I really don't want to do this... First off, contrary to what you might think, I try to keep my transgender-related posts to a minimum. You don't need to read my whiny rants about how I wish I could look cuter in a skirt; it's a waste of your time and mine. Plus, I feel like I'm about to cross a line here...
It's like this. My dear, lovely, brilliant, beautiful wife KJ recently posted a blog, in which she explains her feelings on my transgenderism (or lack thereof). It is well-written and smart, as is everything she writes. But of course it also disagrees with pretty much everything I believe.
So, now I face a dilemma... let it go? Respond in public? Reply directly to her blog, or post a counter-blog of my own? Do people really want to read our arguments? If I respond, will it solve anything, or will it just escalate? And why should I sit down and type this out in my blog, when I can just say it to her? What's the point of writing a long, pointless post, when she's six feet away from me watching TV on the couch?
I guess I knew all along I'd have to put this on my blog. For one thing, I don't want to muddy up KJ's blog with petty bickering. Her page is hers, and I don't want to post anything negative on it. But I do need to make a mark somewhere, partly because it's cathartic, and partly because I've already had one friend e-mail me asking for my counter-arguments. I could answer him privately, but this way I can let everyone know at once.
If this turns into a long-running debate, so be it. I will happily play Demosthenes to KJ's Locke, if for no other reason than that I like to argue. But I'd rather this post be the end of it. KJ and I are generally mature when it comes to our disputes, and "agreeing to disagree" is one of the things we do best.
Note, don't read any further until you've read her blog. If you can't access her blog for some reason, let me know. I'll be doing a bit of snipping here and there to quote her, and I don't want KJ to look stupid because of something taken out of context.
Here goes nothing.
>>> WARNING: This is not a happy fun blog. This is also not meant for those who are easily offended, not secure enough with themselves to make mature, adult comments, or too young to take immature coarse language. This is not anything to curse me or praise me but what is on my mind at this point.
*** Actually, there's very little in it I found offensive. "There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys, there's only you and me, and we just disagree." I do think the title's a little misleading, though... you spend most of your blog arguing whether or not I'm transgendered, and don't actually get to your "views on transgenderism" in general until the last couple of paragraphs.
>>> My husband is an absolutely brilliant man who could be anything he/she wants to be and that includes a woman. The whole thing boils down to this--just because he could be a woman does not mean he IS.
*** Of course not. I don't believe I've ever used that argument. Heck, I could be a bowling pin impersonator if I wanted to. Means nothing.
>>> I will not stop him from pursuing what he wants. Its not part of who I am but that does not mean that I have to agree. He acts as though I do not understand what is like to feel lost and unsure of yourself. He seems to think that I have never had to become my own person, separate from what my parents and peers have taught me. I like to think I kept some of the better parts to offset the bad habits instilled upon me by genetics and breeding.
*** I never claimed you haven't gone through anything like this. If I honestly thought I was the only one in the world to ever face an identity crisis, I probably really would shoot myself.
>>> However, he is not the first person to go through a crisis of conscience, to stop believing in everything because it just didn't quite turn out the way it should have. The one thing everyone learns and keeps learning is life is not fair, life is not predictable and bad things happen to good people. He is not the only person to look back at his life and say, "oops." I do think that his intellect has submarined him.
*** This is where you start to part from reality. Your idea - that life was turning out badly, so I invented another one - has no basis in fact. While it had been building for years, the day I actually had my epiphany was hardly one of our darkest days. Yes, my father had recently passed away, I'll give you that one. But that was about it. The other factors you mention - money, your miscarriages, etc - just weren't factors at the time. We are talking about a time when, while I was still technically in mourning, overall I was fairly happy. We were doing pretty well financially, I hadn't thought about the miscarriages in a very long time, and so on.
In fact, one of the biggest tragedies about all of this is that we were so happy. It's as if I was waiting for things to settle down - for us to get caught up on bills, etc, before I decided to throw a wrench in the works. Your "failure as a man" theory might have made sense back when we lived in Bowling Green, but I'm rather proud of the progress we've made since then.
>>> My darling hubby seems to be a text-book example. It is interesting to note that the more he reads, the more he "realizes," the more text-book he becomes. That is already a flag for most first-year psychology students.
*** On principle I can't disagree. It's a common phenomenon, and not limited to psychology. Someone picks up a book of diseases, starts thumbing through the pages, and they're sure they have every one of them. "Let's see, symptoms... 'vomiting'... well, I did feel like I was going to throw up the other day... 'pale skin'... yep, I haven't had much of a tan this winter... 'unusual sweating'... yeah, I was pretty sweaty after my aerobics this morning... I must have a deadly disease!" People do that, and it's not always just the hypochondriacs.
But you have me in a catch-22. If I were to walk around saying, "I'm a girl, I'm a girl", without doing any research, you'd say I had no idea what I was talking about. But when I actually do the research, you use your "first-year psychology student" cop-out. You've got me trapped to where there's simply no way to prove anything to you.
>>> Even laymen eventually come to realize that when dealing with the individual a text-book case is a rare thing. There is a guideline, there are examples with similarity, but to be down the line text-book is very unusual and highly suspicious.
*** Again, catch-22. Before, whenever you found ways that I differed from the "textbook example", you used them to tell me why I wasn't transgendered. Now you think I fit the textbook case too well. So what you're saying is, before you had too little proof, and now you have too much proof? What is the exact amount of proof you need to believe something?
It's moot anyway. As far as I'm concerned, it's not about "proof". When I list "symptoms" from my childhood, like how I would often pick female characters when playing GI Joe with my friends, you dismiss them because "all little boys do that now and then". In fact, most examples I could give - most examples ANY transperson could give - could be dismissed as something lots of boys do. I mean, everybody tries on Mommy's shoes sooner or later.
But the proof means NOTHING. If I couldn't list a single example of how I fit the profile, I would still know that I feel female inside. If my list of childhood memories was nothing but NASCAR races and NFL games, I would still know that I'd rather be a woman.
>>> Hubby is brilliant and can put himself in any situation or on either side of any argument. What happens if you are putting yourself into an argument and you don't know yourself enough to separate who you are from what the topic is? You become Spock doing a mind-meld with Nomad, "We are Nomad. We are Nomad."
*** Well, I am a master debater. But are you trying to tell me that the fact that I'm good at arguing, somehow proves that what I argue is wrong? I can see how it would give my arguments less weight, sure. But that doesn't make me flat-out wrong.
>>> I say because he was searching for answers he found one that was as close to getting away from his old life as possible.
*** And I submit that I love my old life, and want to change as little as possible. I'm not even trying to "change" myself, so much as "find" myself. The fact that I like my life is reason I've been able to stay this way for such a long time. Some transfolk are from broken homes, had difficult school lives, were beaten and humiliated for being different, and so on. I'm sure such people can't wait to break out and establish their own identities. I had a great childhood, and I have many happy memories. Between playing female characters with friends, and living vicariously through characters in the comics I drew, I had some outlets for my femininity. Enough to keep me from questioning my happiness, anyway. I believe that this is one reason it took me so long to become dissatisfied with my identity - I just had too many reasons to be happy.
> 1.) He is effeminate.
*** And your point is, being effeminate doesn't mean you're transgendered. I totally agree.
> 2.) He hates males in general
*** I say that a lot, but it's really not true. I like men just fine. What I don't like is MEN. I trust I don't need to spell this one out for you, but what I don't like is manly, chauvinistic, muscle-headed he-men who only care about sports, cars, and sex. I suppose the opposite would be empty-headed girlie-girls who don't care about anything but nails, clothes, and makeup. I can't say I like those either, but I don't mind being around them nearly as much as the men I mentioned.
