the 1980's, and homosexuality just wasn't discussed by anyone I knew, save in derogatory terms of horror, contempt and curiosity. But my brother saw the exterior of the gay bar in his travels around town. All he knew was that it had a sign out front that stated, in all capital letters (don't worry, reader, I will spare you the caps), "This is a gay bar. Do not enter the premises unless you are a homosexual." He thought the sign was funny, and so did I, but I imagine it was designed to defuse potential conflicts and misunderstandings. When I asked him where it was located, he looked at me with suspicion, and asked why I wanted to know. I looked away, made excuses and resolved never to bring the subject up again. Except I did. More than once or twice. Eventually it transpired that he had forgotten the location, or else he felt it unwise to share such dangerous information with a young and impressionable mind such as mine. Undeterred, I examined the phone book, looking for nightclubs or bars with a gay-sounding name, without success. After that, I made a couple of trips around the city, looking for the sign that my brother had described, but I never found it.
Two years later, I was taken to all of the gay bars in town in one night by an older man that I had met on my own, in the wild, so to speak. Stepping into a gay bar for the first time, as a gay man, is difficult to describe to those who are not gay, but I will try. Imagine that you are an American living in China, and you step into a bar filled with Americans. They greet you, their fellow countryman, with a smile. That is the best analogy that I can make.
I was too young to drink, and so I drank Coca-Cola. My companion had a smile as wide as mine, because he was showing me off, while I was coming to terms with not being the only one, ever again. I shook hands with many men, but remember little of what was said. It was in the line of good humor and advice to the new initiate. I did not remember the names of anyone I was introduced to. I felt happiness as well as sensory overload.
There was a good-looking black man of twenty-five or so standing beside a video game machine, and he said the only words that I remembered from the whole experience. We only looked at each other, and as if in response to the question he read in my eyes, he said, "Yes, you are beautiful." I thanked him and paid him a compliment in return. Emboldened, he asked me what my name was, and I made something up that sounded appropriate. I should have given him my number, but felt loyalty to the one who had brought me and paid my way.
No Sooner Do I Praise a Corporation...
No sooner do I write a post on my blog that praises AT&T, than I receive a postcard in the mail from AT&T destroying my favorable impression about that corporation.
I had boasted of AT&T's Internet service having 99.99% reliability. Well, that part still applies. Yesterday, AT&T sent all of their customers a nasty postcard that read, in part (paraphrasing), "your user agreement has been amended [without your consent] to let us call you at any time for telemarketing purposes. We may robocall, use anonymous numbers, or any third-party minion of our choosing to interrupt you at dinner-time with pointless adverts designed to waste your time."
I had boasted of AT&T's Internet service having 99.99% reliability. Well, that part still applies. Yesterday, AT&T sent all of their customers a nasty postcard that read, in part (paraphrasing), "your user agreement has been amended [without your consent] to let us call you at any time for telemarketing purposes. We may robocall, use anonymous numbers, or any third-party minion of our choosing to interrupt you at dinner-time with pointless adverts designed to waste your time."
Saturday, January 2, 2010
New Year's Resolutions
A friend of mine resolved that from now on, he would reject any glass of wine offered at a party. I asked him what his policy would be on beer. "That," he said, "will be decided on a case-by-case basis."
Friday, January 1, 2010
Charity to Strangers in Distant Lands
Charities may give a skinny penny out of every dollar to the actual people they are collecting for. There are too many charities and too little oversight. In general, the bigger and older the charity, the better. A large charity is likely to enjoy economy of scale and be more efficient. It is also likely to attract enough attention to remain honest in its dealings, rather than devoting most of its income to maintaining its staff.
When Westerners give to Third World nations, they may fail to consider who they are giving to and what their aims and motives might be. They give because it gives them a fuzzy feeling inside, which is all right, but where does the money ultimately go, and who benefits? Throwing money into a blind alleyway to unknown strangers is not a good way to distribute charity.
Here is a recent case of a Somali man who entered Denmark with bloody murder on his mind. I wonder whether he was fed and nourished by Western aid at some point in his life. Some in Third World countries have different values than we do. If they were better off, they would choose to harm, rather than help us. They might interpret our cartoons, poetry, fiction, movies, or editorials in a negative light and target us for killing. I'm reminded of Uganda, which has declared that they will murder all homosexuals and imprison anyone who knows of a homosexual and does not inform authorities. Contributing to relief in Uganda would be like paying for the nourishment of future murderers. There is a case in Malawi where the police want to conduct humiliating medical exams on gay men to prove they had "unnatural relations," punishable by a lengthy prison term.
I prefer for charity to begin at home. I'm more familiar with people that live around me and would rather tend to them than unknown strangers in a distant land, who might be villains for all I know. I think there is a kind of self-loathing that causes people in developed countries to shrink from helping their own countrymen, but to look to distant lands to bestow gifts. In this way, they assist those who may later prove to be villains.
When Westerners give to Third World nations, they may fail to consider who they are giving to and what their aims and motives might be. They give because it gives them a fuzzy feeling inside, which is all right, but where does the money ultimately go, and who benefits? Throwing money into a blind alleyway to unknown strangers is not a good way to distribute charity.
Here is a recent case of a Somali man who entered Denmark with bloody murder on his mind. I wonder whether he was fed and nourished by Western aid at some point in his life. Some in Third World countries have different values than we do. If they were better off, they would choose to harm, rather than help us. They might interpret our cartoons, poetry, fiction, movies, or editorials in a negative light and target us for killing. I'm reminded of Uganda, which has declared that they will murder all homosexuals and imprison anyone who knows of a homosexual and does not inform authorities. Contributing to relief in Uganda would be like paying for the nourishment of future murderers. There is a case in Malawi where the police want to conduct humiliating medical exams on gay men to prove they had "unnatural relations," punishable by a lengthy prison term.
I prefer for charity to begin at home. I'm more familiar with people that live around me and would rather tend to them than unknown strangers in a distant land, who might be villains for all I know. I think there is a kind of self-loathing that causes people in developed countries to shrink from helping their own countrymen, but to look to distant lands to bestow gifts. In this way, they assist those who may later prove to be villains.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Fox News Versus Time Warner Cable
Fox News wants Time Warner Cable to pay $1 per subscriber for its content.
On this particular issue, and possibly no other, I'm on the side of Fox. Fox News is little more than the propaganda organ for the Republican party, but on the other hand, I'm not a big fan of cable companies, either. They enjoy near-monopolies in most markets and charge outrageous fees while shortchanging the content providers. I would like to see cable companies get the squeeze and stop intruding into areas where they lack competence, such as the Internet and VOIP. Leave VOIP to experts like Vonage. When cable companies venture outside their core competence, customers are the ones who suffer.
I subscribed to Charter cable and received abominable Internet service. I didn't know how bad it was until I switched to AT&T and experienced 99.99% reliability for the first time. Over the eight years that I was subscribed to Charter, they made one substantial investment in the service. They installed a device beside each house to filter the television signal from the Internet signal, so that subscribers like myself could no longer pick up both television and Internet, but were compelled to subscribe to each of the services separately. My Internet became unavailable while their technicians were working and remained unavailable for many days afterward. No one notified me. This was just another in a long series of rude interruptions from Charter. I was grateful, because it made my decision to cancel their services an easy one. I remember going for a entire week without service, because of an unexplained technical difficulty. No adjustments were ever made to my bill for the dozens of unannounced outages, although the CSR's at the help desk would always promise to adjust my bill to reflect the downtime. They lied.
Every two weeks, Charter still sends me marketing fliers in the mail offering me "television, VOIP, and Internet for $69.99 a month." Their fliers are deposited in the trashcan without being opened. I received an email from a Charter Representative once, in response to a blog post of mine, that recommended that I log onto the Charter web site and provide my address so that they won't mail me fliers anymore. Why should I take time out of my day to do that? I do not care whether Charter wastes its money mailing fliers to me. Maybe it helps the Postal Service, which seems to be struggling financially these days, according to media reports. I like the Postal Service, because they provide a useful service in a reliable fashion at a modest price.
On this particular issue, and possibly no other, I'm on the side of Fox. Fox News is little more than the propaganda organ for the Republican party, but on the other hand, I'm not a big fan of cable companies, either. They enjoy near-monopolies in most markets and charge outrageous fees while shortchanging the content providers. I would like to see cable companies get the squeeze and stop intruding into areas where they lack competence, such as the Internet and VOIP. Leave VOIP to experts like Vonage. When cable companies venture outside their core competence, customers are the ones who suffer.
I subscribed to Charter cable and received abominable Internet service. I didn't know how bad it was until I switched to AT&T and experienced 99.99% reliability for the first time. Over the eight years that I was subscribed to Charter, they made one substantial investment in the service. They installed a device beside each house to filter the television signal from the Internet signal, so that subscribers like myself could no longer pick up both television and Internet, but were compelled to subscribe to each of the services separately. My Internet became unavailable while their technicians were working and remained unavailable for many days afterward. No one notified me. This was just another in a long series of rude interruptions from Charter. I was grateful, because it made my decision to cancel their services an easy one. I remember going for a entire week without service, because of an unexplained technical difficulty. No adjustments were ever made to my bill for the dozens of unannounced outages, although the CSR's at the help desk would always promise to adjust my bill to reflect the downtime. They lied.
