Dear Internet,
From a young age, I was taught that all drugs, including tobacco and alcohol, are bad for one's health and should be avoided at all costs. I refused, as a second-grader, to drink church wine because it is alcohol and I was only eight years old, so technically, I figured, it was illegal for me to drink it (and besides, it smelled unappetizing). That in mind, I decided never to consume any alcohol in my life. I knew my mom used it in soup recipes for flavor, and onion rings, one of my favorite restaurant foods, are often deep-fried in beer batter. However, I was assured that any alcohol used in cooking was boiled off.
Recently, though, I stumbled upon an article from a reliable source saying that not all of the alcohol is cooked off, no matter how long you cook something-- and boiled liquids, such as soups, have the highest alcohol content- the lowest amount of alcohol burned off in cooking. So, it seems I have already accidentally consumed some alcohol already.
I have also been through emotional turmoil as of late, arguably the worst emotional turmoil of my life (I have had a few such incidents/stages), and I was tempted to take up drinking to blow off some frustration. I was not entirely serious, though, and decided almost instantly that drinking would be a bad idea. At least until I turn twenty-one, and am legally allowed to drink.
Getting drunk is obviously a bad idea, and I intend to never allow myself to do that, no matter how depressed I get. However, I am seriously considering drinking after all, when I am legally allowed to. I would only be interested in drinks which did not actually taste like alcohol and which are not purely alcohol- I'm thinking more along the lines of a drink that is "spiked" with just a bit of alcohol.
I may change my mind and stick with the not drinking thing for life, but right now... I am beginning to think that I will not stick to that after all.
Cheers.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Sunday, October 24, 2010
This is for all the girls out there
Dear Internet,
This is to all the girls who have ever been hurt, who have ever thought they weren't good enough, who have ever been let down, who have ever had their heart broken, who have ever been lied to or cheated on, who have ever felt like they had no one they could talk to, who have ever felt depressed or worthless or frustrated, who have ever wished they could turn back time. If you are a girl and this has never happened to you, you are either very lucky or you are lying to yourself.
Boys suck.
There are good guys out there, but they're awfully hard to find. Unfortunately, most guys are jerks. They toy around with girls' feelings, they're shallow and egocentric, and they think they're the shit. And they're fucking EVERYWHERE.
If you've ever been hurt by a guy like that, it's not your fault. It's his. Be mad at him. It's okay. Don't do anything illegal, but do talk about your feelings. Let it out. Scream if you have to. Physical activity, such as aerobic exercise, is a great outlet as well. Don't keep that anger, that hurt, locked up inside. Let it out!
Think about yourself. Think about those that love you the most- is it your mother? your best friend(s)? a teacher? Whoever it is, make a list of all the compliments they've ever given you. Think of the best compliments you've ever gotten. Bask in that glow.
Ladies, I don't care if you're black or white, thin or curvy, nerdy or popular, tall or short, blonde or brunette-- whoever you are, however you look, you need to realize that you are beautiful, and you deserve to be loved. If a boy doesn't love you truly and deeply, he doesn't deserve you. If a boy pushes you around and takes advantage of you, he doesn't deserve you. You deserve way better than that boy. You deserve a boy who will listen to you, who will pay attention to you when you need it most, who will accept all your flaws and tell you in his own way, every day, how much you mean to him.
Boys are funny that way-- sometimes it's flowers, sometimes it's kind words, sometimes it's standing up for you, sometimes it's holding a door open-- but if you look, there are little things he will do every day to show that he really loves you. That's how you know he truly loves you. You are precious to him. He will treat you as the treasure you are. True love heals. It nourishes. It makes you glow.
No matter how much the boy who broke your heart meant/means to you, the fact is, he broke your heart. He was probably a jerk to you in a thousand different ways. He's not worth it, honey. I know you're hurting right now. But you need to realize that love does not hurt you. Love heals you. You need to let it go. Move on. Find the one who really loves you.
It is my firm belief that everyone, everywhere, regardless of gender, ethnicity, physical appearance, or any other defining characteristic, deserves to be loved.
And girls, never underestimate the value of friendship. Keep your friends close at all times. Talk to them about your problems. They want to help you. The more you confide in your friends, the stronger the friendships will grow. You can depend on your true friends. Never forget that.
VAGINAS UNITE!!!
This is to all the girls who have ever been hurt, who have ever thought they weren't good enough, who have ever been let down, who have ever had their heart broken, who have ever been lied to or cheated on, who have ever felt like they had no one they could talk to, who have ever felt depressed or worthless or frustrated, who have ever wished they could turn back time. If you are a girl and this has never happened to you, you are either very lucky or you are lying to yourself.
Boys suck.
There are good guys out there, but they're awfully hard to find. Unfortunately, most guys are jerks. They toy around with girls' feelings, they're shallow and egocentric, and they think they're the shit. And they're fucking EVERYWHERE.
If you've ever been hurt by a guy like that, it's not your fault. It's his. Be mad at him. It's okay. Don't do anything illegal, but do talk about your feelings. Let it out. Scream if you have to. Physical activity, such as aerobic exercise, is a great outlet as well. Don't keep that anger, that hurt, locked up inside. Let it out!
Think about yourself. Think about those that love you the most- is it your mother? your best friend(s)? a teacher? Whoever it is, make a list of all the compliments they've ever given you. Think of the best compliments you've ever gotten. Bask in that glow.
Ladies, I don't care if you're black or white, thin or curvy, nerdy or popular, tall or short, blonde or brunette-- whoever you are, however you look, you need to realize that you are beautiful, and you deserve to be loved. If a boy doesn't love you truly and deeply, he doesn't deserve you. If a boy pushes you around and takes advantage of you, he doesn't deserve you. You deserve way better than that boy. You deserve a boy who will listen to you, who will pay attention to you when you need it most, who will accept all your flaws and tell you in his own way, every day, how much you mean to him.
Boys are funny that way-- sometimes it's flowers, sometimes it's kind words, sometimes it's standing up for you, sometimes it's holding a door open-- but if you look, there are little things he will do every day to show that he really loves you. That's how you know he truly loves you. You are precious to him. He will treat you as the treasure you are. True love heals. It nourishes. It makes you glow.
No matter how much the boy who broke your heart meant/means to you, the fact is, he broke your heart. He was probably a jerk to you in a thousand different ways. He's not worth it, honey. I know you're hurting right now. But you need to realize that love does not hurt you. Love heals you. You need to let it go. Move on. Find the one who really loves you.
It is my firm belief that everyone, everywhere, regardless of gender, ethnicity, physical appearance, or any other defining characteristic, deserves to be loved.
And girls, never underestimate the value of friendship. Keep your friends close at all times. Talk to them about your problems. They want to help you. The more you confide in your friends, the stronger the friendships will grow. You can depend on your true friends. Never forget that.
VAGINAS UNITE!!!
Monday, October 18, 2010
Animals: Are We So Different?
Dear Internet,
I confess that I have not actually begun my analysis of the Bible yet. I have had other things of more immediate necessity which I have needed to take care of. Nevertheless, a new subject for discussion has become rather more concrete in my mind, if only as an idea, and that is animals.
Much of the Bible, and even much of science, focuses on the assumption that we are the only "intelligent" life forms. Aliens aside (that's another topic for another time), humans consider themselves as being apart from animals, even though we are closely linked to some of them. Even evolutionists (not all, but a lot of them) assume that humans are different from animals, that we are special somehow. This is yet another idea that humans have formed because of egocentricity.
There have been studies that cats and dogs show the same six basic emotions that humans do. There have been incidents where monkeys have learned sign language. There have been elephants taught to paint and horses taught to count. It has been found that cats and dogs, and many other domesticated animals, react to the tone of a human's voice.
I propose that animals are more intelligent than we are giving them credit for. I think that animals, although not as "intelligent" as humans, are, in fact, sentient beings who react to their surroundings not just out of instinct, but out of thought processes.
Of course, their level of cognitive functioning is directly linked with the size of their brains. Some are more intelligent than others.
But how can we say that we are so different from them, so special? Pigs are, after all, almost identical to humans when dissected. All the same organs in all the same places, and almost exactly the same size. And chimpanzees are very closely related to us genetically.
So how can humans claim that we have souls, that we are the only life forms on this planet with souls and that no other creature on this planet is going to Heaven, that we were created in the form of God? Does that not sound just a bit egocentric? We have no proof of what God looks like. We have no proof that there even is a God, let alone Heaven and souls.
Humans are self-centered by nature, so it is not too surprising that many of them have believed such things for thousands of years. In fact, it is probably this self-centered tendency which has propagated the beliefs for so long.
I wish I could have said more on the matter, and made more sense, but I'm very tired today, so I'm going to leave it at that. I just wanted to share those thoughts.
