Hooray for gays!

Last night, I watched the election coverage and felt a strange and unfamiliar emotion… pride. I admit it, as cynical and as jaded as I am, I couldn’t help it. I laid my head down with a good feeling about the direction of this county. That general feeling lasted until about 2 minutes ago when I saw that California is looking like it will pass a ban on gay marriage. Pardon my French, but what the fuck???

I’m so tired of this being an issue. There is no issue! There is no conceivable reason why homosexuals should not be allowed to marry. In California? The gayest state per capita in the U.S.? How does this happen?

Well, I’ve heard all the usual arguments, all of them being beyond retarded. In fact, I shouldn’t use that word because calling these arguments retarded is an insult to the word retarded. I’d like to suggest a new word to describe asinine ideas of this magnitude:

Humongatarditude (huu-mon-ga-tard-i-tuud) noun
An attitude or belief that is so stupid, so unbelievably barren of any logic, reason or sense, that any sentient being cannot even fathom it.

However, just saying that these views are humongatarditudes won’t satisfy those who oppose same-sex marriages. So, let’s take some time to dispel some of arguments for this humongatarditude:

Note: These arguments are taken from here, may their god strike them down with lightning. Word!

---

Humongatarditude #1.

The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. A recent article in the Weekly Standard described how the advent of legally sanctioned gay unions in Scandinavian countries has already destroyed the institution of marriage, where half of today's children are born out of wedlock.

Response:
That “logic” is astounding. People have been making babies out of wedlock since the beginning of time. Not to mention the number of heterosexual marriages that are the true disgrace to the sanctity of marriage. I also fail to see how gay marriage would affect the heterosexual’s attitude on whether to get married or not. That’s likely because there IS NONE!

---

Humongatarditude #2

The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions.

Response:
Another slippery slope argument, which if you taken even a high school debate class, you know this how desperate people with no real evidence to support their claims. First off, although polygamy isn’t my bag and sounds like more trouble than fun, I’m not against it. I know this will likely have some people wagging their finger at me, but stop. If consenting adults want to have the headache that is a polygamous relationship, I’m certainly not going to tell them it’s wrong and I can’t see how it’s anyone’s business. Just like I’m not going to tell a Christian that they’re not allowed to be Christian.

---

Humongatarditude #3

An even greater objective of the homosexual movement is to end the state's compelling interest in marital relationships altogether. After marriages have been redefined, divorces will be obtained instantly, will not involve a court, and will take on the status of a driver's license or a hunting permit. With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it.

Response:
This is getting redundant. Divorce is already that way practically and it has nothing to do with whether or not Bill and Bob want to marry. Heterosexuals need to grow a pair and realize that THEY are the reason the institution of marriage is in the shitter. As a married person myself, I practically worship my wife and she me. My parents are similar. That is what marriage should be about but many if not most heterosexual people don’t take this approach. Men treat their wives like slaves or crazy bitches and women see their husbands as cheating pigs with brains in their penises. People have forgotten how to love and that blame is squarely directed at heterosexuals. Homosexuals, in my experience, when having a relationship they deem worthy of marriage, actually appreciate the union and their partners! That’s not to say gay people can’t be dicks, but the lack of opportunity for marriage seems make them take it more seriously. Gay marriage is an asset to fortifying the sanctity of marriage not a problem.

---

Humongatarditude #4

With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Textbooks, even in conservative states, will have to depict man/man and woman/woman relationships, and stories written for children as young as elementary school, or even kindergarten, will have to give equal space to homosexuals.

Response:
Again, I can’t see the trouble in teaching tolerance in public schools. We are all different and we all have to get along. Schools aren’t responsible for spreading your hate doctrine, you are. Teach your kids to hate gays at home if you want. Stop whining.

---

Humongatarditude #5

From that point forward, courts will not be able to favor a traditional family involving one man and one woman over a homosexual couple in matters of adoption. Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad. The prospect of fatherless and motherless children will not be considered in the evaluation of eligibility. It will be the law.

Response:
I’m failing to see the problem. Not to mention that currently we are a nation of fatherless children and again none of that has to do with the homos. Heterosexual males are the ones leaving women to raise children on their own.

Furthermore, what about all those children who never get adopted, asshole? More gay marriages mean more adoptions and you can’t possibly argue that no parents are better than two parents of the same gender? I’d like to see you tell an orphan the reason they have to go without a family for the rest of their lives is because of your superficial hang-up on gay people.

---

Humongatarditude #6

Foster-care parents will be required to undergo "sensitivity training" to rid themselves of bias in favor of traditional marriage, and will have to affirm homosexuality in children and teens.

Response:
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit. Since they’ve not even bothered to support this claim with any evidence, I’ll just leave it at that. Bullshit.

---

Humongatarditude #7

How about the impact on Social Security if there are millions of new dependents that will be entitled to survivor benefits? It will amount to billions of dollars on an already overburdened system. And how about the cost to American businesses? Unproductive costs mean fewer jobs for those who need them. Are state and municipal governments to be required to raise taxes substantially to provide health insurance and other benefits to millions of new "spouses and other dependents"?

Response:
What if all of a sudden millions of more heterosexual people decided to marry? Even better, what if all those gays went straight (your wet dream) and had a traditional marriage? You’d have the same problem. Further, if you are entitled to those benefits, who are you to tell others they can’t? Currently homosexuals are being taxed so that YOUR dependants are entitled. Is that fair?

You gotta love these arguments because they are never the real reason people are against gay marriage. People come up with these arguments to support a pre-existing aversion to same sex marriages. Please, if we’re going to solve this issue, be honest. The only reasons you don’t want gays to marry is because it grosses you out or your religion tells you it’s wrong. Separation of church and state, bitches, end of problem.

---

Humongatarditude #8

Marriage among homosexuals will spread throughout the world, just as pornography did after the Nixon Commission declared obscene material "beneficial" to mankind.11 Almost instantly, the English-speaking countries liberalized their laws against smut. America continues to be the fountainhead of filth and immorality, and its influence is global.

