17 August 2012

And yet........another post today

Well, here I go again. 
Yes, another post today. Actually this entry was prompted by an email discussion on the first post I did here today.

Some how, a friend and I got into a discussion after the post I put up here earlier today.
We got onto the subject of "gay marriage" and this was due to the mention of the eatery "Chick-fil-A. Yes, that outfit, which many of you know is quite anti-gay in their stance. The founder of said restaurant chain is a very "devout" christian. (Yes, I know I did NOT use a capital "C", the "beliefs of said type of person is more in keeping with the term xtian. as there is very little of Christ in said beliefs.)

I have to admit, for the record and the sake of honesty, that I have had a meal at one of the chains' places of business. We ate there once and that was some while ago. This was all before I had heard that the founder and the corporate officers are anti-gay. For myself, I did not think the food was worth the price nor was it very good in my opinion. It seemed to me that it was not cooked properly. Maybe they had a bad day or my taster isn't what it may have been once. No matter, I found the food to not be worth a "second" try.

Any way, what got to the two of us in our discussion via email was why should anybody get so angry about "gay marriage"?  I have placed quote marks around the term "gay marriage" for a reason. My reason is that personally I see NO need at all to refer to "gay marriage"and just call the marriage of two gay men or two lesbian women as marriage, no "need" to insert "gay" into it at all.

Now here comes the kicker; how does "gay marriage" hurt anybody besides, perhaps the two who are married? How does a gay or lesbian couple being married hurt me in any way? What harm is there in two loving people getting married to each other, assuming of course that they are not currently married as that would be bigamy which is unlawful. 

Maybe I am just too old or too much of an "unbeliever" to understand, but I do not see how any couple who love each other and wish to be married hurts me or anybody else. OK, I suppose I could make an argument that a third party is seriously "in love" with one of the two who wish to be married. Well, this happens quite often. How so? Well, say you find a member of the opposite sex  to be very attractive, but she/he is in love with another and not you. The two of them get married and live  a nice life together. You are "left out" as it were and perhaps a bit "hurt" by this turn of events. Happens every day I bet. Big deal. We can even change this some  what, make the object of your affection a member of the same sex. The couple still marries each other and you are still "left out" as it were. No doubt this happens often as well.
In neither of the above possible scenarios is anybody done long lasting real harm. Yes, the one who is "left out" may be saddened and it may take some time to "get over" being the one left, but no real, serious or permanent harm has been done. I would even go so far as to say that every person has been "unlucky" in love at some point in our lives. Hey, it happens, it is part of life.

Again, I keep coming back to my question; how does a caring, loving couple being married hurt me?  How does it hurt anybody?
And yet, the real question ought to be, why are we not all very happy to see a couple who love and care for each other get married? How can a decent human being not be happy when they see a caring and loving couple? OK, sure, one might say, keep it private. Well, of course, nobody needs to see "over the top" affection in public places. that is NOT what any marriage is about however. Gay marriage is NOT flaunting themselves in public. A gay or lesbian couple do not act differently in public than a "straight" couple. In most parts of the USA, any gay/lesbian couple will act very discreetly in public. The reason is they do not wish to attract undo attention to themselves. If they were to "flaunt" their relationship in public, well, lets just say that it wouldn't be looked upon favorably in much of the USA. 

In this world we live in today there is little enough real joy and happiness. This being the case, how can any sane human being get upset about two people who wish to be married and make a life together? Who has been genuinely harmed by love? Love is not destructive, it is a positive, a good and this life can use all the good it can get. 

One point that I want to make, one that I should not have to make but I think it needs being repeated as often as possible; gay people are NOT child molesters. Child molesters are pedophiles, they are NOT homosexuals. OK? Everybody got that? You best have as there just might be a test.

How can people claim to be members of a religion that says "god is love" and then turn around and condemn a marriage?  What sort of a "loving god" would condemn a marriage between two caring, loving, consenting adults? And some wonder why I refuse to believe in or follow any religion? How can a sane, decent human being be against a caring relationship and marriage of two loving people?  What sort of religion would condemn a loving marriage? Just how does such a marriage harm anybody who is not party to that marriage?
We do much, much more harm by not allowing a caring, loving couple to marry than any supposed harm can be done by their marriage, even if they be of the same sex. 

