| It's Been A While Since We Heard This One
Chuck fucked a midget!
Crapola
So, a comment left on the education thing led me to respond with a comment, which then turned into a tirade... I hate when that happens, but wanted to hang onto it...
Yeah, personally, I would have no problem with schools teaching intelligent design... especially if it were done in religion classes... In science classes, my problem is that it's just a shitty argument... It'd be like if schools wanted to teach that we had gravity because invisible fairies pulled things toward one another... I mean, you can't disprove it of course, but come on... It's not a matter of belief, it's a matter of science... Have you ever heard of Occam's Razor? It's a great concept... Basically, given two options, one which is simple and the next which is complicated, steer toward the simplest, it's usually right...
Crap, I totally wasn't going to try to argue intelligent design v. evolution...
Honestly, I believe that the universe was probably created by something or someone... Whether that was an intelligent decision on that person/thing's part I'm not so sure of... But the idea behind teaching kids science has nothing to do with the facts they teach kids. It's all about learning a process and a method of thinking and solving problems... It's about reason... and watching people try to reason the existence of God is like watching 6 midgets try to fuck a doorknob...
Fun Fun Fun
Thanks TexasBorn_TexasBred for putting this idea in my head... Now I have to figure out how to come up with $200...
http://www.adameve.com/p-5220-love-swing-universal-swing-stand.aspx
The possibilities are just endless with this thing...
What Is Art?
I went to someone's site somewhere and some other site or blogring or something wants everyone to post about what art is...
I'm going to show you all tomorrow... Tomorrow, I am not going to use any verbs in my post... All verbs will be replaced by blanks, 6 underscores long...
Friday I will tell you what it means...
And Now...
My favorite comment of the day, courtesy of nkleyva:
"...So shit, c'mon out the closet and tell us you want to do it in the poopshooter...tell us you want it in the chair reverse cowboy style...tell us you want a sex swing..."
So turned on right now...
Simple Questions
Why are churches granted tax-exempt status in America?
What does it take for an organization to be recognized as a religious one and to acquire tax-exempt status?
Sexual Wish List
So, Maxim Magazine this month had a "100 Things You Should Know About Women" article... #25 or so was something to the effect of, "Your girlfriend/wife wants to do all the sexual things you want to do; she's just waiting for you to gather the courage to ask."
Women, do you agree with this? Are you a sexual dynamo who's just afraid to initiate anything? Do you think your significant other(s) (past or present) would feel the same way? What would your sexual wish list look like?
Guys, are there things you've been wanting to do with your significant other(s) (past or present) that you've just been afraid to ask? What does your sexual wish list look like?
I'm going to throw mine together, and consult with my wife before posting it (I'm not sure she'll let me post everything), but it should be up here (at least in part) this evening or tomorrow...
This Is So Awesome
Check out Woogle.
Last Night
Sometimes when I study, I get the feeling that the world is out to get me...
Alright Class, Everyone Who Wants To Have A
Threesome, Raise Your Hand
Some News That Might Not Start A Fight
I just found this article, and thought it was really well-written... I have to say I agree completely with the author... I agree that intelligent design should be taught in some class other than science classes (if it is taught at all), but I also agree that the purpose of copyright laws is not to keep school boards from making incredibly stupid curriculum changes... My thought is that if a community wants to make their public schools the laughing stock of the country, they should be able to do so... As long as parents still have the right to teach their children reason and logic independently from the schools (which every parent does), I think the schools should be able to teach whatever the elected or appointed officials in charge of those decisions in the area deem appropriate...
I am sure at some point in Mia's education, I will be forced to make this statement to her:
"Mia, I know [insert teacher's name here] is teaching you this. For the purposes of passing this class you need to remember what she is teaching you, and use it on the tests as applicable. However, I want you to know that [teacher] is an idiot and what he/she is teaching you with regard to this matter is absolutely incorrect. Here is the correct information. Remember this information so that once you are finished with this class, you will know what's actually true..."
The moral of the story is, parents, you need to stop whining and take the time to teach your own children instead of expecting everything that comes out of a teacher's mouth to be correct... If you want to teach your child that intelligent design is the truth, do it... but don't expect the government to force it down anyone else's throat...
Evolutionists Are Wrong!
Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,69512,00.html
02:00 AM Nov. 09, 2005 PT
Where are the copyright liberals when right-wing conservatives need us?
Last week, the National Academy of Sciences, or NAS, joined with the National Science Teachers Association, or NSTA, to tell the Kansas State Board of Education that it would not grant the state copyright permission to incorporate its science education standards manuals into the state's public school science curriculum because Kansas plans to teach students that "intelligent design" is a viable alternative theory to evolution. Kansas is scrambling to rewrite its proposal to win over the NAS and NSTA.
