Monday, February 18, 2008

  Had some interesting dreams, but the one I remember any details about had me with a few other people.  The parts I remember were us going into a building and up to the second or third floor with a sort of prison cell.

  It was a normal room, except the door was a swinging prison that was open.  Inside the room was a man, in a straight jacket, standing up.  I don't remember what he said, but it was important, and I think directing our attention to a sink in the room.

  The sink was a rectangular, metal, single-basin sink that had apparently been set into concrete instead of a counter, except that it had been torn out of the concrete, because it was sitting either on the floor or a table (don't remember).

  The sink had only about three or four inches of concrete around it with a few pieces of bent rebar sticking out the broken edges.  Inside the sink was some water, but it was only in one corner, and it was as if there was an invisible wall, because the water went all the way to the top.

  It looked like something was in the water, though a lot of that was light and shadow.  A Hello Kitty face appeared briefly, and then a small fish swam (possibly a goldfish, though it looked a little more exotic) into view.  I reached into the water from the side and grabbed the fish.

  We heard a deep voice, presumably from the fish, telling us something.  It's a little fuzzy, here.  As the fish spoke, the scene went to me looking at a "quiver" holding three crossbow bolts.  The "quiver" was designed to hold those specific three, each in its own compartment.

  Each bolt was a different color.  Red, yellow, and I think either blue or green, but the red one was the most prominent.

  I don't recall exactly what was being said, which sucks, because it was important to the rest of this, but someone had three days to do something, though I don't think it was a physical act.  Maybe it was three people had three days.  At any rate, if something were not achieved on the first day, then the person would kind of get sucked into the bolt.

  It was the same for every day, but not the same person, which leads me to wonder if it was more than one person.  There's just too much I don't recall.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

  I'm watching Boston Legal.  Personal responsibility took a nose-dive.  I'll give you the summary.

  A woman wants to sue her daughter's high school, because her daughter drove to school tired from all the school work she was doing and then got into an accident.  An important detail is that the daughter chose to take on so many extra-curricular courses.

  Through the course of the hearing (btw, this is just for the judge to determine whether or not to let it go to trial, or be an actual case, or whatever), a few different people talk about... basically things that acknowledge that people are doing what they're doing by their own choice, and that they don't have to do them.

  The judge acknowledges these things and acknowledges the responsibility of the parents and the students, but here's the bitch: She says that she believes that the school is in a better position to regulate such things.

  IT'S NOT THE SCHOOL'S RESPONSABILITY TO REGULATE IT, YOU DISGRACEFUL EXCUSE FOR A JUDGE!!!!

  And it sure as hell is not the court's job to force them to.

  It doesn't matter how high a college sets it's standards.  It doesn't matter if a job requires a nearly unattainable list of course requirements.  The individuals choose for themselves what kind of future they wish to pursue, and if they make the choice to do more than they can handle, then they are solely responsible.

  This is one aspect of Liberalism that I go bat shit over: This asinine refusal to let people suffer the consequences of their own dumbass choices.  Get your fucking nose out of everybody's fucking business.

  The school's job is to teach facts.  It's not their job to raise your kids for you.  It's not their job to instill values into your kids.  It's not their job to guide your children's' future.  It doesn't matter if the parents are the worst ever, and the school actually would do a much better job of raising them.  The fact remains that it is NOT the school's job, no matter how much you might want it to be, or how much more helpful it would be.

  If you are expecting the school to do more than feed them knowledge and keep them from killing each other on school property, then you are a dumbass with no real concept of personal responsibility.

  If the school chooses to do more and the parents are okay with it then that's great.  Icing.  Bonus.  But that more should not be required of the school or by the school in any way.

  A hope of mine for people is that they will know themselves better.  I want people to know and understand why they make their choices.  I want people to live intently.  I want people to love truth and knowledge.

  I often notice the differences between myself and other people, either individually or collectively, and one of those big differences seems to be a love for truth and knowledge.   I don't mean all other people, just a very significant number of them.

  I invite people to question my beliefs.  I invite people to give me information that contradicts my beliefs.  I invite people to try to prove me wrong and to change my mind, if they can, with facts and logic.

  I don't do this because I am trying to win some contest or defeat people.  I want two minds to join to share information for the benefit of both people.  I value the data.  Maybe you will benefit more.  Maybe I will benefit more.  Maybe my data will be wrong.  Maybe your data will be wrong.

  If data is wrong, then it's wrong.  Put the ego aside in favor of truth.  Would you rather people just think you're right, or would you rather actually be right?

  So here's my question for you, and for you to ask yourself, for those to whom it applies.  Why do you not invite people to "change your mind", to put it simply?  Why do you not eagerly welcome discussion on any and every topic?  When someone asks you to participate in a discussion, why do you not do it?

