As an FYI... Facebook has changed their privacy settings page. If you find the "such and such is now friends with such and such" annoying, please look into removing such posts from your own privacy settings. You can't turn off the other people's, but you can remove yours from their walls.
If you feel like doing something, go to your facebook, click settings in the upper right corner, and then click privacy settings, and play around with it a bit.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
With Us, or Against Us?
George W. Bush famously stated that "you're either with us, or with the terrorists." Interesting statement. I was reminded of this by reading my New Testament, and coming across Luke 9:50, wherein Jesus states "Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us" Mr. Bush states that any not with us are against us, while Jesus states that any not against us are for us. These are two very different approaches to the same group of people. The one's who are undecided. Bush puts them against us, while Christ puts them with us. Whose team are you on?
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Guantanamo Bay
Due to a recent Facebook Chat conversation, I thought I would record some thoughts, in a return to a more political nature of this blog.
Guantanamo Bay. President Obama is attempting to close it. The men imprisoned there are accused of heinous crimes. They have been held there and subjected to enhanced interrogation.
What makes a "terrorist" different from you and me? They are people. Being people, they have rights to life, liberty, and property. Two of these have been denied them for who knows how long. They are not given a trial, and they have not been treated as the Geneva Conventions allow. Why? Because we have said that they are "terrorists", and therefore are scum.
However heinous their crimes, all men should be given a fair trial. This is why John Adams defended the British Regulars who were accused of manslaughter in the "Boston Massacre." The opinion of the public does not change the fact that they are people, and deserve that right. If they are found guilty, then let them be punished accordingly. If they are found not guilty, then let them go free. Not giving them a trial is unjust.
Let us imagine for a second that the tables are turned. Instead of the United States occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, the opposite is true. They are occupying us. Would we resist, even if they were here trying to give us "Democracy"? I certainly would. For resistance, I would be labeled a terrorist by the United States of Iraq. I would then be imprisoned without trial under questionable circumstances. I could be subjected to "enhanced interrogation". Would I find it to be pleasant? I doubt it. Would I define it as torture? Probably.
Even though the above is not the case, it certainly questions the Christianness of our actions. The Golden Rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, is exactly the opposite of what we are doing in these countries. No matter how noble the cause, the end does not justify the means. We must not be led to believe that our safety and security, and the future "democracy" of Afghanistan are worth the loss of a military that has been historically the kindest conqueror ever.
Guantanamo Bay. President Obama is attempting to close it. The men imprisoned there are accused of heinous crimes. They have been held there and subjected to enhanced interrogation.
What makes a "terrorist" different from you and me? They are people. Being people, they have rights to life, liberty, and property. Two of these have been denied them for who knows how long. They are not given a trial, and they have not been treated as the Geneva Conventions allow. Why? Because we have said that they are "terrorists", and therefore are scum.
However heinous their crimes, all men should be given a fair trial. This is why John Adams defended the British Regulars who were accused of manslaughter in the "Boston Massacre." The opinion of the public does not change the fact that they are people, and deserve that right. If they are found guilty, then let them be punished accordingly. If they are found not guilty, then let them go free. Not giving them a trial is unjust.
Let us imagine for a second that the tables are turned. Instead of the United States occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, the opposite is true. They are occupying us. Would we resist, even if they were here trying to give us "Democracy"? I certainly would. For resistance, I would be labeled a terrorist by the United States of Iraq. I would then be imprisoned without trial under questionable circumstances. I could be subjected to "enhanced interrogation". Would I find it to be pleasant? I doubt it. Would I define it as torture? Probably.
Even though the above is not the case, it certainly questions the Christianness of our actions. The Golden Rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, is exactly the opposite of what we are doing in these countries. No matter how noble the cause, the end does not justify the means. We must not be led to believe that our safety and security, and the future "democracy" of Afghanistan are worth the loss of a military that has been historically the kindest conqueror ever.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Time
Since I started my policy of doing my homework in advance, I feel like I have all the time in the world. It's an incredible feeling. I'm taking 15 credit hours, and I feel like I have time to spare. I'm ahead in all of my classes, I'm working to get even farther ahead, and I've cleaned all of my dishes in the sink because I can. It's an incredible feeling. I thought I'd list some ideas as to where all this time came from, because I've never had it before.
First and most importantly, I don't eat meals in the cannon center anymore. That place ate up nearly an hour and a half a meal, at least. I now spend about 15 minutes a meal. That's an incredible amount of time right there.
Second, I don't have a girlfriend. Girlfriends are fun, and great, but they take up a LOT of time. I had a girlfriend for all of my previous semesters.
Third, I don't have guys down the hall constantly playing videogames and sucking me into their world. That's probably nearly as much time as the cannon center. Woot for not playing videogames except like an hour a week. That's a win.
Fourth, I think I'm taking a slightly easier 15 credits than normal. 5 of those credits are religion classes and orchestra. 6 are microbiology and chemistry, and 4 are hebrew.
Fifth, unlike during the summer, I'm not working a full-time job. In fact, I'm only taking classes. That's it. I have time to do things with my life because of it. It's incredible.
Anyways, I've got to get back to my homework that's not due till next friday. Peace be with you!
First and most importantly, I don't eat meals in the cannon center anymore. That place ate up nearly an hour and a half a meal, at least. I now spend about 15 minutes a meal. That's an incredible amount of time right there.
Second, I don't have a girlfriend. Girlfriends are fun, and great, but they take up a LOT of time. I had a girlfriend for all of my previous semesters.
Third, I don't have guys down the hall constantly playing videogames and sucking me into their world. That's probably nearly as much time as the cannon center. Woot for not playing videogames except like an hour a week. That's a win.
Fourth, I think I'm taking a slightly easier 15 credits than normal. 5 of those credits are religion classes and orchestra. 6 are microbiology and chemistry, and 4 are hebrew.