I agree with the vast majority of scientists who believe that evolution is the strongest and most comprehensive explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. I also agree with the vast majority of scientists who think that intelligent design, the theory that the complexity of life must be derived at least in part from a supernatural intelligence, is junk. I support the two scientific organizations in their mission of teaching legitimate theory, rejecting specious sermonizing in schools, and promoting the scientific method for studying observable phenomena.
Yet it concerns me that the NAS and NSTA are using their copyrights to bring wayward Kansas educators into line.
In the United States, intellectual property, or IP, law ensures that creators and inventors will get paid for their work, while doctrines like fair use and time-limited rights leave enough breathing room for the next innovator to use existing creations to comment, critique or make something new. But we have increasingly seen owners leverage their IP rights to get control rather than to get paid.
For example, Disney distributes (.pdf) its movie trailers with a license that says recipients may not use the trailers to criticize the company or the entertainment industry. Diebold challenged college students concerned about election fraud for publishing e-mails in which the company's employees complain about problems with electronic voting machines. Cisco Systems sued security researcher Mike Lynn for revealing certain information about flaws in its routers, then agreed to dismiss the suit after Lynn promised not to disseminate that information any further. Scientology has used copyright law to attack critics that document their complaints with excerpts from the church's texts. And NBC rejected filmmaker Robert Greenwald's request to pay for permission to use a one-minute clip of President Bush fumbling through an explanation for the war in Iraq on the grounds that the clip is "not very flattering to the president."
With each of these events, scholars and activists, concerned that overly broad IP laws squelch creativity, innovation and speech, rallied to the cause. We "copyright liberals" have been highly critical when IP owners enforce an ideological litmus test for permission to use a work. So why was there no hue and cry in the copyright blogosphere when Kansas got stung? (An exception was Wendy Seltzer's Legal Tags, the Blog.)
NAS and NSTA do not have to endorse the Kansas Board of Education's decision to teach intelligent design. The theory isn't supported by science, and Kansas should not be able to imply that teaching it comports with NAS or NSTA standards. United States trademark law would certainly prohibit Kansas from claiming NAS or NSTA approval for its alternative curriculum. But instead, the organizations are leveraging their copyrights in the standards manuals to get Kansas to accept evolution theory.
There is no well-developed body of law to stop IP owners from leveraging those rights to squelch speech. Increasingly, speakers are trying to use the relatively new doctrine of "copyright misuse" to protect their constitutional rights against IP claims. In the first copyright-misuse cases, defendants claimed the doctrine as a defense when IP owners sued to enforce contract terms that were anti-competitive, like tying software and hardware sales, or prohibiting use of unprotected ideas in future works. Then, in two cases, renowned Judge Richard Posner suggested conditions under which using a copyright to stop criticism also might be copyright misuse. The court said that courts may refuse to enforce a copyright when the IP owner's licensing practices interfere with constitutional policy, specifically the First Amendment right to free speech.
This is an uncomfortable issue for copyright scholars, who, if they are anything like biologists, presumably disagree with intelligent design. But we have to call the game fairly. After complaining so loudly when Disney, Diebold and NBC used copyright as a weapon, it's hypocritical to stand by and watch as others use it to bring the Kansas Board of Education into the scientific fold.
Loyalty
Someone said to me today that they were trying to remain "loyal" to someone else... I'm not sure who they were referring to or in what context, but it got me thinking...
Lately, I have been disagreeing a lot with my best friend's actions... I have been constantly questioning his actions and motivations and encouraging him (sometimes quite forcefully) to question them as I do... This has not really changed his choice of paths greatly, but it has made him consider the ethics and wisdom behind his decisions... Has my refusal to support and encourage his decisions been "disloyal?"
Who is the more "loyal" friend: the person who questions your every action and asks you to question your actions, or the person who agrees with you all of the time when talking to you whether they really agree with you or not?
Is there a different standard of "loyalty" when talking about our country's government officials? Should we always support the person we voted for no matter what they decide to do simply because we elected them? What about people we voted against? Are we bound to support them in all cases just because they hold office?
A Word From Our Sponsor
A letter from Chuck...
Russell Cowdrey is the reason that I am not a republican, even though I am jealous of him for having exclusive rights to the best boobies ever created by god. The problem with the republican party is that it is currently composed of both people who believe in limiting government and people who believe in legislating their own moral beliefs. The reason that Christian beliefs are represented in government, beyond the form of utilitarian ethics, is because the two-party system has forced the fiscal conservatives to vote for candidates who also have to appeal to protestant Christians. This should not be the case. However, I am not worried. I think that the need to form religion is a flaw in humanity that will eventually be erased by evolution.
