A Camera and a Gun

They're more similar than you think...

Both of them shoot...

Both of them have the ability to destroy lives and careers...

Both of them are linked to some level of guilt or responsibility...

Both can serve as evidence, in the right arena...

Both have the ability to change the world; and both have...

Both come in black...

Both can have telescoping lenses...

Both have sights...

Both have triggers...

Both can be rapid-fire...

Both can be modified to one's specifications...

Both can be dangerous, in the wrong hands...

Both can be concealed easily...

Both have cartridges of varying capacities...

Both have been used to take down political figures...

Both are seen as symbols of Constitutional Amendments...

Both require a human to operate them...

Both are viewed as symbols of revolution...

Both must be operated with proper timing and skill...

Both require training or instruction...

Both come in a variety of styles...

Both are found on all corners of the planet...

Enthusiasts of each are equally crazy...

Both can settle or escalate an argument...

Both have fatefully found people in compromising positions...

Both have been used by James Bond...

Both are found in most American households...

Both can be used as a tool; although, I wouldn't recommend using either one as a hammer...

Both can come with a strap and/or case...

Both are commonly used in the wilderness...

Both are commonly used by people working abroad...

Both are used by the military...

Both have been, at times, mounted on various vehicles...

… and personally, I don't like haring either one pointed at me.

Strange, isn't it, how two things so different can have so much in common?

Definition of "Stupid" Expanded to Specifically Include North Carolina Legislature

In case you haven't heard, North Carolina has just found a new level of stupid to sink to. With this move, it appears that Mississippi has competition in their stampede towards “Idiocracy.” (Incidentally, I don't believe Mr. Judge intended that movie to be a suggestion.)

North Carolina's State Legislature is about to pass a bill that declares North Carolina to be above the rulings of the Federal Courts and the Constitution, with regards to the Separation of Church and State.

You see, North Carolina only has ONE religion that matters, and everyone who believes differently from them are simply unworthy of equal rights or representation. Therefore, they believe that this religion should be the OFFICIAL religion of North Carolina, and that for that reason, they deserve special advantages and privileges that are ignored to other religions... I mean, those religions aren't THAT religion, so they must be WRONG... they must be some kind of CULT... they simply don't matter...

… so that their schools can lead prayers...

… so that they can go to a “school voucher system” that excludes religions that they don't agree with, like other states have tried to do...

… so that they can use ONE RELIGION to govern (or rather, oppress) people...

… so that they can pass bills like Tennessee's law that makes it legal for Christians to bully gays...

Am I the only person who sees something WRONG here???

I mean, if North Carolina is declaring that they magically, for some reason, are above the courts and Federal Government, doesn't that look like an attempt to secede???

Following this logic, North Carlina can just as easily pass more measures regarding ways they feel “oppressed” by the Federal government... they can declare that their citizens don't have to pay Income Taxes, for example... or that their cops have the right to search and seize anything they damn well please; warrant or not... or that the Second Amendment says you can own tanks and F-18s... or that there is no such thing as a minimum wage... or they could even bring back slavery, if they wanted to (although, if they undo the minimum wage, it would do the same thing)...

In the articles I've read, they haven't stated where North Carolina believes they have the authority to do this, but I can assume that they believe it comes from the Tenth Amendment, which reads:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Now, when most morons talk about the Tenth Amendment, they know they're talking about “State's Rights,” but most of them have NEVER READ THE FUCKING AMENDMENT!!!

If they had, they would understand that this basically says “if it doesn't say it here, then it's up to you to figure it out...”

What THEY think it means is, “States can do whatever the fuck they want; even if they want to eliminate parts of the Constitution to meet their own sick desires.”

If they didn't think that, then they wouldn't be attempting this legislative coup d'etat. That's the only rational reason I can conceive to explain their actions.

… but then again, it may not be entirely rational to attempt to understand the rantings of irrational people... I mean, sure, they're interesting and all... but only a Schizophrenic could follow what they call “logic.”

North Carolina, you may have just inspired me to create a “movement toward Idiocracy” timeline... while I'm thankful for the creative inspiration, I just have to ask... wouldn't you rather be known for doing something GOOD?