Every two weeks, Charter still sends me marketing fliers in the mail offering me "television, VOIP, and Internet for $69.99 a month." Their fliers are deposited in the trashcan without being opened. I received an email from a Charter Representative once, in response to a blog post of mine, that recommended that I log onto the Charter web site and provide my address so that they won't mail me fliers anymore. Why should I take time out of my day to do that? I do not care whether Charter wastes its money mailing fliers to me. Maybe it helps the Postal Service, which seems to be struggling financially these days, according to media reports. I like the Postal Service, because they provide a useful service in a reliable fashion at a modest price.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
The Fascist Regime in Iran
Although peace is the preferred state, pacifism cannot succeed in areas where evil is running rampant, dedicated to oppression and killing. Based upon media reports that I have read, Iran has become a kind of Hell where the authorities advocate and practice murder, rape, violence, and every other tool of tyranny. By their actions, the hardliners have proved themselves bloodthirsty villains. They do not believe in freedom of speech and do not place any value upon popular elections. They are intent upon ruling through violence and the fear that violence instills. This is the very definition of evil.
Due to the paranoid psychology of the dictatorship, the regime has become devoted to promoting evil, both at home and abroad. However, many people feel that life has no meaning if it serves evil. It would be glorious to die for the cause of freedom in Iran, while destroying the maximum number of evil mercenaries who serve the dictatorship. There could be no higher purpose to the life of a human being than to work towards the overthrow of an evil dictatorship.
When I feel in need of inspiration, I like to view videos of the protests in Iran, where moral right confronts moral evil. The martyrs of the opposition are heroes of all of humankind and should be recorded in the history books alongside other heroes and martyrs throughout the ages from every culture. The brave young people of Iran show us by their example that heroism has not perished with the modern age, but remains alive and well.
It is my hope that, if necessary, the opposition in Iran acquires military weapons and meets bullet for bullet and bomb for bomb. The proper goal for anyone with a sense of ethics is to destroy both the regime and the conscienceless villains that support it, so that they do not pass on their wicked traits to future generations. It has become clear that those who once did evil in the name of the Shah, now do similar and worse deeds in the name of Khameini and his puppet, the vile Ahmadinejad.
The crimes that the regime commits today against its own people serves as a reliable guide to what it will do to the West, once it develops nuclear weapons. Unlike Iraq, Iran is the real deal when it comes to nukes.
Hugo Chavez of Venzuela revealed himself to be both a fool and a hypocrite when he welcomed Ahmadinejad to his country and congratulated him on his reelection. I was disgusted by that display of ignorance and resolved there and then that Chavez was a villain. Having aligned himself with absolute evil, Chavez has zero credibility to invest on any other issues.
It is a pity that Chavez has become something of a hero in some quarters. He is more interested in personal power and ego gratification than he is in justice and truth. The United States is the favorite boogeyman of Chavez, who expects us to invade at any moment, and tells his countrymen to be vigilant against the Yankee aggressor.
My country may not be perfect in every respect, but it is better than some other countries, such as Iran and China, which rule with the rifle, the prison, the hangman and the torturer. If Chavez could just look beyond the shadow of the United States for one minute, he might see the world as it really is, in all its complexity and shades of gray, rather than his paranoid anti-American construction of the world.
I realize that the U.S. erred in supporting the Shah back in the 1960's and '70's, but that is water under the bridge. Nothing can be done about that now. I think most Americans today would agree that support for certain right-wing dictators around the globe during the Cold War (and after) was a mistake. My country was obsessed with the threat of Communism at the time. Conservative and unethical politicians had control over American foreign policy. They decided that supporting an S.O.B. like the Shah and the tyrant in Viet Nam was OK, because he was "our" S.O.B. But that was over thirty years ago.
Today, I think most Americans would be happy to see a democratic Iran, even if it did not ally itself with the U.S. We would welcome a free Iran, which would contribute more to the world in the way of science, industry, film, and literature. There are many areas in which the U.S. and Iran could cooperate out of mutual interest. Americans do not hate the Iranian people, but sympathize with them, and hope that they succeed in reforming and moderating their government. It is safe to assume that a free Iran would be less hostile and more cooperative, because the common interest of most people is peace and prosperity. Everyone, at heart, wants peace. As long as the governments of the world will allow peace to happen, it will flourish due to the common desire of all human beings.
The real enemies of humankind are not other human beings, but disease, poverty, ignorance, pollution, and fascism. It is possible to work toward optimal solutions for all of the problems that confront the human race as a whole. War is not necessary or inevitable, as some people fear. War is, however, a prominent feature in history books. But that is in the past, as a lesson and a warning to everyone. The future can be different. We just have to believe that peace will work. But this does not mean giving in to evil-doers that are willing to kill in order to get their way.
Due to the paranoid psychology of the dictatorship, the regime has become devoted to promoting evil, both at home and abroad. However, many people feel that life has no meaning if it serves evil. It would be glorious to die for the cause of freedom in Iran, while destroying the maximum number of evil mercenaries who serve the dictatorship. There could be no higher purpose to the life of a human being than to work towards the overthrow of an evil dictatorship.
When I feel in need of inspiration, I like to view videos of the protests in Iran, where moral right confronts moral evil. The martyrs of the opposition are heroes of all of humankind and should be recorded in the history books alongside other heroes and martyrs throughout the ages from every culture. The brave young people of Iran show us by their example that heroism has not perished with the modern age, but remains alive and well.
It is my hope that, if necessary, the opposition in Iran acquires military weapons and meets bullet for bullet and bomb for bomb. The proper goal for anyone with a sense of ethics is to destroy both the regime and the conscienceless villains that support it, so that they do not pass on their wicked traits to future generations. It has become clear that those who once did evil in the name of the Shah, now do similar and worse deeds in the name of Khameini and his puppet, the vile Ahmadinejad.
The crimes that the regime commits today against its own people serves as a reliable guide to what it will do to the West, once it develops nuclear weapons. Unlike Iraq, Iran is the real deal when it comes to nukes.
Hugo Chavez of Venzuela revealed himself to be both a fool and a hypocrite when he welcomed Ahmadinejad to his country and congratulated him on his reelection. I was disgusted by that display of ignorance and resolved there and then that Chavez was a villain. Having aligned himself with absolute evil, Chavez has zero credibility to invest on any other issues.
It is a pity that Chavez has become something of a hero in some quarters. He is more interested in personal power and ego gratification than he is in justice and truth. The United States is the favorite boogeyman of Chavez, who expects us to invade at any moment, and tells his countrymen to be vigilant against the Yankee aggressor.
My country may not be perfect in every respect, but it is better than some other countries, such as Iran and China, which rule with the rifle, the prison, the hangman and the torturer. If Chavez could just look beyond the shadow of the United States for one minute, he might see the world as it really is, in all its complexity and shades of gray, rather than his paranoid anti-American construction of the world.
I realize that the U.S. erred in supporting the Shah back in the 1960's and '70's, but that is water under the bridge. Nothing can be done about that now. I think most Americans today would agree that support for certain right-wing dictators around the globe during the Cold War (and after) was a mistake. My country was obsessed with the threat of Communism at the time. Conservative and unethical politicians had control over American foreign policy. They decided that supporting an S.O.B. like the Shah and the tyrant in Viet Nam was OK, because he was "our" S.O.B. But that was over thirty years ago.
Today, I think most Americans would be happy to see a democratic Iran, even if it did not ally itself with the U.S. We would welcome a free Iran, which would contribute more to the world in the way of science, industry, film, and literature. There are many areas in which the U.S. and Iran could cooperate out of mutual interest. Americans do not hate the Iranian people, but sympathize with them, and hope that they succeed in reforming and moderating their government. It is safe to assume that a free Iran would be less hostile and more cooperative, because the common interest of most people is peace and prosperity. Everyone, at heart, wants peace. As long as the governments of the world will allow peace to happen, it will flourish due to the common desire of all human beings.
The real enemies of humankind are not other human beings, but disease, poverty, ignorance, pollution, and fascism. It is possible to work toward optimal solutions for all of the problems that confront the human race as a whole. War is not necessary or inevitable, as some people fear. War is, however, a prominent feature in history books. But that is in the past, as a lesson and a warning to everyone. The future can be different. We just have to believe that peace will work. But this does not mean giving in to evil-doers that are willing to kill in order to get their way.