As always, to any readers out there, I strongly encourage you to take everything I say with a grain of salt, challenge it with your own minds and ideas, and form your own beliefs.
Until next time...
I confess that I have not actually begun my analysis of the Bible yet. I have had other things of more immediate necessity which I have needed to take care of. Nevertheless, a new subject for discussion has become rather more concrete in my mind, if only as an idea, and that is animals.
Much of the Bible, and even much of science, focuses on the assumption that we are the only "intelligent" life forms. Aliens aside (that's another topic for another time), humans consider themselves as being apart from animals, even though we are closely linked to some of them. Even evolutionists (not all, but a lot of them) assume that humans are different from animals, that we are special somehow. This is yet another idea that humans have formed because of egocentricity.
There have been studies that cats and dogs show the same six basic emotions that humans do. There have been incidents where monkeys have learned sign language. There have been elephants taught to paint and horses taught to count. It has been found that cats and dogs, and many other domesticated animals, react to the tone of a human's voice.
I propose that animals are more intelligent than we are giving them credit for. I think that animals, although not as "intelligent" as humans, are, in fact, sentient beings who react to their surroundings not just out of instinct, but out of thought processes.
Of course, their level of cognitive functioning is directly linked with the size of their brains. Some are more intelligent than others.
But how can we say that we are so different from them, so special? Pigs are, after all, almost identical to humans when dissected. All the same organs in all the same places, and almost exactly the same size. And chimpanzees are very closely related to us genetically.
So how can humans claim that we have souls, that we are the only life forms on this planet with souls and that no other creature on this planet is going to Heaven, that we were created in the form of God? Does that not sound just a bit egocentric? We have no proof of what God looks like. We have no proof that there even is a God, let alone Heaven and souls.
Humans are self-centered by nature, so it is not too surprising that many of them have believed such things for thousands of years. In fact, it is probably this self-centered tendency which has propagated the beliefs for so long.
I wish I could have said more on the matter, and made more sense, but I'm very tired today, so I'm going to leave it at that. I just wanted to share those thoughts.
As always, to any readers out there, I strongly encourage you to take everything I say with a grain of salt, challenge it with your own minds and ideas, and form your own beliefs.
Until next time...
Friday, October 15, 2010
Opening My Veins
Dear Internet,
List of songs describing how I feel:
Gee, why have I been depressed lately. I wonder.
I will always love him, and there's not a damned thing I can do about it. And he doesn't care.
Except he DOES care about me. And he keeps talking to me from time to time, trying to be friends with me. But like the saying goes, that's like saying "I hit your dog with my car, but you can keep the body if you want."
List of songs describing how I feel:
- "What If" by Kate Winslet
- "Total Eclipse of the Heart" by Bonnie Tyler
- "Dream On" by Aerosmith
- "Mama Mia" from the musical, Mama Mia
- "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" by The Beatles
- "If I Never Knew You" from Disney's Pocahontas
- "Broken Vow" by Josh Groban
- "I Will Always Love You" by Whitney Heuston
- "Always" by Bon Jovi
- "I'm Not That Girl" from the musical, Wicked
- "Love Again" by Cascada
- "Live and Learn" from Sonic Adventure 2 Battle
- "Happy Ending" by Avril Lavigne
- "It's Not Over" by Chris Daughtry
- "How It Used To Be" by Chris Daughtry
- "Unbreak My Heart" by Toni Braxton
- "To Where You Are" by Josh Groban
- "Open Arms" by Journey
- "Seperate Ways" by Journey
- "I'll Be There For You" by Bon Jovi
Gee, why have I been depressed lately. I wonder.
I will always love him, and there's not a damned thing I can do about it. And he doesn't care.
Except he DOES care about me. And he keeps talking to me from time to time, trying to be friends with me. But like the saying goes, that's like saying "I hit your dog with my car, but you can keep the body if you want."
Epic Bible Study
Dear Internet,
"Epic" refers not to something super-awesome, as you would have people believe, but actually refers to something very long, somewhat boring, and at times rather dark and depressing. Examples of epics are "The Odyssey" and "Lord of the Rings." Using the correct definition of epic, I am embarking on an epic study of the ENTIRE BIBLE, starting today.
The particular bible that I'm using is called 'Student Bible For Catholics', and it has questions in the beginning like "Does God Really Exist?" and "Does Hell Really Exist?" and "My Buddy Is Gay"; stuff like that. So far, I've read those three... and I must say, Catholic arguments against atheism are somewhat lacking. They rely so much more on faith than logic, and they quote the bible a lot. Atheists don't believe in the Bible, so you may as well quote Grimm's Fairy Tales at them, because that's all the good you're doing.
Also, the answers to these questions are somewhat muddy... As I said, they rely a lot on the support of the Bible, but they also rely a lot on traditional faith. One good logical argument for the existence of God that I saw was "Evolutionists believe that we evolved from amoebas, but no one has yet told where the amoebas came from." An excellent question-- answered by neither side. The Catholics bank on the assumption that a divine being, "God", created everything. (But if God is perfect and makes no mistakes, then why did evolution occur at all?) The scientists/evolutionists say "We haven't figured it out yet."
As far as Hell goes, they say that Hell is mentioned several times in the Bible; therefore it exists. Umm- what? NOT convincing. Also, they say that no one is going to Hell, because they have a paragraph-long quote from the Bible saying that Hell was never intended for humans; it was intended for Satan and his demons. In other words, no matter what we do or how warped we are, we are all going to Heaven. --This is NOT what the Catholic church has told me my whole life.
The questions and answers section has not been helpful to me AT ALL. All it has done is make me even more aware that the arguments for faith are very shaky and rely a lot on faith. I would liken it to someone with vision trying to tell someone blind what it is like to see a dolphin. The person with vision takes his eyesight very much for granted, and is stumped as to how to tell the blind person what the dolphin looks like. Furthermore, the blind person is wondering if the whole thing is pointless in the first place. After all, the blind person can't see the dolphin. So the blind person begins to lose interest as the seeing person fumbles for some sort of description, and finally ends up describing the dolphin in terms that only the seeing person understands.
Christians believe that they have seen the light and that those who haven't can if they want to... which is why I made the seeing man the converter. Still, it's not a perfect analogy.
I shall be examining every book of the Bible one by one. Some, I will deem not even worth reading because they are pure fiction. Others, I will be examining very closely and deciding what I can and cannot trust as even being possibly true. Finally, and ultimately, I will decide whether or not I am a Christian, and I will give all my reasons for it, calmly and logically.
I may end up, if my notes are long enough, publishing my works as a book, "Skepticism and Catholicism." If I do end up believing Catholicism, or at least Christianity in general, then I will use my real name as the author. If, however, I find that I am an atheist at the end of it all, I will have to use a pen name, because on the very off-chance that the book actually gains popularity and ends up on some sort of booklist, my parents are going to see it, and they are not going to be happy with me. As I am the peacemaker of my family, I would really prefer not to start any personal wars within it.
If you want, I can publish my results here... but look at it as a rough draft, and sometimes cliffnotes, because if I do decide to publish it, it would be awfully foolish to have the whole damned thing available free online to anyone who's looking for it.
So, for now, Internet, I bid you adieu.
"Epic" refers not to something super-awesome, as you would have people believe, but actually refers to something very long, somewhat boring, and at times rather dark and depressing. Examples of epics are "The Odyssey" and "Lord of the Rings." Using the correct definition of epic, I am embarking on an epic study of the ENTIRE BIBLE, starting today.
The particular bible that I'm using is called 'Student Bible For Catholics', and it has questions in the beginning like "Does God Really Exist?" and "Does Hell Really Exist?" and "My Buddy Is Gay"; stuff like that. So far, I've read those three... and I must say, Catholic arguments against atheism are somewhat lacking. They rely so much more on faith than logic, and they quote the bible a lot. Atheists don't believe in the Bible, so you may as well quote Grimm's Fairy Tales at them, because that's all the good you're doing.
Also, the answers to these questions are somewhat muddy... As I said, they rely a lot on the support of the Bible, but they also rely a lot on traditional faith. One good logical argument for the existence of God that I saw was "Evolutionists believe that we evolved from amoebas, but no one has yet told where the amoebas came from." An excellent question-- answered by neither side. The Catholics bank on the assumption that a divine being, "God", created everything. (But if God is perfect and makes no mistakes, then why did evolution occur at all?) The scientists/evolutionists say "We haven't figured it out yet."
As far as Hell goes, they say that Hell is mentioned several times in the Bible; therefore it exists. Umm- what? NOT convincing. Also, they say that no one is going to Hell, because they have a paragraph-long quote from the Bible saying that Hell was never intended for humans; it was intended for Satan and his demons. In other words, no matter what we do or how warped we are, we are all going to Heaven. --This is NOT what the Catholic church has told me my whole life.