The reason I hold a particular grudge for manly-men is the fact that I've had so many negative experiences from being around them. The girlie-girls are at best entertaining, and at worst offensive to my intelligence. But the manly-men actually scare me - it's guys like these that beat up people like me. It's cause-and-effect time. They sensed my femininity, they made fun of me, I stopped liking them. You seem to think it's the other way around - that I disliked them first, then made myself feminine so I wouldn't be like them.
>>> I don't think the concept of its okay to like pink and have a dick was ever explained to him until there was just no way he could accept it as true.
*** Please. My entire childhood was an esteem-building excercise. "Different is better" has been my mantra since, well, since before I knew the word "mantra". Yet another reason I came out to myself so late in life: I always knew I was "different", and I was comfortable with that. What wasn't explained to me was that "wanting to be a girl" was okay. In fact, it was specifically explained to me that "wanting to be a girl" was a very bad thing that would cause the ground to open beneath my feet, dropping me straight to Hell. So if you're looking for a good example from my formative years, that might be one to examine.
>>> 3.) Low self-esteem
*** Comes and goes; probably the same with everyone. Having a poor view of one's identity is no ego booster, but this is another one of those "chicken-or-the-egg" scenarios. The hard part is, you don't even know what you think you know. I don't even know myself that well. I've been wearing masks since I was a child, and I'm so used to them, that I don't always know when I have them on. If I look like I'm on an ego trip, it's probably because I'm kicking myself inside for doing something stupid. If I look like I've lost the will to live, it's probably because I'm proud of myself and don't want to look like a show-off. This might make me seem a bit deceitful, but when you've been told that one of your core personality traits is a mortal sin, you too might decide you want to be harder to read.
>>> Where is the line drawn for reality, for the quantitative data that cannot be changed and must be accepted? In this day and age it gets smaller and smaller. Welcome to the world of plastic surgery!! Think you should have been born with horns and a tail because you know, just absolutely know, you are the prince of darkness? Do you have the money? Just step right up and we'll check it out! You say you have at least five people who truly believe you are the prince of darkness or that you should have been born with perfectly white razor sharp teeth? Have you acted like you have razor sharp teeth? Do you have the money? Oh you're a bird man too!! Where should we put the feathers exactly, please pay the girl on you way out. Enjoy your new life disco duck; you'll get just about as much respect and prestige.
*** Well, arguably, the Prince of Darkness should have the power to make these changes without having to resort to surgery. And if not, well, he's probably better off keeping his ability to blend in with the crowd.
The line you question is drawn by psychologists. Remember psychology, that subject you once majored in? A person who believes he is the Prince of Darkness has serious mental issues, which ought to be addressed before he gets any surgery. And hey, guess what, transpeople DO go through therapy first (assuming they follow the rules). The irony is, that I could probably walk into the plastic surgeon's office right now and have horns by the end of the day. Depressing, but true. But unlike the delusion that you are the devil (or a bird), transgenderism is a real, psychologically accepted condition, and yet it's incredibly difficult to be allowed the surgery that corrects it.
And why are you so focused on the surgery, anyway? You understand that's the very LAST step, and one that not every transperson even takes. Your mind is who you are. A woman born in a man's body IS a woman. She was born a woman, and she will die a woman, regardless of whether she ever gets the surgery. If it makes her happy, and her therapist is sure she won't regret it later, what's the downside? Typically, by that time she gets the surgery, she's already gone through all the tragedies that would "ruin" her life. She is required to live as a woman for at least a year first. During that time, she will have already lost any friends/family/jobs that this condition will cause her to lose. When the time comes around for the actual surgery, that's just something that makes her feel more complete.
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Thursday, January 4, 2007
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar?
A friend of mine has informed me that some of my recent posts might be offensive to stupid people. To any stupid people reading this, please accept my heartfelt apology... but you might just want to avoid my blog from now on.
A lot of my rants of late have centered around my own bias against organized religion. This is probably unfair of me. Growing up, I was always ready to defend Christianity. A lot of the other kids thought of me as the "holier-than-thou" type. Even after college, I had a reputation as a teetotaler. I can't really pin down exactly when I changed; some of it was gradual, but there were some obvious spikes in there.
Some of my family would probably blame KJ for "corrupting" me, and I don't doubt that she was a factor. But I honestly think I've been a bigger influence on her than the other way around. Personally, I would give more credit to a friend I met online, who for anonymity's sake I'll call "BH". I could tell early on that this guy was the smartest person that I had ever met, either online or off. BH was the type of person who wouldn't open his mouth unless he had completely researched everything about the subject. I'm not saying he was infallible, but he definitely possessed a powerful combination of education, wisdom, and common sense.
And yet he was an athiest. I didn't once think about trying to convert him. I knew that there was no point I could make that he wouldn't be able to counterpoint. But at the same time, he didn't try to convert me either. BH didn't mind his friends being religious. He did draw the line at absolute Creationists - he felt that those ideas (Earth only being 6000 years old, created in six days, etc) were so silly that only a complete idiot would believe them. Luckily I was never that type of Creationist, and it didn't bother him at all that I considered myself a Christian.
But without even trying, he planted a seed in my mind. It wasn't any particular thing he said, but rather the simple fact that he was so smart and rational, and yet an athiest. For the first time in my life, I realized that it was okay to be an athiest. Well, not "athiest" specifically, so much as I realized it was okay to have your own beliefs. You don't have keep the beliefs you grew up with. You don't have to believe something just because your parents and grandparents believed it.
"Duh", you say. Of course I always knew it was okay to believe what you want. But there's more than one level of knowing something. For instance, I might have felt it was okay for people to have their own beliefs, but I never thought it was okay for me to have my own beliefs.
So I went agnostic. It wasn't a major life change or anything. Generally speaking, my beliefs didn't change much.
Before: I thought all recreational drugs should be illegal.
After: I still think drugs are for the stupid, but it should be legal for people to make their own mistakes.
Before: I felt that abortion was murder and should be illegal.
After: I still think abortion is a very bad thing, but sometimes unwanted pregnancies destroy even more lives.
Before: I felt premarital sex was evil.
After: I still feel that you should limit your sexual partners, and never sleep with anyone you don't think you'd marry. But that's just a "should", not a "you're going to Hell."
Before: I didn't want to push my religion on to others, so when someone offended me, I just got quiet.
After: It's a lot harder to offend me, but I'm still just naturally quiet.
While I was no longer actively worshipping God, I still defended religion. I didn't suddenly decide that all Christians were idiots, nor did I try to tell anyone else what to believe. I still believed that by and large, religion was a good thing, and that some people needed religion in order to keep themselves in check. Some people were naturally good people, while others required the fear of God to keep their natural selfish tendencies from taking over.
I would have defended religion to my dying day, whether I was in it or not. So what changed? When was that "magic moment" when I decided that Christians had gone too far? I don't know, exactly. Well, no doubt my transgenderism played a big part in it. I've now had greater exposure to a segment of the population that is often persecuted by religion. But even when I was religious, I knew that sometimes people went too far "in the name of God", so that opinion hasn't changed much.
So, I'm trying to figure out exactly why I've developed a chip on my shoulder lately. Forgetting my world-issues, I'm specifically trying to list ways religion has hurt me personally. Here's what I've come up with so far:
1. My realizations about my sexual identity. When I was a kid, I thought that the word "gay" meant, "a guy who wishes he was a girl." I had been told time and time again that being gay was wrong. So whenever I had thoughts about wanting to be a girl, I pushed them out of my head. Those thoughts were the work of the Devil, and would send me straight to Hell. If it weren't for religion, I might have figured myself out a lot earlier in life. Granted, if society as a whole had understood as much then as it almost does now, then I might have been better off. Gender Dysphoria is completely different from homosexuality; it's more like a birth defect. And as such, it's slightly more likely to be acceptable to homophobic Christians. But I was just a kid then, at a time when even adults were confused about the subject.
