May 12, 2015

Where I Stand On Popular Issues

Haven't posted for quite a while. I feel a little guilty about that, but since not one person has either emailed me or tweeted me about my lack blogging, the guilt doesn't linger very long.

Pretty sure I did a piece about my worldviews a few years ago, but I'll be first to admit that my opinions can change based on new information (at least new information to me) so in some cases my views have changed, very moderately I think.

Evolution is fact. Creationists who reject evolution and especially those who reject an ancient earth are starting to turn people away from religion. A lot of that has to do with the internet. When creationists show off their willful ignorance by repeating AIG crapola they aren't just met with LOLs, usually someone with even a basic understanding of science refutes their idiocy and in many times link an article or two as well. The ass kicking is left in cyberspace for inquiring minds to see, many who have been indoctrinated with YEC nonsense. The questioning begins, and those capable of even escaping the brainwashing even for a minute begin to start doubting. And doubting and fact finding can lead to leaving religion and even *gasp* atheism. So keep up the good work internet cretards.

Global Warming aka climate change. Why is there such an overlap between evolution deniers and global warming deniers? Hmm. Aside from that, my opinion on GW is that it is happening and man is contributing to it. How much man is contributing is the only thing up for debate and it is very difficult to quantify. When I come across a denier I like to ask this: Where does man made carbon go? I don't think I've ever had that question answered yet, which I believe, says something about the deniers.

Gay marriage. Here is an old joke, but it is a foundation of my beliefs on the subject: Gay couples have every right to be just as miserable as heterosexual couples so let them get married. Scientific research coupled with common sense makes it pretty clear that in the overwhelming majority of cases, homosexuality like red headedness, is not a choice. But cretinists and even more moderate religious folk need it be a choice so they can attempt to justify their idiotic belief system. I find it really funny that it is Baptists that have the highest divorce rates and their traditional marriage claim also has no merit as the first recorded marriages were Egyptian royalty who came up with the idea of keeping wealth in the family by allowing fathers to marry daughters or brothers marrying sisters, and then marriage evolved to the purchasing of brides.

To me, marriage should be between two consenting adults...end of story. Polygamy shouldn't be recognized by the government however because it gives a people involved an extra ability to scam for government handouts.

Speaking of economics. I don't think a system that gives so much in social assistance as to make someone question if they are better off getting a paying job or staying unemployed is a very good system, and it needs to be corrected.

I think Canadian government workers, especially teachers, are over paid (especially when taking into consideration benefits). Apparently there is a lot more demand for teacher positions than supply. Economics 101 dictates that salaries are out of whack when this happens and there are other job alternatives out there. In Ontario, I cringe when they work to rule or strike. Something is broke in our system.

As for politics. All leaders who get to the top or near the top are corrupt compared to the general population. They have to be, or they won't raise enough money to become contenders. They have to suck up to their contributors and to the people most likely who will vote for them. This means they make decisions to appease oil companies, for instance, and end up punting other energy alternatives down the middle. It also means they have to "act" dumb by not admitting they believe that homosexuality is not a choice, or that climate change is a science scam, or that they either don't believe in evolution or they are agnostic about it.

In Ontario, the Liberal Party has spent years bowing to public servants by giving them more money and benefits than they would ever get in the private sector. Their party leaders could literally be caught robbing a bank and still get elected because public servants (which is a large over sized percentage of the workforce here) would be silly to vote against them.

Gun control. I wonder if more highly evolved civilizations on other planets still have guns or the necessity to have them. They are still a necessary evil on our planet, thanks to crazed leaders and crazed ideologies. Gun control seems to work well in Canada but can be improved. It can be improved an awful lot in the USA though. I just don't get their gun culture, it isn't 1776 anymore. I think someone buying a gun should go through a process that is somewhere between buying a house and buying a nuke, and there should be records for where every weapon is or should be. That would be a good start.

Abortion. This is a tough one where I can see two sides, not the religious side though. Every sperm and egg is a potential human if you really want to take an extreme position. That means that semen on a KleenX being flushed down the toilet is some sort of genocide. Pretty silly stuff. I'm against murder, but where do we draw the line? I don't think I have any memories of being inside the womb. That being stated, I tend to think that a fetus becomes a human the day that it can live without its mother outside the womb using the best technical advances. Until that time, it is completely the woman's choice.