Of course, the problem runs deeper than just the legislators... I mean, SOMEBODY had to put them in office, right? They didn't just APPEAR there, magically. They didn't just walk in one day and start legislating... they were VOTED IN!

Now, what does that say about the voting populous of North Carolina? Well, given the fact that they voted for Obama twice, it's safe to say that the majority of the people only vote once every four years (which, by the way, is the case across THE ENTIRE COUNTRY).

The State Legislature, however, is obviously elected by an entirely un-informed electorate; nearly impervious to such things as “facts” or any understanding of the Constitution. The people who elect these morons only serve to further prove the hypotheses in my earlier post, “Cultivating the Stupid.”

Yes, as people get dumber, they elect dumber people, who do things that help to make people dumber; which only hurts the rest of us, because those of us who actually DO have the ability to think rationally have to constantly deal with the pure rivers of mental sludge that come from this segment of the population.

Watch out going through doors... they might close on your hands, with your knuckles dragging behind you like that...

Actually, Yes... You ARE a Bigot...

Some topics are unavoidable when they're prominent in the news. Lately, one of these topics has been that of marriage equality. One common theme keeps popping up, and it BOTHERS THE SHIT OUT OF ME! One such discussion happened recently at a local bar. It went something like this...

“I'm not a bigot; I just don't think gays should marry...”

Actually, yes... you ARE a bigot.

“NO I'M NOT! I have friends who are gay...”

… and yet, you think they're less of a human than you are?

“Why would you say that?”

Well, you don't think that they deserve to have the same rights that you do. If we, as humans, are supposed to have equal rights, then why do you think they don't deserve the same rights you do, then that would suggest that you see them as less human.

“But the Bible says it's wrong...”

Actually, the OLD TESTAMENT says that, and a lot of other crazy things... you left your ex-wife after she cheated on you... did you slaughter a fatted calf after stoning her? CHRISTians are supposed to look to the words of CHRIST; and in Matthew 19:12, he says (in the language of his time) that some PEOPLE are born gay.

If they are, indeed, people, as Jesus said, then don't they deserve to live under the umbrella of the words “Love thy neighbor?”

It doesn't say:

“Love thy neighbor*”

*Unless they're gay

“But the Church opposes it...”

The First 10 words of the First Amendment read “Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of Religion.” The position of your Church is irrelevant. Religious doctrine can't become law.

“But the next part says 'nor abridging the free-exercise thereof.' Laws can't discriminate on my religion.”

If you don't support gay marriage, don't have one. Your religious beliefs aren't being oppressed. However, if you're telling other people, who believe differently than you; that marriage is about love, rather than gender; that their religious beliefs can't be expressed, just like your's, because of YOUR beliefs, then aren't their religious beliefs being oppressed by yours?

“So just because someone chooses to be gay, they should be allowed special laws?”

When did you choose to be straight? Furthermore, how is that a “special law?” It seems to me that more laws have been created to DENY people this right... simply removing those laws, to make the current laws apply to EVERYONE sounds more like we're REMOVING “special laws,” going the other way; just like the repeal of the 3/5 clause in the Constitution.

"I didn't choose to be straight.  I just know I am."

So I guess, then, it's outrageous to think that other people might be born different than you.  I guess, then, everybody must be born with brown hair and blue eyes.  I guess, then, everybody must need glasses.  I guess we're all just born the same?

"Well, no... obviously not... but..."

So then, it's perfectly possible that someone else might grow up KNOWING they're gay... glad we settled that...

“But marriage is a religious pact. If the Constitution can't tell us how to worship, how can marriages be regulated by law?”

Actually, marriage is a contractual agreement with the State and Federal government. If it weren't, marriage status wouldn't affect taxes. If marriage weren't a legal contract, then everybody would have to file taxes individually, rather than as a married couple.

“But it'll hurt the economy...”

How will more weddings hurt an economy? That means more officiants, more cakes and bakers and bartenders and caterers and limo drivers and dove handlers and event planners and event centers (which may need to be built or renovated) and more gift registries (which means more gift buying... stuff needs to be made when stuff is bought) and more traveling and more hotel stays and eating out and more flying and driving and Amtraking and Busing... that all sounds like MORE jobs to me, and a BETTER economy...