The questions and answers section has not been helpful to me AT ALL. All it has done is make me even more aware that the arguments for faith are very shaky and rely a lot on faith. I would liken it to someone with vision trying to tell someone blind what it is like to see a dolphin. The person with vision takes his eyesight very much for granted, and is stumped as to how to tell the blind person what the dolphin looks like. Furthermore, the blind person is wondering if the whole thing is pointless in the first place. After all, the blind person can't see the dolphin. So the blind person begins to lose interest as the seeing person fumbles for some sort of description, and finally ends up describing the dolphin in terms that only the seeing person understands.
Christians believe that they have seen the light and that those who haven't can if they want to... which is why I made the seeing man the converter. Still, it's not a perfect analogy.
I shall be examining every book of the Bible one by one. Some, I will deem not even worth reading because they are pure fiction. Others, I will be examining very closely and deciding what I can and cannot trust as even being possibly true. Finally, and ultimately, I will decide whether or not I am a Christian, and I will give all my reasons for it, calmly and logically.
I may end up, if my notes are long enough, publishing my works as a book, "Skepticism and Catholicism." If I do end up believing Catholicism, or at least Christianity in general, then I will use my real name as the author. If, however, I find that I am an atheist at the end of it all, I will have to use a pen name, because on the very off-chance that the book actually gains popularity and ends up on some sort of booklist, my parents are going to see it, and they are not going to be happy with me. As I am the peacemaker of my family, I would really prefer not to start any personal wars within it.
If you want, I can publish my results here... but look at it as a rough draft, and sometimes cliffnotes, because if I do decide to publish it, it would be awfully foolish to have the whole damned thing available free online to anyone who's looking for it.
So, for now, Internet, I bid you adieu.
Monday, October 11, 2010
I'm Not Going To Hell For This
Dear Internet,
Today, I want to talk about Satan.
I don't think he exists.
Think about it-- when does Jesus mention the presence of Satan in the Bible? Can you recall any specific mention of Jesus talking about Satan? Sure, there's the incident when Jesus went out into the desert and was "tempted by Satan", but I really think that story was more of a pilgrimage for Jesus, and that instead of being tormented by Satan, he was actually being tormented by his human body, by its wants and needs, the "wants of the flesh." (I shall expand on this topic shortly, and why I put it in quotation marks. But until then, back to the point.) Now, I don't have a Bible next to me, but as being raised Catholic by some very Catholic parents and extended family, I'm pretty confident in my claim that if Jesus ever mentioned Satan's existence, it was very rarely.
Why is that? If God and Satan are at war with each other, as the Old Testament proclaims, then why did Jesus not talk at length about this battle?
Could it be because Satan doesn't exist?
I've already commented on the very arrogant nature of humans. Historically, and even today, humans tend to be very self-absorbed, egotistical beings who would like to believe that the world revolves around them. (In psychological terms, this tendency is called being "egocentric.") Because of the egocentricity of humans, we, as a race, wanted to explain all the bad things that happen- disease, famine, plague, death, heartbreak, mental abnormalities, physical deformities, misfortune in general- and so someone, somewhere along the line, came up with the idea that there is a supreme, evil being called The Devil, or Satan, or Lucifer, who has legions of demons sent out to do these evils in the world.
According to this theory, there are demons everywhere tempting us to do wrong things. In ye olden days, it was believed that people with psychological abnormalities, such a schizophrenia, were being possessed by demons. (Of course, nowadays, we know that this is not the case.) Possessions of humans by demons were a rather regular occurrence, and priests were paid to exorcise the demons from their bodies with primitive chants and earnest, if corny and self-righteous, prayers to God. It was believed that following the Ten Commandments, going to church, and going to confession regularly would lessen the chances of being possessed, and that if one was born in a bad condition, then the parents must have committed some large sin to have a deformed/diseased child. (Again, nowadays we know that this is not the case.)
However, even in the Bible, there are obvious holes in this Satan theory-- for example, it was also believed that psychological abnormalities, disease, and such were punishments from God to those who had sinned. Everything from famine to birth defects was a punishment for a sin. --Well then, if all the misfortune in the world is a punishment from God because someone committed a sin, then where is there room for the Devil to do his torment? Answer: there is none.
It is my theory that Satan was invented by humans in order to explain the bad things that people do, and that Satan does not exist. The Bible re-iterates over and over that "The flesh is weak, but the spirit is strong." They are referring to the physical body of a human when they say "the flesh", and our "immortal soul" when they say "the spirit." (Immortal soul is put in quotation marks because it will be discussed later.) Well, just for a minute, let's think about Freud. He hypothesized that the human consciousness has three major forces controlling it: the id, the ego, and the superego. It sounds to me as if "the flesh" is the id, and "the spirit" is the superego. (Our actions are decided and carried out by the ego.)
This means that whenever "the flesh" is being tempted by Satan, what is actually happening is that the human body is having a primitive urge. (You name one sin that this theory doesn't work for, I DARE you.) So what do we do? We think about what we want to do versus what we 'should' do, according to our personal morals, and we act. Worded differently, our "spirit"/superego tells us what the 'right' thing to do is, and we do that via our ego.
If you don't believe Freud, or you if you are skeptical of Freud, for some reason (Note: I do not encourage anyone to blindly accept theories from any source. You should really think things over for yourself and take everything with a grain of salt, no matter how convincing it is, and ultimately, do not let anyone else tell you what to believe. Decide for yourself; see what sits right with you.), then I shall word the basic concept differently one more time: Everyone has basic urges- thirst, hunger, lust, to name a few. If we could, we would have sex with every attractive person we wanted, and we'd eat until our stomachs burst (Note: stomachs cannot actually burst. It was an expression). According to the Bible, this is the weakness of the flesh. However, we have morals which prevent us from sleeping with every attractive person that we see, and common sense to tell us that we should not eat until we are sick. The Bible refers to this as the spirit. So our urges and our morals conflict, and we decide what to do.
This takes me to another topic: "the spirit." Aka, the "soul."
I don't think souls exist. (Which also means that I do not believe in Heaven or Hell, or an afterlife of any sort.)
I think (Note: I am saying "I think"; this is a theory, a hypothesis, an idea. Feel free to believe what you want.) that humans created the idea of souls because they wanted to believe that they were immortal. They created the idea of an afterlife because they want to live forever. For hundreds and hundreds of years, humans were obsessed with staying young and living as long as possible. So, egocentric, arrogant, egotistical beings that we are, humans decided that this "spirit" part of us is immortal, and that if we are "bad" and give in to our primitive urges, we are going to Hell with Satan (who does not exist), but that if we are "good" and follow our morals, we are going to Heaven with God (who probably exists).
Basics of religion (any religion, not just Christianity): Be good, and you will be rewarded. For some religions, you are promoted to a higher life form in your next life via reincarnation. For others, you are rewarded by going to a place with an eternal supply of food and virgins, or worship and praise, forever. (The problem I find with most heavens is that they offer joys of the flesh, which we will (according to these religions) no longer have once we get to heaven.)
Well, if there is no Satan, then there is no Hell. So that means we all go to Heaven, no matter how we act. This certainly does not fit in with the views of Christians. According to them, if you do not act "good", or if you do not accept Jesus Christ as your savior, you are going to Hell.
Now, my idea of God has always been that of a forgiving, loving figure. If he lovingly created us in his image and sent his only son to "save" us, then doesn't he sound like the kind of guy that, no matter what religion you are, if you lived a good life, you'd go to Heaven? --That question really bothered me for years.
And given our new definition of "flesh" and "spirit", isn't "soul" just a misnamed term for our conscience? If so, nobody goes to Heaven because there is no Heaven, and we do not have souls.
To me, Christianity sounds more and more like just a set of rules for behavior. A certain elite group wanted people to act a certain way, so they manipulated us into believing it all.
Now, that makes people like the twelve apostles look really stupid. They started a lot of this stuff, including all of the traditions of the Catholic church. They believed without doubt that Jesus was the son of God (except for Thomas, who insisted on feeling the holes in Jesus's hands) (but how do we know that the story of Jesus's ghost visiting them is not just another fabrication, an exaggeration?).
No matter how convincing some of the stuff in the Bible is, and putting aside supposedly historically accurate things (like ancestry), nothing in it can be proven, especially in a concrete, undoubtable way. Mostly, it is the collective works of philosophers and the recording of legends passed down by oral tradition. Some of it is pure fiction, like the story of creation.
Mom talks to me all the time about how American society is brainwashing us, but she is blind to the fact that religion does the same thing: insisting that we believe certain things because some elite group wants us to. (Yes, I realize this claim makes me a conspiracy theorist, to an extent. I have no problem with that, as it is true.)