Prayer in school or government. Alienating and just not right. No matter how universal the prayer is. And what? If you allow the prayer of one religion, you have to allow all of them. There is no time to accomplish anything after that. Prayer should be conducted anytime one wants....silently, or as loud as one wants if you in a place of worship or one's home.

Islamophobia. Stupid term because a phobia implies irrational fear. Though some phobias have evolved from being a fear to actual hate or have erroneously always implied hate. Take homophobia for instance, the true term implies that one is scared to be around gays or touch gays but in society it means hate gays in many instances. Those who call people Islamophobic, I think, are calling people Muslim haters and almost purposely trying to paint as irrational bigots, anyone who is genuinely criticizing what many Muslims believe and the actions they take. There is overlap. There are some people who hate Muslims and also hate their beliefs and actions. However, it is completely rational to fear and take steps to prevent what Islam brings to the table. You have to have your head in your ass not to.

Israel. Israel exists. What is happening in France right now, justifies its necessity to be a Jewish majority state at this time. Israel, like every country on this planet got its start using might and negotiations. If one is against Israel, they might as well be against every country in the universe. I'd like to see a two state solution, but the Palestinian side seems to only want a one state Muslim majority state or just the annihilation of Israel. And it is unreasonable to invoke Right of Return when refugees are to include children, grand children and great children of refugees (where the children weren't even born in Israel). They are the only ones who define refugees this way. There is so much propaganda out there and so much hypocrisy, I feel a need to defend Israel even though I have no intention of ever going there.

Taxation. I believe in paying for infrastructure and education, etc. I just think the taxation system is overly complicated and should have been simplified yesterday. I can't worry if accountants would lose their jobs because of much needed reform, but it should be simple as to what you make, and what you can deduct (per whatever industry, just allow a certain percentage deduction and it doesn't matter if the money was actually spend or if more money was spent, etc.).

Prostitution and drugs. Prostitution and many drugs should be legalized, not government regulated but enforced vigorously. Hard addictive drugs like cocaine and heroine should be banned outright (too much social cost and crime comes from these drugs). Large fines and much tougher jail sentences should be imposed as a deterrence. Other than that, the government should have a really decent source of new income through taxing hookers and pot.

Relationships. Don't waste time with people who bring you down or are negative a lot more than they are positive. The secret to a long marriage is to be able to admit you are wrong even when there is no chance in hell you are wrong.

Death Penalty. I believe that certain scum should be vaporized ASAP. I can see not sentencing domestic murderers who may have been driven by emotion to death. I can also very much see not sentencing those convicted solely on circumstantial evidence to death. But when there is no doubt I'm all for it. Partly deterrence and partly vengeance. You don't have to love me for thinking this way. It wouldn't bother me at all if the likes of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was impaled on pay for view (in fact, I see the practicality of it on a few levels). As for Sister Helen Prejean who says that someone who is incapable of killing someone who is on death row with their own hands must be against the death penalty, well, I could never kill an animal but I still eat meat. The latter statement means I'm not perfect. I really can't stand the slaughter of animals but I don't think I've ever turned away a bacon sandwich. And when it comes to game hunters I'm in Ricky Gervais' camp. There is something off with game hunters, I can't respect them.

God. There is no evidence for God or anything supernatural. I'm truly open to evidence, but I'm as certain as one can be, there never will be evidence for either God or supernatural events. I believe we have evolved a susceptibility to believe supernatural explanations, it is in our hard wiring. Even I catch myself sometimes thinking that if I move or get up during a rally from a sports team I want to win that I will some how effect the outcome. Totally irrational and I usually snap out of it quicker the older I get.

Moses, the Exodus, Noah's Ark and Jesus. No evidence points me in the direction there was a historical Jesus or Moses. Noah's Ark story is ridiculous, and there is a lot of evidence that indicates other things happened in the time that the Exodus was supposed to happen, and nothing outside the bible to back it up either. Just as every new scientific and archaeological finding fits evolution and an ancient earth, every new finding seems to put more and more distance between reality and a historical Jesus or Moses.

