It was a simple misunderstanding.
I read Jack London’s The Call of the Wild, and didn’t realize that Buck was a dog for a while. I thought it was weird that a clerk, or whatever he was, would live in the mansion with the judge and laze by the fire at the judge’s feet. But I read on until I learned Buck’s father was literally a Saint Bernard.
Continue reading “I wrote a book!”About 15 years ago now, I worked a summer job at Kings Island, a regional theme park in southern Ohio, famous for its record roller coasters. My job was to get people to come play those carnival games, like Ring Toss or Peach Basket. Essentially, I was a carnival barker. “Come on down, give it a shot, give it a try! Get a single, solitary ring on any one of the brown or green bottles, and YOU, yes you there in the blue shorts, YOU could be walking home with one of the biggest prizes in the paaaark!” I would jump onto and parade and dance around the counter. “We’ve got scooters *kick*, poker sets *kick*, and a stuffed Scooby Doo so big it won’t fit through your door!” I would jump down and run all over the area around my game, putting my arms around people and whispering (into a microphone, over a loudspeaker) “Hey buddy, look at your girlfriend there, she’s had her eye on the giant Scooby, aren’t you gonna win it for her? It’s only a dollar to play…”
I know tensions are high.
I know it’s way too hot out.
I know it seems like Covid isn’t going away.
I know a lot of us are scared, depressed, and uncomfortable.
None of that makes it okay for adults to act like spoiled children.
Continue reading ““What are you gonna do, call the cops on me?””
So this Confederate Flag controversy… makes me wish people would do a little bit of research.
The flag that is in question right now is a red rectangle with a white outline, a large blue X in the center, the blue X filled with 13 white stars.
That flag was rejected as the national flag of the Confederate States of America in 1861. It was later adopted as the battle flag of the Army of North Virginia. This flag’s origin is not tied to Southern heritage, because it was never the nation’s flag. It’s hardly tied to rebellion or battle, because it was the battle flag of ONE ARMY. That flag, according to political scientists Martinez, Richardson, and McNinch-Su, “was never adopted by the Confederate Congress, never flew over any state capitols during the Confederacy, and was never officially used by Confederate veterans’ groups. The flag probably would have been relegated to Civil War museums if it had not been resurrected by the resurgent KKK.”
Put simply, the “southern cross” is not a symbol of heritage or national history, because it was never a part of their heritage or history. In the same way, citizens of the United States of America don’t demand to be called “United Statesers” or “United Statesians”, both names that were proposed and rejected, like the southern cross flag.
NOW, flags the Confederate States of America (CSA) did use include 3 variations that can all be found here.
The original CSA flag was much like the northern flag, a blue square in the upper left of the flag held a circle of 13 stars and the flag bore 3 stripes—2 red, one white. This flag was eventually replaced because it resembled the northern flag, and it was therefore far too related to northern ideals of abolition and emancipation
The second flag was called the “Stainless Banner”. It held the entire southern cross flag in the upper left, and the majority of the flag was plain white. According to W. T. Thompson, the flag’s designer, “As a people we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause.”
This flag flew from 1863 to 1865, when a vertical red bar symbolizing the blood of fallen Confederates was added to the far right of the flag, lest it be confused as a white flag of truce.
When we get down to the history of the flags, the original banners of the Confederate States of America were all racist symbols, AND they were important parts of southern heritage and history. I find it ironic that nobody demands to fly the original CSA flag, nor any of its successors, but rather the battle flag of the Army of North Virginia, which, as mentioned above, was never flown above the capitol or officially used by any groups other than the Army of North Virginia, and later the KKK.
As a final aside, we should all be careful when comparing this situation to the use of the swastika in Nazi Germany. Some call for the removal of the Confederate Flag because, “you don’t see Germans flying the Nazi flag anymore”. While this is true, we should remember that the swastika was not originally a Nazi symbol and is only recognized as such in half of the world. Eastern buddhists and hindus continue to use the swastika as a symbol of prosperity, luck, glory, and good.
Adolf Hitler did believe that the victory of the Aryan man would be a push for good, and in his clouded, human mind, he identified with an eastern symbol of victory and glory. Do we ban the swastika in the world? No. Do we ban the swastika in areas that were impacted by the new symbol of supremacy? Yes. And I think we will ban the symbol until a new meaning has the strength to take its place.
The crucifix was used by Rome as a symbol of terror and oppression. Slave rebellions were often quelled by the crucifixion of the rebels on the main streets of Rome. Today the cross is a sign of hope, peace, worship, and eternity. Do we shun the cross because of its original symbol of tyranny? No—the tyranny has been swallowed up in a new symbol.