Uganda's First Impression
I knew next to nothing about Uganda before the news broke about their new fascist law, which mandates the death penalty for gays. Now my impression of Uganda is negative. I wonder how many millions of others all over the world feel the same way. It is unlikely any positive stories will cover Uganda in the near future. Many appealing choices compete for foreigners' vacations, investments, and philanthropy. With words of hate, Uganda has rendered itself a less desirable option. The unwise actions of certain Ugandan politicians will haunt their country for years to come.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Hopes for the Future
Assuming there is a future, a civilized one not much worse than the present, I have several items on my wish list:
1. A cheaper, more efficient, and non-polluting replacement for fossil fuels to reduce global warming and pollution. Many fascist regimes devote their oil money toward evil ends, such as war, oppression of their own people, and terrorism. Their level of morality is low, while their income is high. The primary focus of scientific research should be to replace fossil fuels as an energy source.
2. An end to the wars, and the flourishing of peace everywhere, so that the competing tribes can communicate without the interference of violence, which interrupts communication and creates an atmosphere of paranoia and hostility. This goal may be the most difficult to accomplish. But it is possible. In the past, there was more war, not less. Today, the wars are limited in scope.
3. An overthrow of the fascist regime in Iran, which seems bent upon the brutalization of its own people. Iran is an important nation with great potential. Change should come from within, though, not from without. The intervention of outside powers has proved counter-productive in the past.
4. Socialized medicine in America, so that the cost of health care declines, while reaching the poor, who need medicine as much or even more than the affluent. If other countries such as Cuba and Mexico can do it, then surely the United States can.
5. Legal civil unions for gays in America. It is a measure that has no costs, but has many benefits for society as a whole. Assimilation of minorities is the way to make society more cohesive. Many gays want to be seamless members of the community. Today, gays must devote their energies and resources to coping with a variety of injustices that afflict them on a personal level, rather than working upon other social issues. If society is to receive the full measure of their talents, it must recognize their personal relationships.
6. An end to the prohibition of marijuana. It is safer than alcohol. Prohibition laws are designed to make marijuana users felons, unemployed, unemployable, alienated, isolated, imprisoned, traumatized, brutalized, and dead. The laws create far more harm than the substance.
7. The replacement of the menu of fast-food restaurants with healthier choices that have higher amounts of vitamins and fiber, and lower amounts of fat, salt, and sugar. Good food can be healthy, tasty, and popular. The only reason fast food restaurants have not tried good food yet is due to stodginess.
8. A reduction in the use of cars, and an increase in pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Physical exercise has many benefits, both psychological and physical. Too many people dread using their feet. But feet want to be used. It is their function.
9. An end to the "Don't Ask / Don't Tell" policy in the U.S. military that results in the discharge of gay service members through no fault of their own other than honesty.
1. A cheaper, more efficient, and non-polluting replacement for fossil fuels to reduce global warming and pollution. Many fascist regimes devote their oil money toward evil ends, such as war, oppression of their own people, and terrorism. Their level of morality is low, while their income is high. The primary focus of scientific research should be to replace fossil fuels as an energy source.
2. An end to the wars, and the flourishing of peace everywhere, so that the competing tribes can communicate without the interference of violence, which interrupts communication and creates an atmosphere of paranoia and hostility. This goal may be the most difficult to accomplish. But it is possible. In the past, there was more war, not less. Today, the wars are limited in scope.
3. An overthrow of the fascist regime in Iran, which seems bent upon the brutalization of its own people. Iran is an important nation with great potential. Change should come from within, though, not from without. The intervention of outside powers has proved counter-productive in the past.
4. Socialized medicine in America, so that the cost of health care declines, while reaching the poor, who need medicine as much or even more than the affluent. If other countries such as Cuba and Mexico can do it, then surely the United States can.
5. Legal civil unions for gays in America. It is a measure that has no costs, but has many benefits for society as a whole. Assimilation of minorities is the way to make society more cohesive. Many gays want to be seamless members of the community. Today, gays must devote their energies and resources to coping with a variety of injustices that afflict them on a personal level, rather than working upon other social issues. If society is to receive the full measure of their talents, it must recognize their personal relationships.
6. An end to the prohibition of marijuana. It is safer than alcohol. Prohibition laws are designed to make marijuana users felons, unemployed, unemployable, alienated, isolated, imprisoned, traumatized, brutalized, and dead. The laws create far more harm than the substance.
7. The replacement of the menu of fast-food restaurants with healthier choices that have higher amounts of vitamins and fiber, and lower amounts of fat, salt, and sugar. Good food can be healthy, tasty, and popular. The only reason fast food restaurants have not tried good food yet is due to stodginess.
8. A reduction in the use of cars, and an increase in pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Physical exercise has many benefits, both psychological and physical. Too many people dread using their feet. But feet want to be used. It is their function.
9. An end to the "Don't Ask / Don't Tell" policy in the U.S. military that results in the discharge of gay service members through no fault of their own other than honesty.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Favorite Celebs
Among celebrities on television, I like Jon Stewart, Graham Norton, Kathy Griffin, and Catherine Tate. I cannot imagine how they do what they do. I don't envy them at all. I wouldn't want to do their jobs. But they are entertaining to watch.
The gay community is lucky that Graham Norton is around. He's an out gay man with his own talk show, which is rare to say the least and a refreshing change from the hetero-hosted talk shows, which used to have a monopoly. I like his hilarious, witty, vulgar, juvenile show, which definitely has a camp flavor. Graham gets great guests from all over the English-speaking world, including Catherine Tate, which I think was a pretty big "get". His guests are always entertainers--comedians, musicians, performers that pose as musicians, directors, and film stars.
Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" (Comedy Central) has the best talk show on television, covering contemporary news from a humorous angle, often sarcastic and witty. I've never seen anyone as good as he is. His material is really the best. And he has a big heart as well. Jon is an inspiration to us all, on many levels: ethical, humorous, philosophical, political and strategic. Whenever he challenges the nitwits on FOX, he comes out on top every time, which isn't too surprising, all things considered.
Kathy Griffin is someone I never thought I would see on television: a declared atheist, moreover a female one, and a hilarious comedienne as well. She makes me laugh. I really like her. She works hard at annoying the rich and famous.
Catherine Tate is versatile as an actress. She has so much talent that it feels like a gift just to be able to watch her perform. My American friends like her. Television executives should sign her for an American television show. She makes me think as well as laugh. Her humor is universal in appeal, making commentary about the human condition. She appeared on season 6, episode 10 of the Graham Norton show, where she seemed by far the most likable of the three guests, which included 50 Cent and David Carr*.
I detected a subtext of tension between 50 Cent and Graham. I was not impressed by my first glimpse of the rapper. After listening to him perform, I do not see how it is possible that he should have sold so much music. It is a strange thing indeed. Consumers are paying for an image to which they aspire, which is often the case in the music biz.
The gay community is lucky that Graham Norton is around. He's an out gay man with his own talk show, which is rare to say the least and a refreshing change from the hetero-hosted talk shows, which used to have a monopoly. I like his hilarious, witty, vulgar, juvenile show, which definitely has a camp flavor. Graham gets great guests from all over the English-speaking world, including Catherine Tate, which I think was a pretty big "get". His guests are always entertainers--comedians, musicians, performers that pose as musicians, directors, and film stars.
Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" (Comedy Central) has the best talk show on television, covering contemporary news from a humorous angle, often sarcastic and witty. I've never seen anyone as good as he is. His material is really the best. And he has a big heart as well. Jon is an inspiration to us all, on many levels: ethical, humorous, philosophical, political and strategic. Whenever he challenges the nitwits on FOX, he comes out on top every time, which isn't too surprising, all things considered.
Kathy Griffin is someone I never thought I would see on television: a declared atheist, moreover a female one, and a hilarious comedienne as well. She makes me laugh. I really like her. She works hard at annoying the rich and famous.
Catherine Tate is versatile as an actress. She has so much talent that it feels like a gift just to be able to watch her perform. My American friends like her. Television executives should sign her for an American television show. She makes me think as well as laugh. Her humor is universal in appeal, making commentary about the human condition. She appeared on season 6, episode 10 of the Graham Norton show, where she seemed by far the most likable of the three guests, which included 50 Cent and David Carr*.
I detected a subtext of tension between 50 Cent and Graham. I was not impressed by my first glimpse of the rapper. After listening to him perform, I do not see how it is possible that he should have sold so much music. It is a strange thing indeed. Consumers are paying for an image to which they aspire, which is often the case in the music biz.
An Exchange of Secrets
This is a continuation of the previous post.
These are the secrets that were shared on a fateful night in a deserted city street, sitting in her car waiting for the light to change from red to green. She confided in me about being beaten so badly by her ex-girlfriend that the police were called. I am not sure why some people choose to live in this way with an abusive lover, but they do for whatever reasons. It was difficult for me to understand, then and now. I was willing to shelter her from all of that, but not everyone wants to be sheltered. Some are drawn to the flame. I cannot explain this behavior. It is foreign to me. Perhaps her orientation was exclusively homosexual, but it begs the question of why she ever got involved with me in the first place. Was my function to impress her friends? Or was she just testing the waters to see what life was like on the other side of the fence? She had seemed enthusiastic while we were doing all of the sexual things that she wanted us to do. If it was all just acting, then she was a good actress.