Moonbats. Often very functional and even intelligent in a lot of areas. However they are screwed up in the head when figuring out justice. They tend to automatically believe that the victim is always the person with the least, no matter why a conflict happened and who started the conflict. Blaming everyone but the perpetrator. They blame upbringing, the government, society for even the most heinous actions by a person or a group. They are the first to cry out Islamophobia and the first to go after Israel because the person with the least is always the victim. I'm not sure if they got too much breast milk when they were kids or too little, but either way I still think that Moonbats like those who commit heinous acts are responsible for their own action.

August 8, 2014

What The Hell Is Wrong With Some Of You

The Israel Gaza conflict sure has me spending a lot more time on Twitter than ever before.  Very disillusioned  about the amount of atheists that I've had to either stop following or blocking because of their absolutely nonsensical hypocritical attitude towards Israel.

Sick of reading what Israel shouldn't do when it comes to civilian deaths.  Ask one of these Moonbats what Israel should do, and you get either a smart ass answer, shrugs or crickets chirping.  This proves that atheists do not necessarily have to be critical thinkers.  I've lost complete respect for PZ Myers, for example.  His use of terms like apartheid and genocide show he is a misinformed rhetorical assmonkey.  And now cognitive dissonance has put him over the edge, he will forever be anti-Israel in order to fool himself into believing he is a sane rational individual.

Thankfully, there are many atheists who get it, in fact, the majority do.  I would hate to live in a world full of atheist Moonbats.

I think anyone with an ounce of humanity hates to see children, women and other innocents dying because they are victims of being under control of genocidal terrorists (read the Hamas charter) who use them as human shields.  But Israel is a sovereign country. Yeah, its birth wasn't perfect to say the least, but neither was any countries birth on this planet today.  Israel has a right to defend itself when getting bombed.  What are they supposed to do?  Let the bombs come in, hope the Iron Dome intercepts them or that the bombs do little damage if not intercepted?  Is that reasonable to ask of Israel or any country?

As for disproportional response.  In a war, this has to be the stupidest concept out there.  You don't play for a tie.  The object is to win the war.  In Israel's case, it is to get Hamas to stop firing rockets into Israel.  I'm not advocating Israel carpet bomb Gaza, but use enough force to end the conflict.  This doesn't mean firing a home made rocket for each home made rocket Hamas fires into Israel.

Lets put things another way.  ISIS is cornering various ethnicities right now giving them the option to convert or die.  The USA isn't being threatened, but humanity is.  If disproportional response is to be adhered to, the USA should do nothing.  Is that what Moonbats really believe in this case?  I guess proportionate response would be to capture ISIS members and give them the option of converting to Christianity or get their head chopped off.  Again, it such a stupid concept, yet Moonbats, Jihadists, and Jew haters expect it from Israel.

Countering some propaganda

Hamas has no choice but to fire from civilian territories.  Sorry, but there is plenty of rural area that Hamas could wage war from.  Problem is that Israel would easily be able to take them out, and Hamas would have a difficult time gaining Western sympathy if children don't die:

Propaganda maps that many Moonbats seem to fall for based on the faulty premise that Palestine was Arab land prior to 1948.  Fact is that Arabs owned around 21% (close to 80% of that number was owned by absentee Arab land owners.  Jews owned 7-8%, and the bulk of the land was state land.  The fact that Palestine was not sovereign means that land was in control of the British at the time of the Partition Plan.  Not Arab land by default!

One more thing.  When it comes to the Zionist Expansion canard.  If you believe that, and this map doesn't make you feel silly, you might need psychiatric help:

July 9, 2014

What Would The USA Do If Mexico Attacked?

A Zogby poll from 2003 found that 58% of Mexicans believe that the Southwestern USA belongs to Mexico.  Now, what if The Mexican Nationalist Front started sending suicide bombers into Texas and then started lobbing a few hundred bombs a month into that state as well in an attempt to get Texas back and wipe Texans off the map?

True, this scenario is highly unlikely, but it is playing out in Israel.  Yet, there are many people who believe Israel shouldn't retaliate (mostly Far Left Moonbats, Jihadists, or Jew haters).