I shall probably read a Bible again some time in the near future, with all this skepticism in mind, and blog again about the results of my research (for reading the Bible through cynical eyes will be research).
Until then, I leave you to ponder what I have said and examine your own beliefs. Don't be afraid to do this; if you find good reasons that I am wrong, then your faith will be all the stronger for it, and your convictions as well. And I say, sincerely, that if that is what happens, then I congratulate you. If, however, you find yourself forming your own theories about religion, then I also congratulate you, because you are doing something that many people are afraid to do: search for the truth.
Today, I want to talk about Satan.
I don't think he exists.
Think about it-- when does Jesus mention the presence of Satan in the Bible? Can you recall any specific mention of Jesus talking about Satan? Sure, there's the incident when Jesus went out into the desert and was "tempted by Satan", but I really think that story was more of a pilgrimage for Jesus, and that instead of being tormented by Satan, he was actually being tormented by his human body, by its wants and needs, the "wants of the flesh." (I shall expand on this topic shortly, and why I put it in quotation marks. But until then, back to the point.) Now, I don't have a Bible next to me, but as being raised Catholic by some very Catholic parents and extended family, I'm pretty confident in my claim that if Jesus ever mentioned Satan's existence, it was very rarely.
Why is that? If God and Satan are at war with each other, as the Old Testament proclaims, then why did Jesus not talk at length about this battle?
Could it be because Satan doesn't exist?
I've already commented on the very arrogant nature of humans. Historically, and even today, humans tend to be very self-absorbed, egotistical beings who would like to believe that the world revolves around them. (In psychological terms, this tendency is called being "egocentric.") Because of the egocentricity of humans, we, as a race, wanted to explain all the bad things that happen- disease, famine, plague, death, heartbreak, mental abnormalities, physical deformities, misfortune in general- and so someone, somewhere along the line, came up with the idea that there is a supreme, evil being called The Devil, or Satan, or Lucifer, who has legions of demons sent out to do these evils in the world.
According to this theory, there are demons everywhere tempting us to do wrong things. In ye olden days, it was believed that people with psychological abnormalities, such a schizophrenia, were being possessed by demons. (Of course, nowadays, we know that this is not the case.) Possessions of humans by demons were a rather regular occurrence, and priests were paid to exorcise the demons from their bodies with primitive chants and earnest, if corny and self-righteous, prayers to God. It was believed that following the Ten Commandments, going to church, and going to confession regularly would lessen the chances of being possessed, and that if one was born in a bad condition, then the parents must have committed some large sin to have a deformed/diseased child. (Again, nowadays we know that this is not the case.)
However, even in the Bible, there are obvious holes in this Satan theory-- for example, it was also believed that psychological abnormalities, disease, and such were punishments from God to those who had sinned. Everything from famine to birth defects was a punishment for a sin. --Well then, if all the misfortune in the world is a punishment from God because someone committed a sin, then where is there room for the Devil to do his torment? Answer: there is none.
It is my theory that Satan was invented by humans in order to explain the bad things that people do, and that Satan does not exist. The Bible re-iterates over and over that "The flesh is weak, but the spirit is strong." They are referring to the physical body of a human when they say "the flesh", and our "immortal soul" when they say "the spirit." (Immortal soul is put in quotation marks because it will be discussed later.) Well, just for a minute, let's think about Freud. He hypothesized that the human consciousness has three major forces controlling it: the id, the ego, and the superego. It sounds to me as if "the flesh" is the id, and "the spirit" is the superego. (Our actions are decided and carried out by the ego.)
This means that whenever "the flesh" is being tempted by Satan, what is actually happening is that the human body is having a primitive urge. (You name one sin that this theory doesn't work for, I DARE you.) So what do we do? We think about what we want to do versus what we 'should' do, according to our personal morals, and we act. Worded differently, our "spirit"/superego tells us what the 'right' thing to do is, and we do that via our ego.
If you don't believe Freud, or you if you are skeptical of Freud, for some reason (Note: I do not encourage anyone to blindly accept theories from any source. You should really think things over for yourself and take everything with a grain of salt, no matter how convincing it is, and ultimately, do not let anyone else tell you what to believe. Decide for yourself; see what sits right with you.), then I shall word the basic concept differently one more time: Everyone has basic urges- thirst, hunger, lust, to name a few. If we could, we would have sex with every attractive person we wanted, and we'd eat until our stomachs burst (Note: stomachs cannot actually burst. It was an expression). According to the Bible, this is the weakness of the flesh. However, we have morals which prevent us from sleeping with every attractive person that we see, and common sense to tell us that we should not eat until we are sick. The Bible refers to this as the spirit. So our urges and our morals conflict, and we decide what to do.
This takes me to another topic: "the spirit." Aka, the "soul."
I don't think souls exist. (Which also means that I do not believe in Heaven or Hell, or an afterlife of any sort.)
I think (Note: I am saying "I think"; this is a theory, a hypothesis, an idea. Feel free to believe what you want.) that humans created the idea of souls because they wanted to believe that they were immortal. They created the idea of an afterlife because they want to live forever. For hundreds and hundreds of years, humans were obsessed with staying young and living as long as possible. So, egocentric, arrogant, egotistical beings that we are, humans decided that this "spirit" part of us is immortal, and that if we are "bad" and give in to our primitive urges, we are going to Hell with Satan (who does not exist), but that if we are "good" and follow our morals, we are going to Heaven with God (who probably exists).
Basics of religion (any religion, not just Christianity): Be good, and you will be rewarded. For some religions, you are promoted to a higher life form in your next life via reincarnation. For others, you are rewarded by going to a place with an eternal supply of food and virgins, or worship and praise, forever. (The problem I find with most heavens is that they offer joys of the flesh, which we will (according to these religions) no longer have once we get to heaven.)
Well, if there is no Satan, then there is no Hell. So that means we all go to Heaven, no matter how we act. This certainly does not fit in with the views of Christians. According to them, if you do not act "good", or if you do not accept Jesus Christ as your savior, you are going to Hell.
Now, my idea of God has always been that of a forgiving, loving figure. If he lovingly created us in his image and sent his only son to "save" us, then doesn't he sound like the kind of guy that, no matter what religion you are, if you lived a good life, you'd go to Heaven? --That question really bothered me for years.
And given our new definition of "flesh" and "spirit", isn't "soul" just a misnamed term for our conscience? If so, nobody goes to Heaven because there is no Heaven, and we do not have souls.
To me, Christianity sounds more and more like just a set of rules for behavior. A certain elite group wanted people to act a certain way, so they manipulated us into believing it all.
Now, that makes people like the twelve apostles look really stupid. They started a lot of this stuff, including all of the traditions of the Catholic church. They believed without doubt that Jesus was the son of God (except for Thomas, who insisted on feeling the holes in Jesus's hands) (but how do we know that the story of Jesus's ghost visiting them is not just another fabrication, an exaggeration?).
No matter how convincing some of the stuff in the Bible is, and putting aside supposedly historically accurate things (like ancestry), nothing in it can be proven, especially in a concrete, undoubtable way. Mostly, it is the collective works of philosophers and the recording of legends passed down by oral tradition. Some of it is pure fiction, like the story of creation.
Mom talks to me all the time about how American society is brainwashing us, but she is blind to the fact that religion does the same thing: insisting that we believe certain things because some elite group wants us to. (Yes, I realize this claim makes me a conspiracy theorist, to an extent. I have no problem with that, as it is true.)
I shall probably read a Bible again some time in the near future, with all this skepticism in mind, and blog again about the results of my research (for reading the Bible through cynical eyes will be research).
Until then, I leave you to ponder what I have said and examine your own beliefs. Don't be afraid to do this; if you find good reasons that I am wrong, then your faith will be all the stronger for it, and your convictions as well. And I say, sincerely, that if that is what happens, then I congratulate you. If, however, you find yourself forming your own theories about religion, then I also congratulate you, because you are doing something that many people are afraid to do: search for the truth.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
How I Get Through Life
Dear Internet,
I get down just like everybody else. I have my good days, and I have my off days. But sometimes, things happen which hurt me deeply, which cause depression, which make me wonder sometimes if life will ever be happy again or if I should just off myself-- but I always manage to bounce back, to keep moving forward, because of my drugs of choice: Humor and Optimism.
My main philosophies are:
Truly, I would not be me without him.
Nor would I be alive.
I get down just like everybody else. I have my good days, and I have my off days. But sometimes, things happen which hurt me deeply, which cause depression, which make me wonder sometimes if life will ever be happy again or if I should just off myself-- but I always manage to bounce back, to keep moving forward, because of my drugs of choice: Humor and Optimism.