Does a piece of red cloth with a blue X and stars on it mean racism? It never did, but now it does, and I believe that we ought to relegate it to the museums until a new, positive meaning arises for the symbol. Whether that does or does not happen, is up to our children and theirs.
I’m not even mad anymore.
I’m sad and disappointed, and I shake my head in pity at the misinformed religious and political zealots who continue to push the narrative that Muslims as a people and Islam as a religion are the biggest threat that the U.S. faces today.
They believe that Islam is the enemy. And they are dead wrong.
They seem to forget, or maybe they just don’t know, that non-Muslims have been responsible for 90% of terrorist attacks in the past 40 years. More terrorism befell the United States at the hands of Puerto Ricans than Muslims. There have been more attacks on U.S. soil by the Animal Liberation Front than by all of the Islamic groups put together.
Anti-abortion terrorists have carried out 168 attacks in the U.S. since 1970, compared to the 60 attacks made by Muslims. You are almost 3 times more likely to be attacked by an extremist Christian than an extremist Muslim.
60 attacks from any Muslims in the past 40 years, compared to the 120 attacks by the aforementioned Puerto Ricans between 1974 and 1983. Twice as many attacks in a quarter of the time.
Given that there have been 60 attacks on U.S. soil at the hands of Muslims, and there are over 2 million Muslims in the U.S., the odds of any one of those Muslims being an extremist is less than one in 30,000.
And that’s just looking at the numbers, not any individuals.
I’m assuming that the people who blindly like, share, and publish this vitriolic hate have ever met a Muslim. This past summer, I had the privilege of teaching English at an international school that hosted mostly Muslims from Arabic areas such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Mali, Egypt, etc.
I remember, after class one day, having a discussion on religion with Hassan, a Muslim student of mine. I told him that I had heard that it was appropriate for a Muslim to attack anyone who attacked the Islamic faith in any way; kind of like self-defence of faith.
Hassan recoiled in horror and quickly told me that I must be mistaken, that Islam would never teach that kind of behavior as acceptable in any way. “You can defend yourself,” he said, “like, if someone’s trying to kill you, you can hurt them to protect yourself.”
*As a side note, Hassan was also in favor of inter-faith relationships and he supported same-sex marriage, because: “It’s their choice.”
I remember Mehmet responding to a short movie we watched in the English through Film class. I had asked the class if it was OK to assign values to people in society, depending on what they did, where they were from, what they believed.
Mehmet responded by saying that everyone was equal, even if they were different from you, and that you can’t treat someone different for looking or thinking different from you.
I remember Turkey writing an essay about an important person in his life. Turkey would write things like, “One day, I was playing close to the street, and my mother said, ‘Turkey, don’t go too close to the street.’ And I listened to my mother.”
Every paragraph , almost every sentence seemed to end with, “and I listened to my mother.” Is this the behavior of a man who would throw acid on a woman for not enjoying being raped?
I remember Eyas telling me that Muslims aren’t required to pay a “tithe” or offering to the church or organization as a whole, but that they are required to give their offerings directly to the poor or someone who is in need. He lamented that the oil tycoons in the Middle East are obviously not faithful Muslims in good standing, “if they were,” he said, “there would be no poor peoples. Not just Saudi Arabia. In the whole world.”
We live in a time and culture where it is not appropriate for us to even think that black people as a whole are responsible for any detail of Michael Brown’s death. We live in a time and culture where we can’t ask if someone is an illegal immigrant, because it’s worse to assume that someone is breaking the law than it is to actually break the law.
But a group of 3, maybe 4 Muslims attack Charlie Hebdo, and the whole religion is to blame.
That would be like saying that Mormonism led to Ted Bundy’s serial murders.
That would be like saying that the Italian mob is a result of the Roman Catholic Church.
That would be like saying that Christianity is responsible for every hateful action of the Klu Klux Klan.
But it would be wrong, because although on the rise in the past 10 years (ironically coincidental with the war that the United States seemed to have waged against Islam) religion has only been the motivation for 7% of terrorism since 1970. Not Islam. Any religion as a motivation. If you know Christianity, then you know that the KKK is not Christian. If you know Catholicism, then you know that the mob is not Catholic (especially now that Francis has excommunicated them). If you know Mormonism, then you know that modern polygamists are certainly not Mormons.
And if you know Islam, you know that Islam is not responsible for terrorism, but extremist groups who will twist scripture to their already twisted beliefs.