“Gay marriage will threaten traditional marriages...”

So, if gays are allowed to marry, would you leave your new wife for a man?

“No... I'm not gay...”

Then YOUR marriage won't be threatened. Why should it matter to you?

“Well, it doesn't matter to me, but it might affect other people...”

And why is that your business?

“Well, it's not...”

Then it shouldn't matter...

“But marriage has ALWAYS been between one man and one woman.”

No it hasn't. In Ancient Greece, Ancient Egypt, some Native American tribes, Mormons, and many Muslim current countries, marriage is between one man and SEVERAL women, or two people who love each other, regardless of gender. The Roman Emperor, Caligula, married his horse. Clearly, marriage has NOT always been between 'one man and one woman.'

“And Ancient Greece and Rome fell; the Native Americans don't have many people left; the Mormons abandoned polygamy; and the Muslims are... well... Muslims...”

Greece and Rome fell because their empires got too big to maintain, and they collapsed beneath their own decadence and arrogance. Gay marriage had nothing to do with it; furthermore, it's largely because of CHRISTIANS that there aren't many Native Americans left; and after your comment about Muslims, how can you say you're not a bigot?

“Well, I was talking about gays; not Muslims...”

Should Muslims be allowed to marry?

“Well, of course they should.”

So why is it ok for Muslims, but not gays?

“Muslims believe in a God, just like I do.”

So Atheists shouldn't be allowed to get married, either?

“I didn't say that...”

Yes, you did... you said that the reason Christians and Muslims should be allowed to marry, is because they believe in God. Alternately, if someone doesn't believe in God, they shouldn't be allowed to marry.

“I didn't say that. There's no reason Atheists shouldn't marry...”

… as long as they're not gay...

“Right...”

Tell me again, how are you not a bigot?

“... uhhhhh...”

Consti-Tuesday: "Freedom" of Religion

Here we are... our second installment of Consti-Tuesday. Having covered the Preamble last week, it only seems appropriate to continue on to the First Amendment. Sure, I could do the Articles of the Constitution, but there's just too much there to decide where to go first, so I think I'll come back to those issues as they present themselves to be necessary in later debates... cool?

So... the First Amendment...

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

(text from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution)

Let's be honest, here... there's a lot packed into it, and quite frankly, that's a lot to conquer in one post, so I'll break it down to several pieces in order to keep it more readable.

We'll start today, with the first two little sections. (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”)

Why is it that the FIRST TEN WORDS are so hard for so many people to acknowledge?

“Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion...”

For some reason, people of one particular religious leaning fail on every level to realize that this means THEIR RELIGION can't be used to affect law! That's where our bigoted laws preventing the marriage of loving couples comes from. “Certain people” think that because THEIR religion says that gays are lesser human beings at best (and SUB-HUMANS in some circles), that means THEIR religious beliefs should be shoved on everybody else. These are the same people who use THEIR religion to claim that Abortion should be illegal.

Here's some news, though... YOUR religion doesn't speak for EVERYONE! That's why the Amendment says YOUR religion can't become law, and neither can ANYBODY ELSE'S! (yes, that means that your fears of "Shariah Law" taking over the courts... I'm looking at YOU, Oklahoma... *remember?... are founded in absolute ignorance of the Constitution)

Those are also the people who like to say that America is a “Christian nation”... no... it's not... “Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion”... remember?

They also use THEIR religion to say that SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACTS can't be used when educating our country's children! Just because YOUR book says something contrary to what FACTS have determined, doesn't make it true! I mean, would you be as apt to have students taught that the world is actually on the back of a turtle, floating through the Universe, like OTHER PEOPLE'S beliefs state? I doubt it... but THEIR book says so, so what's to say THEIR theory isn't just as relevant as your's? Don't like THEIR religion being shoved down YOUR throat? Tough shit! That's EXACTLY what you've been doing to everyone else!

… such arrogance is destructive and belligerent...

Let's look at the second half of the first part now, shall we?

“... nor abridging the free exercise thereof...”