Response:
This argument is funny because it’s not saying anything to justify a ban on gay marriage. It’s simply stating that it will spread. Maybe so, maybe not. That doesn’t make it wrong; it means people’s attitudes are changing. Give me a reason being gay is bad. I can’t think of any besides the garish fashion sense but then again, I wear a t-shirt and cargos everyday of my life. I’ll say it again; the slippery slope approach to debate is the lowest of the low. Cast is aside and give me a good argument. I dare you.

---

Humongatarditude #9

Perhaps most important, the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed. The family has been God's primary vehicle for evangelism since the beginning.

Response:
I couldn’t care less. Contrary to popular belief, we are not a Christian nation and laws should never been enacted on the basis of religious beliefs. We are a melting pot of diversity and culture. Get used to it.

At least they’re being honest here. This is why people hate gays. They read somewhere in some book that god hates them too. Well, if Jesus can hang out with lepers and prostitutes, you can stomach a homosexual. Then again, you don’t actually want to be like Jesus, you just want to wag your finger at everyone who is different from you. If you actually tried to be Christ-like, we wouldn’t be having this argument.

---

Humongatarditude #10

The culture war will be over, and I fear, the world may soon become "as it was in the days of Noah" (Matthew 24:37, NIV). This is the climactic moment in the battle to preserve the family, and future generations hang in the balance. This apocalyptic and pessimistic view of the institution of the family and its future will sound alarmist to many, but I think it will prove accurate unless-unless-God's people awaken and begin an even greater vigil of prayer for our nation. That's why Shirley and I are urgently seeking the Lord's favor and asking Him to hear the petitions of His people and heal our land. As of this time, however, large segments of the church appear to be unaware of the danger; its leaders are surprisingly silent about our peril (although we are tremendously thankful for the efforts of those who have spoken out on this issue). The lawless abandon occurring recently in California, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Washington and elsewhere should have shocked us out of our lethargy. So far, I'm alarmed to say, the concern and outrage of the American people have not translated into action. This reticence on behalf of Christians is deeply troubling. Marriage is a sacrament designed by God that serves as a metaphor for the relationship between Christ and His Church. Tampering with His plan for the family is immoral and wrong. To violate the Lord's expressed will for humankind, especially in regard to behavior that He has prohibited, is to court disaster.

Response:
WTF? See my above response.

---

If you have any good arguments on why gay marriage should be banned in a society that recognizes separation of church and state, I certainly like to hear them. Please note that I’ll immediately rebut and make you look foolish.

It goes back to my creed, don’t mess with my shit and I’ll leave yours be. If we’re ever going to actually change for the better in this country, we need to honestly look at ourselves and our ideals to the core. Jesus said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” I am not a Christian, but I think this one of the most profound and undervalued statements ever made. Jesus never hated a homo, he loved all members of creation equally and you’d be wise to follow his lead. Seriously, what would Jesus do?

More on that later.

Hooray for gays!

God is Your Nachos

Questions

• Does god or the big some-sort-of-a-something have a consciousness?
• What constitutes your body?
• When does a nacho become “you”?
• Are you really what you eat?
• Stop it, seriously.

So, today I’ll be discussing my emerging theory of what the totality of existence may be. Some like to call it god, but that word is so laden with baggage and implied meaning; I typically try to avoid it. Yet, it’s as good a term as any other so be aware that anytime I use it, unless stated, I’m not referring to a specific god or even a personal god. It’s a label for the unnameable.

After reading this theory of the big some-sort-of-a-something, you may have a few reactions. First, some will think me ridiculous. Others will think its sacrilege while still others will say, “No shit! It’s obvious.”

To me, however, this recent personal revelation is exciting. It seemed to be staring me in the face for the longest time without me knowing. I like these sorts of “eureka moments”, actually I live for them. I especially like them when they’ve been hiding in plain view because the moment of realization is similar to getting a joke. It’s hilarious and it makes me feel stupid.

Kneelers, Squares and Kooks

These days, it seems that people fall into approximately 3 groups, “religiously”. There are those that maintain an older view of god, be it Jehovah, Shiva or any other personal god. These folks imagine god as some kind of spirit-person, all-seeing and knowing, etc. For these sorts of people in America, typically, god has some definite opinions/rules on how to live life. He/She is involved directly in our day to day life and if you know what’s good for you, you’ll bow in worship. Let’s call these people the Kneelers.

Then there is the opposition to this view held by atheists. In their world, god doesn’t seem plausible – hell, it seems ridiculous. So, for them, the world is meaningless and we all die alone. For these guys, life is a big pool game with things crashing into each other and life is essentially mechanical in nature. Everything must be scientifically proven to be valid. Life is a dull torture from birth to death. I’ll call these peeps the Squares.

Finally, in my heavily generalized division of religious thought, there are what I’ll call the Kooks. The Kooks eat at the buffet table of religious thought. They mix and match appealing ideas from various metaphysical schools. They, more often, don’t belong to organized religion and they certainly don’t belong to the local established religion (perish the thought!). These are the “intellectual spiritualists” who often have a very nebulous idea of god. God is a some-sort-of-a-something.

Now, I’m certainly painting with broad strokes here and there are many mixes and facets not represented. For the purposes of what I’m talking about, it’ll have to do. An important thing to note is that each group looks down at the others in its own way. The Kneelers think the Squares are sinful and the Kooks are sacrilege. They wag their fingers in disapproval. The Squares view the Kneelers as delusional and the Kooks as hippies who need to grow up and get a job. They scowl at the opposition and turn up their noses. Finally, the Kooks stroke themselves by viewing the other groups as only having part of the picture. They laugh at the others, thus trivializing their views.

In an effort for full disclosure, I submit myself as a Kook. I admit that my way is no better than any other, but the mere fact that I’m on this path seems to indicate that I find it in someway superior. Granted, it’s only superior for “me” and this way may be perfectly useless for someone of a different disposition. Nonetheless, as much as I’d like to be all-accepting and all-encompassing of all beliefs, it seems out of my capacity.

So, why have I said all this? First, it helps to have contrasting views to show just how my view works. Also, I think it’s important to see how I view other views because it is in context that my view grows. Perhaps it will be easier to understand my line of thinking if one sees my preconceptions and prejudices. In other words, you need light to see darkness and we can’t deal with one without the other.