After her confession, I told her not to worry, that I was bisexual, too. We were at a stoplight, and the light turned green, but she did not press the gas. She stared at me in disbelief, waiting for the punchline. But the joke was cosmic in nature, played by God upon us both. I reminded her that she needed to move the car or else a patrolman would pull us over. She needed to be reminded several times before she pressed the gas.
We had a good laugh over the situation, and the night ended well, or so I thought. The next day (I found out later), she confided in her ex, who promoted the suspicion that I was infected with the HIV virus and had infected her out of malice. She chose to believe her ex. After she had brooded over the situation for the better part of a day, she called me up with accusations. I had never heard her so angry before. I don't remember whether she called me a murderer or not, but that was the implication. I knew this might be the last time she ever spoke to me, so I told her what I had been waiting for the right time to tell her, that I loved her. She didn't believe me.
I offered to get tested along with her at the local clinic, but it was not good enough, because she was afraid someone might have recognized her there. She arranged for us to get tested at a clinic sixty miles away. I offered to drive, but she insisted upon going in separate cars. She felt terrified by the needle and the nurse's questions. I consoled her, but we did not touch. Of course I was not infected and neither was she. Once she got a clean bill of health, she called to let me know and thanked me for my cooperation. Then she ceased all communication with me forever.
We never saw each other again until thirteen years later, when we passed each other on a bridge. She and her female companion were on bicycles, and I was on foot. She said not a word to me, nor did she make any gesture. But I knew that she knew who I was. She had mirrored sunglasses on, but began blinking violently, as from a nervous tic. She aborted her trip across the bridge and came back the other way, while her companion complained. As she passed me a second time, still she said nothing. I did not say anything either. Sometimes silence is best, after all.
Long ago, I built in my imagination a palace of gold where she reigned as Queen. She destroyed the beautiful illusion of love that I created in my mind. All my plans came to naught. It is just as well that it ended. I know that now. I don't think she understood anything of what I felt for her. She craved the scent of a woman. It is okay by me. I just wish it had ended in a better manner, without the paranoia.
Later I found another, who is far better to me than she ever was. He is kinder, more thoughtful, more skilled, more beautiful, and much wiser. I made a good life with him, and together we have built a splendid palace where we reign as Kings.
These are the secrets that were shared on a fateful night in a deserted city street, sitting in her car waiting for the light to change from red to green. She confided in me about being beaten so badly by her ex-girlfriend that the police were called. I am not sure why some people choose to live in this way with an abusive lover, but they do for whatever reasons. It was difficult for me to understand, then and now. I was willing to shelter her from all of that, but not everyone wants to be sheltered. Some are drawn to the flame. I cannot explain this behavior. It is foreign to me. Perhaps her orientation was exclusively homosexual, but it begs the question of why she ever got involved with me in the first place. Was my function to impress her friends? Or was she just testing the waters to see what life was like on the other side of the fence? She had seemed enthusiastic while we were doing all of the sexual things that she wanted us to do. If it was all just acting, then she was a good actress.
After her confession, I told her not to worry, that I was bisexual, too. We were at a stoplight, and the light turned green, but she did not press the gas. She stared at me in disbelief, waiting for the punchline. But the joke was cosmic in nature, played by God upon us both. I reminded her that she needed to move the car or else a patrolman would pull us over. She needed to be reminded several times before she pressed the gas.
We had a good laugh over the situation, and the night ended well, or so I thought. The next day (I found out later), she confided in her ex, who promoted the suspicion that I was infected with the HIV virus and had infected her out of malice. She chose to believe her ex. After she had brooded over the situation for the better part of a day, she called me up with accusations. I had never heard her so angry before. I don't remember whether she called me a murderer or not, but that was the implication. I knew this might be the last time she ever spoke to me, so I told her what I had been waiting for the right time to tell her, that I loved her. She didn't believe me.
I offered to get tested along with her at the local clinic, but it was not good enough, because she was afraid someone might have recognized her there. She arranged for us to get tested at a clinic sixty miles away. I offered to drive, but she insisted upon going in separate cars. She felt terrified by the needle and the nurse's questions. I consoled her, but we did not touch. Of course I was not infected and neither was she. Once she got a clean bill of health, she called to let me know and thanked me for my cooperation. Then she ceased all communication with me forever.
We never saw each other again until thirteen years later, when we passed each other on a bridge. She and her female companion were on bicycles, and I was on foot. She said not a word to me, nor did she make any gesture. But I knew that she knew who I was. She had mirrored sunglasses on, but began blinking violently, as from a nervous tic. She aborted her trip across the bridge and came back the other way, while her companion complained. As she passed me a second time, still she said nothing. I did not say anything either. Sometimes silence is best, after all.
Long ago, I built in my imagination a palace of gold where she reigned as Queen. She destroyed the beautiful illusion of love that I created in my mind. All my plans came to naught. It is just as well that it ended. I know that now. I don't think she understood anything of what I felt for her. She craved the scent of a woman. It is okay by me. I just wish it had ended in a better manner, without the paranoia.
Later I found another, who is far better to me than she ever was. He is kinder, more thoughtful, more skilled, more beautiful, and much wiser. I made a good life with him, and together we have built a splendid palace where we reign as Kings.
Romantic Love
Writers cultivate the meme of romantic love, which is an unrealistic expectation that by finding just the right person and winning them over, happiness will become permanent. The meme is best expressed in movies like "Impromptu" or "The Princess and the Warrior," both of which I have watched many times over.
Finding the right person is not easy. Sometimes we think we have found the right person, but are mistaken. Young men look for physical beauty, which is superficial, and neglect to consider more important traits, such as kindness. There are beautiful people in the world whose beauty is skin-deep. Inside, they are selfish and lazy, having learned that they can receive rewards without earning them.
Women are aware of the male preference for physical beauty and take pains to make themselves seem more attractive. None of this effort will assist the longevity or the quality of a long-term relationship. It is superficial. It will help in establishing a relationship, but no more. The same trait, physical beauty, that attracts a man will also lure him away to others who possess it in a novel configuration.
Even if we do find the right person, winning anyone over is a more difficult task by far. Attraction must be mutual, an unpleasant fact that leads people with a sub-par appearance to consign themselves to lives of solitude. Many people are alone who need not be. They have much to offer a partner, such as loyalty, affection, and friendship. There are many other forms of love of greater value than romantic love. Also, the media dwells upon sex because it sells copy, but sex is a small component of a relationship. Only form a relationship with a trustworthy and kind person. Any other relationship will be marked by discord and unhappiness in the end.
As a boy, I listened to songs from groups like Led Zeppelin, Styx, the Scorpions ("Still Lovin' You"), David Bowie ("China Girl"), and countless others that describe a blind, superficial, romantic love based upon physical desire and unrealistic expectations. I used to play these songs over and over again. I could never get enough of them. They described a version of reality that I had never experienced before, but had great appeal to me. I had a hunger for that kind of experience.
Romantic love took firm hold of my imagination. Maybe it was because I was focused upon scholastic achievement. My heart yearned for drama to relieve the tedium of academic study. I was forever falling in love with people that had little to offer besides stunning looks. None of these crushes led to a relationship of any depth or meaning. They were just learning experiences at best. I often assumed that my crushes were profound and spiritual. I wrote hundreds of pages about the objects of my affection, analyzing every facet of their being and of mine. Decades later, when I went to inspect this prose with cold blood, I recognized much of it was drivel, of no value to me or to anybody, no better than the lyrics to the songs that we hear on the radio. I realized that I had been deluded. What I had written was false in many respects. The songs I had been listening to on the radio, over and over again, had infiltrated my psyche, encoding viral memes into my thought processes. I had believed the song lyrics and aspired to follow them. It was like a false religion.
Romantic love is a strange drug with soaring highs and crashing lows. I think it is just as the Ancient Greeks said, a kind of madness. For me, the worst case was with a girlfriend in college. We knew each other for a brief time, but in those few weeks, much happened. My intentions were serious, but hers were not. There was drama in her life that she concealed from me until the end, when all was revealed late at night, in the middle of a deserted city street, in a bewildering explosion of confessions. Her deep, dark secret, as she viewed it, was that she had an ex-girlfriend, a much older and abusive ex-girlfriend, who still wanted her. I did not mind, because I had my own secrets, which I revealed to her in full for the sake of reciprocity. Candor occurs naturally when one is in love. I do not regret telling her what I did, even though she used it as a justification for ending everything between us. Nothing good can come of lies. She showed the measure of her worth through her actions. All is just as it should be.
One always remembers the highs, because they are without compare over the course of a lifetime. The highs occurred when my beloved gave me a token of affection, such as a kiss. Opium pales in comparison to the brain's indigenous substances, which are produced in abundance under the right conditions. I remember pleasure so intense that I expected to be incinerated. My hands grew as warm as when I had had the flu. Reality transformed into paradise. Everything was imbued with new meaning. Nothing was random anymore. God became real and was taking a hand in my life for the first time. I would have married her in an instant. These are some of the thoughts I had at the time.