  Whatever answer you give to any of those, ask yourself "why" to that as well.  Go about three levels of that.

  I just read a number of letters to the FCC regarding the "Holier Than Thou" episode of "Penn & Teller's: Bullshit".  They were all Catholics and many, if not all, complained about the "Catholic bashing", among other things.

  First off, I think "bashing" is a half floppy term, when it comes to speech.  I'm not trying to condemn or condone "bashing" with this.  I just want to offer a perspective, here.

  Maybe Catholics (or whatever person or group) wouldn't get bashed so much if they didn't make it so darn easy.  I'm not trying to justify "bashing" or the negative feelings or attitudes of those who do it, but if it's happening a lot, then maybe there's a "good" reason for it.

  It's like women who think all men are jerks because they keep choosing men who are jerks and just don't see it.  If you've been divorced 9 times, then maybe it's you that's the problem.  And if Liberals wouldn't maintain so much proven hypocrisy and illogical thinking, then they wouldn't get bashed as much.  But then, exactly how many times can you repeatedly point out examples of negative truths before it suddenly becomes "bashing"?

  There's a reason there are so many priest/alter boy (and similar) jokes.  There is something wrong happening within the Catholic organization, and if certain beliefs are being "bashed" a lot, then maybe it's because they don't make sense in relation to other beliefs of the same religion, or just in general.

  Question: Where in the Bible does it, in any way, encourage a Pope to wear that tall Pope hat?  Exactly how does that hat glorify God?

Thursday, February 21, 2008

  I think pirate-speak needs to start including the word "anus".  Arr, ya anus licking scallywag!  Or the alternative I just came up with: Arr, ya anus licking oar scab!  Swab the deck or I'll stretch you anus 'round the yard arm.

  I just think we need to hear more of the word, in general.  Anus is being left behind (no pun intended, initially).

  Yesterday, some time after having written the "bashing" bit, I thought about the stereotype about Baptists and dancing.  The Flaming Idiots did a joke in their routine that included Pyro telling Walter, "Shake your booty, white boy."  Walter says, "I can't dance, I'm Baptist."  To which Pyro replies, "That's okay.  I'm Catholic, I can forgive you."

  Incidentally, I highly doubt Walter is actually Baptist.  His family may have been, but I'd peg him for a Buddhist.  And I do like the joke, and they perform it excellently.

  And then there was a comedian on Comedy Central who said Baptists believe that dancing leads to premarital sex and drinking alcohol.

  My family is Baptist.  I used to go to Baptist church.  Some relatives of mine watch Baptist church services on TV, which I saw while visiting.  In my entire life, I've had no first-hand experience of anyone Baptist speaking ill of dancing in general or making any comments about dancing leading to drinking and premarital sex.  Where exactly is this guy getting his information?

  I will grant you that you're less likely to catch a Baptist dancing than some other religions, but is that necessarily a bad thing?

  Let's look at dancing.  You're moving your body basically in sync with the repetition of a beat.  That's the physical part, but it's the psychological part that is important.  Why are you doing it?  And don't give some half-assed, bullshit answer like "because it's fun".

  At the same time, we don't necessarily have to go too deep into the motivation.  If you are extremely happy about something, you might feel like doing a little happy dance.  Or maybe you're someone who has a love for the art form of dance.  Maybe it's an enjoyable way to experience unity and synchronicity with others, partly perhaps as a matter of skill.

  But what about those people, who are probably the majority, who go to a club and dance?  Dancing that is little more than just moving to music, in terms of skill.  Why are those people doing it?

  I acknowledge that there may be numerous specific reasons, but I wager that most or all revolve around the desire to eliminate something negative in their life.  Like wanting to wind down from a hard day, being bored, wanting attention.  Basically, using dancing to overcome something they couldn't otherwise effectively deal with on a psychological level.

  There are times, though less often now, that I feel like playing some "mindless" shooter computer game.  I suspect that's similar to what motivates such dancing, in many cases.

  The point is that it's being done to escape something undesirable, as opposed to it being the result of something good.

  So maybe Baptists aren't big on dancing.  Maybe Baptists tend to have more productive ways of dealing with issues.  Maybe Baptists live lives that don't allow those issues to arise in such great degrees.  Maybe Baptists just aren't as weak against those issues, so they're not really issues.  Who knows?  I can speak only for myself.

  Sometimes I move a little to music, but I've never felt any desire to actually go to some other location to do it extensively.  I don't have a problem with being at home.  However you want to look at it, I am just without that sense of need for it, and to "need" is to have weakness.

  If you want to do such dancing, then maybe that's your flawed psychology, and those particular types of people who don't dance have the advantage.  Just a theory.  Feel free to offer a logical alternative theory.