My Old View

Also, in order to contrast my new idea, I’ll submit my older view. I’ve not necessarily abandoned this idea of the grand some-sort-of-a-something, but before I was more hardnosed about it. These days, it’s still plausible to me, but so is the new idea.

In a nutshell, I believed in an impersonal god. I felt that given the ever so intricate ways in which all things are related and dependent on each other is a form of unity. This unity means that, in a way of thinking, I am the same as you and that plant and that rock.

When a biologist studies an organism, he/she cannot study it in isolation. It is only in context to its environment that one can fully understand how an organism works. Thus, he studies a field of pattern called an organism-environment. The environment doesn’t push the organism around and conversely the organism doesn’t push the environment around. They are symbiotic and one cannot exist without the other. There can be no predator without prey.

I felt and still feel this interconnectedness is profound and applicable to all life. You can’t even think about anything without an opposite to contrast it with. So, if all is connected and basically one happening, then we can conceive that whatever the marvelous some-sort-of-a-something is, that we are it. We are god, whatever that means. I still hold this belief.

What is currently up for debate in my noggin is what exactly IS the super some-sort-of-a-something? Quite some time ago I dropped the idea of this being conscious and self-aware. It seemed more plausible that it was some kind of indescribable happening; a sort of gooey energy that kept everything happening. I couldn’t conceive of a god that cared whether I was good or evil and that would create me with all these desires, only to forbid me to indulge in them. Such a god seems like a real dick, to be frank. An all-knowing and infinitely just god is being rather unreasonable if he has created me with sinful tendencies and will damn me forever if I act on them.

I still can’t get on with that idea of god but because I was repulsed by that idea originally, I also rejected the idea of a personal or conscious god all together. I threw the baby out with the bathwater. So, this new theory is the exploration of a consciousness at the top of life.

You are the Poo

So, before we get to my theory on god or whatever name you have for it, I’d like to share the foundations for this idea of the everything-that-is. First, let’s note that a Square would say there is no evidence for god. The Kneeler would say there is. The Kook might say there is no evidence to suggest that there is no god. Forever ambiguous…

I’d say that while, like anything else, there is no absolute proof of either view, there is “proof” of a possibility. We could devise inferences based on any number of local, observable phenomena. I’ll be using the human body this time around. So first, let’s get a grip on what we define as the human body.

Let’s think about what actually constitutes our bodies. Most people think that our body is sack of skin with bones muscles and organs – basically. We think that this is one thing, a unit – but if that unit requires other things to sustain that unit (the pattern of a living organism) is the mere flesh the extent of that unit? If you’re eating a plate of nachos, at what point does that nacho become you?

Let’s take the journey of a cheese covered nacho chip (with a nice green jalapeño on top!). First it’s on your plate – certainly it’s something other than you at this moment. Correct? I disagree, but let’s keep going.

You place it in your mouth and begin chewing, saliva is secreted and even now digestion begins. Your teeth are breaking down that delicious delectable into smaller bits and your saliva is beginning to break things down at a smaller level. Are we still separate chip and person? Most folks think about this scenario as a chip IN the mouth, but not the same unit (a chip-mouth or a chip-body). Really? Okay, I’ll play along.

Once sufficiently chewed, you swallow and down the esophagus it goes into the stomach. Here it swims in gastric acid and enzymes. Small molecules (for example alcohol, if this were beer and not a nacho) are absorbed in the stomach. Are we chip-person yet? I hear you saying that part of the chip is now us or perhaps you say that part of the chip has given us energy/fuel, as if our energy was separate from our body. But, the rest of the chip is still not us! Gosh, you’re meticulous aren’t you?

Our next stop is the small intestine, most of the digestion/absorption occurs here. Then the waste is pushed on to the large intestine and afterwards, you guessed it – POO! Well, you’ll prolly say that the poo was the part that isn’t and never was us, while the other parts became us at the moment of absorption. Or further still, some will say it gave the body fuel but is somehow still not the body.

This is because a lot of people view the body as analogous to a car. It’s some kind of contraption that you put food in one end and get poo on the other. Just as you put gas one end of a car and get exhaust from the other. Though the food/gas is the fuel needed for locomotion, it is not the mechanism itself. I think this is crazy talk, but then again, I’m a Kook. Bare with me.

Body as Pattern

Ultimately, I see what we call “things” as sustainable patterns. To borrow a metaphor, we call the flame of a candle a “thing”, but is the flame on a candle the same flame as was in that locale 10 minutes ago? Or even ten seconds? A flame is a chemical reaction releasing heat and light. It is an event, happening or a pattern. Yet this pattern keeps going for a time and thus becomes sort of a constant. I see all life as these kinds of patterns and the human body is no different.

There is a turnover of cells in your body happening all the time. From what I understand, the frequency of this turnover varies from tissue to tissue, the “longest living” of these happens in your brain. Regardless, the body is forever in a state of change. You are not the exact person you were yesterday. Your pattern is roughly the same and thus identifiable, but nonetheless “you” are not the same. It is this change that gives you life. You are a whirlpool or a cloud.

So, if we consider the body a pattern, we can think of anything that is required to keep the pattern going as part of the pattern. A flame needs a candle to keep flaming. A whirlpool needs water to keep whirling. A human needs food and many other things to keep humaning. Without food you would very quickly cease to be a human and soon be a corpse. So, food is a requirement for humaning. In this way, we can see that nacho on your plate as part of your pattern.

Now, we could extrapolate this indefinitely (humans need air, so the air is you, we need the earth, etc.) and reach some interesting thoughts. Let’s table these for now because it’s off the beaten path from where I’m going (though we should discuss this later in detail). What is important at this moment is that we can see that separate things can be a whole.

Let’s go back to our digestive system. Did you know you have animals living inside your belly? Bacteria in the intestines help break down food into bits “your body” can use. Were it not for these bacteria, you’d be screwed in a big way. The process of digestion is vitally dependent on them. Yet, we call them something “other” than the body. Isn’t that funny? We refer to it as a symbiotic relationship. We swallow food, which feeds the bacteria and the bacteria poop out stuff that we can eat. You don’t even eat your own food! How strange!