I realize this is a "hot button" issue for some politicians and their followers. It is not something I would rant on about either as I see no need to voice my opinions on what I think is a very private matter. OK, so why this rant? Well, because it IS an issue in the politics of the USA. This is most unfortunate. I see it as unfortunate because we should be mature enough to not care about what sex the two parties of a marriage are. What does it matter if the marriage is a man and a woman, or two men,or two women? Unless they want to reproduce, it should not matter at all. Even the reproduction can be dealt with as any competent doctor can tell you. 
While I believe that gay marriage, any marriage, should not have any bearing at all for any elected office, it IS a huge issue to many in the USA. It is an issue because some very, very immature people live in  the USA and many of those same immature are politicians. No doubt that Mittens and his "best bud" Paul Ryan (if he ain't dyin' he be a lyin', that sort of ryan) will make it an issue. And, of course the Gobomber gang will have to counter somehow or other. Now, to me at least and no doubt some of you as well, the real reason that "gay marriage" (those damn "  " again) is an issue is that it distracts us from the REAL issues. Yes, we are given uncounted hours of "gay marriage" pro/con and little to zero time for real issues like the damn fool wars of choice and the government debt, obscene credit card interest, ungodly student loan debt, and many REAL issues that not a single politician want to ever discuss in any way. The whole deal about gay marriage (no "  " this time!!) is to keep our minds off of the real problems, problems that the same politicians have created and have no clue how to fix or stop. The same can be said of abortion. The only male who might have any say whatsoever about abortion would be the male who  is the biological father of the unborn child who may or may not get aborted. NO other man should ever be allowed to have any real say about abortion. There I leave myself open to attack, but what the hell, I was a Marine and saw combat in Vietnam, so big deal, I can take it.

Once more, for the final time in this post any way, nobody is hurt by gay marriage. Nobody at all. The bigots who oppose gay marriage are disgusting and open themselves up to ridicule and scorn. We all should be happy to see a loving couple no matter what sex they are. This old world needs all the love and joy it can get, if gay couples wish to be married, we should all rejoice at the care and love they wish to share in a loving marriage. In a sane world, there would be no need for this post as the very idea of gay marriage, any marriage in fact, would be a given and the happiness of the married couple would bring joy to all who encounter them every day. All family members of each person in the marriage would be over joyed that their son/daughter had found a caring, loving life partner. We would no longer talk about gay marriage and only talk about marriage, plain and simple, the way life should be. We should all be happy to see a caring, loving couple. End of story.
semper fi

Random thoughts on a hot summers day

Greeting to all again.
The old corner has been a bit lazy of late. Oh well, we have had more than a few days of heat and humidity of late. There have been many days where we have the heat index at or very near 110 this summer here in central Louisiana. It reminds me of my first summer here, in 2000. Back then the state was in the middle of a drought and the heat index was in the 100's for weeks on end.
OK, that is one explanation for the lack of posts here. Another is that I have been devoting time to reading for pure enjoyment recently. I dug out a few books that I had not read in many years. Just recently finished ""The Sirens of Titan" by the late Kurt Vonnegut Jr. Also, a certain blogger, yes Bill, you, has kept my interest with his excellent posting of original work at his wonderful blog. (Bill, you said to promote you, is this OK?) The link to his site is among the links I have listed, check out "Bill the Butcher" for some very thought provoking and entertaining writing. In the opinion of this old guy, Bill is a master story teller.

While I have allowed my following of the "news" to slip some recently, a few things did catch my attention, so, buckle up, here we go, into the deep end...........again.

Recently there have been a couple articles at another web site where the author said that voting for any third party candidate was a "vanity" vote. Yes, the author is an American. Of course, what else could he be? To call any persons' vote for the candidate of his/her choice as a "vanity" vote is beyond disgusting. It reeks of pure "party politics". Of course said author wants us all to vote for Gobomber. And it also seems(??) that this election is, once again, the "most important" election ever. How many times have we heard that load of pure horse manure? Take a minute and think it over. Ready? OK, we hear this very same "argument" EVERY election. In 1980, we had "the most important" election ever. Now that one I'll grant them. Dad was so set against "saint" Ronnie that it MAY have been the "most important" election up until then. Old Mr. "peanuts" Carter lost and Dad died the Saturday after "saint" Ronnie won the election. OK, that one was important then, maybe.

Think back to the first election of Billy Bob Bubba from Arkansas. Yep, another "most important" election ever. And then when he ran for re-election, same story. And who can forget the stolen mess of 2000? Yes, another :most important" election ever. Well, Gore lost, mostly due to his own damn fault and NOT because Ralph Nader was running. Hell, Mr. Nader didn't grab enough votes to move the tally one way or the other if we look at the entire country. Would that Mr. Nader HAD won. No doubt the real rulers of the country would not have allowed him to be sworn in. Bets that he would have met with an "accident"? Maybe an accident that involved an automobile, as a sort of "gottcha" with a bit of irony added for free?

Again in 2004, we had another in the long line of "most important" elections ever. W. Shrub "won" that one also. Yes, Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 did have some small input in those "wins" by Shrubbie. And we cannot forget the "nine supremes" who aided his "win" in 2000. Ah yes, the "nine", bloody damn fools who serve the corporate masters. How else does one "explain" the Citizens United decision? It would appear that the "nine" know where their pay comes from and it is not "we the people".