My main philosophies are:
- "Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life"- Monty Python
- What is meant to be will find a way
- Love conquers all
- Things will get better
- Everyone deserves to be loved, as they are at this very moment, no matter what
- Everything happens for a reason
Truly, I would not be me without him.
Nor would I be alive.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Prayers and Free Will
Dear Internet,
I touched on this in Skepticism and Catholicism, but only briefly: what is the point of prayers?
I concede that there is probably a God out there, since I do not believe in the Big Bang theory or evolution, so something must have created us somehow. Even if the Big Bang theory is true, something had to have created those first quarks. They didn't just pop up out of nowhere. The universe can't have suddenly just came to be for no reason at all. Something out there must have created it. And we choose to call that something "God".
Now, assuming that this belief is true-- assuming that there is a God-- it is probably a good idea to respect such a being. With all the intricacies of the universe he supposedly created, and with all the things that happen in this world and in outer space, he seems to have formidable power. The power to create; the power to destroy. I am not advocating fear of him, necessarily- just healthy respect. Sort of like how one respects Niagara Falls, because it is big and has lots of power.
So respect: granted.
But why do we have to worship him? Jesus apparently told us to, and for a long time before he came along, other people believed in this God guy and offered him dead animals and stuff- but how do we know what Jesus said? I'm fairly certain Jesus existed; historically, that seems to be confirmed, if by nothing else than a lot of people telling the same story, which would be extremely unlikely to happen if it was a lie, especially since those people insisted that it was all true.
All right, so Jesus existed. And he told us to pray to God.
Supposedly.
But how do we know that? We don't. It's all by word of mouth.
And yet someone must have told all his disciples the words of the Our Father, which they all know... but who is to say that one of the disciples did not just make it up? How do we know they kept the same exact words Jesus told them-- once? It is entirely possible that they messed up the words.
The church encourages us to pray to God all the time. To tell him what we want, to apologize for things we did against Him, to thank him for stuff. But why?
If fate is true, if God has a plan for all of us, then it doesn't matter what we do because everything has been pre-determined. We could just sit on the sofa all day watching Spongebob and playing Halo, and our jobs would just fall into our laps magically. Wouldn't that be nice?
But no, God gave us free will.
Well, why in the heck did God give us free will if everything we would ever do was already planned out? Why would he give us a conscience if all the wrong we would ever do was already in his neat little schedule? Why would he give us rules for existence if our existence was already going to happen a certain way, rules or no rules?
Why ask God for anything if everything is already planned out?
If God has a plan for all of us, if we are stuck with our fates no matter what, then why did God tell us to pray to him? That would make no sense. We'd all be asking for things we'd never get, all the time. Why would he tell us to do that? Why give us false hope?
So although fate is supported in the Bible, so is free will. Both cannot coexist. It has to be one or the other.
I tend to believe that some things are meant to be. But what? Only good things ever seem to be meant to be, or really really bad things that we have no other way of coping with. Fate is a coping mechanism of a belief.
There are lots of stories, though, about things that cannot be explained by science. Ways in which people were helped, seemingly, by divine intervention. Stories about events that only seem to prove that the Christian God is real.
So it seems that God does help us out, does show His infinite power, every so often- if only to remind us that he's there.
Therefore, I still believe that some things are meant to be, that God interferes with our lives sometimes.
But why would he do that? If he has a plan for us... then that would make sense.
So how can God have a plan for us if fate is not real? The Catholic church would tell me to stop right there, and settle this whole thought train with "It's a divine mystery."
Well, I happen to think 'divine mysteries' are a load of bull crap. I don't think God is three people in one- that's impossible. Maybe he has friends up there helping him. Maybe he has the power to split himself into multiple beings if he so chooses. But I do not believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I mean, obviously, if Jesus spoke the truth, he was the son of God, so there must be a father up there that impregnated Mary. But what in the heck is the Holy Spirit? A dove? A bunch of flames? The Catholic church would probably say that we represent the Holy Spirit as a dove or a bunch of flames because we cannot really see or imagine its true form. --Yeah, bologna. God sent that stuff himself.
I used to be into praying when I was a kid. I think lots of kids raised Christian pray for stuff they want-- toys, mostly-- but then they get it and they start to wonder why they should pray for things that they don't get. People pray for God not to take away a dying loved one, and when that loved one dies, they are depressed and lose faith in God. "Oh, but it was God's will that your loved one died. He was calling them home. It was their time." --That is what the church says. That endorses fate. And it means that prayers are useless, because whatever it is is gonna happen, no matter if you pray or if you don't.
That's why I don't pray anymore. Whether God 'answers' a prayer or doesn't, people still pray either way, even though they believe God's will is gonna happen no matter what. And they even ask God for his will to be done, as if we have the power to stop the will of an all-powerful being who put us here in the first place.
--You see why I'm questioning religion so heavily, here? Even the basics of life are contradicted all over the freaking place, and we just have to blindly believe it.
Well, I don't.
The conclusion for this post is that God probably exists, that prayers are useless if fate is real, and that I am still not sure if I believe in fate. I still believe that some things were meant to be, but I am still questioning the logic of those beliefs.
You don't have to agree with me. You can feel free to tell me, calmly and rationally, why you believe one thing or another. I'm just sharing my reasoning and my beliefs here.
I touched on this in Skepticism and Catholicism, but only briefly: what is the point of prayers?
I concede that there is probably a God out there, since I do not believe in the Big Bang theory or evolution, so something must have created us somehow. Even if the Big Bang theory is true, something had to have created those first quarks. They didn't just pop up out of nowhere. The universe can't have suddenly just came to be for no reason at all. Something out there must have created it. And we choose to call that something "God".
Now, assuming that this belief is true-- assuming that there is a God-- it is probably a good idea to respect such a being. With all the intricacies of the universe he supposedly created, and with all the things that happen in this world and in outer space, he seems to have formidable power. The power to create; the power to destroy. I am not advocating fear of him, necessarily- just healthy respect. Sort of like how one respects Niagara Falls, because it is big and has lots of power.
So respect: granted.
But why do we have to worship him? Jesus apparently told us to, and for a long time before he came along, other people believed in this God guy and offered him dead animals and stuff- but how do we know what Jesus said? I'm fairly certain Jesus existed; historically, that seems to be confirmed, if by nothing else than a lot of people telling the same story, which would be extremely unlikely to happen if it was a lie, especially since those people insisted that it was all true.
All right, so Jesus existed. And he told us to pray to God.
Supposedly.
But how do we know that? We don't. It's all by word of mouth.
And yet someone must have told all his disciples the words of the Our Father, which they all know... but who is to say that one of the disciples did not just make it up? How do we know they kept the same exact words Jesus told them-- once? It is entirely possible that they messed up the words.
The church encourages us to pray to God all the time. To tell him what we want, to apologize for things we did against Him, to thank him for stuff. But why?
If fate is true, if God has a plan for all of us, then it doesn't matter what we do because everything has been pre-determined. We could just sit on the sofa all day watching Spongebob and playing Halo, and our jobs would just fall into our laps magically. Wouldn't that be nice?
But no, God gave us free will.
Well, why in the heck did God give us free will if everything we would ever do was already planned out? Why would he give us a conscience if all the wrong we would ever do was already in his neat little schedule? Why would he give us rules for existence if our existence was already going to happen a certain way, rules or no rules?
Why ask God for anything if everything is already planned out?
If God has a plan for all of us, if we are stuck with our fates no matter what, then why did God tell us to pray to him? That would make no sense. We'd all be asking for things we'd never get, all the time. Why would he tell us to do that? Why give us false hope?
So although fate is supported in the Bible, so is free will. Both cannot coexist. It has to be one or the other.
I tend to believe that some things are meant to be. But what? Only good things ever seem to be meant to be, or really really bad things that we have no other way of coping with. Fate is a coping mechanism of a belief.
There are lots of stories, though, about things that cannot be explained by science. Ways in which people were helped, seemingly, by divine intervention. Stories about events that only seem to prove that the Christian God is real.
So it seems that God does help us out, does show His infinite power, every so often- if only to remind us that he's there.
Therefore, I still believe that some things are meant to be, that God interferes with our lives sometimes.
But why would he do that? If he has a plan for us... then that would make sense.
So how can God have a plan for us if fate is not real? The Catholic church would tell me to stop right there, and settle this whole thought train with "It's a divine mystery."
Well, I happen to think 'divine mysteries' are a load of bull crap. I don't think God is three people in one- that's impossible. Maybe he has friends up there helping him. Maybe he has the power to split himself into multiple beings if he so chooses. But I do not believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I mean, obviously, if Jesus spoke the truth, he was the son of God, so there must be a father up there that impregnated Mary. But what in the heck is the Holy Spirit? A dove? A bunch of flames? The Catholic church would probably say that we represent the Holy Spirit as a dove or a bunch of flames because we cannot really see or imagine its true form. --Yeah, bologna. God sent that stuff himself.