So, if we can’t sustain the human pattern without bacteria, I’m compelled to see them as part of me. Well, let’s go the other direction and take an example which we ordinarily think of as our body. White bloods cells are considered us in the ordinary way of thinking. They’re wonderful little guys. They’re like little knights fighting off bad bacteria, fungus, parasites and all that. But, do you tell them which one’s to battle? Well, not consciously at least. They just do their thing. They fight infection because that’s what white blood cells do. Well, everything in your body is, in a way of looking, doing just that. Your body is like a massive community of autonomous cells which have organized themselves in a marvelous way as to be your body.

Cosmic Conscious Intelligence

Now, what am I getting at? Well, think of your conscious attention, the portion of your process that you so closely identify with. It’s a very small part of what is going on. More importantly, it is only sustainable because of the autonomous actions of millions of itty bitty guys. Without your body there would be no mind. How does this relate to my budding personal theory on the big some-sort-of-something?

Well if a bunch of cells and bacteria, each serving its own ends, when combined grows a brain which grows an intelligence, who’s to say that if you could zoom out to the totality of existence, that all these galaxies and seemingly separate things don’t grow some kind of cosmic brain? I feel the need to restate that in some official kind of way:

If the body, being made of individual autonomous constituents, can result in an intelligence, then the entire scope of existence being also made of individual autonomous constituents, may also result in an intelligence.

Now, you’ll notice I’ve put a big “may” in there. As stated before, this is not proof of god, only proof of a possibility.

Time to Repent?

Now, before someone uses this to start hitting people over the heads with the good book, there are some significant notes to make. Let’s say for the sake argument, that this in fact true. The totality of existence has a consciousness. Some may think that means that god wants us to be good people and follow the ten commandments, etc. This is a broad and unwarranted jump.

Let’s go back to our bodies. As previously noted, you don’t consciously “will” your cells to do certain things. In fact most of what your body does eludes your conscious mind. You can observe the overall body, but you can’t wag your finger at a white blood cell if it stops performing its “duties”.

So, in the just the same way that we are not really aware of our little “disciples” there is a good chance that if there is a Cosmic Conscious Intelligence, it also doesn’t really “know” about us. That’s not to say that a CCI couldn’t know about us, either seems plausible. For whatever the great some-sort-of-something is or isn’t, at this juncture it is beyond our ability to comprehend it fully. All of our explanations are mere symbols pointing to a reality we seem unfit to fully grasp.

Forever ambiguous…

Jerry Springer’s Final Thought

Don’t turn your nose up at your poo,
For that dirty turd is in-fact you!
I’m sure it’s true, through and through,
Boo-dee boop dee boop-dee boo!

AIG Gets 85 Billion, Needy Get the Bird

So, I just read about the feds bailing out AIG with a whopping $85 billion. Amazing! All of this because "A disorderly failure of AIG could add to already significant levels of financial market fragility".

Now, I know the "financial market" is important but what about real people? It occurs to me that if our government can drop $85 down AIG's g-string in a crisis ($300 billion when combined with similar bailouts), it should be able to help our poor and starving in a much bigger way.

Let's do some quick math. I just read here that our homeless population is at around 3.5 million (but I didn't look for multiple sources). Let's say instead of saving some mal-run financial mogul, we put that directly in the hands of the homeless to get them back on their feet. Just taking AIG's $85 billion, that would amount to $24,285 per person! I think that'd go a long way in helping America be what it always says it wants to be.

Dramatic Aside

What's that you say, Johnny McWallStreet? Oh yeah! I forgot! Homeless people would just waste it on booze and crack cocaine! That's why they're homeless in the first place. They're just lazy and need to get a job. That's so silly of me.

Ok, I've got a better idea. We need to get these lazy sobs some jobs. But it's tricky, because they're REAL lazy. We need to find some jobs where they wouldn't have to do much. Real work is too demanding.

Ah! ¡Solución magnífica!! Let's put them on Wall Street! An infant could make those decisions and let's face it, how much worse could it get?

End Scene

I suppose what bothers me most is the amount of effort we exhaust for the sake of saving money. We have huge businesses dedicated to nothing more than handling money, trading money and spending money. We pay people to watch those people who watch the money. But money isn't actual wealth, it's a damn symbol.

To paraphrase Alan Watts (again), "money is of the same nature of reality as inches or grams, it's a unit of measurement". We're letting people starve and die for the sake of a symbol, a referent and we're all to blame.

I'm not a Christian, but seriously, what the hell would Jesus do? More on this later...

The Large Hadron Collider and the Hubris of Science

So, apparently tomorrow (September 10th), CERN will be circulating the first protons in the Large Hadron Collider in an attempt to find the elusive Higgs Boson. Why should you care?

Well, some would say you should care because of the ever so slim chance that it could create a miniature black hole and of course destroy us all. As I understand it, however, this exciting possibility is mostly fantasy. In the remote chance that it does create a miniature black hole, it would be incredibly unstable and be gone in a blink of an eye.

Why you should really care is that there is a tremendous amount of scientific knowledge riding on this experiment, namely the standard model. For those of you unfamiliar, I'll give you the basic gist as described by an artist. I highly recommend you read all about it though, it's terribly interesting.

The Artist's Gist

The standard model is basically about the smallest constituents of "matter", the building blocks of well, everything. These particles make up everything you see. The standard model is the mathematics that tie it all together. Imagine Einstein's E=mc2 but several pages in length and completely mind numbing.

So, what's the problem? Well basically the standard model seems to allude that no particles have mass at that level. But, we experience mass on a daily basis, so where's it coming from? In order to compensate for this, there is what's called the Higgs Field. Basically, this is some kind of field which permeates everything and which "slows down" some elementary particles, giving them mass. Now, the only way to verify this field's existence is to find it's corresponding particle: enter the Higgs Boson. This particle has been labeled "The God Particle" because it's the keystone to making the standard model work and "completing" our understanding of the basic building blocks of nature.

These alleged particles where only in existence during the Big Bang, so in order to verify them, we need to smash protons together at such a speed as to break them apart , singling out the Higgs Boson. Up to now, we've not had particle accelerators powerful enough to do the trick. The Large Hadron Collider developed by CERN has this potential. But, the success/failure of this experiment is more than just possibly finding the Higgs Boson.