BTW, if the protestant Christians of Jacksonville somehow manage to make my girlfriend who works at a strip club unemployed, every Baptist I see WILL be shot on site.
Fuck you, have a nice day.
Sore Loser?
As far as your "sore losers" comment, I don't really think things would be that much different if John Kerry had been elected... Only instead of trying to limit what people could watch on TV, we'd be trying to limit what people could do with their land in the name of saving a frog or a tree or a bird or some other bullshit...
I hate Republicans and Democrats alike now because they're all liberals... The fact of the matter is, they've chosen their issues, and forced every American to choose between a liberal candidate and a liberal candidate... It's all a matter of what issues they want to be liberal on... The reason I generally support Democrats is that they usually are more conservative when it comes to legislating social issues like strip clubs in communities, a woman's right to choose not to carry a child in her body for 9 months, what is able to be broadcast on television, etc...
These issues seem to be a greater threat to freedom than some dictator half the world away whose country has been sanctioned to death, who might have weapons that have no ability to be delivered across the globe to threaten our country...
Regimes
Our government uses the term "regime" to describe any authoritarian ultra-liberal government... Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong Il, the government of Iran: all "regimes."
Well, look at the behaviors of our government... See any similarities? Just like the religious leaders of Tehran and the leaders of other oppressive "regimes", every day we seek to limit the personal freedoms of our citizens more and more... We take over other countries in efforts to impose our own governing principles upon them...
Are these not the behaviors of aggressive dictators?
This is why I refer to our government as a "regime."
Secret Prisons
You're right, we didn't violate the Geneva Conventions because our President is a coward. He knew if he actually declared war on Iraq, that he could be charged for war crimes for the atrocities that he ordered... So he calls it a fucking conflict... He and his cronies are nothing but common criminals...
The fact is, this is a war... When you intentionally attack another country, you are starting a war... The Geneva Conventions forbid holding prisoners of war in secret prisons... So we argue that the people we're holding aren't prisoners of war because they weren't in uniforms... So, just because we attack a poor country whose people can't afford uniforms, they aren't prisoners of war... Let's give them another name: like "enemy combatants." That way we can do whatever we want and say we're doing nothing wrong... Cowards.
Although I pity the soldiers that have suffered and all who may one day suffer because of the refusal of our country's regime to follow the Geneva Conventions, I have to admit that I feel that the actions of the insurgent groups who cut off the heads of prisoners and things like that are totally justified... As I have said so many times before, if we as individuals and as a nation do not stop the cycle of negative and hateful behaviors, hate will always breed hate, wrongdoing will always cause more wrongdoing...
So torture on, President Bush... Toture on Bush supporters in the name of your "greater good"... But when it is your child on television being tortured at the hands of our enemies because of their construction of a "greater good," you shut your fucking mouth and take it... You asked for it.
Saddam
The reason I think Saddam Hussein should be free is that he was the dictator of a country... Dictators can do whatever they want. That's how they run their countries... America had absolutely no business taking over his country... It was the liberal ideals of the Republican party that caused us to attack Iraq... The attitude that we are some sort of world police force... The idea that we're right, and anyone who doesn't follow our system is wrong... It's total bullshit... I can only hope that one day the United States of Every Other Country in the World decides to get together and declare that the way our government operates is unfair, and they invade our country and charge our politicians with crimes against humanity using externally imposed international laws...
Our Nation's Beautiful Past
There was a time in America's history when the term conservative was used in politics to describe a person who believed in limiting the scope of government. These true conservatives believed that it was not the role of our government to impose too many restrictions upon the lives of its citizens. They also believed that it was in the United States' best interests to restrict ourselves from becoming too entangled in the affairs of foreign nations...
I often doubt whether there are any true political conservatives in our government today. Today's conservatives are actually liberals, masquerading behind the name conservative. They do not believe in political conservatism; instead, their aims are for extending the reach of our government into every aspect of citizens' lives in order to restrict free will in the name of "moral conservatism."
Every day I see it: self-proclaimed conservatives touting their "conservative" beliefs on television. "We need to restrict adult entertainment in our neighborhoods," they cry. "We need to limit what our children watch on television," they shout to the cameras. "We need to spread Democracy around the world," they say, as they mobilize our country to war. These pseudo-conservatives are more liberal than the "liberals" they seem to despise and work to defame publicly.
Every time I hear the word conservative used to describe these individuals, I throw up a little bit in the back of my throat... It disgusts me.
The American media and the American public needs to begin painting these liars for what they truly are: ultra-liberals...