I used to be into praying when I was a kid. I think lots of kids raised Christian pray for stuff they want-- toys, mostly-- but then they get it and they start to wonder why they should pray for things that they don't get. People pray for God not to take away a dying loved one, and when that loved one dies, they are depressed and lose faith in God. "Oh, but it was God's will that your loved one died. He was calling them home. It was their time." --That is what the church says. That endorses fate. And it means that prayers are useless, because whatever it is is gonna happen, no matter if you pray or if you don't.
That's why I don't pray anymore. Whether God 'answers' a prayer or doesn't, people still pray either way, even though they believe God's will is gonna happen no matter what. And they even ask God for his will to be done, as if we have the power to stop the will of an all-powerful being who put us here in the first place.
--You see why I'm questioning religion so heavily, here? Even the basics of life are contradicted all over the freaking place, and we just have to blindly believe it.
Well, I don't.
The conclusion for this post is that God probably exists, that prayers are useless if fate is real, and that I am still not sure if I believe in fate. I still believe that some things were meant to be, but I am still questioning the logic of those beliefs.
You don't have to agree with me. You can feel free to tell me, calmly and rationally, why you believe one thing or another. I'm just sharing my reasoning and my beliefs here.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Homosexuality
Dear Internet,
Today I am going to blog about homosexuality.
My parents, as Catholics, have been kind of a thorn in my side on this issue, because they insist on sticking to the traditional beliefs, put forth by closed-minded, egotistical, fear-all-that-are-not-like-us people thousands of years ago, and if they ever found out that I supported homosexuals, they would either disown me or throw a Bible at me and watch me as they forced me to read every word until I'd memorized the damned thing. The Bible has parts in it that are obviously against homosexuality, and homosexuality is frowned on by Christians. It is seen as impure and wrong, as a disease, as a choice, as a sin.
I have seen reason enough to convince me that homosexuality is not a choice; therefore how can it be a sin? God created us all lovingly with our own crosses to bear. Some of us are shy, some of us are not-too-bright, some of us are stubborn, and some of us are gay. It's not really a choice, in my opinion, because of a few very compelling arguments I've heard.
1) If you have a homosexual relative, then you more than likely have more than one homosexual relative.
2) Therapy does not work. It only frustrates them, because someone else has told them that homosexuality is wrong, and they want to do the right thing, but they just can't.
3) Why on Earth would a person decide to get made fun of in early adolescence, throughout all of middle school and high school? Why would they choose to look for something so rare- it's hard enough to find The One; why insist on someone that is part of such a small group? Why ostracize yourself and make life hard on yourself? Who would choose to live like this?
Saying that it is genetic is sort of puzzling, because how could it be? Logically, if two people of opposite genders are gay, or even if only one of them is gay, why would they have sex with a member of the opposite gender, when they are repulsed by members of the opposite gender? It makes no sense. So how can a gay person have a baby?
Well, my answer is, typically, the gay people of the world do not have children. --So then, how...?
Because- I believe that it is sort of like a recessive trait, except that it is a mutation of a gene (or certain genes) having to do with sex drive. It is not entirely genetic; environmental factors can either negate, lessen, or encourage the trait. But I do think that it could be genetic. But this is only a theory I have... there is not much research that really shows either way, whether it is genetic or not.
Anyway.
I have personally met both homosexual men and women, and I have to say that, especially for men, this trait seems to be something they cannot control. (Weirdly, the women I met had made a choice to be homosexual. One of them was fed up with men in general, and had been getting crushes on women and men throughout adolescence. The other had a phobia of penises, was repulsed by them, but did not find out until she saw one. Up until that point, she had been primarily interested in men. After that point, she became interested solely in women...) (The men, though, said that they would change their sexual orientation if they could...)
I, myself, am bi-curious. I have always enjoyed looking at both women and men, and as I see women as more beautiful in general, I more often remark on a beautiful woman than a beautiful man. (But then, I'm very picky when it comes to men, so it is not very often that I meet/observe one which I find attractive.) However, although I do enjoy looking at women, I have managed to convince my mother, at least, that it is a purely artistic thing (I am an artist), and that I am simply admiring beauty. I would never become lesbian for three reasons: One, my parents would disown me; Two, I want children, and I need a man to do that; Three, although I have had little crushes on women here and there, I have never been in love with one. I have only ever fallen in love with men.
So I am straight for the sake of dating and future spouse purposes, and I would never have sex with a girl, but I still enjoy looking at them, especially when they are naked, or when they have wonderful breasts. I have had fantasies where I am a man and I am having sex with a woman, but although I wanted to be male for most of my life, I realized sometime over the past few years that my brain is wired to be a woman. I considered getting a sex change through most of adolescence, but I realized that I want to be a mother, and I am attracted most strongly to men, so it would be best if I stayed female.
This being the case, and me having been close to homosexuals socially and emotionally, I am a bit biased towards them. But those that are against homosexuality either have not been exposed to it or else are afraid of it, and I think that is sad.
Marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman. Homosexuals would like to change that definition to being a union between two people who want to love (and have sex with) solely each other for the rest of their lives. I say, if two people love each other, it does not matter what their race or gender or financial standing or social standing is, what their background is, or what their religion is. If two people love each other enough to dedicate their lives to each other, then I say Love is Love. Let them to it. Who are they hurting? Nobody.
So yes, Internet, although I have to hide it, I do support gay marriage.
It is sad that I have to hide things like this from my parents. I wish they would be more open and accepting. There are even a few friends that I have to hide these type of thoughts from... but I love them, so I do hide these thoughts from them.
That is a bit of a conflict with me, because I believe in being as honest as possible. A lie, no matter how seemingly innocent or small, is still a lie, and it is always painful when the truth is found out. I say that there is no excuse, ever, for telling a lie, even if the lie is just not telling the truth. But think of it this way: You do not tell a child about sex, even though it is true. That is not a lie; it is the withholding of certain information to protect their innocence. So in a way, it is to protect these friendships that I am not telling them, because they do not need to know these things about me.
All the same... I still wish my parents would be more open-minded.
Today I am going to blog about homosexuality.
My parents, as Catholics, have been kind of a thorn in my side on this issue, because they insist on sticking to the traditional beliefs, put forth by closed-minded, egotistical, fear-all-that-are-not-like-us people thousands of years ago, and if they ever found out that I supported homosexuals, they would either disown me or throw a Bible at me and watch me as they forced me to read every word until I'd memorized the damned thing. The Bible has parts in it that are obviously against homosexuality, and homosexuality is frowned on by Christians. It is seen as impure and wrong, as a disease, as a choice, as a sin.
I have seen reason enough to convince me that homosexuality is not a choice; therefore how can it be a sin? God created us all lovingly with our own crosses to bear. Some of us are shy, some of us are not-too-bright, some of us are stubborn, and some of us are gay. It's not really a choice, in my opinion, because of a few very compelling arguments I've heard.
1) If you have a homosexual relative, then you more than likely have more than one homosexual relative.
2) Therapy does not work. It only frustrates them, because someone else has told them that homosexuality is wrong, and they want to do the right thing, but they just can't.
3) Why on Earth would a person decide to get made fun of in early adolescence, throughout all of middle school and high school? Why would they choose to look for something so rare- it's hard enough to find The One; why insist on someone that is part of such a small group? Why ostracize yourself and make life hard on yourself? Who would choose to live like this?
Saying that it is genetic is sort of puzzling, because how could it be? Logically, if two people of opposite genders are gay, or even if only one of them is gay, why would they have sex with a member of the opposite gender, when they are repulsed by members of the opposite gender? It makes no sense. So how can a gay person have a baby?
Well, my answer is, typically, the gay people of the world do not have children. --So then, how...?
Because- I believe that it is sort of like a recessive trait, except that it is a mutation of a gene (or certain genes) having to do with sex drive. It is not entirely genetic; environmental factors can either negate, lessen, or encourage the trait. But I do think that it could be genetic. But this is only a theory I have... there is not much research that really shows either way, whether it is genetic or not.
Anyway.
I have personally met both homosexual men and women, and I have to say that, especially for men, this trait seems to be something they cannot control. (Weirdly, the women I met had made a choice to be homosexual. One of them was fed up with men in general, and had been getting crushes on women and men throughout adolescence. The other had a phobia of penises, was repulsed by them, but did not find out until she saw one. Up until that point, she had been primarily interested in men. After that point, she became interested solely in women...) (The men, though, said that they would change their sexual orientation if they could...)