There are two sides to the idiotic passion, the highs and the lows, and I soon discovered the latter. Romantic love is often one-sided. One partner may offer all, while the other offers only a portion of themselves on a temporary basis. Some look for a relationship, while others are just having fun. I think she felt flattered to be with me. I was handsome. She liked to show me off to her friends. But that was all. "Love" is a loaded word. Don't shoot that gun until the target is ready. I shot too soon. If love is not felt in the other, then they shrink from the intensity of the emotion. Sometimes, the other may not love themselves, and they wonder what is wrong with you, that you love them.
My sweet dream was destroyed as fast as it had been formed. I think she made her decision with too much haste, but it does not matter now. The door has been locked shut. After that experience, I began to view romantic love as a hard drug like heroin. I can't say I never fell again. I did fall, a couple of times, but it was never as intense. I observed with a kind of relief the decline in the intensity of my feelings. Wisdom replaced foolishness at last. At last I have a partner that loves me in the same measure that I love him, someone that I can trust and that can trust me in the same measure.
Today, I think romantic love, the unrealistic and idealistic variety, is overrated, but then I am older now, and older people often think so. Affection, compassion, honesty, kindness, and intimacy are more important. Romantic love seems brittle to me. It breaks upon the rocks of hard reality. But it remains popular, judging by the subjects that pop stars sing about and writers write about. Young people have an appetite for it, and where there is demand, supply will follow.
Finding the right person is not easy. Sometimes we think we have found the right person, but are mistaken. Young men look for physical beauty, which is superficial, and neglect to consider more important traits, such as kindness. There are beautiful people in the world whose beauty is skin-deep. Inside, they are selfish and lazy, having learned that they can receive rewards without earning them.
Women are aware of the male preference for physical beauty and take pains to make themselves seem more attractive. None of this effort will assist the longevity or the quality of a long-term relationship. It is superficial. It will help in establishing a relationship, but no more. The same trait, physical beauty, that attracts a man will also lure him away to others who possess it in a novel configuration.
Even if we do find the right person, winning anyone over is a more difficult task by far. Attraction must be mutual, an unpleasant fact that leads people with a sub-par appearance to consign themselves to lives of solitude. Many people are alone who need not be. They have much to offer a partner, such as loyalty, affection, and friendship. There are many other forms of love of greater value than romantic love. Also, the media dwells upon sex because it sells copy, but sex is a small component of a relationship. Only form a relationship with a trustworthy and kind person. Any other relationship will be marked by discord and unhappiness in the end.
As a boy, I listened to songs from groups like Led Zeppelin, Styx, the Scorpions ("Still Lovin' You"), David Bowie ("China Girl"), and countless others that describe a blind, superficial, romantic love based upon physical desire and unrealistic expectations. I used to play these songs over and over again. I could never get enough of them. They described a version of reality that I had never experienced before, but had great appeal to me. I had a hunger for that kind of experience.
Romantic love took firm hold of my imagination. Maybe it was because I was focused upon scholastic achievement. My heart yearned for drama to relieve the tedium of academic study. I was forever falling in love with people that had little to offer besides stunning looks. None of these crushes led to a relationship of any depth or meaning. They were just learning experiences at best. I often assumed that my crushes were profound and spiritual. I wrote hundreds of pages about the objects of my affection, analyzing every facet of their being and of mine. Decades later, when I went to inspect this prose with cold blood, I recognized much of it was drivel, of no value to me or to anybody, no better than the lyrics to the songs that we hear on the radio. I realized that I had been deluded. What I had written was false in many respects. The songs I had been listening to on the radio, over and over again, had infiltrated my psyche, encoding viral memes into my thought processes. I had believed the song lyrics and aspired to follow them. It was like a false religion.
Romantic love is a strange drug with soaring highs and crashing lows. I think it is just as the Ancient Greeks said, a kind of madness. For me, the worst case was with a girlfriend in college. We knew each other for a brief time, but in those few weeks, much happened. My intentions were serious, but hers were not. There was drama in her life that she concealed from me until the end, when all was revealed late at night, in the middle of a deserted city street, in a bewildering explosion of confessions. Her deep, dark secret, as she viewed it, was that she had an ex-girlfriend, a much older and abusive ex-girlfriend, who still wanted her. I did not mind, because I had my own secrets, which I revealed to her in full for the sake of reciprocity. Candor occurs naturally when one is in love. I do not regret telling her what I did, even though she used it as a justification for ending everything between us. Nothing good can come of lies. She showed the measure of her worth through her actions. All is just as it should be.
One always remembers the highs, because they are without compare over the course of a lifetime. The highs occurred when my beloved gave me a token of affection, such as a kiss. Opium pales in comparison to the brain's indigenous substances, which are produced in abundance under the right conditions. I remember pleasure so intense that I expected to be incinerated. My hands grew as warm as when I had had the flu. Reality transformed into paradise. Everything was imbued with new meaning. Nothing was random anymore. God became real and was taking a hand in my life for the first time. I would have married her in an instant. These are some of the thoughts I had at the time.
She drove us in her car. The summer sun poured through the windows. Her eyes were the color of sapphires. I asked her why she was smiling. She said she didn’t know. I offered her my hand, which she accepted, her fingers intertwining with mine. She remarked upon the warmth of my hand and asked whether I had a fever. I said I didn’t know. When her eyes were focused on the road, I made an adjustment. She said, “What are you doing?” “Nothing.” “Tell me.” “Sunlight has this effect on me.” I felt embarrassed until I perceived her thought and then I wasn’t. Time slowed down as she took matters in hand. She drove another five miles before the end. Marked were her hand, her chest, the gear lever, and the dashboard. She laughed at the abundance. Kissing her hand, I made an offer that was declined. I closed my eyes. Sometimes I opened them just to see my dream looking back at me and smiling.The moments that I were with her were stored in memory. Later, I would turn them over and over in my mind, looking for meanings, trying to understand as much as I could about the experience. When she told me things or showed me things, I remembered them all. Even today, I can recall with precision many details that are no longer of any importance to anyone. The information has remained through a process similar to imprinting. I used to think things like this happened for a reason, but now I think that accidents happen for no reason at all. Much more is random than we would like to believe. There may be a design, but it is of a general nature, and many details are left to chance.
There are two sides to the idiotic passion, the highs and the lows, and I soon discovered the latter. Romantic love is often one-sided. One partner may offer all, while the other offers only a portion of themselves on a temporary basis. Some look for a relationship, while others are just having fun. I think she felt flattered to be with me. I was handsome. She liked to show me off to her friends. But that was all. "Love" is a loaded word. Don't shoot that gun until the target is ready. I shot too soon. If love is not felt in the other, then they shrink from the intensity of the emotion. Sometimes, the other may not love themselves, and they wonder what is wrong with you, that you love them.
My sweet dream was destroyed as fast as it had been formed. I think she made her decision with too much haste, but it does not matter now. The door has been locked shut. After that experience, I began to view romantic love as a hard drug like heroin. I can't say I never fell again. I did fall, a couple of times, but it was never as intense. I observed with a kind of relief the decline in the intensity of my feelings. Wisdom replaced foolishness at last. At last I have a partner that loves me in the same measure that I love him, someone that I can trust and that can trust me in the same measure.
Today, I think romantic love, the unrealistic and idealistic variety, is overrated, but then I am older now, and older people often think so. Affection, compassion, honesty, kindness, and intimacy are more important. Romantic love seems brittle to me. It breaks upon the rocks of hard reality. But it remains popular, judging by the subjects that pop stars sing about and writers write about. Young people have an appetite for it, and where there is demand, supply will follow.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
A Cure for Envy
Some people dream of becoming a celebrity and enjoying the advantages of fame, wealth and leisure. However, out of a population of billions, only a select few can join the glitterati. To earn admittance into the elite club, one must have either one or a combination of traits such as talent, luck, looks, self-promotion, or connections. Early on, I dismissed any notion of my becoming a famous athlete or actor, because I lack talent for those professions. However, I never gave up wanting to become a famous writer. My talent may be modest. I don't know. It is difficult for me to judge, and it is natural to have hope.
This evening, I read excerpts from the journals of a successful American gay writer from the 1970s. Although he may not enjoy much name recognition today, he earned enough to support himself through his writing, and I think some of his books may be found in any public library of a substantial size.
Anytime a person publishes excerpts from their journal, the flattering passages will be distilled to a high concentration, giving the impression of a fantasy life beyond the reach of most of us. The depressing and mundane will be excised, making it appear that their life was far superior to our own. Envy can take hold of the reader.
He dropped such golden lines as "one million copies of my books are in print," which fell upon my head like a brick. Another passage read, "present at the party were..." (a list of prominent authors, editors, and artists followed). He records casual sex and shared marijuana highs with beautiful people as though they were commonplace, everyday occurrences. He attended fabulous parties where he befriended some of the leading gay intellectuals of the day.