2. Dungeons & Dragons. In the past few years I've developed a love for role-playing games. I would have liked to have played them with my friends as a child. There's one childhood friend in particular who probably would have loved to play D&D... except his parents wouldn't allow it. D&D was the subject of a lot of several urban legends, and my friend's family firmly believed them. There was that one where the kid played D&D then jumped out a window, which was just an evolved version of the story where the kid puts on a Superman cape and tries to fly. Not to mention a precursor to the one where the kid watches Harry Potter and jumps out a window holding a broomstick (*). If kids were really as stupid as the ones in these legends, nobody would reach adulthood.
(* Before anyone tries to correct me on the Harry Potter thing, yes, I do know there really was a child who got hurt playing with a broomstick. But that child was much younger than the kids typically are in the legends, and she fell off the kitchen counter (the legends have them jumping off of rooves or out of windows), and I'm not convinced she actually thought the broomstick would make her fly. But in addition to that true story, an urban legend also circulated that was much more similar to the D&D/Superman legends. )
But forgetting the legends for a minute, D&D was considered evil for other reasons too. Magic, demons, and other anti-Christian themes. But seriously, it's based on mythology, not religion. You might fight made-up evil gods, but you never fight Satan. And even if you did, I'm not sure how that would make it anti-Christian, since the players are (usually) fighting on the side of good. Is there something in the Bible about not making up stories? Because that's all the game is - a group of creative friends sitting around a table, making up a story. If that's wrong, then so is the entire fiction section of your local bookstore.
3. Censoring myself to my wishy-washy friends. The only thing worse than a friend who has just discovered Jesus, is one who goes through cycles of piety and hedonism. A few years ago, I received a phone call from a long-lost friend. We talked for about 10 minutes before I realized he was currently in Saint mode. Once I knew, I thought back to the things I'd been saying over the past few minutes, and counted how many times I'd probably offended him. But, I swear this guy switched back and forth every week. And while I am loathe to censor myself, I do try to be sensitive to others when I'm speaking. It would be nice if people came with ratings labels. You'd look at a person, see he's wearing a "PG-13" T-shirt, and you'd adjust your conversational topics accordingly. Wait, no, actually it would be nice if people just weren't so easily offended. But I've already done that rant.
5. Censorship in general. I don't mind keeping adult materials away from kids, but I hate it when they outright ban something because someone thought it was offensive. Off the top of my head, I can't think of too many ways this has affected me personally. Removing the blood from the SNES version of Mortal Kombat kind of pissed me off at the time. I vaguely remember hearing about an irreverent animated sitcom I wanted to see, which got cancelled because of a letter-writing campaign from a small church group in Ohio or somewhere. There was a time in Kentucky when KJ and I weren't allowed to receive the "Adam & Eve" mail-order catalog because it violated some local law.
I could probably list a lot more examples of how censorship almost affected me, like when Married With Children nearly got taken off the air, but in most cases smarter heads have prevailed.
6. The assumptions of others. When you live in the Bible Belt, people don't ask, "Do you go to church?", they ask "What church do you go to?" ...which leads to a lot of awkward silences. And every office has that one employee who forwards every sappy religious e-mail they receive, assuming that all the recipients will be overjoyed to have their inbox clogged up with these made-up stories of miracles (punctuated by animated gifs of wide-eyed puppies). Then there's the people who mix politics and religion. Terrorists commit horrible acts in the name of their gods, while our country's Christians shake their heads and say, "poor misguided fools"... completely failing to make the connection.
That's really about all I can come up with right now, but I think it's enough to explain my grudges. Now I have to ask myself a lot of questions.
Do my own experiences justify my bias against religion?
Do the global issues I've studied justify my prejudices?
When I pick on Christians for being bigots, am I being just as bigoted as the people I condemn?
The truth is, I probably have gone too far. Ranting is a great way to work out my frustrations, but it does sound like I'm judging all religious people by the actions of a few. And deep down, I don't really feel that way. I stand by everything I've said, but - Keep in mind, when I rant on Christians and other religious people, I really don't mean "all Christians" or "everyone who believes in a god". If I felt that way, I would consider myself an athiest, not agnostic. I'm specifically talking about that subgroup of believers who commit the sins I've listed.
So before anyone sends me hate mail, just remember - Right now you're probably one of those Christians I support (or at least tolerate). But by complaining, you're being easily offended and trying to censor me. And if you do that, you're placing yourself into the very categories I've been insulting. Sure, it's a catch-22, but that's my bottom line.
A lot of my rants of late have centered around my own bias against organized religion. This is probably unfair of me. Growing up, I was always ready to defend Christianity. A lot of the other kids thought of me as the "holier-than-thou" type. Even after college, I had a reputation as a teetotaler. I can't really pin down exactly when I changed; some of it was gradual, but there were some obvious spikes in there.
Some of my family would probably blame KJ for "corrupting" me, and I don't doubt that she was a factor. But I honestly think I've been a bigger influence on her than the other way around. Personally, I would give more credit to a friend I met online, who for anonymity's sake I'll call "BH". I could tell early on that this guy was the smartest person that I had ever met, either online or off. BH was the type of person who wouldn't open his mouth unless he had completely researched everything about the subject. I'm not saying he was infallible, but he definitely possessed a powerful combination of education, wisdom, and common sense.
And yet he was an athiest. I didn't once think about trying to convert him. I knew that there was no point I could make that he wouldn't be able to counterpoint. But at the same time, he didn't try to convert me either. BH didn't mind his friends being religious. He did draw the line at absolute Creationists - he felt that those ideas (Earth only being 6000 years old, created in six days, etc) were so silly that only a complete idiot would believe them. Luckily I was never that type of Creationist, and it didn't bother him at all that I considered myself a Christian.
But without even trying, he planted a seed in my mind. It wasn't any particular thing he said, but rather the simple fact that he was so smart and rational, and yet an athiest. For the first time in my life, I realized that it was okay to be an athiest. Well, not "athiest" specifically, so much as I realized it was okay to have your own beliefs. You don't have keep the beliefs you grew up with. You don't have to believe something just because your parents and grandparents believed it.
"Duh", you say. Of course I always knew it was okay to believe what you want. But there's more than one level of knowing something. For instance, I might have felt it was okay for people to have their own beliefs, but I never thought it was okay for me to have my own beliefs.
So I went agnostic. It wasn't a major life change or anything. Generally speaking, my beliefs didn't change much.
Before: I thought all recreational drugs should be illegal.
After: I still think drugs are for the stupid, but it should be legal for people to make their own mistakes.
Before: I felt that abortion was murder and should be illegal.
After: I still think abortion is a very bad thing, but sometimes unwanted pregnancies destroy even more lives.
Before: I felt premarital sex was evil.
After: I still feel that you should limit your sexual partners, and never sleep with anyone you don't think you'd marry. But that's just a "should", not a "you're going to Hell."
Before: I didn't want to push my religion on to others, so when someone offended me, I just got quiet.
After: It's a lot harder to offend me, but I'm still just naturally quiet.
While I was no longer actively worshipping God, I still defended religion. I didn't suddenly decide that all Christians were idiots, nor did I try to tell anyone else what to believe. I still believed that by and large, religion was a good thing, and that some people needed religion in order to keep themselves in check. Some people were naturally good people, while others required the fear of God to keep their natural selfish tendencies from taking over.
I would have defended religion to my dying day, whether I was in it or not. So what changed? When was that "magic moment" when I decided that Christians had gone too far? I don't know, exactly. Well, no doubt my transgenderism played a big part in it. I've now had greater exposure to a segment of the population that is often persecuted by religion. But even when I was religious, I knew that sometimes people went too far "in the name of God", so that opinion hasn't changed much.