As I understand it, if we do not find this Higgs Boson in this experiment, it simply means it doesn't exist. In turn, it unravels the Standard Model and science has got some splainin' to do, Lucy. So, tomorrow we'll apparently find out if our greatest minds over the past decades have actually figured out life or whether our universe is far more mysterious and elusive that anyone could have imagined.

I'll have more to say on this later but sufficed to say that I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the latter option. I have a hunch that this cosmic circumstance we find ourselves in is far more complex than we can ever truly comprehend and thus maintaining the mystery of life and a humble attitude to it's wonder.

What Makes Being Human Significant?

This is a mild break from the regular format. Rather than purging my ideological ramblings, I'd like to get some feedback from you lot. What do you like about being human? What makes life as a human worth the trouble? Here in the states, in spite of our current situation, we are allowed access to a great many wonderful things about being human.

If that seems vague, I'll share a few off the top of my noggin in no particular order:

• Love (Romantic, Friendly, Family, Etc.)
• Relationships (Building a Story Together, Being a Part of Something)
• Art, Music, Delicious Food
• Hot Tea
• Thinking, Philosophy
  
• Spirituality (Regardless of Origin)
• Eureka! Moments
• Observing & Interacting with Other Species (Dog, Fish, Plants, Nature)
• Enjoyment of Sex (Very few species do!)
• Learning, Discovery
• Creating Art, Music, Food, Etc.
• Having Fun! Celebrations!
• Helping Those in Need
• Hugs!
• Kisses!
• A Feeling of Freedom and Liberty
  

There is just so much more to list, but it's a start. If you're wondering where this is going, I'll tell you. I have an infant theory beginning to bubble. So far, it's something like this:

If we can figure out what it means to be human, what makes it special, what makes it joyous, what makes it "worth it", then we can devise a method of living that exemplifies these vitals. It will guide us in prioritizing problems, etc.

So often, we focus on the negative, what bugs us (for which I'm completely guilty). How about rather than thinking about what we don't want people doing, we focus on things everyone should be able to enjoy?

So, what's your list?

Belief, Fact & Authority

Questions:

• How do we distinguish facts?
• What is our criterion for placing authority?
• Is faith and belief necessary?
• This sounds dull, will it be?

When I was an infant
I saw mother and I saw father
And they were my deities

When I was a boy
I saw priest and I saw president
And they were my devils

When I became man
I saw quark and I saw cosmos
And they were my undoing

What the hell? Sorry, folks, that poetry fart jumped out of nowheres. Nowheres, I tells ya! It sounds really pretentious don’t it? Sounds familiar too, hope I didn’t just plagiarize. Perhaps it’s just an overused formula.

In my defense, I was just sitting here figuring out how to start this entry. I was going to tell a story about origins of belief and authority. I was going to tell my story. So, I began with, “When I was an infant” and sometime between then and now it became a little poetry turd. Fortunately, it feels pretty representational, so I’m staying with it.

In this entry, I’m going to try and arrange elements which, I feel, form a core aspect of my outlook. First, I’m afraid we’re going to have to discuss our senses to start building this from the ground up.

Part 1: The Senses

So, when I was an infant (hah!), before I had science to tell me what my senses were doing, I experienced my senses pretty intensely. It must have been the craziest multimedia light-show ever. Now with smell AND touch! Dig that soundtrack!

I wish I could remember the moment I was first put in a nice soft, cozy blanket. That had to be so intensely soft and cozy. It’s no wonder I love sleeping in as an adult. Yay for naps!

So, then at some point, in my growth from diapers to mustache wax, someone told me a story. They told me a fantastic tale of how my senses worked! They told me there was a spectrum of light that I couldn’t see. They said there are frequencies I couldn’t hear. In other words, there was a whole mess of shit going on beyond the world of my senses. My senses didn’t tell the whole story. They were filters for my experience of this existence.

Thus, I took this view point. I accepted that my experience of existence was limited. It is, of course, important to note that this may be a mistake. Perhaps I’ve been lied to, but until I reenact all the experiments that support this line of thought (no current plans to do so), I cannot really confirm or deny it.

So, why do I take this viewpoint?

I suppose it’s because it’s the most convincing story I’ve heard so far for this phenomena. We could argue forever about why I perceive this as more convincing. Perhaps, a pan dropped on my head as a child, which dented my brain, which shifted the focus of neural connections, which strengthened the area of my brain which would someday be the area that deals with this subject matter. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter. I’m still a battered human with these ideological leanings. Allow me to lean a little further.

Part 2: Facts & Knowing

If I accept that I don’t have the whole story because of my filters (you might include the brain in that group), then I must admit that I don’t “know” anything for certain. It’s like I’m watching a movie. I can see what’s taking place in the picture frame and I can infer what is happening as a whole. I may feel like I “know” who the killer is. I can sort it all out, but the real killer may still be just outside the picture frame.

This realization means I can only make mildly educated guesses about life’s phenomena. I can only infer from the available evidence, via the senses, which we’re holding to be limited. One might even say “flawed”. Thinking this, I feel obliged to look at other humans in the same way. They’re just as limited and flawed, fundamentally.

Thusly, if I’m inferring that other humans have the same basic set of limited-range inputs (senses), I conclude that others don’t “know” anything either. Isn’t that convenient?

Aside: Now, by pointing out that we “know” nothing, am I then saying that we should throw out all our “knowledge”? Give up? Go have a beer? No. We humans have indeed done marvelous things by inferring underling patterns from our limited data set.

Obviously, this inquisitive and creative way of getting acquainted with life’s mysteries is highly valuable within the realm of humans. We can use these observations to predict events (to a degree), manipulate our surroundings to suit our needs and all sorts of fun/useful stuff (art!).

What I’m trying to get at, is that when we get caught up with hubris, I feel it’s a good idea to take a step back and get the big picture. We are very small, very mortal and very limited.

Humility. Plain and simple. I think it helps ground a person and helps us from getting overzealous. If you ever need some humility, take a gander at some photos of space. You’ll feel small and stupid in an instant.