In 2008, again, we had the "most important" election ever. Now, I'll grant that one some credit. The nation DID elect a "person of color". That was a real first, but unfortunately, it didn't quite turn out as expected. Yes, old Gobomber is NOT any "savior" of the common folks after all. How many of us have read articles by leftists who moan about the abuses being heaped on the poor and working class by "dear leader" Gobomber? True, the "left" is very careful when it comes to being the least bit critical of Gobomber.

Now we are being told that we "must" vote for Gobomber and whoever he "decides" to pick as his number two. It is so bad that those of us who refuse to play along with the two wings of the war party (the elephant wing and the donkey wing) and vote for third party candidates, are just doing so because of our "vanity". Well, I call BULL SHIT on that! Total BULL SHIT even. My opinion for this attack on those who vote for candidates other than the "big two" is because the donkey wing and its hangers on fear that Gobomber just might be debated even though Mittens is a much worse candidate than even W. Shrub was. Wow, think on that one for  a minuet or so. Mittens is worse than Shrubbie. Mush worse as I think he would sell off every asset still remaining in this country. Shrub just started wars he never could win. Mittens would bow down to the zionist entity and has done so already, witness his recent trip to that poor fake excuse of a country. He went begging for bucks in foreign countries folks. Since when did candidates for president of the USA hold fund raisers in foreign countries? To me, that sounds down right un-American, but then who the hell am I?

In a way, electing old Mittens may actually be the best thing we could do. Hold on a second before you get the tar and feathers out for me. Think about it a second. Mittens as "commander-in-chief", as our CEO in fact. If he holds true to Bain Capital form, he'll sell off everything that is not tied down and mortgage the rest to the maximum. In short, he and his "best bud" Paul Ryan will turn the USA into something worse than a third world country.
How is that "good" you ask? Well, we ARE on that very road right now. Don't believe me? Just look around this country. See any decent paying jobs available? See any recent college graduates unemployed? See any highly skilled people out of work and nearing the end of their unemployment benefits? See any folks on food stamps?  I bet it didn't take much looking to find all that an much more. So, the way it looks, the USA is already on the road to third world status. So, why not just go all out and get there sooner? The sooner the country bottoms out, the sooner we the people can start to rebuild. During said rebuild, maybe this time we can set real limits on greed. Yes, I know, greed is a human thing and cannot ever be eliminated, but I do think we could limit the absolute greed as seen on Wall Street and among the "too big to JAIL" banksters and other war industry crooks. While greed and envy are very real human emotions/feelings, there needs to be some limits to such greed and society can impose decent limits on it. We might also demand that our civil rights be extended to ALL human beings in the nation and make that stick. No more "talk" of rights, but real rights that are respected by all, not separate "rights" for the rich and "other" rights for the rest of us.
One thing that I believe that we all have forgotten here in America is that with our rights comes certain responsibilities. For far too long, those responsibilities have been ignored. That is one of the reasons the country  is in the state it is today. Everybody goes on and on about their rights, but very, very few ever mention, let alone act on, their responsibilities. Go back and read what the founders said about rights and responsibilities. If you want your rights, they come with a set of responsibilities. You don't get the one without the other. 
I take responsibility for my actions. I am ready to take full responsibility for my vote also. I WILL vote for a candidate for president who is NOT a member of either wing of the war party. So, I supposed if Gobomber comes out on the short end of the coming election, all you "true believers" in Gobomber can lay the blame for his defeat on me. No problem, I have found that I am very capable of carrying more than my fair share of the burdens. Hell, I was a Marine so another bit of mess to carry is no real bother.

Another thing that has me riled today was an article that said that being cynical was a form of cowardice. What the hell is THAT about? Also, who the hell is Henry Rollins and why should I or anybody give a flying crap about what he says?  He is one of those who is  quoted as saying that cynics are cowards. Another load of total BULL SHIT! 
Being a cynic and being public about it is NOT cowardice. In fact, in some areas of this country, it is an act of real courage to be cynical. Don't think so? Come down here to the "bible belt" section of the USA and try to be cynical about religion, any religion. Or, politics here in Louisiana. Some say that in Louisiana, politics is a contact sport. And they mean it, for real.
Now, maybe I might allow that being cynical is not exactly an act of courage IF, and only IF, all one does is make cynical comments and does not act on what one says. To just sit back and make comments while not doing anything might be a bit chicken. Either way, being cynical is NOT, in any way at all, an act of cowardice. In some cases, being a cynic IS a true act of courage. Go ahead and be the least bit critical of those in power in your home city and see how many "friends" you win over. Yes, I do put being cynical along side being critical. True, they are NOT exactly the same, but I think they are close. 
To just make cynical statements and not give any possible solutions might be a bit chicken, I'll grant you that. However, I refuse to see being cynical as anything close to being a coward. And Henry Rollins, who ever the hell he is, can put that in his goddamn pipe and smoke it.
Until the next rant at the old corner.
 Thank you for your time.
semper fi