So, I'm trying to figure out exactly why I've developed a chip on my shoulder lately. Forgetting my world-issues, I'm specifically trying to list ways religion has hurt me personally. Here's what I've come up with so far:
1. My realizations about my sexual identity. When I was a kid, I thought that the word "gay" meant, "a guy who wishes he was a girl." I had been told time and time again that being gay was wrong. So whenever I had thoughts about wanting to be a girl, I pushed them out of my head. Those thoughts were the work of the Devil, and would send me straight to Hell. If it weren't for religion, I might have figured myself out a lot earlier in life. Granted, if society as a whole had understood as much then as it almost does now, then I might have been better off. Gender Dysphoria is completely different from homosexuality; it's more like a birth defect. And as such, it's slightly more likely to be acceptable to homophobic Christians. But I was just a kid then, at a time when even adults were confused about the subject.
2. Dungeons & Dragons. In the past few years I've developed a love for role-playing games. I would have liked to have played them with my friends as a child. There's one childhood friend in particular who probably would have loved to play D&D... except his parents wouldn't allow it. D&D was the subject of a lot of several urban legends, and my friend's family firmly believed them. There was that one where the kid played D&D then jumped out a window, which was just an evolved version of the story where the kid puts on a Superman cape and tries to fly. Not to mention a precursor to the one where the kid watches Harry Potter and jumps out a window holding a broomstick (*). If kids were really as stupid as the ones in these legends, nobody would reach adulthood.
(* Before anyone tries to correct me on the Harry Potter thing, yes, I do know there really was a child who got hurt playing with a broomstick. But that child was much younger than the kids typically are in the legends, and she fell off the kitchen counter (the legends have them jumping off of rooves or out of windows), and I'm not convinced she actually thought the broomstick would make her fly. But in addition to that true story, an urban legend also circulated that was much more similar to the D&D/Superman legends. )
But forgetting the legends for a minute, D&D was considered evil for other reasons too. Magic, demons, and other anti-Christian themes. But seriously, it's based on mythology, not religion. You might fight made-up evil gods, but you never fight Satan. And even if you did, I'm not sure how that would make it anti-Christian, since the players are (usually) fighting on the side of good. Is there something in the Bible about not making up stories? Because that's all the game is - a group of creative friends sitting around a table, making up a story. If that's wrong, then so is the entire fiction section of your local bookstore.
3. Censoring myself to my wishy-washy friends. The only thing worse than a friend who has just discovered Jesus, is one who goes through cycles of piety and hedonism. A few years ago, I received a phone call from a long-lost friend. We talked for about 10 minutes before I realized he was currently in Saint mode. Once I knew, I thought back to the things I'd been saying over the past few minutes, and counted how many times I'd probably offended him. But, I swear this guy switched back and forth every week. And while I am loathe to censor myself, I do try to be sensitive to others when I'm speaking. It would be nice if people came with ratings labels. You'd look at a person, see he's wearing a "PG-13" T-shirt, and you'd adjust your conversational topics accordingly. Wait, no, actually it would be nice if people just weren't so easily offended. But I've already done that rant.
5. Censorship in general. I don't mind keeping adult materials away from kids, but I hate it when they outright ban something because someone thought it was offensive. Off the top of my head, I can't think of too many ways this has affected me personally. Removing the blood from the SNES version of Mortal Kombat kind of pissed me off at the time. I vaguely remember hearing about an irreverent animated sitcom I wanted to see, which got cancelled because of a letter-writing campaign from a small church group in Ohio or somewhere. There was a time in Kentucky when KJ and I weren't allowed to receive the "Adam & Eve" mail-order catalog because it violated some local law.
I could probably list a lot more examples of how censorship almost affected me, like when Married With Children nearly got taken off the air, but in most cases smarter heads have prevailed.
6. The assumptions of others. When you live in the Bible Belt, people don't ask, "Do you go to church?", they ask "What church do you go to?" ...which leads to a lot of awkward silences. And every office has that one employee who forwards every sappy religious e-mail they receive, assuming that all the recipients will be overjoyed to have their inbox clogged up with these made-up stories of miracles (punctuated by animated gifs of wide-eyed puppies). Then there's the people who mix politics and religion. Terrorists commit horrible acts in the name of their gods, while our country's Christians shake their heads and say, "poor misguided fools"... completely failing to make the connection.
That's really about all I can come up with right now, but I think it's enough to explain my grudges. Now I have to ask myself a lot of questions.
Do my own experiences justify my bias against religion?
Do the global issues I've studied justify my prejudices?
When I pick on Christians for being bigots, am I being just as bigoted as the people I condemn?
The truth is, I probably have gone too far. Ranting is a great way to work out my frustrations, but it does sound like I'm judging all religious people by the actions of a few. And deep down, I don't really feel that way. I stand by everything I've said, but - Keep in mind, when I rant on Christians and other religious people, I really don't mean "all Christians" or "everyone who believes in a god". If I felt that way, I would consider myself an athiest, not agnostic. I'm specifically talking about that subgroup of believers who commit the sins I've listed.
So before anyone sends me hate mail, just remember - Right now you're probably one of those Christians I support (or at least tolerate). But by complaining, you're being easily offended and trying to censor me. And if you do that, you're placing yourself into the very categories I've been insulting. Sure, it's a catch-22, but that's my bottom line.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
The Truth About Matts and Dogmas
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -Mahatma Gandhi
Disclaimer: It is not my place to convince anyone that their religion is wrong. If your faith is shaky, I'd prefer you didn't read this. Nor do I want you to read this if you're going to retaliate by trying to convert me to your religion/denomination/cult/wireless plan. I was raised Christian, I've read the Good Book from cover to cover, I've studied it in countless Bible classes, and I've attended service in at least five different churches. And in my experience, I usually know more scripture than most of the Christians who try to convert me.If there is a god, then I thank him very much for my existence. Which is pretty appreciative, I'd say, considering how much time I spend wishing I'd never been born. I consider myself agnostic, which means that I try to keep an open mind, and I don't rule anything out. Considering how much humans have learned about the universe just in my lifetime alone, it would be complete idiocy to rule out anything at this point, including the concept of a supreme being.
But I can't believe in a god whose doctrines would advocate cruelty for my fellow human beings, or one who would condemn people to eternal pain just because of the way they were born. I can't believe in a god who would sculpt something as artistic and beautiful as the human body, and then tell us it's a sin to see it. I can't believe in a god who would tell his followers, "don't think for yourselves, just read my book and follow it word-for-word, because after all, thinking too much gives you wrinkles." And I flat-out refuse to consider a god whose average followers are as mind-bogglingly stupid as the ones I see here in the Bible Belt.
It's not that I require proof of God's existence. I understand that believing in God is a test of faith. However, there's dozens of religions/sects/denomination/etc that say the same thing: "You have to take us on faith." What, do I just throw a dart and pick one at random? "Take it on faith" is a cop-out, pure and simple. It's a way of saying, "We've got nothing to go on but the beliefs of people who lived 2000 years ago, and articles that were written before science had been discovered. But... but... but... that's our proof! Since our religion is based on faith, then the fact that there's no proof is proof in itself! In fact, God took away all the proof on purpose, just so he could find out who really believes in Him! Yeah, that's the ticket!"
Christianity is full of cop-outs like that. Like if someone finds a contradiction in the Bible, the nearest Christian will point out that "even the Devil can quote scripture, and will do so in an attempt to trap you." Which is cop-out-ese for, "If you find any damning mistakes in our doctrine, it must be because the Devil was making you think too much." How can you argue with that?
