Basement X

So you don't hafta go elsewhere to read my blogs, I'll put'em all here...

Here are the two most recent to get us started:

"A Godless America? I don't think so."

Last night Bill O'Reilly reported on a recent survey conducted by ARIS (American Religious Self-Indentification Survey) which showed that between 1990 and today, the percentage of Americans that called themselves Christian dropped from 86 to 76. Additionally, 20% of Americans now choose to associate themselves with no defined religion, with Catholicism taking the biggest hit in numbers. The conclusion, therefore, is that today more and more Americans are becoming "Godless" beings and hold no faith to speak of.

I believe that can't be farther from the truth.

On the contrary, I believe we are simply in the midst of a massive redefining of how we view religion in America and around the world. Perhaps a second Reformation, if you will. Much like the Reformation of the 16th century, Americans are seeing the obvious flaws with organized religion, including the omnipresent "do as I say, not as I do" mentality of many preachers and churchgoers alike. So, they choose to not be a part of the hypocrisy and opt to not associate themselves with a certain church.

Does that then mean they have no faith? That they are Godless heathens? Absolutely not. Just because a person chooses not to go to church every Sunday does not mean they don't share many of the same thoughts, feelings, and faith in God. They just choose to exercise their religious beliefs in a more personal way. At home, for example - where God belongs the most. I can honestly say that I do not attend church on a regular basis, but my kids do. Not because they have to, but because they genuinely want to. And that's the way it should be. Religion should not be force fed down a child's throat on a young age. Instead they should be given the option to attend church, and they should decide for themselves if that is something in which they wish to participate. Mandatory church attendance will only go on to cause greater distrust in organized religion later in life. Church should be a place of fun and togetherness, not a place of "fire and brimstone" where you learn about all the things God doesn't like about us meager humans.

And because I don't go to church, does that mean my family has no faith or belief in God? Negative. If anything, I'd say deep down we are much more religious than the individual who goes to church and then leaves the parking lot afterwards and proceeds to lie, cheat, steal, etc etc etc (but it's okay because they went to Church). Just remember: if you do go to church, take what you learned with you when you leave, and make sure you apply it all throughout the week, not just two hours on Sunday morning...and then maybe we'll see the churches start to fill up again.

"Wonder why we're Godless? Here's a hint."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/03/11/brazil.rape.abortion/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

So yesterday I wrote about the survey that indicated that Americans are going away from religion, especially Christianity. And more specifically: Catholicism. Why is this happening? The above article may be a huge hint.

Imagine you have a daughter and she is nine years old. God forbid, the unthinkable happens. She gets raped. To add insult to an already grave injury, the worst case scenario happens. She gets pregnant. With twins. Besides wanting to tear the rapist limb from limb and jam those limbs down his throat, what do you do now?

I would imagine the last thing you would want to do is let the pregnancy go on. Not just because it was caused by rape (because many good people have chosen to keep and love their babies caused by this heinous act), but because your daughter is nine years old. There is no way the pregnancy would be without significant risks. Now I'm no doctor, but I would venture to say that the probability of the babies surviving would be relatively low, and if they did they would undoubtedly face countless health issues throughout their lives. And even more importantly, what about your daughter? A nine year old is not designed to carry a baby, much less twins.

A group of doctors in Brazil realized this, so they performed an abortion for the little girl, which I would say probably saved her life. What thanks did they get? They got excommunicated from the Catholic Church because of what they did.

So you would at least think the rapist would have gotten excommunicated as well, right? Absolutely not. Why? Because "A graver act than (rape) is abortion, to eliminate an innocent life." I'm not usually at a loss for words, but...wow. I always believe abortion should be the last option, but in this case, undoubtedly necessary.

Why are people moving away from religion? You decide.

I walked away from religion many years ago when I was younger. I got sick of having it thrown down my throat and just up and quit, so my mom never tried to push me into it since then (except for Christmas Mass occasionally, which is funny cause she's Christian). I won't go as far as to say "fuck organized religion", I just don't like religion that much. I find your idea of a new Reformation coming, definitely an interesting idea...

"Death on a Bun...yummy!"

So if anybody still carries the delusion that America is not living in excess (and hence the cause for all of our current problems), a minor league baseball team has done their part to smash all those delusions by making...wait for it...a 5/3 POUND BURGER! This thing packs (obviously) 5/3 of a pound of All-American fatty beef, lettuce, tomato, cheese, mayo, etc etc etc resulting in an impressive 5000 (five thousand) calories!

You know, the Roman Empire had the attitude of "eat, drink, and be merry" right before it....awwww...nevermind, just pass me one of those burgers!

I like the new avatar. hee hee

NOM NOM NOM

That might be the 50 or 500/3 Burger, but I'll hafta check it out....

That is too much Burger for one King.

ChimeraCreative wrote:

NOM NOM NOM

Whats that in terms of your average americans diet? breakfast? or just a liht snack?