I felt an unusual emotion, like sadness, and wondered why I should be feeling sad. Then I understood it was envy I was feeling. I seldom feel envy. But in the case of a gay writer, who unlike me was published and able to support himself with his writing--yes, I suppose that I would have liked to trade places. Very much so.
I had to put the book down. I felt embarrassed to feel such a base emotion as envy. All things considered, I have had a pretty good life. I should not be envious of someone else. Plenty of people have had less luck than me. What about them? I should consider their lives, rather than just the lives of those who seem better off.
The cure for envy strolled into the room on four legs. I wondered if my cat ever wanted to be like me, as I wanted to be like the prominent author. I have a more interesting life than my cat. I can drive a car, use a computer, and host dinner parties. My cat can do none of these things. The difference between my cat and me is even greater than the difference between me and any successful writer.
But my cat does not care. It is content. It does not want to be like me, as far as I can tell. I admire that attitude. It is my cat I should envy, for being above the petty emotion of envy. My cat lacks the reasoning power to compare and contrast the advantages of my life with its own lot. This is why it does not feel envy.
Animals can teach us lessons as well as reinforce old lessons. I was reminded tonight that human intelligence has drawbacks. Intelligence introduces errors into our thinking. Envy is one such error. Observing the cat teaches me to discard the errors that arise because of intelligence, which is often a mixed blessing in human beings.
I suspect that a famous writer looks to greater writers such as Mark Twain or Shakespeare, and compares his lot to theirs, and feels envy as well. Unless, that is, he has a cat, and makes the same kind of observations that I have made.
This evening, I read excerpts from the journals of a successful American gay writer from the 1970s. Although he may not enjoy much name recognition today, he earned enough to support himself through his writing, and I think some of his books may be found in any public library of a substantial size.
Anytime a person publishes excerpts from their journal, the flattering passages will be distilled to a high concentration, giving the impression of a fantasy life beyond the reach of most of us. The depressing and mundane will be excised, making it appear that their life was far superior to our own. Envy can take hold of the reader.
He dropped such golden lines as "one million copies of my books are in print," which fell upon my head like a brick. Another passage read, "present at the party were..." (a list of prominent authors, editors, and artists followed). He records casual sex and shared marijuana highs with beautiful people as though they were commonplace, everyday occurrences. He attended fabulous parties where he befriended some of the leading gay intellectuals of the day.
I felt an unusual emotion, like sadness, and wondered why I should be feeling sad. Then I understood it was envy I was feeling. I seldom feel envy. But in the case of a gay writer, who unlike me was published and able to support himself with his writing--yes, I suppose that I would have liked to trade places. Very much so.
I had to put the book down. I felt embarrassed to feel such a base emotion as envy. All things considered, I have had a pretty good life. I should not be envious of someone else. Plenty of people have had less luck than me. What about them? I should consider their lives, rather than just the lives of those who seem better off.
The cure for envy strolled into the room on four legs. I wondered if my cat ever wanted to be like me, as I wanted to be like the prominent author. I have a more interesting life than my cat. I can drive a car, use a computer, and host dinner parties. My cat can do none of these things. The difference between my cat and me is even greater than the difference between me and any successful writer.
But my cat does not care. It is content. It does not want to be like me, as far as I can tell. I admire that attitude. It is my cat I should envy, for being above the petty emotion of envy. My cat lacks the reasoning power to compare and contrast the advantages of my life with its own lot. This is why it does not feel envy.
Animals can teach us lessons as well as reinforce old lessons. I was reminded tonight that human intelligence has drawbacks. Intelligence introduces errors into our thinking. Envy is one such error. Observing the cat teaches me to discard the errors that arise because of intelligence, which is often a mixed blessing in human beings.
I suspect that a famous writer looks to greater writers such as Mark Twain or Shakespeare, and compares his lot to theirs, and feels envy as well. Unless, that is, he has a cat, and makes the same kind of observations that I have made.
Merry Christmas
There are atheists who won't wish a Merry Christmas on principle, but I'm not one of them. I interpret Christmas in my own manner. The holidays mean different things to different people. To me, Christmas is a time of warmth and fellowship, of inclusiveness and getting back together with distant members of the family. The religious aspect is of less significance than the cultural aspect. I see no reason to dismiss such a long-standing holiday that predates the world's most popular religion. Every year, I have a wreath, a Christmas tree, presents, and I like to hear Christmas music, whether religious or secular. It brings to mind good feelings and good memories.
I don't mind speaking about God and Jesus, though I try to avoid it, because these terms mean different things to different people. To say that not everyone agrees on the definitions would be an understatement. Also, plenty of people are leery of proselytization, as am I, because I have had Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons knock on my door many a time. They like to speak about God and Jesus, but they mean something much different than what I have in mind.
To me, God and Jesus are symbols of something greater. I believe in the greater, which I take to be universal goodness. I remember being taught in Sunday School at a very young age that God is Love, which may be the best explanation I have ever heard. When we feel love for ourselves and for others, then we come closest to God, or so it seems to me. Love, affection, friendship or a simple regard, if it is mutual, results in the greatest benefits and good feelings, whereas other schemes, like animosity, bring negative consequences and negative feelings. In my opinion, the greater the simplicity to religion, the better. All that needs to be said concerning religion is that God is Love. Those three words really say it all. Anything else seems unnecessary.
My current hypothesis regarding God and Creation is also unnecessary, but I like it because it seems right somehow. It is pure speculation. I have an idea that the Universe is One. We perceive one another in terms of individuality, but it is due to the limitations of our senses and our awareness. Everything is connected in a spiritual sense. It is difficult to explain except in mystical terms, because the details are unknown. I call my idea a hypothesis, because it is unproven. I should not say, this is the way things are, but rather, this is my opinion, based upon what I have observed. I think God encompasses all things and is interchangeable with the Universe. I think that the Universe, which encompasses all things, has a certain personality. It is creative. It wants to produce great and good works, and the more elaborate, the better. It is ambitious and plays with its power, which is beyond comprehension. The power is vast. We see little of it, but what we do see is awesome.
I have written about this hypothesis concerning Oneness before on this blog. I used to wonder whether any small part of it was original with me, but somehow I doubted whether it was, because I seem to have heard similar ideas before. A good rule of thumb is that no idea is original. We all borrow ideas from other sources, usually the dead. If we cannot name the source, we think it was generated by our imagination. But I wonder sometimes whether imagination really exists. Maybe all we ever do is imitate and elaborate upon our imitations. A month ago, I was in a thrift store when I encountered an old book about Marcus Aurelius. It turns out that he believed much the same as I do, or at least that was my impression after reading a brief description of his philosophy.
My understanding of contemporary scientific thinking concerning creation is that all things were once combined into a single mass known as a singularity. This mass exploded or expanded into many separate stars. From stardust derived planets and other celestial bodies. On an unknown number of the planets, at least one to our certain knowledge, unicellular life came into being. From unicellular life, sentient beings evolved. From sentient beings evolved reasoning beings, such as humans and certain other animal species such as cats, dogs, dolphin, and monkeys. All of the beautiful and fascinating objects are here for a time, but they will be destroyed later, because they are all just temporary manifestations of the One. And what is the one? Is it a singularity, such as existed before the Big Bang? Or is it more than that?
I think the end and the beginning are not points on a line, but points on a circle, which means that the end of the Universe leads back to a new beginning. How many times has the Universe been destroyed, only to create itself once again? Maybe 1,023 times. Maybe only once. Maybe a billion times. Maybe things were different last time. Or maybe the same things happened in exactly the same fashion.
In terms of the stories that are in the Bible, I would consider myself still to be an atheist, because the miracles appear to be allegories written in only some cases by wise men, but in other cases by men who were not very wise at all. I do believe in a historical Jesus, but believe that he was an ordinary man, an eloquent skeptic of the established order. His arrest and execution were unjust and motivated by petty politics. Many other skeptics have been martyred throughout human history. People in power tend to be jealous of their power and paranoid about perceived threats. Jesus should have been installed as the Roman Emperor. There, he could have done the most good, certainly more good than dead.
If Jesus came back to Earth and ran for President, and if he were the same man as represented by the Gospels, then I would work for his campaign and help raise money. I'd help with the computers. I'd make phone calls. But I doubt Jesus would sink to cold-calling, like telemarketers do. I wonder whether he would be popular. I think he would have many surprising observations to make.
In my younger days, I used to be an outspoken atheist, because I grew up surrounded by outspoken conservatives. I am reminded of Newton's Third Law, in which every action has an equal and opposite reaction. As I've gotten older and moved to different parts of the country, I have encountered Christians of a moderate persuasion. I understand that there are a great many good people who serve under the banner of Christ. They do not permit evil to latch hold of their hearts. To judge the entire faith by the words and actions of a few would be unfair, just as atheists should not be judged by the words and actions of a few.