It's funny, with so much rationalization going on, that more Christians can't accept the idea of evolution. The two theories go right together; if anything, evolution supports the Christian bible. Both beliefs present fairly similar ideas about the order in which animals started to appear on Earth, etc. If creationists would just get past the whole "7 days" thing, and rationalize that each "day" was several million years long, and most importantly THINK, there might be fewer picket lines at our high schools.
From my POV, I really don't see any compelling difference between the Christian Bible and Greek mythology. Both use fanciful speculation to close the gaps that were waiting to be filled by science. You'd start with a mystery, like "what's the deal with that big yellow ball in the sky?" People would scratch their heads and shrug, then some egotistical Cliff Claven type would stand up and say, "Well, there's this guy named Apollo who likes to fly around in a flaming chariot..." Or he might just say, "Well, God said 'Let there be light', and then He separated light from darkness." Either way, he was just talking out of his ass, because it made him feel smarter.
In my opinion, Christians would have a lot more credibility if they would actually read their Bible, and follow it as a whole. As opposed to what they really do, which is pick out their favorite verses, misinterpret the rest, and plow their way through life doing whatever they were going to do anyway, their natural hatreds now reinforced by divine approval. Because that's how religion works - it doesn't change beliefs, it strengthens beliefs people already have, and grants assertiveness to people who really don't need to be assertive.
Why do so many people focus on certain verses? For instance, if your Bible tells you that homosexuality is a sin, then fine, believe it. But why center on it? With such a long list of sins in the Bible, many of which are committed by everyone, including you, every day, why should you single out gay people as being evil sinners, when you're just as much of an evil sinner yourself? "Let he among you who is without sin..." yada yada yada. Even if I was mentally-stunted enough to believe that homosexuality is a choice, it's not like they're actually engaging in homosexual intercourse 24 hours a day. To flat out hate them, you're condemning them for their state of being, not for their individual sins.
The Bible may or may not actually condemn the act of homosexuality (I'll save that debate for some other time), but I swear to you, sinners or not, nowhere does the Bible instruct you to HATE these people (or anyone, really). And if your copy does, then I implore you to find a new copy, a new religion, and a new brain. Possibly a new planet as well - with attitudes gradually improving, it won't be too long before homophobic rednecks are such a minority, they'll be afraid to open their mouths for fear of being beaten to death by purses. It'll be a good day. ;)
So.....
In the interests of keeping the peace between the religious and the not-so-much-religious, to bridge the gap between different denominations (split because people found two ways to interpret a vaguely-written verse), to help the "it's-easier-to-do-whatever-my-preacher-says-than-to-think-for-myself" people get along with the "God-likes-people-who-can-think-for-themselves" crowd, and possibly to save the planet itself from total destruction, I have decided it's time to start my own religion.
Introducing... (drum roll please)...
The First Church of DOYC
The name "Church of Bob" was already taken, believe it or not. Anyway, for those unfamiliar with internet lingo, "DOYC" stands for "Deity Of Your Choice". In my church, you will be allowed to worship any god (or gods) you wish, or even none at all. Our sermons will preach about nice things people can do for each other. We will include inspirational stories from all sources, including the Bible, as well as the bibles of other major religions. Think of it as more like a "comparative religion" course, combined with an ethics class.For the first few years, worship service is going to be sort of abstract. Meaning we won't actually meet, we'll just all stay home and visualize going to church. If we make enough money from our imaginary collection plates, we'll start visualizing a much larger church. Obviously the concept of "tithing" is going to be a little different in this respect. If (and only if) you can afford to give away 10% (or any amount) of your earnings, then let's just skip the middle man. Give your donation straight to charity. Preferably something to do with education. After all, what good does it do society for me to spend your donations on more comfortable pews?
Our Ten Commandments:
1. Thou Shalt Not mix religion with politics.Morality and legality are both important entities, but should be kept seperate. Save the government for important things like murder and property theft. Things that hurt you. There's no reason to call the police because you're offended by someone else's favorite TV show. If you're so sure your neighbor's being immoral, then trust your god to handle that one in the afterlife. If you don't think your god can take care of a little matter like that, then why do you go to the trouble of believing in him? He is the "supreme being" after all. In fact, your god is probably highly offended that you think so little of him. "Hey, 911? I was peeking into my neighbor's window with a telescope, and I noticed that he's masturbating to an issue of Cat Fancy. I find this highly offensive, and I think he should be punished, but my god has a small penis and just isn't powerful enough to send this guy to Hell later. Can you send an officer over to arrest him, so I'll feel like justice has been done?"
2. Thou Shalt Not push your religious views onto other people.If they don't want to hear it, don't make them. People will be more likely to follow your example if you're not actively trying to piss them off. Why in the world would I want to join your church, when everyone in it is obviously such an annoying prick?
3. Thou Shalt Not use religion as an excuse to hate people or groups of people.
Religion is just a more active version of philosophy, and the nature of philosophy is to question your beliefs from time to time. Philosophical disagreements are an invitation to think, not a reason to hate. Some people have a tendency to reach a certain age, and decide that they now know everything. Then when they're presented with something that challenges their set beliefs, they immediately go on the offensive.
4. Thou Shalt seek peaceful solutions to your disagreements.
If someone slaps you, turn the other cheek... then sue them. But don't get yourself in a fight just because you're afraid of looking like a sissy. For the love of DOYC, you're just going to make matters worse. What do you think's going to be solved? After a fight, the two guys still don't respect each other, only now they both have broken bones. All they did was give in to their emotions... the same thing these "macho" men constantly accuse women of doing, and try to use as "proof" that men are superior. Bottom line: People who get into fist fights are wusses.
5. Thou Shalt Not be a fuddy duddy.
I can't tell you how many times I've seen one person tell a slightly off-color joke, and then watched the nearest Christian try not to laugh. "Oh, I can't find that funny, or God'll get me." Dude, if it tickled your funny-bone, the damage has been done. Laughing isn't going to make it any worse. Have fun with life, for DOYC's sake. What fun is heaven going to be if everyone there has sticks up their asses? But this really goes back to my previous blog on "offensensitivity". If you're so easily offended that every casual conversation leaves you fuming, then you're no fun to be around. And if your friends and co-workers don't want to be around you, what makes you think God will?
6. Honor Thy Father and Mother, but not to the point where you forget they're human.
So many people pick the religion their parents worshipped. Of course, if they'd been born in the house across the street, they'd worship a different god, and would still be claiming that proof didn't matter, because they have faith. In fact, people base lots of their beliefs on that of their parents, under the assumption that they're older and wiser. Which is forgetting that their parents' beliefs are based the beliefs of their grandparents, the same grandparents who still buy them Garfield underwear for Christmas and call them by their dog's name. It amazes me how many other beliefs - not just religion - start out as, "because that's how my parents did it." Do you realize that if everyone thought this way throughout history, we still wouldn't have electricity?
And that's the type of rationalization that really makes Baby Doyc cry - everyone believes themselves to be the perfect human being, and therefore the way they were raised must be the perfect way to raise a child. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say, "I support child beatings. My daddy beat me every day growing up, whether I'd done anything or not." ...and I'll reply, "Yeah, but you're an asshole. I don't want my kids to grow up to be assholes." It's particularly hard growing up in areas where racism is considered acceptable. I had several friends growing up who were decent, smart kids, but whose parents were trying their damnedest to raise their children racist. Some of my visits didn't feel so much like "play dates" as they did "damage control".
7. Thou Shalt Have No Other Blogs Before Me.
Because, you know, mine's best one on the internet. ;)
9. Thou Shalt Not Notice I Skipped #8.
I only have so much time on my hands. What, you think I get paid to make up commandments all day?