I, myself, am bi-curious. I have always enjoyed looking at both women and men, and as I see women as more beautiful in general, I more often remark on a beautiful woman than a beautiful man. (But then, I'm very picky when it comes to men, so it is not very often that I meet/observe one which I find attractive.) However, although I do enjoy looking at women, I have managed to convince my mother, at least, that it is a purely artistic thing (I am an artist), and that I am simply admiring beauty. I would never become lesbian for three reasons: One, my parents would disown me; Two, I want children, and I need a man to do that; Three, although I have had little crushes on women here and there, I have never been in love with one. I have only ever fallen in love with men.
So I am straight for the sake of dating and future spouse purposes, and I would never have sex with a girl, but I still enjoy looking at them, especially when they are naked, or when they have wonderful breasts. I have had fantasies where I am a man and I am having sex with a woman, but although I wanted to be male for most of my life, I realized sometime over the past few years that my brain is wired to be a woman. I considered getting a sex change through most of adolescence, but I realized that I want to be a mother, and I am attracted most strongly to men, so it would be best if I stayed female.
This being the case, and me having been close to homosexuals socially and emotionally, I am a bit biased towards them. But those that are against homosexuality either have not been exposed to it or else are afraid of it, and I think that is sad.
Marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman. Homosexuals would like to change that definition to being a union between two people who want to love (and have sex with) solely each other for the rest of their lives. I say, if two people love each other, it does not matter what their race or gender or financial standing or social standing is, what their background is, or what their religion is. If two people love each other enough to dedicate their lives to each other, then I say Love is Love. Let them to it. Who are they hurting? Nobody.
So yes, Internet, although I have to hide it, I do support gay marriage.
It is sad that I have to hide things like this from my parents. I wish they would be more open and accepting. There are even a few friends that I have to hide these type of thoughts from... but I love them, so I do hide these thoughts from them.
That is a bit of a conflict with me, because I believe in being as honest as possible. A lie, no matter how seemingly innocent or small, is still a lie, and it is always painful when the truth is found out. I say that there is no excuse, ever, for telling a lie, even if the lie is just not telling the truth. But think of it this way: You do not tell a child about sex, even though it is true. That is not a lie; it is the withholding of certain information to protect their innocence. So in a way, it is to protect these friendships that I am not telling them, because they do not need to know these things about me.
All the same... I still wish my parents would be more open-minded.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
I Believe In Love
Dear Internet,
I don't know what I believe anymore, as far as Christianity goes. But I do know this, that the one thing I've always believed in, more than anything else, is Love.
Love is real. Love is everything I want, everything I need. When people act out of Love, it is powerful, it is sweet, and it is always for good. Love teaches us respect and kindness for our fellow human beings, teaches us strength and courage, wisdom and hope. Love is at the center of all things, is the happiness we all strive for.
The Catholic church does not teach about Love often enough. It tells us of God's love for us, but it tends to focus on the rules he has laid out for us, on justice and punishment. I don't want to hear about that. If there is a God, I hope that he is a god of Love. Love is the temple at which I worship.
American society, American pop culture, has got Love all wrong. They describe it as something selfish, something all-consuming, something which sticks in your mind and dictates your actions; you cannot stop thinking about them, how much you want them, how much you want them to be yours and only yours. --But this is not Love. This is Lust. Lust is dangerous, can poison a relationship to the point of breaking it. Many people fall in lust with someone and believe that it is Love, because of what pop culture and society lead us to believe.
So what is Love, you ask? Love is patient, love is kind. It is not selfish; it is selfless. Love does not dwell on injury; it is forgiving. Love is not self-important, but makes one forget oneself. Love is all things light and beautiful, warm and clean and bright. Love helps us grow. Love is optimistic and hopeful. Love is endlessly forgiving. Love is pure. Love never dies.
That is what True Love is. It exists. It is real. It is infinite. It is the most important thing in the world, and the most powerful thing in the world. Compared to Love, hate is small and immature. Hate can topple countries, but Love can unite the world.
Even when I am not sure even if there is a God, I always believe in Love.
I don't know what I believe anymore, as far as Christianity goes. But I do know this, that the one thing I've always believed in, more than anything else, is Love.
Love is real. Love is everything I want, everything I need. When people act out of Love, it is powerful, it is sweet, and it is always for good. Love teaches us respect and kindness for our fellow human beings, teaches us strength and courage, wisdom and hope. Love is at the center of all things, is the happiness we all strive for.
The Catholic church does not teach about Love often enough. It tells us of God's love for us, but it tends to focus on the rules he has laid out for us, on justice and punishment. I don't want to hear about that. If there is a God, I hope that he is a god of Love. Love is the temple at which I worship.
American society, American pop culture, has got Love all wrong. They describe it as something selfish, something all-consuming, something which sticks in your mind and dictates your actions; you cannot stop thinking about them, how much you want them, how much you want them to be yours and only yours. --But this is not Love. This is Lust. Lust is dangerous, can poison a relationship to the point of breaking it. Many people fall in lust with someone and believe that it is Love, because of what pop culture and society lead us to believe.
So what is Love, you ask? Love is patient, love is kind. It is not selfish; it is selfless. Love does not dwell on injury; it is forgiving. Love is not self-important, but makes one forget oneself. Love is all things light and beautiful, warm and clean and bright. Love helps us grow. Love is optimistic and hopeful. Love is endlessly forgiving. Love is pure. Love never dies.
That is what True Love is. It exists. It is real. It is infinite. It is the most important thing in the world, and the most powerful thing in the world. Compared to Love, hate is small and immature. Hate can topple countries, but Love can unite the world.
Even when I am not sure even if there is a God, I always believe in Love.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Dilemma
Dear Internet,
Awfully talkative today, I know. This is my third entry... but I just really need to talk to somebody, somebody that won't judge me or talk back, somebody I don't know, somebody I can't hurt.
See, my dilemma is that I'm in choir. I sing in my church choir, and yet, as you saw two entries ago, I'm seriously doubting everything about my religion. I feel out of place... and yet in place... when I'm there. Singing is what I want to do, what I was meant to do. But I don't believe the words I'm singing. I don't buy into it; I think it's archaic and strange. I feel dishonest, singing things I don't believe, and even some things I don't even like.
I especially hate Handel.
I've been waiting for a year for my choir director to realize I'm the strongest descant they've got, and now that the director has finally realized and admitted it, he told me I could pick out a soprano piece from Handel and learn it. Handel is hard enough to learn as it is, and I've been dying to showcase my voice, but I hate the way he phrases things. The notes come too quickly. I want to sing something melodic, something beautiful-- not something staccato and energetic. And I don't believe a single word in Handel's book.
But they need me... so I'll stay... for now.
Awfully talkative today, I know. This is my third entry... but I just really need to talk to somebody, somebody that won't judge me or talk back, somebody I don't know, somebody I can't hurt.
See, my dilemma is that I'm in choir. I sing in my church choir, and yet, as you saw two entries ago, I'm seriously doubting everything about my religion. I feel out of place... and yet in place... when I'm there. Singing is what I want to do, what I was meant to do. But I don't believe the words I'm singing. I don't buy into it; I think it's archaic and strange. I feel dishonest, singing things I don't believe, and even some things I don't even like.
I especially hate Handel.
I've been waiting for a year for my choir director to realize I'm the strongest descant they've got, and now that the director has finally realized and admitted it, he told me I could pick out a soprano piece from Handel and learn it. Handel is hard enough to learn as it is, and I've been dying to showcase my voice, but I hate the way he phrases things. The notes come too quickly. I want to sing something melodic, something beautiful-- not something staccato and energetic. And I don't believe a single word in Handel's book.
But they need me... so I'll stay... for now.
Family complaints
Dear Internet,
Do you ever wish that everyone around you would just disappear? Not forever... just for a while. I just want them all to go away and leave me alone.
See, my aforementioned Catholic parents have this problem: Mom has the maturity level of a 5-year-old, and Dad has the maturity level of a 4-year-old, and both of those children act friggin' spoiled. Oddly enough, I've found Mom is more reasonable than Dad is, even though Dad is the one that's in charge.
Dad came from a military family. His dad was very German and took a disciplinarian method to child rearing, running his house under a very strict thumb and taking no questions to authority. Dad is nicer about it, but it's the same philosophy.
Mom, on the other hand, grew up with the most permissive parents you can imagine. Sure, they were Catholic, like the rest of our family, but they let their kids get away with anything. They drank, they got knocked up, they stayed out late and partied, they pissed off drivers on purpose; they could do whatever they wanted and their parents didn't blink an eye. So Mom is the permissive one.
I don't know why they're so immature.
Mom was the youngest of eight, and she was the only girlie girl (her two sisters were tomboys), so I could sort of see how she got spoiled as a kid. That, and her permissive parents, sort of make sense... I guess I could see why Mom never really grew up. At times, her 5-year-old maturity level is even endearing.