Is violence committed in the name of Islam? Yes. It would be ludicrous to deny that.
Has violence been carried out in the name of Christianity? Yes. It would be ludicrous to deny that.
Do either of these religions or their world leaders espouse this violence and condone it?
That would be like all the Baptist pastors in America suddenly saying, “Guys, you know what? The Westboro Baptists have it right. We should condone and support their actions and beliefs, and use their methods too.” And we all know that’s less likely than Nicholas Cage starring as anyone but Nicholas Cage in any movie he’ll ever be in for the rest of his career.
If you don’t know any Muslims; if you haven’t read more than 3 verses from the Quran (the three most quoted verses in white America, that tell the Prophet to make a war on the infidels); if you like, share, publish, and most disappointingly, believe all the anti-Islam garbage that the media shoves down our throats—
Then go meet a Muslim. Mark Twain said, “Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts”
Then read the Quran. Scholars say that it is a book of peace, not war.
2:256 “Let there be no compulsion in religion.”
Then study Islam from the eyes of Muslims. You wouldn’t want your faith being taught by those who have already decided that you are a terrorist who will kill infidels. Remember that the news anchor at FOX or a poorly assembled YouTube video is much less of an authority on Islam than the Hadith would be. Most of the antagonists of Islam are much more familiar with the “kill the infidels” motif than with the following.
“Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment.”
Islam is not the enemy. Terrorism is the enemy, and some small extremist groups of Muslims are a small part of that enemy, but remember that they’re about as Muslim as Al Capone is Catholic.
“Genie, you’re free”
Genie, you’re free. pic.twitter.com/WjA9QuuldD
— The Academy (@TheAcademy) August 12, 2014
These small words were tweeted by The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences in the wake of the death of famed comedian and actor Robin Williams. A lot of controversy has arisen over the inherent or implied meaning behind the tweet. Most of the internet’s hearts melted and many people, including my wife and I, heard the words with sadness, but teary-eyed hope. Matt Walsh commented a bit tactlessly regarding death, depression, and suicide— I’d rather not post his remarks here— and one of my friends wrote the following, which is quite tactful and at the same time expresses her feeling that we should not popularize suicide as an escape.
Like most everyone else, I’m saddened to hear about Robin Williams. But I am also really frustrated with all the posts of photos from Aladdin captioned “Genie, you’re free”…
Having recently lost someone to suicide, I understand wanting to feel like that person is not in pain anymore, that they are in a better place, that they are finally free of all their problems and negative feelings. But I also think that the last thing we should be doing is encouraging the mentality that suicide will free someone from their problems.
I do appreciate … the many posts people have simply linked to legitimate resources where people can find help and/or learn about depression, suicide, or mental health issues as a whole.
Some have made claims on the “Suicide is a choice” side of the conversation—claims that it’s not really that hard to overcome depression; that good scripture reading, faithfully attending your church or some kind of spiritual support group, daily prayer or meditation, and a positive outlook on a life filled with joy can beat depression. Some have expressed their hope that God will have mercy on Robin Williams because of his condition, because if God isn’t merciful, then Robin Williams has sent himself to Hell.
I do recognize, as do many others, that suicide is a choice with a permanent consequence. I think it would do us all some good to recognize that depression and sadness are two different things. Not having a purpose in life and not having any place where you feel like you are a part of something bigger than the daily grind can give you the blues, it can bring you down, and it can sure make it hard to get through the day. I’m sure we’ve all been there. After a bad breakup, losing a job, losing a loved one, failing an exam, etc. Bad/sad things happen to us in varying degrees of severity and we all have different ways of handling these events.
One key difference between having a lot of sadness in your life and having depression is that clinical depression, or Major Depressive Disorder, is a permanent condition, not a bad case of the blues. It is also often associated with brain chemistry and factors outside of the control of the person who has the disorder. (It is important to note that research shows a connection between traumatic events in early life and significant changes in brain chemistry that later impede ‘normal’ functioning in adult brains. Yes, depression can be caused by social factors, because social factors can in fact change the makeup of the brain.) People don’t choose to have depression, and people can’t just choose not to have depression anymore. It’s a disease. You can’t just wake up one day and choose not to have a broken leg. And this may be a news flash to some, but reading the Bible will not make your leg better by 5:00 this evening when you wanted to go out with your friends. It won’t “fix” depression either.
Do people choose to get angry? All the time. Do people choose to be sad? I did it for most of my teen/young adult life, so yes. Do people choose to be offended? If you are on the internet at all, you know that people choose to get offended where there is no offense even remotely possible.