"What's up with these friggin' morals?"

So there I was yesterday, going to the Navy Exchange to buy some new sneakers (because my current shoes were only shoes by definition in that they pretty much covered my feet) as well as sunscreen for the Flowertown Festival, Emma's baseball cleats, and a new Miracle Gro hose attachment thingy because I lost my last one. I did find a suitable pair of sneakers for the low Navy price of $49.99, along with all the aforementioned goodies.

The cashier was certainly friendly - as friendly as someone at the NEX can be, at least - and rang up all my items, with the exception of my shoes. The total came to about $46, and this obviously being less than my Nike's, I astutely deduced that she had not rung up my shoes, and she had already taken the security device off and everything.

So decision time: do I do the smart thing, save my family of five $50 that could be used for groceries or a new Wii game? Or should I be a "damned idealistic fool" and let her know that she forgot to do her one job and ring up my sneakers.

You know me - I'm an idiot. I told her. She did manage to mumble "thank you" for the fact that I was so honest, and helped her to keep the job for which she was evidently underqualified.

So my question is why? Why did I feel the need to not take advantage of the fact that I could have saved fifty bucks. And if she wasn't smart enough to figure out that all my items came up to less than 1 item costed, no one else would have been the wiser. And if the answer is "because it's the right thing to do," what makes it so "right?"

I'm pretty sure if it had been Wal-Mart, I would've taken the free shoes...

Because years of enculturation told you it was right. The End.

P.S. Good on ya for telling her about the shoes. You are a prince among men.

Why thank you! =)

"Prisoners' Rights"

Senator Graham recently said it was “dangerous and naïve” to afford the detainees being held at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan the same rights as those held captive in Guantanamo. And with that statement, Sen. Graham could not be more wrong.

The only thing “dangerous” about our actions over the past eight years is the policy that President Bush set saying that the guidelines of the Geneva Convention (and the U.S. Constitution, for that matter) do not apply to prisoners of the global war on terror. Following the events of 9/11, The U.S. went to a very dark place when we went away from those values that made America so great in the first place.

President Obama is finally putting us back on track by ordering a report be generated no later than July reviewing all of our detention policies, including detainees having the right to challenge their imprisonment. “Habeas corpus” is one of the foundations of our legal system, and it is absolutely essential that wherever there is American soil – whether it be here at home or on a military base abroad – all the rights of being in America follow, no matter who you are.

Yes, it is necessary to take prisoners of war to obtain information that will help defeat the enemy, but when we dismiss our most basic principles, we become no better than those we have vowed to defeat.

JediMindTrick wrote:"What's up with these friggin' morals?"

So there I was yesterday, going to the Navy Exchange to buy some new sneakers (because my current shoes were only shoes by definition in that they pretty much covered my feet) as well as sunscreen for the Flowertown Festival, Emma's baseball cleats, and a new Miracle Gro hose attachment thingy because I lost my last one. I did find a suitable pair of sneakers for the low Navy price of $49.99, along with all the aforementioned goodies.

The cashier was certainly friendly - as friendly as someone at the NEX can be, at least - and rang up all my items, with the exception of my shoes. The total came to about $46, and this obviously being less than my Nike's, I astutely deduced that she had not rung up my shoes, and she had already taken the security device off and everything.

So decision time: do I do the smart thing, save my family of five $50 that could be used for groceries or a new Wii game? Or should I be a "damned idealistic fool" and let her know that she forgot to do her one job and ring up my sneakers.

You know me - I'm an idiot. I told her. She did manage to mumble "thank you" for the fact that I was so honest, and helped her to keep the job for which she was evidently underqualified.

So my question is why? Why did I feel the need to not take advantage of the fact that I could have saved fifty bucks. And if she wasn't smart enough to figure out that all my items came up to less than 1 item costed, no one else would have been the wiser. And if the answer is "because it's the right thing to do," what makes it so "right?"

I'm pretty sure if it had been Wal-Mart, I would've taken the free shoes...

I'd have took the freebie, but you already knew that:)

JediMindTrick wrote:"What's up with these friggin' morals?"


So my question is why? Why did I feel the need to not take advantage of the fact that I could have saved fifty bucks. And if she wasn't smart enough to figure out that all my items came up to less than 1 item costed, no one else would have been the wiser. And if the answer is "because it's the right thing to do," what makes it so "right?"

Because if you had taken the shoes with full knowledge that you weren't paying for them, it would've been stealing. And stealing, with a few exceptions, is wrong. You did the right, and honest, thing by informing her of the error.

We need more of that.

It is stealing with no risk thouh. If you get stopped you just say you assumed they had been rung up and paid for.

look after number 1 i say

I'm still alive, and in the meantime, I got this:

I'm still alive! And doin' pretty damn well, too. Go to facebook.com/JediMindTrick621

I got me a new tat which I love so very very much.