Merry Christmas to all the Christians, the atheists, the Muslims, the Jews, and everyone else. I can't list every creed, because it would take forever. A better expression might be, "Happy Holidays," because that is non-denominational. But I like the sound of "Merry Christmas," and it is after all that time of the year.
My Christmas wish is this. I hope that the vision of Jesus can be realized, which is that the human race should evolve into a benevolent and cooperative body of people, rather than a fragmented world of competing tribes as it is today. Cooperation will bring the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people. I am not sure whether it will be possible. I don't know whether it will happen or not. But it seems necessary, due to the unique threats to civilization brought about by modern technology.
I don't mind speaking about God and Jesus, though I try to avoid it, because these terms mean different things to different people. To say that not everyone agrees on the definitions would be an understatement. Also, plenty of people are leery of proselytization, as am I, because I have had Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons knock on my door many a time. They like to speak about God and Jesus, but they mean something much different than what I have in mind.
To me, God and Jesus are symbols of something greater. I believe in the greater, which I take to be universal goodness. I remember being taught in Sunday School at a very young age that God is Love, which may be the best explanation I have ever heard. When we feel love for ourselves and for others, then we come closest to God, or so it seems to me. Love, affection, friendship or a simple regard, if it is mutual, results in the greatest benefits and good feelings, whereas other schemes, like animosity, bring negative consequences and negative feelings. In my opinion, the greater the simplicity to religion, the better. All that needs to be said concerning religion is that God is Love. Those three words really say it all. Anything else seems unnecessary.
My current hypothesis regarding God and Creation is also unnecessary, but I like it because it seems right somehow. It is pure speculation. I have an idea that the Universe is One. We perceive one another in terms of individuality, but it is due to the limitations of our senses and our awareness. Everything is connected in a spiritual sense. It is difficult to explain except in mystical terms, because the details are unknown. I call my idea a hypothesis, because it is unproven. I should not say, this is the way things are, but rather, this is my opinion, based upon what I have observed. I think God encompasses all things and is interchangeable with the Universe. I think that the Universe, which encompasses all things, has a certain personality. It is creative. It wants to produce great and good works, and the more elaborate, the better. It is ambitious and plays with its power, which is beyond comprehension. The power is vast. We see little of it, but what we do see is awesome.
I have written about this hypothesis concerning Oneness before on this blog. I used to wonder whether any small part of it was original with me, but somehow I doubted whether it was, because I seem to have heard similar ideas before. A good rule of thumb is that no idea is original. We all borrow ideas from other sources, usually the dead. If we cannot name the source, we think it was generated by our imagination. But I wonder sometimes whether imagination really exists. Maybe all we ever do is imitate and elaborate upon our imitations. A month ago, I was in a thrift store when I encountered an old book about Marcus Aurelius. It turns out that he believed much the same as I do, or at least that was my impression after reading a brief description of his philosophy.
My understanding of contemporary scientific thinking concerning creation is that all things were once combined into a single mass known as a singularity. This mass exploded or expanded into many separate stars. From stardust derived planets and other celestial bodies. On an unknown number of the planets, at least one to our certain knowledge, unicellular life came into being. From unicellular life, sentient beings evolved. From sentient beings evolved reasoning beings, such as humans and certain other animal species such as cats, dogs, dolphin, and monkeys. All of the beautiful and fascinating objects are here for a time, but they will be destroyed later, because they are all just temporary manifestations of the One. And what is the one? Is it a singularity, such as existed before the Big Bang? Or is it more than that?
I think the end and the beginning are not points on a line, but points on a circle, which means that the end of the Universe leads back to a new beginning. How many times has the Universe been destroyed, only to create itself once again? Maybe 1,023 times. Maybe only once. Maybe a billion times. Maybe things were different last time. Or maybe the same things happened in exactly the same fashion.
In terms of the stories that are in the Bible, I would consider myself still to be an atheist, because the miracles appear to be allegories written in only some cases by wise men, but in other cases by men who were not very wise at all. I do believe in a historical Jesus, but believe that he was an ordinary man, an eloquent skeptic of the established order. His arrest and execution were unjust and motivated by petty politics. Many other skeptics have been martyred throughout human history. People in power tend to be jealous of their power and paranoid about perceived threats. Jesus should have been installed as the Roman Emperor. There, he could have done the most good, certainly more good than dead.
If Jesus came back to Earth and ran for President, and if he were the same man as represented by the Gospels, then I would work for his campaign and help raise money. I'd help with the computers. I'd make phone calls. But I doubt Jesus would sink to cold-calling, like telemarketers do. I wonder whether he would be popular. I think he would have many surprising observations to make.
In my younger days, I used to be an outspoken atheist, because I grew up surrounded by outspoken conservatives. I am reminded of Newton's Third Law, in which every action has an equal and opposite reaction. As I've gotten older and moved to different parts of the country, I have encountered Christians of a moderate persuasion. I understand that there are a great many good people who serve under the banner of Christ. They do not permit evil to latch hold of their hearts. To judge the entire faith by the words and actions of a few would be unfair, just as atheists should not be judged by the words and actions of a few.
Merry Christmas to all the Christians, the atheists, the Muslims, the Jews, and everyone else. I can't list every creed, because it would take forever. A better expression might be, "Happy Holidays," because that is non-denominational. But I like the sound of "Merry Christmas," and it is after all that time of the year.
My Christmas wish is this. I hope that the vision of Jesus can be realized, which is that the human race should evolve into a benevolent and cooperative body of people, rather than a fragmented world of competing tribes as it is today. Cooperation will bring the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people. I am not sure whether it will be possible. I don't know whether it will happen or not. But it seems necessary, due to the unique threats to civilization brought about by modern technology.
Monday, December 21, 2009
The Cause is also the Solution
The real answer to global warming lies not in laws, but in technology. The cause of the problem is also the solution. Money should be invested, not upon bribing evil dictatorships to do what is right, but upon scientific research to develop energy sources that do not emit greenhouse gases.
The obvious non-polluting energy source for humankind hangs over our heads. Many educated observers scoff at solar energy, because they evaluate only the low-yielding solar panels of the present, which are primitive. A better method of harnessing the Sun is to use nature's example, chlorophyll, which is efficient. Microorganisms can be modified to produce electricity in a direct or indirect manner, such as by extracting hydrogen from water. Microorganisms can be adapted to clean the atmosphere of undesired pollutants. The beauty of organisms is that they are self-replicating and self-maintaining. Just as we now derive energy from dead things, in the future, we will derive energy from the living.
The obvious non-polluting energy source for humankind hangs over our heads. Many educated observers scoff at solar energy, because they evaluate only the low-yielding solar panels of the present, which are primitive. A better method of harnessing the Sun is to use nature's example, chlorophyll, which is efficient. Microorganisms can be modified to produce electricity in a direct or indirect manner, such as by extracting hydrogen from water. Microorganisms can be adapted to clean the atmosphere of undesired pollutants. The beauty of organisms is that they are self-replicating and self-maintaining. Just as we now derive energy from dead things, in the future, we will derive energy from the living.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Three Great Fears
My fears for the future of the human race concern three possibilities:
All of these fears have their origin in technology. I think it would have been better if technology had remained at the level of the Ancient Roman civilization, at least until the ethical sense had become better developed. Today, there are people behind the wheel of a large automobile who have no business being there. There are people who carry guns that should not, because they have a desire to inspire fear in others. There are people that are using telephones to harass and abuse others, such as so-called collection agencies and telemarketers. There are people, as well as governments, that use computers to spy upon others. There is something of vital importance missing in their brains. They understand how to use tools, but not how to behave in an ethical manner. The ethical faculty remains much the same as it was thousands of years ago.
The minimum standard for ethics should be not to harm others. If everyone followed this maxim, there should be peace everywhere, solidarity, and efficiency. There would not be much need for debate. Instead of bitter disputes, there would be collegial discussions that focused upon a dry and technical cost/benefit analysis. Problems could be solved, instead of new problems being created all the time. Solutions that have been found not to work could be abandoned, and new solutions chosen in their stead. All too often, ethics must do battle with corruption. There are vested interests that prefer things to stay the same, because an easy profit has been found.
I'm not sure what the answer is. Religion has been tried, but does not work. Reason can be used to similar ill effect, because reason depends upon facts, and sometimes facts are disguised falsehoods. A proper legal system has many advantages, because fear of the law keeps many people who lack ethics from doing harm to others. However, the law is only as good as the lawmakers. Injustice and corruption become entrenched in the law, so that the law itself is evil and harms good people.
The only thing that has not been tried yet is eugenics, but that too may prove to be a mixed blessing. What some consider ideal may prove later to not always be so, and what some consider inferior may yet have hidden advantages. Even so, I believe eugenics to be the most perfect potential solution to the problem of evil in the world, provided it is used by the good and the wise. If eugenics were ever to be employed by evil-doers, then it will become the greatest fear of all, outstripping the three in my list above. I am afraid of China, because it is likely to become the greatest world power, yet has a very undeveloped sense of ethics. It is not China's behavior toward the United States that worries me, but rather its behavior toward its own citizens.
