Archive

Archive for the ‘Humanity’ Category

White Supremacists and Medievalism

February 7, 2018 Leave a comment

Though this is not a recent argument, it is one that I ran into while I pondered the rigid feminist ideology Cathy Newman adhered to in her debate with Jordan Peterson. In fact, Cathy exemplifies the type of ideological blindness found with many types of ideas and ideologies. This led me to Dorothy Kim’s idea that professors who teach about the medieval period should explicitly condemn white supremacists in their classrooms. Why should that be done? I am stuck with the question of what will that accomplish?

If I take the premise that it will make white supremacists re-think their medieval use or racism as a whole, then this fails as many if not most supremacists are not college educated. How does condemning help if those people are not taking the class? In this element of Kim’s idea, it fails. Condemning in class is no solution for this situation.

The impressionable students can be indoctrinated by the incessant pounding of the professors if these professors follow Kim’s idea. Afterall, college isn’t about critical thinking or having as student think. It is about indoctrinating the student with the current societal approved ideology. We have filled the minds of students with doctrine and nothing else. Success, except it, isn’t. We now have students crying about their feelings and wanting to suppress other thoughts that were extrapolated based on the indoctrination. This doesn’t do much. In fact, if a student doesn’t have the white supremacist idea, then it was a huge waste of the student’s tuition and university promise of educating them. However, I have at tendency to believe that universities jumped the shark years ago.

One idea could be that if ALL of the medieval professors were to band together and ignore their medieval courses to condemn white supremacy, then everyone will have to believe them and white supremacy will go away. Sorry, that won’t work. As soon as a professor or two takes to belittling white supremacist ideas, their effect dies, and white supremacists do not care what these professors think anyway.

White supremacists, in general, have no clue about the medieval period. Their knowledge consists of what they have learned in the movies such as medieval soldiers wore studded gambesons, Vikings (raiding Norsemen) has horns on their helmets, an onager could knock down walls with huge stones, and the Knights Templar found some secret treasure. There are plenty of people that believe that swords go “shwing” when pulled out of a scabbard not to mention the idea one man can defeat twenty with ease. This makes me question Professor Kim’s intelligence.

Preaching to the choir solves nothing. In fact, it can very well create the opposite effect she desires. Does wearing an umbrella inside the house in order to keep from being rained do anything? If the roof is keeping you try, then the redundancy is useless. Even if there are some gains to her idea, are they even worth the cost?

Any form of hatred comes from the home where it was ingrained or a traumatic experience where the individual associates an entity with negativity, thus hatred. All of this is due to the lack of familiarity with that entity. Without familiarity, there is no empathy or compassion towards the entity and hatred persists. All of this needs to be addressed and a silly idea of “say no to white supremacy” in a classroom accomplishes nothing more than a false sense of accomplishment. You achieve the same accomplishment by silently wishing there were no white supremacists.

Advertisements

We Have Come So Far And Learned Very Little

August 18, 2017 Leave a comment

I have had the opportunity to watch the United States and the world for that matter evolve socially and culturally for over thirty years. It always seems as we take a step forward we take not two, not three but ten steps backward. There has been so much movement forward that is always retarded by ideology and some form of greed whether it is financial, ethnic, or cultural greed.

The Charlottesville, Virginia incident was an event that represented a minority for both sides. There are really few KKK and neo-Nazis when we look at the numbers. The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates there are at most 8,000 members. Even if there are ten times that number, it would be small. I have had the hilarity of seeing a few of these marches, and they were very uncomfortable for the few members that were there. The absurdity of it all almost made you feel sorry for them except for what they represent. Fortunately, the counter protesters were few in number and did not agitate the KKK members. This further diluted the KKK’s desired effect as they became laughable in their uncomfortable movements. They are the comedy of hate groups.

Neo-Nazis, on the other hand, are a bit more frightening as they are more international than the sad KKK and their name has a more fear instilling ability than Klu Klux Klan, which sounds like some Looney Tunes cartoon or Dumb and Dumber movie. I often associate Neo-Nazis to the next group, white supremacists. These groups tend to be more violent than the KKK.

Another group, while I am covering hate groups, are the black separatists and the BLM. Yes, BLM should be considered a hate group if we go by the definition set up for hate groups. A hate group is a social organization or group that advocates or even practice violence towards others. The violence can be as simple as hostility and the hatred can be directed at law enforcement personnel. We cannot give them a pass even if they have valid points or even perceived valid points. Are they truly so different than the KKK other than silly acronyms such as KKK and BLM – bacon lettuce ‘n mutton. Will the BLM become as impotent as the KKK has become? I only hope so and continue to hope the KKK members just go away and find something constructive to do such as donate their sheets to the needy.