If Texas was attacked, and the Mexican government turned a blind eye to the attacks, there is absolutely no doubt that the USA would be targeting anyone having anything to do with the invasion, and "excessive" force would be used.  There would be few people in the US objecting if Mexican deaths outnumbered US deaths by numbers as high as 1000-1 either.  And the US wouldn't stop until there would be a complete stoppage of bombings and a compliance agreement from Mexico that will pretty much prevent the same thing from happening at a later date.

Initially, if attacks were happening, I could see the US doing its best to make sure that Mexico didn't receive weaponry from other countries as well.  Mexico is tougher to blockade than Gaza, but the US would be doing as much as they could that way.

Back to Israel.  Lunatics somehow believe that Israel should just allow bombings because the Palestinians miss with so many of the bombs.  And the justifications go further than that.  Many loons believe that Israel shouldn't retaliate because it has no right to exist anyway.

Playing whack-a-mole for a minute, every single nation on this earth was created by either might and/or negotiations.  But for some reason, Israel should be different.  Demographics change everywhere, but for some reason, they shouldn't have changed in Palestine.  It is OK that Brazil has over 10 million ethnic Arabs, and it is OK that Dearborn, Michigan has a Muslim majority.  You see, it is OK for Arabs and Muslims to go to Western Lands, but Jews to the Middle East?

Back in 1948, when Israel became a sovereign nation, there was a Jewish majority in the Partitioned portion of Palestine that was to become the Jewish state.  The Arabs rejected this to the point that started a war immediately, and lost.  A few more wars and a few more losses, and Israel is still standing.  Imagine if the Arabs won even one war?  The few Jews left if any would be enjoying Dhimmi status at best.

True, the was that followed the creation of Israel in 1948 created refugees.  It created Arab refugees who Arab states didn't want to take in, and it created Jewish refugees from other Arab nations who Israel happily took in.  But the number of total refugees wasn't even 20% the total refugees created in 1947 when the Muslim state of Pakistan was created.  The lunatic far left seems ignorant over the fact that Pakistan's creation caused over 5 million people to be displaced.  I guess it is OK to them because it didn't involve Jews.

February 9, 2014

Pat Robertson Is Getting Wiser With Age

I'm pleasantly surprised that Old Age Creationist Pat Robertson seems to have taken another leap of fact.  He is now officially embraces Theistic Evolution (evolution happens as per God's plan).  This is the same official position as the Vatican.

Yes, there are quite a few people out there still who believe in an ancient earth and universe, but also believe man was poofed here by God around 10,000 years ago.  Of course, there are those, like Ken Ham, who believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old and that evolution is nonsense.  These Young Earth Creationists are laughing stocks, and apparently have become embarrassments to the Pat Robertson's of the the world.  

The majority of Americans who support the the Republican Party are YECs.  And the Republican politicians have to play to these fools.

Anyway, here is Pat Robertson laying into the YECs:

December 24, 2013

To Quack or Not To Quack

It isn't shocking that anyone on the cast of Duck Dynasty has religious views that I find repugnant.  And it isn't a surprise that head Duckman Phil Robertson was tricked into stating them in a not so eloquent way either.

What really gets me is that so many people think this is a free speech issue.  It isn't even close.  Free Speech means everyone in the West has the right to say anything they want without having to worry about going to prison.  Now, we don't have 100% Free Speech because certain things like inciting hate and libel and a few other things (depending on the country) could mean jail time, but the simple hate speech uttered by Robertson doesn't fall upon this category.

Free speech isn't free from consequences.  You can say something offensive to a neighbour and it could cause ill will for years.  And of course, when it comes to employment, if you say something that a private employer doesn't like, they have the right to show you the door.  If you say something they don't care about or are indifferent to, but it potentially costs the company money, they can fire you for that too.

It is a pretty simple concept, but it seems many on the Right don't have a clue what Free Speech is.  And then there is Sarah Palin who acknowledged that Martin Bashir's job entailed being mindful of what he said, so his firing/quitting was justifiable, but somehow, the ugly Left is taking away Free Speech from the Duck Family.  She really is a ridiculous person.

I like the way society is going, regardless if Duck Dynasty is restored to full cast and status.  Hate speech might be free, but it isn't tolerated as much anymore, and I think the rational world is starting to pick up on the idea that certain religious people seem to follow a group of pretty intolerant Gods.