The primary goal of any eugenics program should be to instill a superb conscience, so that people care about the well-being of others as well as their own well-being. If everyone were born with this trait, then prisons would be unnecessary, and the police could be disbanded. I'm sure they wouldn't mind, considering that no-one would be committing any crimes, not even the government, other than through negligence or incompetence. Even in those cases, eugenics could answer by creating a smarter race. The military could be disbanded, as well, and here again, I'm sure the army wouldn't mind, given that there would be no more wars. I suppose alternative occupations could be found in agriculture, art, literature, research, and medicine. Mankind could focus its energies upon the exploration of outer space and the perfection of himself, rather than wasting so much energy upon pointless in-fighting with other human beings.
- Fascism that cannot be overthrown. With so many technological tools in the hands of government and/or corporations, it seems possible to install long-lasting authoritarian states. Many people feel that if they serve a great power that is bigger than themselves, they are doing right, without bothering to evaluate the aims and methods of the power. This is where there is the potential for great evil.
- Global warming that mars the planet, causing environmental catastrophes that cannot be easily remedied.
- Nuclear war. Even a small one would have traumatic effects. Think of all the work of so many generations being lost in an instant.
All of these fears have their origin in technology. I think it would have been better if technology had remained at the level of the Ancient Roman civilization, at least until the ethical sense had become better developed. Today, there are people behind the wheel of a large automobile who have no business being there. There are people who carry guns that should not, because they have a desire to inspire fear in others. There are people that are using telephones to harass and abuse others, such as so-called collection agencies and telemarketers. There are people, as well as governments, that use computers to spy upon others. There is something of vital importance missing in their brains. They understand how to use tools, but not how to behave in an ethical manner. The ethical faculty remains much the same as it was thousands of years ago.
The minimum standard for ethics should be not to harm others. If everyone followed this maxim, there should be peace everywhere, solidarity, and efficiency. There would not be much need for debate. Instead of bitter disputes, there would be collegial discussions that focused upon a dry and technical cost/benefit analysis. Problems could be solved, instead of new problems being created all the time. Solutions that have been found not to work could be abandoned, and new solutions chosen in their stead. All too often, ethics must do battle with corruption. There are vested interests that prefer things to stay the same, because an easy profit has been found.
I'm not sure what the answer is. Religion has been tried, but does not work. Reason can be used to similar ill effect, because reason depends upon facts, and sometimes facts are disguised falsehoods. A proper legal system has many advantages, because fear of the law keeps many people who lack ethics from doing harm to others. However, the law is only as good as the lawmakers. Injustice and corruption become entrenched in the law, so that the law itself is evil and harms good people.
The only thing that has not been tried yet is eugenics, but that too may prove to be a mixed blessing. What some consider ideal may prove later to not always be so, and what some consider inferior may yet have hidden advantages. Even so, I believe eugenics to be the most perfect potential solution to the problem of evil in the world, provided it is used by the good and the wise. If eugenics were ever to be employed by evil-doers, then it will become the greatest fear of all, outstripping the three in my list above. I am afraid of China, because it is likely to become the greatest world power, yet has a very undeveloped sense of ethics. It is not China's behavior toward the United States that worries me, but rather its behavior toward its own citizens.
The primary goal of any eugenics program should be to instill a superb conscience, so that people care about the well-being of others as well as their own well-being. If everyone were born with this trait, then prisons would be unnecessary, and the police could be disbanded. I'm sure they wouldn't mind, considering that no-one would be committing any crimes, not even the government, other than through negligence or incompetence. Even in those cases, eugenics could answer by creating a smarter race. The military could be disbanded, as well, and here again, I'm sure the army wouldn't mind, given that there would be no more wars. I suppose alternative occupations could be found in agriculture, art, literature, research, and medicine. Mankind could focus its energies upon the exploration of outer space and the perfection of himself, rather than wasting so much energy upon pointless in-fighting with other human beings.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Is Autism on the Rise?
Can we conclude from this article that autism is on the rise in the United States? The CDC claims that almost 1% of all American children are autistic because of a "mysterious cause."
To put this recent claim into perspective, a few weeks ago, the CDC also claimed that 1 out of 6 Americans have been infected by the Swine Flu, which does not at all jibe with my experience or that of my friends or family. If 1 out of 6 Americans have had swine flu, I would like to know where they are hiding out. Maybe in the CDC headquarters?
Once again, a statistic is being quoted in the media as though it were fact. Without knowing how the data was farmed, the statistic is without value to a reader. I am given a brief summary of the findings, and asked to accept it on face value because it came from an authority that supposedly knows more than everybody else. If that were so, then the CDC would have cured disease by now.
I would like to have read specific details about how the research was conducted, including how the numbers were crunched, by whom, and for what reasons. CDC's claim is that 2,757 out of 307,790 of a certain group have autism. Is the latter number the total number of "American citizens," or "immigrants, tourists, and American citizens" in the age group? Is the group the actual population, or is it merely considered representative of the actual population? The numbers may be based upon people who present to a medical provider. Out of 307,790 children that visit a doctor, 2,757 may have autism. What about the many others who never visit a doctor, or only visit on rare occasions? Was this numerous population of untreated children accounted for?
The data is based upon reports coming from just eleven sites. Could it be possible that parents of autistic children are migrating to urban areas where the CDC is headquartered in order to receive better treatment? Is it possible that populations that might not have been counted in the past are being counted today?
Assumptions make all the difference. I can take the same numbers, interpret them in a different manner, and claim that 99% of all American children are autistic or that .00001% of all American children are autistic. 90% of all Americans don't believe statistics, because 76% have discovered that statistics are 80% misinterpreted, 67% misleading, and 83% exaggerated in order to prove a point.
The media has a bad habit of pressing the panic button to sell copy. No wonder that so many people are skeptical of global warming, an important issue which suffers from "the boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I do not believe most of the things that I read in the media. Paranoia is rampant, because the media wants people to be afraid, because they will keep reading that way. Every writer fears boring a reader, first and foremost. Extreme exceptions are reported, instead of the mild and moderate generalities. Things are never as bad as the media makes them out to be.
More funds should be devoted to researching the potential causes and treatments of autism and other medical issues. Medical and scientific research represents a better use of scarce resources than foreign military engagements, in which billions of dollars are spent with little or nothing to show for it. Because conservative politicians have held the balance of power for so long in Washington, D.C., the government is focused more upon punishing than upon helping people who need help.
To put this recent claim into perspective, a few weeks ago, the CDC also claimed that 1 out of 6 Americans have been infected by the Swine Flu, which does not at all jibe with my experience or that of my friends or family. If 1 out of 6 Americans have had swine flu, I would like to know where they are hiding out. Maybe in the CDC headquarters?
Once again, a statistic is being quoted in the media as though it were fact. Without knowing how the data was farmed, the statistic is without value to a reader. I am given a brief summary of the findings, and asked to accept it on face value because it came from an authority that supposedly knows more than everybody else. If that were so, then the CDC would have cured disease by now.
I would like to have read specific details about how the research was conducted, including how the numbers were crunched, by whom, and for what reasons. CDC's claim is that 2,757 out of 307,790 of a certain group have autism. Is the latter number the total number of "American citizens," or "immigrants, tourists, and American citizens" in the age group? Is the group the actual population, or is it merely considered representative of the actual population? The numbers may be based upon people who present to a medical provider. Out of 307,790 children that visit a doctor, 2,757 may have autism. What about the many others who never visit a doctor, or only visit on rare occasions? Was this numerous population of untreated children accounted for?
The data is based upon reports coming from just eleven sites. Could it be possible that parents of autistic children are migrating to urban areas where the CDC is headquartered in order to receive better treatment? Is it possible that populations that might not have been counted in the past are being counted today?
Assumptions make all the difference. I can take the same numbers, interpret them in a different manner, and claim that 99% of all American children are autistic or that .00001% of all American children are autistic. 90% of all Americans don't believe statistics, because 76% have discovered that statistics are 80% misinterpreted, 67% misleading, and 83% exaggerated in order to prove a point.
The media has a bad habit of pressing the panic button to sell copy. No wonder that so many people are skeptical of global warming, an important issue which suffers from "the boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I do not believe most of the things that I read in the media. Paranoia is rampant, because the media wants people to be afraid, because they will keep reading that way. Every writer fears boring a reader, first and foremost. Extreme exceptions are reported, instead of the mild and moderate generalities. Things are never as bad as the media makes them out to be.
More funds should be devoted to researching the potential causes and treatments of autism and other medical issues. Medical and scientific research represents a better use of scarce resources than foreign military engagements, in which billions of dollars are spent with little or nothing to show for it. Because conservative politicians have held the balance of power for so long in Washington, D.C., the government is focused more upon punishing than upon helping people who need help.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)