10. Thou Shalt not be an asshole.This is just in case I missed anything. Basically, don't kill, steal, rape, molest, punch, kick, torture, vandalize, or incinerate anyone or anything that oughtn't be killed, stolen, raped, molested, punched, kicked, tortured, vandalized, or incinerated. Heck, most of the original Bible's laws could have been summed up as "don't be an asshole".
For your reference, here's a handy Good-to-Evil chart. Note that "well-meaning" Christians fall two notches below average citizens.
GOOD
God, Jesus, DOYC - Good-aligned deities, whether fictional or real.
Ghandi-types, Heroes, Martyrs - People who risk their lives for the sake of others.
Good Samaritans - People who donate to charities, help the downtrodden, etc, whether they do it for religious reasons or not.
Average citizens - Athiests, Agnostics, and Religious people who don't rub your face in it.
Petty Criminals - Those who would steal property, but wouldn't want to hurt other people.
"Well-meaning" Christians - Those who feel that homosexuality is evil, "immoral" should be illegal, nudity is disgusting, etc.
Hitler-types, Serial Killers, Sociopaths - People who cause pain on purpose, or have no qualms about taking human lives.
Satan, Anti-DOYC - Evil-aligned deities, whether fictional or real.
EVIL
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Offensensitivity
I believe there is a direct correlation between how intelligent a person is, and how difficult it is to offend them. To put it bluntly: Stupid people are easily offended. I like this theory, mostly because it makes me look smart.
Often, people who are being offended are actually displaying cultural intolerances. For example: Bill grows up in the small town of Duck Nostril, Tennessee. Jill grows up in Squidlips, Utah. In Squidlips, the word "flurfle" means "to roll a ball". In Duck Nostril, "flurfle" is a vulgarity that means "to copulate". The two meet, and Jill uses the word in casual conversation. Bill is shocked and outraged. Jill realizes her mistake, and decides not to use the word in his presence again. But it's too late, Bill has already filed a suit for sexual harrassment.
A more realistic scenario: In Bill's hometown, the word "girl" is used interchangeably with "woman". There is no disrespect meant by the term. Children are "boys and girls", and adults are "guys and girls". Jill, however, feels that the word "girl" diminishes her, and is used by men to treat women like children. And in many cases she's right, but even so, Bill has the highest respect for Jill as well as all women. He simply thinks that "girls" are females of any age; that's simply what the word means to him. If Jill decides to correct him, that's fine. But if she is offended right away, then she is refusing to see other cultural variations of language.
I was at a restaurant one time with my stepmother. Our waitress kept calling me "Honey" and "Sweetie". After the waitress was gone, my stepmother asked me, "Doesn't that bother you? Don't you find it disrespectful?" I replied, "No, I'm not insane." I understand why some people would be offended by that sort of thing... I guess... but so what? This woman obviously meant the words as compliments, so why should I take them as anything else? The waitress must have grown up in an area where that was considered acceptable and complimentary. My stepmother obviously did not. And I was raised in some third place, possibly an alternate universe, where children are taught to consider the context more than the actual words.
But my stepmother is also very religious. That has little to do with the conversation above, but there does seem to be a connection there. Over-religious people are more easily offended than sane people. And having rejected science, over-religious people also seem to be a bit less intelligent. Okay, I'm overgeneralizing. Believe it or not, I have no problems with religion in and of itself. That's why I say "over-religious" - these are the people who not only worship a higher power, but also insist that everyone else do the same. These are the ones who go to church twice a week, listen to their pastor read Bible stories about loving your fellow man, then somehow turn that message into "why gay people should be killed."
But they're not the only ones. Everyone has thick skin these days, hence "Political Correctness". Thanks to PC, I have no idea how to describe someone. Like, "differently abled" - when something is bad, people don't like to talk directly about it, so they dance around the issue. So the more syllables a description has, the worse the condition sounds. That's one reason I don't like terms like "people of color" and "african american"... it makes it sound like there's something wrong with being black.
Question: in the "flurfle" scenario, did the genders sound reversed to you? You sexist pig :)
So, what offends me? Censorship. Sexism. Racism. People who put their own preferences above that of all others. People who burn books. People who think all TV shows/movies/books/video games should be wiped clean of anything they consider offensive, just in case a child should happen to watch one of them. People who think that this country should be ruled by religion. People who are offended by the nude human body (to clarify: it's okay if you don't particularly want to see nudity, or don't want kids to see it, or find certain bodies a "turn-off", but being "offended" by non-sexual nudity is unnatural and mentally unhealthy, IMO). But the bottom line is, what offends me most is people who are easily offended.
The difference between what is offensive, and what should be offensive, lies in the heart of the offender. Often the people who try to say something diplomatically, do so because the subject matter is offensive in itself. If you ever find yourself saying something like, "I'm not racist, but..." ...don't even bother finishing the sentence; you're about to say something racist. Heck, once in college, I overheard someone say, "I ain't racist or nuthin', but I just think all those n*****s should go back where they came from!"
Some other examples I hear a lot:
"I'm not racist, but I just don't think whites should marry blacks."
"I'm no homophobe, but I don't think they should show two men kissing on TV."
"I've got nothing against fags, as long as they stay away from me."
"I'm not sexist, but I think a woman's place is in the home."
Wednesday, November 8, 2006
Transgenderamblings
Note: This blog entry was moved from another site, and a lot of the formatting didn't quite follow.
Why is gender is an issue at all?
Why let gender define me?
Why not just be "Matthew",
And do whatever feels good at the time?
And if so
Is it the "best of both worlds"?
Or the worst?
Some "normal" people will tell me that
at any given moment,
That's not a universal truth. they don't feel particularly male or female.
Many people relish their gender.
There's millions of manly men,
and gaggles of girly girls. are probably better off.
but those who don't care as much
I don't know which is the majority
Wearing pink doesn't
Being bored by Basketball make
Playing with dolls you
Not caring for cars transgendered
...but this isn't a mystery to be solved.
Mountains of evidence, or nary a clue, it's all the same.
It's my SENSE OF SELF that matters.
It's my SENSE OF SELF that matters.
Sense of
Sense of sight
Sense of hearing tells me
Sense of touch tells me that isn't me in the mirror.
Sense of taste tells me that's not my voice I hear.
Sense of smell tells me my hands should be softer.
Sense of balance tells me I like fruity drinks, not beer.
Sense of time tells me I sweat like a brute.
selftells me I was born to walk in heels.
tells meI've been robbed of my youth.
who I am, what I am, how I feel.
My mind
spins
unravels
swirls undecided decisions
with unexpressed feelings conflicts of interest.
The thoughts
the wants
the needs
change with the tides.
If I stop to think about it,
I am once again, inconsolable.
And so
I stay busy
and try not to think.
I avoid pondering
what could be
and I am calmed
for another month.
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? When Where ? ? ?
? What will am Why ?
Who Am it I me? How
Am I? get going did
I better? with this
really? this? happen?
Can I learn to
live with this?
Can I get
used to it?
Do I have
to feel
this way?
I've lived
with it
this long,
there's no
reason I
can't go w
w another w h
w h 33 years h e h
h a like this. e r o
o t Except that n e w
why why It gets harder why why why why
why why Every year. And I why why why why
why why just don't know if why why why why
why why I can take much why why why
why why more. why why why why why why
why why why why why why why why why why
Everyone is created I have never been so ashamed of this country.
equal. We are endowed We tell the world that we are all about
with unalienable rights freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of the
including life, liberty press, even the freedom to wear plaid pants
and the pursuit of with polka dot shirts. And though it took a
happiness. Assuming you long while, we eventually extended the basic
are a "good Christian." rights - those involving working, voting and
so on, to minorities and women, thus giving every adult American an
equal opportunity to make their dreams come true. So what happened?
Why do we let religion dictate our laws? Why do we show preference
to Christianity, when this country was founded on religious freedom?