Do people choose to be happy? Every day.
Do people choose to alter their brain chemistry and suffer years of literally disabling mental oppression? Do they choose to make it impossible for themselves to have a normal day, and do they make themselves feel the pain because they are selfish and less righteous than the rest of us?
Do people choose to commit suicide? Yes.
Do they choose to suffer from clinical depression? No.
Is there a way to help?
Yes.
A while ago, I mentioned that the simplest way to end racism and discrimination was for people to just get to know each other on a personal level. When you know someone’s story, from their perspective, it gets harder and harder to say that they are the way they are because they’re black. You start to realize that there is a lifetime of experiences behind every person you meet that has shaped them up until that very point, and will continue to shape them forever.
Again; I agree that suicide is a choice. However, clinical depression is not, and we will never know anything about how people with depression feel unless we are willing to open up and talk with them.
Will a conversation cure depression? It would be wonderful, but it’s about as probable as a friendly “Hello!” curing lung cancer.
Might a friendly conversation stop a suicide?
“You can’t just sit there and watch them.”
Hashtag, Hobby Lobby, anyone?
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Hobby Lobby, a company run by religious individuals, would not be forced to provide free contraceptives to their employees as part of their health care benefits. Now Twitter has exploded with reactions, and there are some rumors that the President will use his power to overturn the ruling or at the very least “mitigate” the problems caused by this ruling.
This post is not about religious freedom nor is it about contraceptive coverage. It’s about the Constitution and the rights, powers, checks and balances that the supreme law of the land gives to our government.
Article 1, Section 1 reads: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
This means that only Congress can make law.
The President may not make law.
He may not alter law.
The Supreme Court may not make law.
They may not alter law.
Article 1, Section 7 contains the following: “Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall … proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law.”
This means that Congress makes the laws and votes on them, and then they have to get the President’s approval. If the President approves of the bill, he signs it, and BOOM, it’s a law. If he doesn’t approve, he sends it back to the Senate or the House (wherever the bill started out in the first place). That’s called a “veto” (Vee-Toe).
A veto doesn’t mean that the law is over and done with though. That would give the President an awful lot of power!
If the President vetoes a bill (a pre-law), it goes back to the Senate or House (wherever it started) with the President’s Objections, or reasons why he doesn’t want to sign the bill, and they have to vote on it again. If they can get a 2/3 vote in the Senate, and then get the House of Representatives to also get a 2/3 vote, then the bill becomes a law regardless of what the President has said.
The veto power makes it possible for the President to check the power of the law-makers, and the 2/3-vote override makes it possible for the law-makers to balance out that veto power. Both groups have power over each other and power in spite of each other.
Article 1, Section 7 also explains that if the President does not return a bill within 10 business days, it is passed as if it were signed.
The President cannot ignore a bill. He actually has to do something about it.
Article 2 begins explaining who may be elected as President and how that process works. Section 2 reads: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of [all the armed forces]…and he shall have the Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”
He’s in charge of the military, and he can pardon offenders who he believes are innocent, unless they are elected officials. He can’t pardon himself or members of Congress.
“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur”.
He makes treaties if the Senate says it’s okay. Here are some other things that the President has power to do with consent of the Senate.
This gives the President power over who will be interpreting the laws, seeing as he cannot write the laws or change the laws.
The President may also “recommend to [Congress’s] consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”
He also is in charge of making sure that “the Laws be faithfully executed.”
The President cannot write, change, or interpret laws, but he can appoint the judges in charge of that interpretation, and he can veto any law that he doesn’t approve of. He is in charge of enforcing laws that have been passed.
Article 3 is all about the Judicial Branch. The judicial power is “vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”
The courts have power to interpret law, and all courts below the Supreme Court are established by Congress.
Section 3 of this article explains that “The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason” and that nobody will ever be convicted of treason without an open court and two witnesses testifying against them.
All of the different branches have power over one another.
And you know, if you’re into this sort of thing, here’s the Schoolhouse Rock version:
I don’t have a credit card.
I also have no debt, no loans, and no unpaid bills. I haven’t graduated from college yet, but my wife has, and she did so with no debt, loans, etc. I plan to do the same.
Oh yeah, we have a baby on the way too.
Needless to say, in order to stay out of debt, one has to work hard and spend smart. My job isn’t the most luxurious (because I still haven’t graduated), but it’s enough to pay the bills. Recently, however, my wife and I have discovered that our income/spending rate was not balanced enough to get us through my potential student-teaching-induced unemployment. We didn’t want to go into debt, and we don’t believe that a credit card is the way to go, so we decided to make some budget cuts.