That being said, I'm going to give you my conservative views on issues facing our nation today:
- War: Fuck 'em... I'd bring our boys home and say, "Alright Iraq. You've got police, a government, and a constitution... Take care." Then I'd close our borders to ALL immigration, and take all the damn money we're spending chasing ghosts around the world and find the people inside our own country that are out to incite terror, and lock them up... Our nation's military and intelligence agencies should be used for national defense... Protecting our nation involves strengthening our borders, not breaking through the borders of other nations around the world in the name of "democracy" or some other bullshit term... We have plenty of troops and plenty of intelligence power to protect our nation from within if we stop sending them everywhere else...
- Immigration: You're caught trying to enter this country illegally, you're a terrorist. You're caught knowingly hiring illegal immigrants, you're aiding terrorists. Build a big fucking wall across the US-Mexico border... Know what, build a big wall around all of our borders... Set up a blockade around our coasts... If you're trying to come into our country and you're not supposed to be, you're a terrorist... This would also reduce the drug trafficking from other countries...
- Oil: I'd give everyone in America huge incentives not to use oil. Buy a vehicle that runs on anything other than oil, gasoline, or diesel and you get a tax credit equal to the amount you just paid for your vehicle. Put solar panels on your roof, tax credit... We'd be free from our dependence on foreign oil in 10 years, guaranteed... The fact is, we have the technology to limit our oil needs, but our government has no interest in doing so because oil money puts and keeps most of them in power... The problem has less to do with supply and more to do with demand...
- FEMA... Shut it down. Give Americans a tax refund.
- Taxes: Consumption tax... No income tax... You buy something, you pay taxes... No tax-exempt status except for the disabled and people who cannot work for other reasons... Tax every fucking thing people buy (except for food)... Everyone in Washington seems to want to "simplify the tax code" but no one seems to be noticing the simplest solution of all... Think about how much Americans consume every day... This would also teach Americans to be more intelligent about how they spend their money because people would learn that wasteful purchases cost them more money... And just to clarify, Churches don't get tax-exempt status either...
- Welfare: You work full-time, or you don't get it. Now, if for some reason you can't work (such as a disability), fine... We'll help you out... But expect yearly independent evaluations to insure that you aren't defrauding the government...
- Education: I've posted about this before... Fine the parents when a kid acts up... You come home and tell your parents they have to pay $500 for throwing a spitball at Mrs. Snacklemeyer and I guarantee you're going to get your ass beat so hard you'll never act up again... Failing classes in public school? Fine the parents... Committing violent crimes in schools? Prison. I'm sick of us playing stupid little games... Pay teachers decent salaries so all the good ones don't just move on to the private sector... Also, stop bitching about curriculum... If you don't like the curriculum in public schools, home school your children. If you can't home school them, send them to private school. Can't afford private school? Get a better job or change your spending habits so you can... If you're driving around in a new vehicle or one that gets low gas mileage, or if you're living in a huge house in an expensive neighborhood and you're sending your kids to public schools, you should vote for people that will design the curriculum the way you want or send your kids to private schools... don't give me the "we can't afford private school" bullshit... Sell your new V-10 Ford Expedition and buy a used 4-cylinder minivan... Sell your luxury house and buy a less expensive house in a different neighborhood... Stop eating out... Stop buying designer clothes... Not willing to do this? Well, then you're choosing to send your kids to the public schools... Vote, then shut the fuck up about it...
- [insert moral issue here]: Leave it alone... Let people go to strip clubs if they want. Let people watch porn on television if they want. If a woman doesn't want to have a child, let her get an abortion. Our government does not need another unwanted child on its hands... Leave people's personal lives alone...
- Crime: Make all penalties for non-violent crimes financial ones. Change the bankruptcy laws so that debts due to crime cannot be cast off... If someone is caught with possession of drugs, fine them based on the amount... Someone steals something, fine them... I posted about this the other day... Stop wasting money incarcerating non-violent criminals... Focus on the violent ones... One more thing: you run from the cops, they have the right to shoot you in the back...
- Prisons: Prisons can become a labor source... Building needs to be demolished? Prison labor. We need a new courthouse? Prison labor. Prison labor. Prison labor. Prison labor. In addition to paying for the costs of their incarceration, when these prisoners get out, they will have learned job skills that will enable them to become employed when they get out. The question arises, how do we keep people from escaping? Armed guards... You are caught trying to escape, you are shot in the back...
You liberals need to stop trying to legislate every damn thing that goes on in our country. You need to stop trying to control every damn thing that goes on in other countries. Defend our country from internal and external threats from within our own country. Give people positive incentives to do good and practical things... Don't overburden our government by trying to set up agencies to control everything...
Any questions? Any other issues you would like me to address? |