Why can't laws stick to property and safety, and allow citizens to
decide for themselves what is or isn't "moral"? Equal rights? Not.
There is no point to this blog;
I'm just playing with the pretty colors.
When I'm done here I'll just log
off and then go eat some Krullers.
why, Why, WHY?
The Bigots Have Spoken So, "No. 1" has passed. 1,382,671 to 334,641. 81% to 19%. This means that the vast majority of Tennesseans are bigots. Not only that, but a lot of states had their own version of "No. 1" this election, and most of them (from what I've seen so far) voted down gay marriage as well. So most of America is bigoted.
To recap: "No. 1" was not about the legalization of gay marriage. Had it lost, nothing would have changed; same-sex marriage would still be illegal in Tennessee. What "No. 1" did was make it not just a law, but a TN constitutional amendment. In other words, those who voted for No 1 not only want same-sex marriage illegal, but want it to stay illegal even when their grandchildren are in power.
Generally speaking, I don't let political matters interfere with my friendships. Usually, I don't care what my friends believe. They can be any religion, they can have whatever opinions they like on abortion, capital punishment, flag burning, or whatever. Diversity makes friendships interesting. It invites fun debates.
And I do like to argue, just ask my wife.
But - and this is highly unusual for me - I feel too strongly about this one to just let it go. So listen up: If you voted against same-sex marriage in this election, feel free to remove yourself from my Friend List. As all of you know, I'm transgendered. I'm also attracted to women. Though I have no plans at the moment, it is conceivable that someday I will have the surgery, and will be 100% female. Therefore it is remotely possible that someday I will be part of a lesbian relationship.
By voting Yes on "No. 1", you are basically saying that I shouldn't have the same rights as you. You are treating me like a second class citizen. Would you have voted on an amendment that prevented blacks from marrying? Jews? Left-handed people? So why is my minority any different?
Would you also like to take away my right to vote? My right to own property? What else would you like to take away from me? Bottom line is, if you don't believe in same-sex marriage, then you don't believe in my basic human rights. How can I possibly be friends with someone who feels that way?
So that's my ultimatum. While I always try to see both sides of an issue, on this one I simply can't. There is simply no way I can tolerate an opinion that takes my rights away. So if you truly don't think I should have the same rights as you, don't bother speaking to me again.
Now begone, and sin no more. Sunday, November 5, 2006
My Parrot Ate My Watch and Now "Polly Ticks"
Warning: Psychotic Political Rambling Ahead
I'm sick of seeing the word "Liberal" used as an insult. There's a commercial on TV right now where the announcer says something like, "Bob Corker doesn't share the liberal views of his opponents." The announcer spits out the word "liberal" as if it were a stinkbug stuck in her teeth. By her tone of voice, there's no doubt that she believes word "liberal" means "drug-addicted puppy-kicking child-molestor", and the commercial also assumes that the viewer feels the same way.
There's an old saying, often misattributed to Winston Churchill, "Show me a young conservative and I'll show you someone without a heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you someone without a brain." I fall somewhere in between, as most real people probably do. Very few people are so polarized in their beliefs that they're 100% "Left" or "Right", and the few freaks who are usually end up being radio talk show hosts or mass murderers. But I probably lean a little more towards Liberal than Conservative, and apparently that puts me in the minority.
And speaking of Bob Corker, there's another commercial out right now, that for me achieves exactly the opposite of what it intends. No, it's not the racist one, where it plays African jungle drums in the background when his opponent Harld Ford is mentioned. No, in this one, the announcer goes to great lengths to explain why Corker is a more loyal Tennessean than his opponent. According to the spot, while Corker's opponents were out and about in Washington learning how to be better politicians, Corker was rotting here in Tennessee. ...And it tries to USE that as a reason to vote for him! I've heard of Tennessee Pride, but I can't believe people here are so proud of this state that they want all their politicians to be 100% Tennesseans who never set a foot outside this state. Why not just phrase the ad, "Bob Corker is a true Tennessean: that is, an uneducated redneck hick." Honestly, if Southerners were smart enough to realize how dumb they are, they'd import their politicians from all over the northern half of this country. I can't believe there's so many "Vote for Corker" signs on my street. Wait, yes I can, this is the South. We reward stupidity here.
Okay, I'll admit it, I'm a bit biased. I was born in Tennessee, and I've been a Southerner all my life. But I've really never connected with the place, and if it's ever convenient, I'll probably move farther north. The downside is that I'll go from always being the smartest person in the room, to always being the dumbest.
Well, I can't vote this election anyway. I registered too late. Actually, I registered on time, but the people I registered with turned the cards in too late. A few weeks ago I was in Centennial Park with some friends, during some sort of art fair. I saw a couple of people walking around with a clipboard, wearing T-shirts with the "Vote No on 1" logo.
Note - For you non-Tennesseans, "No. 1" is a proposed amendment to Tennessee's constitution, intended to forever take away the right for same-sex couples to marry. Same-sex marriage is already illegal in Tenneessee, so if "No. 1" loses, nothing will change. Which also makes "No. 1" a bit pointless. However, if it passes, it will make it much harder legalize same-sex marriage in the future. Basically, the point of "No. 1" is to insure that future generations are just as bigoted as this one. Personally, I can't understand why anyone is against same-sex marriage. If you're not gay, then the law doesn't affect you. Either you should be for it, or just not care one way or the other. How does other people's relationships hurt yours? If you don't like it, then don't marry someone of your sex. But telling other people what to do just makes you an asshole.
But back to my story. Since I'm a big fan of "Vote No on 1", I approached them and asked if they had a petition I could sign. No, they told me, they were registering people to vote. Well, I've never voted before. *gasp!* The fact is, I've never felt strongly enough about any particular issue, to make voting worth my time. KJ would say it's because I'm a Libra, but on many issues, I'm a lot more "middle-of-the-road" than most people. And to be fair, I'm somewhat divided on the same-sex marriage issue as well... Yes, I think gay people should have the same rights as straight people, but sometimes I wonder why the government recognizes marriage at all, when it's considered by many to be a religious union. But I am definitely against this "No. 1" amendment. It's made specifically written to keep gays from having the same rights as straights.
But, uh, back to my story. Again. The "Vote No on 1" people told me that it was the last day I could register to vote. It was like fate - I happened to be in Centennial Park (which is pretty rare), and I happened to run into these people on the day it mattered. So I filled out a registration card, and gave it to them. A few weeks later, I went to an early voting center, and found out that my registration hadn't gone through. Apparently my card was turned in late. I asked if there was anything I could do, and was told to register earlier next year. Gee, thanks.
Needless to say, I was annoyed. It's not just that I wasn't able to vote, I'm looking at the bigger picture. Was my registration card alone? Probably not. And since it was the "Vote No on 1" people collecting these cards, then that means that all the lost votes would have been from people who agreed with me. This issue has been running pretty close in the polls I've seen, what if it only loses by a handful of votes?
There is a bright side, sort of. When I was filling out the registration card, the "Vote No on 1" people mentioned that they hadn't been having much luck that day. So maybe it wasn't that many lost votes after all.
I really can't see why this issue is cutting so close. When I first started hearing about "No. 1", I was pleased to discover that some of my neighbors had "Vote No on 1" signs in their yard. Then, a couple of weeks ago, I saw my first "Vote Yes on 1 (Protect Marriage!)" sign, in front of a house on my street. A couple of days later, the next house had a similar sign. And a couple of days after that, their next neighbor had one of those signs. It was kind of creepy, like a virus that was spreading.
I firmly believe that everyone has a right to free speech. I shouldn't be angry with these people for their personal beliefs. But I seriously want to knock on one of their doors and ask, "Why, why WHY? How does it hurt you? Why can't you just let other people be? Why must you go out of your way to tell everyone that you're a bigot? You wouldn't put up a sign supporting the KKK, so why is it okay to tell people you hate homosexuals?"