So, in the grand scheme, there are no facts. A fact is an abstract concept that we have mistaken for the truth (another “unknowable”). I am then compelled to conclude that all ideas whether scientific, religious, philosophical or other are essentially equal in probability. Now, we have a convention of holding an idea on which the majority agrees to be more valid than a less popular idea. In general, this tends to work out pretty well because though we are limited individually, the combined viewpoints and observations of a mass of individuals gets us a great deal further to getting the whole picture.

Let’s go back to our movie analogy for a moment. Previously, we had one camera, one viewpoint. If we had ten cameras all filming the same event, our understanding of the event rises considerably. One or more of us might actually see the killer pull the trigger though our lens.

There are however still limitations to ten observers, or even a million. None of the observers will know what the killer or the victim is thinking. So, while we may have caught the killer red handed, we can still only infer a motive. No matter how hard we try, the human collective can never seem to get the whole story. Further more, how can we as individuals trust other observers are speaking truthfully? Even if they are, how can we be certain that the angle to which they observed provided the right evidence? Perhaps their lens is defective. Who do we hold as the expert?

Part 3: Authority

There was a time, allegedly, when all the top “authorities” on the subject “knew” that Earth was the center of the universe. Then some folks came along and said, “Nope, nope. Wait. We figured it out. The SUN is the center! Just watch through our telescope (another filter), see how we revolve around it?”

These days, we consider ourselves and our solar system nowhere near the center (depending on what you call the center). Perhaps tomorrow we’ve think differently. Who knows?

So, if past authorities have been wrong, how can we decipher if who we hold as our current authorities are correct now? I myself, with all honesty, cannot.

I think a better, more useful question to ask is who decides who is the authority?

When I was an infant (oh dear), my parents were my authorities. More than that, they were my world. Then I started grade school and some of that authority was transferred to my teachers and my principle. My priest was granted authority over spiritual matters, who resigned the supreme authority to Yahweh. My government was granted authority over social and other matters. As I aged, I started wondering, “Who gave these people dominion over me?”

Naturally, I felt quite foolish when I when I found out. It was me!

Egg square on face.

Some might argue that I was tricked into giving it up. In the end, I can only blame myself for any misplaced authority. It was I who bowed in submission to mother, father, teacher, priest, god and government. Naturally, placing authority to a degree is vital and beneficial.

For example, by giving submission to my parents, they showed me how to love, taught me valuable skills as person and infinitely more. I not only imparted authority to them, I gave them the responsibility of taking care of me. This turned out to be an immense benefit for which I’m forever grateful. Lucky for me, my parents had my best interests at heart. Placing authority in them was a top-notch idea! What a smart baby I was!

Religion was another story. While again, I’m grateful for the experience of being raised Catholic (it shaped me also), I no longer place religious authority in the church. As I began questioning my beliefs (around 18), I soon found that these guys knew no more about god than I did. They were all just passing down a rumor in which they had placed authority. Very few, seemed to have actual experience with god. It was then that I decided to remove that authority and place it back to where I felt it ultimately belongs.

Me.

There is much I’d like to say about authority regarding religion, science and government, but this starting to become a tangent, so let’s get back on track. Perhaps, all these ideas are coming together. I now take for granted that no one person has the full story and that I am in control of who I grant authority. This is extremely empowering yet humbling at the same time. A contradiction to be sure, but then again I’ve always been one. There is, however, one last bit of this particular puzzle I’d like to address: faith.

Part 4: Faith, Belief and All the Rest

I’m not necessarily talking about religious faith, but that is one of facets to which this pertains. I think we underestimate just how much faith we show on a daily basis and just how vital it is in human life. In my personal dogma of the moment, the absence of perceivable facts and the arbitrary nature of authority, points to conclusion that all our beliefs (religious, scientific, etc.) are indeed equally signs of faith. Faith placed in priests. Faith placed in scientists. Faith placed in elected officials. Faith placed in your fellow humans. They say faith moves mountains. Belief is even stronger.

Belief makes things happen. It was a belief that a better life was possible which gave a new world colony the balls to secede from a king across the pond. It was belief in engineering that made skyscrapers rise. A few individuals believed one day, humans would fly and that belief turned into dedication which gave way to the fruition of that belief. It is belief that drives us. It quite literally makes our world.

Like most things in life, there is a downside. Belief also has been behind countless acts of religious-based violence. A belief that Africans were subhuman gave way to the disgusting enslavement of an entire race. A belief in WMDs got us into a war we can’t seem to find our way out of.

Like fire, belief can light the way. Kept unchecked, it can scorch us to the core.

Part 5: End It Already!

My hope is that these keystones of my outlook effectively balance me. Like Gautama Buddha, to whom I’ve allowed some religious authority, I try to follow the middle path. Mostly, I’d like people “realize” that we’re all scoundrels, all flawed and let there be honor among thieves. I hope that with self-empowerment; though authority in one’s self, yet hewn with humility, will help grow a world more peaceful, more fulfilling and more joyous to live in. If belief made us fly, let’s believe we can soar.

Disclaimer:
The obvious disclaimer is that in “fact”, I “know” none of this to be true. That’s ok by me.

Why I Rant

Questions:

• What’s my deal?
• Why do I continually complain?
• Why is I so durn “Un-American”?
• Why can’t I just suck it up and fall in line?

Well, while no one else on the net bothers to visit me, slowly I am making this blog known to family and friends. In fact, I just now decided to take the plunge and send my Mum a link. Scarey, huh?

So, it occurred to me that, out of context, these posts may sound subversive and “Un-American”. While normally these observations and accusations (though incorrect) don’t bother me in the slightest (I even indulge them playfully at times), as this blog is about getting at “the real stuff of me”, I feel compelled to add some context. So, Mum, this post is for you:

First off, I don’t hate America. I don’t particularly take to hating anyone. I happen to like who I am, and I would be foolish to negate the vast influence of living in America has had on me. This country has afforded me great opportunities and I’m forever grateful. Positive and negative, it has all shaped me.

I am, however, very disgruntled with our government and its distrust of citizens. In this, I’m not specifically referring to Iraq; I see that as a symptom of a larger issue. Even Bush himself is a mere symptom. It came before Bush and before his father.