Hate groups have always existed and will continue to exist no matter how we try to legislate, humiliate, or even bully them away. We tend to drive them underground and like a pressure vessel without a relief valve, they’ll explode at some point. We are not seeing anything new with hate groups as I recall the fear of white supremacists in the 90s and even earlier. Suffice to say that these groups have us taking steps backward, but they’re not the only ones doing this.

The social justice ideology is another factor that is pushing us downwards. We are removing old, historical monuments to alleviate psychological issues that are not there or eliminate hatred or what? What is this accomplishing other than to hide the realities of history? History, after all, does not care about good or evil. It is like air, it’s just there for us to use. To tear down a monument of Robert E. Lee accomplishes nothing. His monument represents several things. The first is it represents him as a man during a time where society had different norms. He was neither good nor evil. Lee was a human who made good decisions and bad decisions. Should we banish Martin Luther King Jr. from his place in D.C.? He was in many terms a sexists and misogynist as he had multiple affairs and truly does not represent my beliefs. We should remove all monuments to all people for the negative actions they have done. Were Lee’s transgressions that much worse than his positives? Who is to judge, a society that makes the rules to make themselves feel better? Genghis Khan is a hero in Mongolia but hated in China. He was both good and bad.

How does removing Civil War monuments help people mentally? It doesn’t. If one derives their present and future based on their past, then the issue is with them and not society. In fact bowing to these beliefs forces us back even further as we live in the past and miss the future. Why can we not view these monuments as memories of triumph when we began to conquer injustice, hatred, and bigotry with a major victory? I don’t hate the men that fought for the Confederacy just as I do not hate elderly people than continuing to maintain a racial ideology based on the 60s and 70s. It is difficult to remove an indoctrinated idea after living with it for decades. What I cannot forgive is our willingness to cow tail to an ideology that censors freedom of speech and the past for a feel good feeling. Shall we save federal money and shut down all National parks related to all wars and sell the land? While we are at it, raze the National Mall as it represents hatred. There are plenty of places the government can get rid of and save a ton of money in the process. Acadia, gone! Dry Tortugas, no here anymore. There is a long list of places we can be rid of. Think of all the monuments we have. Remove all of them as the person or persons it represents did something unsavory at some point in their life.

Instead of looking to punish the present for the actions of the past, we should be embracing our societal and cultural advancement. Turn away from the mantra of the left and right extremes as they only deceive by giving you only a sliver of the truth and little of it. Their journalistic design, humour, academic knowledge or even ignorance is designed to create hatred within you. Think and analyze for yourself whether it is from the media, website, or even a politician. Hatred will always exist and capturing it is like trying to hold water in a sieve. Embrace our differences in not only the outward features but in our beliefs, too, and this will bring us together as we combat hatred through the unity of acceptance. We can make it known our disproval of someone’s actions, but we should not harshly punish because their beliefs do not model our own ideologies. People have the right to hate other people, but they do not have the right to incite or harm those they hate.

Hatred Breeds Hatred

February 23, 2016 Leave a comment

I was brought up to treat other people as I would like to be treated and as an equal. It was taught to me that a black person was no different than me except for melanin and a few other characteristics that are no different than eye color, hair color or any other such variation of a human. As a son to a mother, brother to a sister, and husband to a wife there was no reason why I would not think of a female as being my equal. This type of vision carries on throughout other people.

For all of the people I have met, I have yet to come in a agreement with 100% of the people. We disagree on many issue such as sports, sports teams, politics, religion, weather, seasons, guns, homosexuality, and so on. Some actions or beliefs I say are very wrong while some friends would disagree. I openly admit I think homosexuality is wrong in many ways and even believe it is a neurological disorder. This belief has never allowed me to discriminate or hate such a person. They’re different than me just as the guy who has cerebral palsy or the friend that likes only red headed women or the one that prefers another type of female. There have been many gay people that I have met in the world, and they knew my belief. It has never stopped us from interacting, because it was not a issue to keep a friendship or working relationship from communicating and interacting peacefully. This isn’t just about gay or color but differences as a whole.

Recently, I have seen people purposely discriminate against those that may share my ideas. There is the unfairness of banning Chick-Fil-A at the University Nebraska or the person who, holding a different opinion than me, has a racist view of blacks or whites for that matter. They express their First Amendment rights and are attacked. When these people or businesses are quashed, these groups attacking become worse than what they have attacked. Their insatiable hatred towards these groups does what they apparently do not understand. They create hatred through their own irrational hatred.