... huh...

... nobody can tell me how to worship...

… unless I use marijuana in my religious practice, as is done in virtually every corner of the world, by people of several different faiths...

Let's be honest... some people CAN'T celebrate their religion lawfully because a certain aspect of their faith has been made illegal in one way or another.

From that perspective, let's consider the job market...

Even companies who claim to be “Equal Opportunity Employers” will discriminate against people who use marijuana for spiritual purposes... If you have THC in your pee, you can't work there... the fact that it's part of your RELIGION doesn't make a lick of difference!

… and, of course, if someone claims religious freedom in this respect, they must be lying just to get high, right? Well, who the fuck are YOU to tell ANYBODY that their belief is illegitimate just because it's not how YOU worship???

Allow me to delve into my own belief a little bit, here...

I believe that God is the absolute intangible personification of purity. Given that fact, bringing thoughts and feelings of “corruption” (anger, hate, arrogance, fear, etc.) into a conversation with God is an abomination akin to blasphemy. Marijuana is a holy herb that drives away “corrupt” thoughts and feelings, so as to maintain the purity of God.

In most of the country (with the current exception of Washington and Colorado), if I'm caught with marijuana, I would go to jail for violating the law, despite my own personal beliefs. MY religion doesn't matter in the eyes of the law, because I don't purport to follow a "major" religion.

… doesn't that sound like they're “abridging the free exercise” of my beliefs? I'd sure as fuck say so...

It's fairly rare that BOTH parts of the first part of the First Amendment are observed congruently. People see one part, but not the other. When will people start looking at EVERYTHING, instead of just the shit they like?

I call this “Constitutional Cafeterianism,” meaning they treat the Constitution like a cafeteria... they only see what they want and ignore the rest... and, of course, if it's there, it must be there JUST FOR THEM!  You don't have to share anything at a cafeteria... if you want to try something, you just get some of it.  So, of course, what you have is YOUR'S and YOUR'S alone!  This is something we HAVE to stop doing! It's arrogant, ignorant, and elitist; and it's a philosophy that we don't need ANYWHERE near our laws!

What it all boils down to is, everyone worships differently. One group's beliefs shouldn't be EVERYONE'S law, and that's EXACTLY what this part of the Amendment says! Furthermore, just because you don't agree with the way someone practices their faith, that doesn't mean they're wrong for practicing it their way! The Amendment says that, too!

The two go together FOR A REASON! You can't have one without the other! You can't pick and choose! Plain and fuckin' simple!

Time to get back on track, America... why can't we all just... get along? Why can't we all just... let people worship the way they please and keep our religion to ourselves?

Consider this... in Article VI, sec. 3, it further enforces the First Amendment by stating “... no religious test shall ever be required as qualification for any office or public trust under the United States...”

Get it? YOUR religion doesn't make you qualified for ANY office! Therefore, even MENTIONING your religion on the campaign trail is a VIOLATION of the Constitution! If your religion doesn't make you qualified for your office, it can't be used to justify the laws you make, either!

On top of that, consider this... if you think that your Christian beliefs are something that should be shoved on everyone, look at Matthew 6:5...

“And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.” (http://bible.cc/matthew/6-5.htm King James version)

How do you like that? Since you made SUCH a big deal of pushing YOUR shit on other people, you won't be going to Heaven... what's more, EVEN JESUS THINKS YOU'RE A HYPOCRITE!

Don't like it? Sorry... it's YOUR Bible... just like the Constitution, if you don't like it, tough shit! You can't pick and choose. It's right there in Jesus' own words... sorry to point that out, but your delusion called for it.

See? The Constitution isn't the ONLY document that tells you to keep it to yourself... your own holy book says so, too! I don't give a fuck if it's inconvenient to your political motivations... blow me!

… and for those of the people who think that what I'm saying is wrong just because it's coming from a “Non-Christian”... for those of the people who think that I should be blocked or banned for speaking my mind, allow me to introduce you to the next part of the Constitution, which I will get to at a later time...

“... nor abridging the […] freedom of speech...”

I can say it as loud as I want, in any way I want, with any tone that I want, and if you don't like it, tough shit!