For this, I’m reminded of the American Revolution and the spirit and philosophies that helped it come to pass (Note to Self: Get reacquainted with John Locke). In a nutshell, I feel that the significance is less the independence from Britain but more on personal liberty and the absurd idea that one man should rule another. When we think of “We the People”, it’s a strong statement that places authority in each of us and trusts the people to create a society that they wish to live in. We are our own rulers and government should be social contract rather than a list of laws handed down from a crown.

One of the main problems, as I see it, is that we’ve lost or let go of this inspired American spirit for the comfort of perceived security. I feel that modern politicians are acting more like rulers and less like public servants. In short, I feel like our modern government doesn’t trust me enough to make my own decisions. I’m a “grown-ass man”, for crying out loud and I don’t need or want a babysitter. Thanks, but no thanks.

I’d like to quote Henry David Thoreau, someone who influenced me greatly as an adolescent and someone who I’m thankfully re-discovering these days (due to my wife):

“Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then?”

If I were to distill my personal government philosophy regarding these things it would be something like as follows:

“What I (as a consenting adult) do is my business and no one else’s, until it infringes on another citizen’s rights.”

Or to put more coarsely, don’t mess with my shit and I won’t mess with yours. I find it a great guide in sorting out what “political” issues need politicizing and which don’t. Gay marriage doesn’t infringe on my liberties in any conceivable way and I think those that make a huff about it are mostly expressing their personal distaste through the guise of “protecting the sanctity of marriage”. If that was the real goal, there are far more heterosexuals tarnishing the good name of marriage than there are homosexuals. Focus on them, Bush. More on this later.

The grand point of this whole thing is that I’m not trying to overthrow or destroy America. I want America to return to its infant spirit and to be introspective, innovative and inclusive. We evolve technology and other aspects of being human at a rapid pace, why do we not evolve our government?

I want us, as citizens, as people and as neighbors to take a long hard look at the way we do things from the ground up. How do we want to live? Let’s renew our dedication to individual liberty and let’s help grow a country and a world where everyone counts, where we “get over ourselves” and show a true respect for our fellow humans.

It is in this context that I critique and attack aspects of American life. I’m not looking to tear us down I want to help grow us up.

In closing, please don’t lock me up, I mean no harm.

The Takers

Here's a quickie.

I had to fly to L.A. recently (unfortunately), and I was awestruck at what WE did:


Zoom out, cause it's a mind fuck:


Keep going...



It made the idea of humanity as a virus hit home unlike it had before when just a concept. I mean, what kind of fool takes the elegant, graceful, exquisite, marvelous, dumbfounding intricacy and asymmetrically beauty of...




...and turns it into a fucking grid?

It bothers me that the patterns we humans make seem alien and completely unlike anything I see in "nature". Why are humans so damn weird? We must be like a bad rash our earth got when consorting with unsavory types. So, perhaps we're the destroyers. We hate to think it, but really and truly, the advancement and encroachment of humanity serves only to help humans. For everyone else, humanity only makes things worse. For everyone else, humanity is the four horsemen.

I think it's funny how we go to the movies to be scared silly of a parasitic alien invasion where the aliens travel from one planet to another. They suck it dry, leaving a dead husk and move on to the next planet. Wow! Those guys are assholes!



I'll avoid stating my, now obvious, conclusion from this idea. Or did I?

BUT

Wow. That's a big but.

I've made an artificial distinction between humanity and nature. We like to do that as humans but we and everything we do is part and parcel of nature. So, how can we act unnaturally? How can we do something not in our nature?



Can someone out there answer these...

Questions:

• Are we the destroyers?
• Can a human actually act contrary to his/her nature?
• Why are our patterns so weird?
• Why are we obsessed over lines, squares and circles?
• Why not spirals?
• Why do we consume the earth so rapidly?
• Can we stop?
• Should we?
• Why doesn't this kind of stuff bother most people?
  

Spiralical Pattern in Time

Questions:

• Is pattern in time cyclical or spiralical?
• What the hell is “spiralical”?
• Did you just make up a word?
• Why should we care?

Oh dear me, I was thinking this was going to be a swift post, but my mind is already complicating things, as per usual. So, let’s just talk about trends for this moment. People say trends go in cycles, yes? Fashion trends always pop up again in a few decades, Hollywood likes to remake old movies, and thus we march on into the infinite future. How depressing, it must look something like this:

We apply this line of thought everywhere. The seasons go in cycles and Winter always gives way to Spring. We’re on a yearly cycle with the sun. We talk about the circle of life. This sort of thing I’ll be calling “pattern in time” and so we imagine time as a ring. Though it’s boring, we take comfort in that we know we’ll be coming back around at any moment. It’s confined and safe. We model our lifestyles after these cycles.

I think this is crap.

I like to think of pattern in time as a spiral. So, how is this different?

Fashion trends don’t reoccur verbatim of their previous life. We take inspiration from a previous trend and build upon it (even if slightly) and thus it isn’t arriving at the same place on a ring. It’s evolving. (Oh shit, he said the “e” word!)

Hollywood doesn’t literally put the exact same movie in theatres for a remake. They remake it, take inspiration from the previous film and build on it (Rambo XXXIII: 33rd Blood). So too, does Winter not give way to the same Spring that already happened! We have mild Winters, harsh ones and freak ones, each unique among it’s ancestors but all sharing the same DNA.

Further more, these cycles will not endure. This solar system will not be around forever and certainly the “cycles” we see on Earth (seasons, day/night, etc.) will be around for even less time. So, let’s get down with some spiralical time:

What the hell is “spiralical”, you ask? Why good madams, sirs and transgenders, it’s a word I just now made up. It relates to spiral in the same way cyclical relates to cycle. So if cyclical is defined as:

“Recurring in cycles or periods of time in which certain events or phenomena repeat themselves in the same order at the same interval.”

Let’s hack in our spiral, so that spiralical means:

“Patterns in time occur in a spiral form, in which periods of time, certain events or phenomena imitate previous periods or events.”

Wow. Really dry stuff, huh? So, why do I feel this to be profound enough expound it on my soap box? Well, I’ll tell you.

If time is a cycle, if it is a ring, then events are simply boring reoccurrences. They’re a nuisance. They’re like your daily chores. They aren’t special! Further, I believe it to be a misleading symbol in that it implies permanence where there is none. It’s mechanical. It’s clean. It’s sterile. Static.