We can’t legislate hate away and we can’t shame or push hate away. Legislation to eliminate hate has always made the issues worse and it creates more hatred of the type of hatred or discrimination the law tried to remove. The same goes with these groups that attack anti-gay businesses or people. Attacking people for what appears to be a racists statement or attitude does not make for a tolerant world.

Sadly, those that believe is banning what seems to be offensive or hurtful words only makes the issues worse. We will always have people hating gays, blacks, whites, hispanics, asians, redheads, short people and what not. When we try to actively stop these people, we only make it worse. When we enact laws that discriminate one group in order to help another, we are creating future hate that is worse than the present.

The solution is a lengthy process called time. Tolerance develops over time and understanding comes after. When we try to circumnavigate time we only make the issues worse. Think of these actions as going to war without diplomacy. Would you doom millions of lives if you could have been more patient and diplomatic? The solution for the University of Nebraska is to allow Chick-Fil-A in. Show the tolerance. It may be difficult, but there are other ways to get someone to change.

In the end, the groups forcing the discrimination of Chick-Fil-A are worse than what they are trying to prevent. In effect these people are the true evil. We should be defending the right for everyone to have their freedom of speech and beliefs even if we strongly disagree. Until those of us who will discriminate based on a righteous cause cease this attitude, hatred will continue to breed hatred, and those of us that actively seek to prevent the rights of others from being expressed in the false belief of freedom are guilty of what we preach against.

The hardest part

January 15, 2016 Leave a comment

My oldest has been in college for a few years, now. This means that in several years he will have to disconnect from our household and start a new life. The base of his living won’t be at our house or  the chances of it are slim. It is during these thoughts I realize how much I will miss him.

For most of our life together, we have done little together. We have sleep, work, and other activities to suction away our time. The moments where we could spend time together are further stolen with activities he wants to do and activities I want or have to do. This leaves the two of us with little time together. The best I can hope for is usually his presence. I get a satisfaction of knowing he is around.

As a parent, we seldom realize the noise a human makes. It is not necessarily the vocal part of noise for there is physical noise and a residual noise. The physical noise is the person being in the house. I know when my son is around because I see him pass by or using some item within the house. This is the physical noise. The residual noise is what the person leaves behind. For my son, these are dishes, laundry, whatever he was playing with, and the open garage door. It drives us up a wall, but when you are without your son, you actually miss it. Wait! Did I say that?

I never understood my parents reaction to my being away, especially when I moved out. They were always encouraging me to come home. My life was full of, well, life. I couldn’t find the effort to always travel the two hours or more to go home. My parents home became a source of boredom, because there was nothing of interest there. My parents were happy to have me in the house, but I didn’t understand. They could continue with life while I struggled to find something to do at the house. It was no longer my home. They were reclaiming what I am now seeing – a loss.

To spend so many years dedicating your life to your offspring is very hard but satisfying. The most difficult part is the separation, more so than the birth of our children. Now throw in homeschooling and it is compounded. We have homeschooled our children for so many years that our lives are happily more intertwined than ever. I was a part of my son’s education. I would trade the frustrations for anything. I just wish I understood them better.

It is hard for me, a person with a cold and emotionless demeanor, to cope with this. Much of what bothers me is kept inside while a rigid human presents a rock of stability. At the death of my father, I never cried but only appeared to be the stable person with the ability to continue one, after all I understand death is normal and will happen to all of us. Still, all of it is difficult.

As I look into the future, I see a change that brings a bittersweet emotion. I will happy for my son’s new life but be saddened for the loss I will encounter. My memories will fade until reminded by his visit. My consolation of understanding what my parents desired and understood does not bring the comfort I seek. Instead, I must soldier on and adjust to life just as my son will do. The best I can have is the comfort of my wife. In the end, half of my life will go away and grow elsewhere. Will I finally weep and such a wonderful but sad loss?

Gun Control and Violence

January 5, 2016 Leave a comment

President Obama’s gun control method, whether you agree or not, is a poor attempt at curbing gun violence. The stated goal is a failure from the initial concept and would do well to be retracted. The President fails or doesn’t care to understand the underlying problem, and it isn’t guns. The first problem is the idea of gun violence. Is that the only violence in existence? Is gun violence the most numerous? Is gun violence a problem? The President is playing politics as well as using fear to attain a goal which is NOT to curb gun violence but to reduce guns. I say reduce because elimination of guns is impossible at this point.