Fifth, unlike during the summer, I'm not working a full-time job. In fact, I'm only taking classes. That's it. I have time to do things with my life because of it. It's incredible.
Anyways, I've got to get back to my homework that's not due till next friday. Peace be with you!
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Cleanliness
I've never thought of myself as a particularly clean person. In fact, I'm kinda messy. However, since I've gotten back to the Y, I find myself being the clean roommate. My housemates are all excessively messy. The sink is constantly full of dirty dishes. None of them are ever mine, though. I wiped down the countertops in our house, because I just couldn't handle how filthy it was. It was GROSS! I dunno. I find myself being more clean than usual, in the presence of such filth.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
I hate "just friends"
In the past year, I have been in close relationships with two of my friends. I've also felt the pain of ending those relationships. Both times, we ended the relationship by being "just friends". The first time it was my prerogative, the second, it was hers. Both times, though, we were lying. There is no going directly from boyfriend/girlfriend to "just friends" in my experience. When you break up, you go to acquaintance status. You aren't really even friends anymore without some serious work. No matter how much I would like to be friends with them still, it hasn't worked for me. I went through a period of avoiding them, or them avoiding me or both, then slowly became friends again. I still feel robbed of one of my best friends because we broke up under not the best circumstances.
My first girlfriend, Clarissa, put it best. When you break up, it's like you jump off a cliff. You don't walk back the way you came, you jump straight off a cliff. Suddenly, you're at the bottom, hardly even friends, if that. You have to work to get to that "just friends" you talked about.
My first girlfriend, Clarissa, put it best. When you break up, it's like you jump off a cliff. You don't walk back the way you came, you jump straight off a cliff. Suddenly, you're at the bottom, hardly even friends, if that. You have to work to get to that "just friends" you talked about.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
A Creed
I found this on the website freedomforceinternational.org. I found it to be just about in line with what I believe. Please read and comment.
THE CREED OF FREEDOM
INTRINSIC NATURE OF RIGHTS
I believe that only individuals have rights, not the collective group; that these rights
are intrinsic to each individual, not granted by the state; for if the state has the power to
grant them, it also has the power to deny them, and that is incompatible with personal
liberty.
I believe that a just state derives its power solely from its citizens. Therefore, the
state must never presume to do anything beyond what individual citizens also have the right
to do. Otherwise, the state is a power unto itself and becomes the master instead of the
servant of society.
SUPREMACY OF THE INDIVIDUAL
I believe that one of the greatest threats to freedom is to allow any group, no matter
its numeric superiority, to deny the rights of the minority; and that one of the primary
functions of a just state is to protect each individual from the greed and passion of the
majority.
FREEDOM OF CHOICE
I believe that desirable social and economic objectives are better achieved by
voluntary action than by coercion of law. I believe that social tranquility and brotherhood
are better achieved by tolerance, persuasion, and the power of good example than by
coercion of law. I believe that those in need are better served by charity, which is the giving
of one's own money, than by welfare, which is the giving of other people's money through
coercion of law.
EQUALITY UNDER LAW
I believe that all citizens should be equal under law, regardless of their national
origin, race, religion, gender, education, economic status, life style, or political opinion.
Likewise, no class should be given preferential treatment, regardless of the merit or
popularity of its cause. To favor one class over another is not equality under law.
PROPER ROLE OF THE STATE
I believe that the proper role of the state is negative, not positive; defensive, not
aggressive. It is to protect, not to provide; for if the state is granted the power to provide for
some, it must also be able to take from others, and once that power is granted, there are
those who will seek it for their advantage. It always leads to legalized plunder and loss of
freedom. If the state is powerful enough to give us everything we want, it is also powerful
enough to take from us everything we have. Therefore, the proper function of the state is to
protect the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens; nothing more. That state is best which
governs least.
THE CREED OF FREEDOM
INTRINSIC NATURE OF RIGHTS
I believe that only individuals have rights, not the collective group; that these rights
are intrinsic to each individual, not granted by the state; for if the state has the power to
grant them, it also has the power to deny them, and that is incompatible with personal
liberty.
I believe that a just state derives its power solely from its citizens. Therefore, the
state must never presume to do anything beyond what individual citizens also have the right
to do. Otherwise, the state is a power unto itself and becomes the master instead of the
servant of society.
SUPREMACY OF THE INDIVIDUAL
I believe that one of the greatest threats to freedom is to allow any group, no matter
its numeric superiority, to deny the rights of the minority; and that one of the primary
functions of a just state is to protect each individual from the greed and passion of the
majority.
FREEDOM OF CHOICE
I believe that desirable social and economic objectives are better achieved by
voluntary action than by coercion of law. I believe that social tranquility and brotherhood
are better achieved by tolerance, persuasion, and the power of good example than by
coercion of law. I believe that those in need are better served by charity, which is the giving
of one's own money, than by welfare, which is the giving of other people's money through
coercion of law.
EQUALITY UNDER LAW
I believe that all citizens should be equal under law, regardless of their national
origin, race, religion, gender, education, economic status, life style, or political opinion.
Likewise, no class should be given preferential treatment, regardless of the merit or
popularity of its cause. To favor one class over another is not equality under law.
PROPER ROLE OF THE STATE
I believe that the proper role of the state is negative, not positive; defensive, not
aggressive. It is to protect, not to provide; for if the state is granted the power to provide for
some, it must also be able to take from others, and once that power is granted, there are
those who will seek it for their advantage. It always leads to legalized plunder and loss of
freedom. If the state is powerful enough to give us everything we want, it is also powerful
enough to take from us everything we have. Therefore, the proper function of the state is to
protect the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens; nothing more. That state is best which
governs least.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)