But, if pattern in time is spiralical, every moment counts. We will not occur again, not in precisely this way at least. Even now, you’re body is changing constantly; you’re literally are not the same person you were a moment ago. This symbol for pattern in time is organic and dynamic. Everything is new; even if inspired by the past and we remain connected to our ancestors along the sprawling ivy of time.

I know some object to this line of thought. It’s gloomy and square to point out the finality of it all. Some might also dislike time spiraling out of control into the abyss. It’s spooky to think of “everything” being “over”. Alas, in my mind, it seems so. Perhaps I’m wrong, but let’s explore this symbol a little more.

You’ll notice a feature in the spiral, something like inflation. With each pass we are further away from our origin and with each pass we increase the amount of deviation from our last pass. That might be getting a little too abstract, let’s try to visualize it.

So, I’ve plotted some points on our spiral. Depending on what scale of pattern we’re thinking about, these intervals can be looked at differently. Here’s the gist. If we take the center as our origin, deviation from that point implies change.

Let’s take it from the pattern of human development. We can think of it like this, if G is pre-caveman days, F might be the beginnings of man but E might be the Middle Ages. Since F and G are closer in proximity things aren’t too different looking (in context!). But, between F & E is 1.5x the distance from F & G. So, we see an increase in change. The landscape of Earth looks quite different with knights and kings and serfs building castles. Even more so if we take our current point in time (around D, maybe?). We, as humans, don’t exhibit hardly any of the same patterns we made in our ape man days and we’ve drastically modified our environment since then (mostly for the worse). By the time we reach A, we might not recognize ourselves at all. Robot-Bodies! Boogedy-Boo!

Now, I’m not saying that all patterns we can observe have the same rate of this inflation. The pattern of seasons would have as much lower rate of inflation and thus produce more evenly and closely placed intervals. So, seasons exhibit roughly the same behavior from year to year with minor differences (in context!) in the event/period of time. But, as our planet ages and the sun begins to die, we’ll see increasingly drastic and ultimately fatal changes in the seasons until the pattern that was the seasons is no longer recognizable. It has become part of another pattern.

Or it always was. Wink!

Notes:
There are a few problems that arise with this symbol. For example, what happens when a drastic event obliterates a pattern? Perhaps the spiral ends? Does that even make sense? I think most of the issues arises with how we look at time and break it into arbitrary chunks. Perhaps if we gather all the patterns in time together, we’d see a fractal pattern rather than a spiral. Or perhaps it looks like white noise. Who knows? More on this later.

Disclaimer:
I’m certainly not applying this symbol scientifically (though one might, I won’t… for now). I’m presenting it as an outlook. A myth. A simile. Pattern in time is like a spiral. In this way, I’m not trying to explain specific phenomena so much as provide a way of looking at these things that is helpful and adds to the enjoyment of life. If we break this symbol down too low, like any symbol, it’s too rudimentary to accurately describe anything. Just as if I draw a picture of a face, no matter how detailed I make it, I have not made a physical head, but just a drawing that represents a head. So, the spiral is not pattern in time, but a symbol pointing towards that concept. Concept! Tangent!

A Declaration of Intent

Questions:

• Why make this blog?
• What do I hope to achieve?
• Where do you get off saying this, asshole?

If you’ve stumbled upon this fresh slice of cheese, I’m not sure how. As I haven’t quite figured out the theme of this blog, I’m not making it a point to shove it in peoples faces like the rampant and self-promotion whoring I do with my art and animation. I could say that this a personal blog and not art-focused but let’s face it, since I approach life from that angle, I’ll be using art to help me express whatever it is I’m trying to express should it suit the need. I also think visuals help people absorb things more quickly and more effectively in some instances. I won't hesitate using any means available to drive points home.

My rough aim is compiling my various thoughts on various subjects and using it to look at my overall slant on life. Its primary function is a mirror so as to get at look at myself from the outside or in as much outside as I can get. So often I develop my outlook in bits and pieces, reacting to small aspects of the whole. It makes me wonder what it all looks like put together (likely a big tangle of hypocrisy). Also, I am a dorky hermit who enjoys thinking about philosophy, religion and the problems of life. So, while I can express certain things through art, I enjoy playing with the written word to explore subjects in a different way. Hopefully this blog will help quench the amateur philosopher in me.

I’m also doing this exercise in blog form because I’ve got an obese ego. Blogs by their very nature imply that the authors have the audacity to assume you, the reader, actually give a shit about his/her thoughts. I play at humility often and try to keep myself in check to avoid looking the fool but in my deepest thoughts I often shake my head at the world disapprovingly. I typically float between feeling like I should act in accordance with this desire for social change and feeling like we’re all fools. Any attempt I make to “help” will more likely just make a bigger mess. Add in that at some point the sun will burn up and some time after the universe will come to a quiet pond-ripple end and I’m left feeling apathetic again.

So I must admit in all honestly that I have a fantasy of some people reading this, digging it and helping promote these thoughts and putting them into practice. I have lots of fantasies of this nature and in the future I’ll be posting some. Many will seem unrealistic and utopian, but when brainstorming I like to indulge all ideas and work them out, letting the one left standing as the strongest. The problem is that I’m an average man of average intelligence. So, perhaps some smart person will see one of my fantasies and work it out and fashion it into something useful. Again, another fantasy. As an artist, it’s something I specialize in.

Notes:

Here are some annoying habits I have that you’ll need to put up with should you desire reading these ramblings. I like using quotes, usually to denote that I’m using the word as a label rather than its conventional meaning. Also, you might find some “creativity” (see that?) in how I break things up and use punctuation, etc. I like to play with words and I tend to think in broad brush strokes so I’ll be using the English language in a loose fashion. Sometimes I make up words too. It’s fun. When this happens, I’ll do my best to define these words for you.

Disclaimer:

Get used to posts ending with disclaimers. I regard myself as average and prone to screwing up. So, with every “brilliant” theory I have, there is in the back of my mind lingering the possibility that I am ill-informed, crazy or just plain wrong. I’m not a writer, scientist, theologian or a professional in anything but art (even that’s debatable). I make no claims to the validity of anything you find on this blog. This is an exercise.