If you ask me what I fear most, gun violence is the last on my list or near it. A shark attack is near the bottom for me unless violent and vicious sharks can swim into the hills using the shallow streams and then launch from these streams to attack me. What I fear are people. It doesn’t matter if they have a gun or not. I have watched road rage where no gun was used, but there was violence. What about the recent spate of soccer violence where several people were killed from punches? I can list a number of violent stabbings, sexual assaults, domestic assaults, and other violent crimes that required no guns. Guns are not a problem, nor are they a convenient weapon of choice.

The issue, believe or not, Trump actually hit on, and it is mental health, but that is only a part of it. We are in a society where aggressive action is encouraged. Don’t think so? Think of Melissa Click and her need of muscle or UC Santa Barbara professor, Dr. Mireille Miller-Young, and her actions she had taken against anti-abortion protestors. These two example are violent actions. If you scream at your opponent this, too, is a violent action.  These two individuals by their actions are telling students that aggressive actions are an acceptable means of coercion. There is no compromise.

Compromise is the issue. Even in marriage, compromise is not necessary in our narcissistic desires. Our own government does not compromise. Look at Donald Trump. There is no compromise in his position, and I am not talking about his political position. His aggressive manner does not allow compromising, and his followers adopt this idea. If we can learn to compromise, we can see the accidents of life as well as the selfishness in ourselves. No longer would we overreact to innocuous incidents where violence becomes the only solution.

This doesn’t solve many mental health issues, but it is a start. Mental health is a complex issue that needs addressed. Simply throwing money at it solves nothing just like how we like to throw money at education in the mistaken belief it will fix something. This is just wasteful and unnecessary. To solve this problem, a goal and the problem need to be identified and targeted. Only then can we allocate money to the problem. Just as in education, I would not allocate a dime to mental health until there is a well-defined goal. The one thing we cannot do is enable or justify for selfish reasons in this case.

Gun control does nothing to alleviate violence, nor does fear mongering the public. Gun control is not a solution nor a temporary solution. All of the statistics in the world solves nothing. Changing the aggressive attitude begins to solve the problem of violence. A non-intrusive method needs to be found and integrated in society. It should not restrict the public but enable the public to maintain individualism and freedom of thought.  To add gun control as a solution, we might as well as restrict alcohol, drugs, movement within the nation, work, finances, sports, marriage, religion, politics, and many other results of aggression.

Who Cares?

May 11, 2014 2 comments

I keep hearing about this Michael Sam. Who is he and why should I care? He is a football player drafted by the St. Louis Rams and is gay. Again, why should I care? This is not important information for our media to go on about. Even ESPN should not be spending much time on this person because he is “openly gay.” This is an insult to all.

Where is the detail information about net neutrality? This is a very important topic and you see very little of it. Instead we are getting a bunch of nonsense thrown at us. I have nothing against Mr. Sam. He is not newsworthy. I’d rather the American public become aware of the battle about net neutrality. This will affect anyone with internet access. For the record, I am for net neutrality. When we give businesses control they squeeze even more money out of us without any benefit.

Another topic is the battle for our fourth amendment. This prohibits the unreasonable searches and seizures:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
The current battle was about mobile phones being seized for a violation unrelated to your phone. So, when is your mobile phone protected? If you are stopped for speeding, can the police seize your phone’s information. Many people today store all their life on these items. What do you think?

Instead we are stuck on senseless issues such as Michael Sam. There is someone out there that will state it is important for rights of people. Funny, huh? The rights you should be concerned about can be taken away while these people jump for joy that some openly gay person has been drafted.

The American public is willing to allow the big issues be settled by their government alone and the few that control while they argue over senseless issues like gay rights. What do gay rights matter when you have no rights.

I believe the fourth amendment is more important, don’t you?

Now to think of tags to use after I post this.

Categories: Humanity

A small victory for humanity

Abortion restrictions pass in Texas. This is a victory but a small one for humanity. I consider Wendy Davis and supporters of her cause to be fundamentally wrong about their views in this case. It is a view based on selfishness and not one for humanity. This has nothing to do with the great lie of women’s health.

I grew up in a family that was strongly pro-life. I went along with this as a kid for I didn’t know much about this battle and nor did I care. What did it matter to me at that time. I had no vested interest in this. We wore the pro-life rose, but there was no meaning in it for me. These were my young year and early teen years. There was no need to be interested in this argument. Sure, I’d seen some of abortion and fetus the images, but they were alien to me. There was no meaning.