...And they're likely to reply that homosexuality is "immoral". Okay, I could argue with them on that one for weeks, but it's beside the point. Even if it homosexuality was a question of morality, what does that have to do with the law? If laws were meant to be based on popular morality, then it would be illegal to curse, drink, have unmarried sex, lie, or write this blog. And everyone's ideas of morality are different. Should we arbitrarily pick somebody and go by their morals? No. There is a huge difference between immoral and illegal, or at least there should be. Laws should be limited to things like property and personal injury. People should not be allowed to harm or steal from other people. Beyond that, let them do what they want.
I'm a huge believer in the seperation of church and state, and it always surprises me when I find people who believe otherwise. As I mentioned in a previous blog, would God rather have followers who worship from their hearts, or followers who never had a choice? But I do know some people who would like this country to be a total Christian nation, and who want to make anything not approved by the Bible to be made illegal. Yikes.
Anyway, lest I lose any more cohesion, I'm going to close with an oldie but goodie. You've probably seen this one before, but for those who haven't:
01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
Forward this if you believe love makes a marriage!
I'm sick of seeing the word "Liberal" used as an insult. There's a commercial on TV right now where the announcer says something like, "Bob Corker doesn't share the liberal views of his opponents." The announcer spits out the word "liberal" as if it were a stinkbug stuck in her teeth. By her tone of voice, there's no doubt that she believes word "liberal" means "drug-addicted puppy-kicking child-molestor", and the commercial also assumes that the viewer feels the same way.
There's an old saying, often misattributed to Winston Churchill, "Show me a young conservative and I'll show you someone without a heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you someone without a brain." I fall somewhere in between, as most real people probably do. Very few people are so polarized in their beliefs that they're 100% "Left" or "Right", and the few freaks who are usually end up being radio talk show hosts or mass murderers. But I probably lean a little more towards Liberal than Conservative, and apparently that puts me in the minority.
And speaking of Bob Corker, there's another commercial out right now, that for me achieves exactly the opposite of what it intends. No, it's not the racist one, where it plays African jungle drums in the background when his opponent Harld Ford is mentioned. No, in this one, the announcer goes to great lengths to explain why Corker is a more loyal Tennessean than his opponent. According to the spot, while Corker's opponents were out and about in Washington learning how to be better politicians, Corker was rotting here in Tennessee. ...And it tries to USE that as a reason to vote for him! I've heard of Tennessee Pride, but I can't believe people here are so proud of this state that they want all their politicians to be 100% Tennesseans who never set a foot outside this state. Why not just phrase the ad, "Bob Corker is a true Tennessean: that is, an uneducated redneck hick." Honestly, if Southerners were smart enough to realize how dumb they are, they'd import their politicians from all over the northern half of this country. I can't believe there's so many "Vote for Corker" signs on my street. Wait, yes I can, this is the South. We reward stupidity here.
Okay, I'll admit it, I'm a bit biased. I was born in Tennessee, and I've been a Southerner all my life. But I've really never connected with the place, and if it's ever convenient, I'll probably move farther north. The downside is that I'll go from always being the smartest person in the room, to always being the dumbest.
Well, I can't vote this election anyway. I registered too late. Actually, I registered on time, but the people I registered with turned the cards in too late. A few weeks ago I was in Centennial Park with some friends, during some sort of art fair. I saw a couple of people walking around with a clipboard, wearing T-shirts with the "Vote No on 1" logo.
Note - For you non-Tennesseans, "No. 1" is a proposed amendment to Tennessee's constitution, intended to forever take away the right for same-sex couples to marry. Same-sex marriage is already illegal in Tenneessee, so if "No. 1" loses, nothing will change. Which also makes "No. 1" a bit pointless. However, if it passes, it will make it much harder legalize same-sex marriage in the future. Basically, the point of "No. 1" is to insure that future generations are just as bigoted as this one. Personally, I can't understand why anyone is against same-sex marriage. If you're not gay, then the law doesn't affect you. Either you should be for it, or just not care one way or the other. How does other people's relationships hurt yours? If you don't like it, then don't marry someone of your sex. But telling other people what to do just makes you an asshole.
But back to my story. Since I'm a big fan of "Vote No on 1", I approached them and asked if they had a petition I could sign. No, they told me, they were registering people to vote. Well, I've never voted before. *gasp!* The fact is, I've never felt strongly enough about any particular issue, to make voting worth my time. KJ would say it's because I'm a Libra, but on many issues, I'm a lot more "middle-of-the-road" than most people. And to be fair, I'm somewhat divided on the same-sex marriage issue as well... Yes, I think gay people should have the same rights as straight people, but sometimes I wonder why the government recognizes marriage at all, when it's considered by many to be a religious union. But I am definitely against this "No. 1" amendment. It's made specifically written to keep gays from having the same rights as straights.
But, uh, back to my story. Again. The "Vote No on 1" people told me that it was the last day I could register to vote. It was like fate - I happened to be in Centennial Park (which is pretty rare), and I happened to run into these people on the day it mattered. So I filled out a registration card, and gave it to them. A few weeks later, I went to an early voting center, and found out that my registration hadn't gone through. Apparently my card was turned in late. I asked if there was anything I could do, and was told to register earlier next year. Gee, thanks.
Needless to say, I was annoyed. It's not just that I wasn't able to vote, I'm looking at the bigger picture. Was my registration card alone? Probably not. And since it was the "Vote No on 1" people collecting these cards, then that means that all the lost votes would have been from people who agreed with me. This issue has been running pretty close in the polls I've seen, what if it only loses by a handful of votes?
There is a bright side, sort of. When I was filling out the registration card, the "Vote No on 1" people mentioned that they hadn't been having much luck that day. So maybe it wasn't that many lost votes after all.
I really can't see why this issue is cutting so close. When I first started hearing about "No. 1", I was pleased to discover that some of my neighbors had "Vote No on 1" signs in their yard. Then, a couple of weeks ago, I saw my first "Vote Yes on 1 (Protect Marriage!)" sign, in front of a house on my street. A couple of days later, the next house had a similar sign. And a couple of days after that, their next neighbor had one of those signs. It was kind of creepy, like a virus that was spreading.
I firmly believe that everyone has a right to free speech. I shouldn't be angry with these people for their personal beliefs. But I seriously want to knock on one of their doors and ask, "Why, why WHY? How does it hurt you? Why can't you just let other people be? Why must you go out of your way to tell everyone that you're a bigot? You wouldn't put up a sign supporting the KKK, so why is it okay to tell people you hate homosexuals?"
...And they're likely to reply that homosexuality is "immoral". Okay, I could argue with them on that one for weeks, but it's beside the point. Even if it homosexuality was a question of morality, what does that have to do with the law? If laws were meant to be based on popular morality, then it would be illegal to curse, drink, have unmarried sex, lie, or write this blog. And everyone's ideas of morality are different. Should we arbitrarily pick somebody and go by their morals? No. There is a huge difference between immoral and illegal, or at least there should be. Laws should be limited to things like property and personal injury. People should not be allowed to harm or steal from other people. Beyond that, let them do what they want.
I'm a huge believer in the seperation of church and state, and it always surprises me when I find people who believe otherwise. As I mentioned in a previous blog, would God rather have followers who worship from their hearts, or followers who never had a choice? But I do know some people who would like this country to be a total Christian nation, and who want to make anything not approved by the Bible to be made illegal. Yikes.
Anyway, lest I lose any more cohesion, I'm going to close with an oldie but goodie. You've probably seen this one before, but for those who haven't:
10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong
01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
Forward this if you believe love makes a marriage!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)