We decided that we were going to try to live on a total of $800 a month. Rent is 550 and insurance is 50 a month. So after the automatic stuff, we were left with $200 for the month. We put $120 towards foodstuffs and $80 towards gas money.
In order to make sure that the gas money lasted all month, I’ve been biking to work. It’s not really all that much, but I’m in better shape and I feel better about my carbon footprint. I think one of the things that has changed most since I started biking to work is that any place that’s as far as my job has become a place I can bike to instead of a place I drive to. Driving less really cuts down on the money spent on gas.
So far this month, we’ve filled up the tank once, and our gasoline bill this month has come to about 63 dollars.
Let’s get to food. One of the things that we had to master was self-control. Debit cards have made it possible to buy just about anything without seeing money move at all. We withdrew the $120 for the month and split it into $30 for each week. We keep the cash on hand, knowing that we could only spend that much each week. The first week, we stayed under 30.
I’ll post again at the end of the month. I don’t think we’re going to be right at or under 120 for food this month, but I do think that we’ll at least be close.
Pornography is demeaning women around the world every day, it hinders any positive outcomes of the feminist movement, and it teaches men (like Elliot Rodgers) and women everywhere that women are objects to be conquered and that sex is a compulsory need.
Elliot Rodgers, the misogynistic socio/psychopath who made headlines for his Day of Retribution this past week is a prime example of what happens when someone’s sense of reality gets distorted and twisted out of shape. One of the key points of his Manifesto was that he (Elliot) was not a part of society, because at least one woman out there owed him sex and every woman refused to “pay up”. Without sex, he didn’t belong to society.
And wouldn’t you know it, he was right. He didn’t belong to society without sex.
Recently, PornHub (a large pornography company) ran an ad campaign to normalize pornography use. They used catchy hashtags like #everybodydoesit and catchphrases like “Love yourself”. Their ads explained that through pornography you can have unlimited sex, and any kind that you want. They marketed porn as something that is used by everyone, and that there’s probably another porn user right next to you on the bus or at the crosswalk, “so don’t be ashamed”.
As far as the pornography industry is concerned, if you’re not using porn and “getting your fix” somehow or another, then you don’t belong. If #everybodydoesit, but you don’t…you must be a nobody.
Porn rewires the brain. It creates pathways paved in dopamine, the brain’s gimme, gimme drug. Frequent porn use changes the brain until addiction has kicked in. Porn users suddenly start looking at it whether they want to or not, because the way has been paved already. Porn becomes the brain’s path of least resistance. This TED talk explains how use of internet porn actually reduces the brain’s (and body’s) ability to “get enough”. When your brain convinces your body that you actually need 14 partners in order to get anything done, your body starts to believe it. (This is where PIED sets in; yes, ladies and gentlemen, Pornography Induced Erectile Dysfunction. It can happen as early as 20-24 years old.) If you get to a point where you can’t get enough virtual “partners” in order to satisfy your cravings that have turned into needs, your body and brain will team up to convince you that you have to go further than porn and actually go have sex with someone. And if your sense of reality is already a bit off, your brain might be capable of convincing you that sex is something you’re entitled to, something that other people owe to you simply because of your existence.
This is where I imagine Elliot Rodgers may have gotten to. He had an entitlement complex that led him to demand sex. He had to have it in order to be a proper human being. His greatest fear was dying a virgin, and his sense of reality was not really in check (we can talk about video games later), and he snapped.
If #everybodydoesit, then everyone is getting their brains rewired. Every man is developing a neurological pattern that tells them: “You have to have sex with a beautiful woman, NOW.” Now you tell me, could that be damaging to women in our society? I know that not all men are womanizing pigs, but when even one man’s brain has convinced him that all women (#YesAllWomen) are objects for him to take advantage of, then all women, yes all women, are affected.
We can take stands in the campaign against guns and violence and domestic abuse, but if we get porn out of the homes in America, we remove one proven cause of brainwashing and ED, and one probable cause of rape, domestic violence, sexual abuse and deviance, unprotected sex, drug abuse, depression, loneliness, ADHD, and a host of other things that nobody wants; things that correlate with pornography use.
Ladies, the porn/sex-saturated society we live in has convinced men that you are objects for the taking, and that you owe your body to a man, simply because he “needs” sex.
Take a stand for women, #YesAllWomen, and speak out against pornography. Not all men are users, but all women are victims.
Lancing a Windmill 