As I entered my late teen years, I began dating. Initially, this argument had no meaning. Everything was the same except my friends were now voicing opinions. Most were in favor of abortion. At the time, I didn’t pay attention to who was for and who was not. Later I would look at this and notice the people in favor of abortion were sexually active. Those not in favor would change their minds when they became sexually active or had a good friend that was sexually active. Those against abortion were not dating and or were religious.

In my college year, I began to side with pro-abortion. I was looking at it from a selfish perspective. If my significant other and I became sexually active with each other, there was a chance of pregnancy. This would ruin our lives. We were college students and not ready to work in the world. In fact we would not survive as a couple if there was a pregnancy. We were too immature and unready for responsibility no matte how much we professed it. We looked at the stigma within our respective families. How could I face my family or my significant other? Inside I knew it was wrong, but I was only thinking of myself. Yes, a little bit of pleasure was worth the expulsion of a nuisance.

My college friends were of the same opinion. The women’s right was rampant since it was the woman’s body we were discussing. Who cares about the separate entity inside. Even though I held this new opinion, I wasn’t entirely sold on it. I was told the fetus was not human even though the DNA said otherwise. Apparently, if it does not look human then it is not human. I guess you can say Joseph Merrick was human or any other deformed human with that logic. There was a lot of information going around about how a fetus wasn’t human and was part of a woman. None of this logic sat well with me, but I went along with it. Afterall, what business is it of mine to be involved in other people’s lives. I guess if I see a crime, I should look the other way.

When I met the Educator and we married, my thoughts about abortion really didn’t change. What did change was my concerns about it. No longer did I worry about having an unexpected baby. If we had a child before we were ready, we could take care of the situation. We both worked and were mature enough to deal with a child. The Educator and I were prepared for a child in every way even though we were not planning on having a child. The abortion argument faded away, and I no longer cared. A baby was NOT going to ruin my life, now.

Fast forward to the second pregnancy where the abortion argument appeared once more. A simple test was done that came back positive. My second child stood a good chance of being mentally retarded. The Educator looked into my eyes and asked if I wanted to have an abortion. My response was very quick. It was a resounding, NO. The Educator was testing me. Had I said yes, there would have been a fight between us. For me, I could not sign the death warrant of an innocent, unprotected HUMAN. My viewpoint on abortion was slightly changed. I did not agree with abortion in my family but still had a no interference viewpoint towards others. This viewpoint was eroding.

I had the opportunity to visit Body Works. It may be called Body Worlds. Once again, I saw fetuses. This and the partial birth abortion technique had me thinking about a lot of things. I started to research everything I could about the fetus and embryos as well as abortion. In a very short time, I understood what I failed to see as a youth.

Abortion is about narcissism and selfishness. There is nothing more to what is behind abortion. Anyone supporting abortion is hiding selfishness or they are ignorant of the truth about abortion, thus believing in the women’s health lie. I was there! I know that I was selfish for a time and ignorant about abortion. It has never been about women’s health, rights or anything else about women. That is the big lie. It is about selfishness for a few minutes of lustful pleasure. Why else would you support abortion? There is only one way to naturally have children, and this requires sexual intercourse. Yes, pregnancy is a bi-product of this act.

Look around with open eyes. As I look back on those supporting abortion, they had something to “lose” if there was no abortion. I have married friends that support abortion. Why? One couple does not want children. They run a risk of an unwanted pregnancy. I know of couples that swing, and they support abortion. Yes, there are couples with families that support abortion. When they were single like me, they too had the same feelings and thoughts. They have not had to truly think about it since. It is easier to just go along. These people admit they don’t care. You don’t care if you have no interest in the subject. Do you care what is happening in some small village in Southeast Asia? Unless you have family or money tied up there, the answer is no.

The fact is the fetus and even the embryo is a human being. This person has human DNA and civil rights that the ACLU has no problems not defending. Like any newborn infant, a fetus requires nurturing. For a test, take a newborn infant and leave it to fend for itself in the wild. Just because the fetus isn’t six foot, speaking and a few other minor details does not mean the fetus is not human. Wasn’t Joseph Merrick human or Chris Burke,too? What about people born without appendages or cojoined twins? These people do not look human, but they are. They have human DNA.

We humans like to be rid of anything that will inconvenience us. It is easier to kill a human that has no civil rights or a defender. This is nothing more than murder at its worst. Should Andrea Yates or other such parents be convicted of murder if we allow abortion. These people only committed post-birth abortion. We have pre-birth abortion and partial birth abortion. Why not post-birth abortion? What is the difference?

I look at my children and thank God I never murdered them. Can supporters of abortion truly look in the mirror and believe their hands are free of the blood of innocents?