But she's panicky, she always jumps to conclusions, and she's way too concerned about her appearance. She gets stressed out easily, and when she's stressed, she starts freaking out and talking really fast and high-pitched, stuttering, and isn't really sure what to do, but insists on being in charge. And no matter what mood she's in, she can't stand silence. If no one else is talking, she'll talk about the same thing over and over again, rambling, just to fill in the air.
Her methods of doing certain things are really fucking annoying, too.
If she wants someone to do their chores, she either yells at them or sings in an overly cheerful voice in order to annoy them into doing it. If someone is fighting with another sibling, she calls them names, sinks down to their level and lower, gets into the fight, and makes everything worse. If she actually notices one of her teenagers questioning her authority, she just yells at them, like if she talks louder she's suddenly and unquestionably in charge.
Dad is worse.
He expects us all to be psychic. If we don't know what he wants, what he's thinking, he gets mad at us. If we don't do a chore, he tells us a story about how he grew up and guilt trips us. He's always guilt tripping people. If we don't do what he wants us to do, even though he almost never tells us what it is he wants us to do, he pouts and sulks and brings it up over and over for months afterwards, no matter how minor and insignificant the incident was.
If one of us gets in trouble with Dad, he almost never is willing to listen to the reason behind our actions. He expects us to know what we did wrong, even if we are convinced we did nothing wrong, because sometimes we honestly don't know why he's angry. He just punishes the offender with no explanation and a lot of anger.
Neither of them takes criticism on their parenting methods-- when I try to talk to Mom, she rejects what I say right away, no matter how right I am or what studies I have to back me up, and none of us would ever DARE trying to criticize Dad.
It's really fucking annoying.
It's one thing when it's a kid acting like he does, pouting and throwing tantrums, but when a full-grown adult, when an authority figure, acts like he does, it is shameful and appalling. And the worst part is there is no talking to him about it.
The other most annoying member of my family is my brother. I have two brothers; one of them is in elementary school and is very energetic and sweet. He talks too much, daydreams a lot, and is rather effeminate. He's also extremely skinny, probably because he seldom eats and never stops moving.
But he's not the annoying one.
No, the annoying one is my other younger brother, who is two years younger than me and is in his senior year of high school.
Him, I can't wait to be rid of. He's looking at colleges that he'd have to live at, and I couldn't be happier to see him go. (I live at home and commute to school.)
This kid-- this kid-- thinks he knows everything. He thinks he's the third parent. Even when Mom or Dad, or even both of them, explicitly says that I am the one in charge, he tells me to my face that he refuses to submit to me, refuses to listen to me, refuses to respect me.
He respects no one.
He fears Dad, as does everybody, but he does not respect Dad.
He thinks he is in charge of everybody. And he is a horrible leader.
My brother's idea of teaching someone to do something is pointing out all their faults angrily and calling them stupid. My brother's idea of calming people down is speaking to them in a condescending tone as if our intelligence is barely on a human level of comprehension and saying all the most infuriating things possible. Sometimes I think he does it on purpose just to piss people off. And the whole time he makes it like he's the calm one.
He refuses to take responsibility for his actions. He avoids any sort of responsibility like the plague. He doesn't do his chores. He weasels his way out of them as often as possible, with the stupidest reasons. He won't go to bed on time, and then complains about being cranky and tired. No matter who tells him to get out of bed at a certain time, be it Mom or Dad or everyone including them, he stays in bed for at least another two hours afterwards and either yells at whoever reminds him to get up, ignores them, or comes to the door and puts on a sob show. He's so infuriatingly melodramatic!
All three of them are! It's like they all want to star in their own soap operas!!
I've never seen another man who is so quick to manipulate people with tears. Isn't that supposed to be a girl thing?! Mom says my brother is just sensitive, but it's not that. Sensitive is understanding women's feelings; sensitive is bringing women chocolates when those women are having a bad day; sensitive is sending his mother flowers on her birthday with a card saying "I Love You, Mom". Sensitive is a positive quality in a man... No, my brother is not 'sensitive'. He is a melodramatic crybaby.
It's going to be awfully funny watching that drama queen learn how to do all those chores the rest of us can do when he goes off to college. He'll have to do his own laundry, keep his own room clean... and he'll finally be out of the freaking house. It'll be just a bit more peaceful around here.
Hell, he's barely here half the time anymore. He locks himself in his room, playing his keyboard or listening to music, doing homework (the only responsibility he actually attends to), or sleeping (he sleeps way too freaking much!), and he's always listening to his music via headphones when he's not in his room. It doesn't matter if he's doing dishes, or if the radio is on. He's only not listening to his headphones when it's mealtime, and then he always has to demonstrate his unfailing knowledge of everything and why it's superior to anything the rest of us could possibly contribute to the conversation.
He says he can't wait to get out of here.
Well, I can't wait for him to get out of here, either. Good riddance!
If I'm so annoyed with my family, then why am I still here, you ask...?
Because for one, living in a dorm is rather expensive, and I happen to be within reasonable commuting distance of my college of choice. And for another, I do not want to live in a dorm if I can avoid it; I need my personal space, and that is hard to come by in a dorm. I am also a fan of peace and quiet; also hard to come by in a dorm. Another reason is that I would very much like to not move out until I have a job. My ultimate reality would be moving directly out of here into me and my husband's new house after our wedding, but of course, I have not found a husband yet.
But that's another post for another time...
Do you ever wish that everyone around you would just disappear? Not forever... just for a while. I just want them all to go away and leave me alone.
See, my aforementioned Catholic parents have this problem: Mom has the maturity level of a 5-year-old, and Dad has the maturity level of a 4-year-old, and both of those children act friggin' spoiled. Oddly enough, I've found Mom is more reasonable than Dad is, even though Dad is the one that's in charge.
Dad came from a military family. His dad was very German and took a disciplinarian method to child rearing, running his house under a very strict thumb and taking no questions to authority. Dad is nicer about it, but it's the same philosophy.
Mom, on the other hand, grew up with the most permissive parents you can imagine. Sure, they were Catholic, like the rest of our family, but they let their kids get away with anything. They drank, they got knocked up, they stayed out late and partied, they pissed off drivers on purpose; they could do whatever they wanted and their parents didn't blink an eye. So Mom is the permissive one.
I don't know why they're so immature.
Mom was the youngest of eight, and she was the only girlie girl (her two sisters were tomboys), so I could sort of see how she got spoiled as a kid. That, and her permissive parents, sort of make sense... I guess I could see why Mom never really grew up. At times, her 5-year-old maturity level is even endearing.
But she's panicky, she always jumps to conclusions, and she's way too concerned about her appearance. She gets stressed out easily, and when she's stressed, she starts freaking out and talking really fast and high-pitched, stuttering, and isn't really sure what to do, but insists on being in charge. And no matter what mood she's in, she can't stand silence. If no one else is talking, she'll talk about the same thing over and over again, rambling, just to fill in the air.
Her methods of doing certain things are really fucking annoying, too.
If she wants someone to do their chores, she either yells at them or sings in an overly cheerful voice in order to annoy them into doing it. If someone is fighting with another sibling, she calls them names, sinks down to their level and lower, gets into the fight, and makes everything worse. If she actually notices one of her teenagers questioning her authority, she just yells at them, like if she talks louder she's suddenly and unquestionably in charge.
Dad is worse.
He expects us all to be psychic. If we don't know what he wants, what he's thinking, he gets mad at us. If we don't do a chore, he tells us a story about how he grew up and guilt trips us. He's always guilt tripping people. If we don't do what he wants us to do, even though he almost never tells us what it is he wants us to do, he pouts and sulks and brings it up over and over for months afterwards, no matter how minor and insignificant the incident was.
If one of us gets in trouble with Dad, he almost never is willing to listen to the reason behind our actions. He expects us to know what we did wrong, even if we are convinced we did nothing wrong, because sometimes we honestly don't know why he's angry. He just punishes the offender with no explanation and a lot of anger.
Neither of them takes criticism on their parenting methods-- when I try to talk to Mom, she rejects what I say right away, no matter how right I am or what studies I have to back me up, and none of us would ever DARE trying to criticize Dad.
It's really fucking annoying.
It's one thing when it's a kid acting like he does, pouting and throwing tantrums, but when a full-grown adult, when an authority figure, acts like he does, it is shameful and appalling. And the worst part is there is no talking to him about it.
The other most annoying member of my family is my brother. I have two brothers; one of them is in elementary school and is very energetic and sweet. He talks too much, daydreams a lot, and is rather effeminate. He's also extremely skinny, probably because he seldom eats and never stops moving.
But he's not the annoying one.
No, the annoying one is my other younger brother, who is two years younger than me and is in his senior year of high school.
Him, I can't wait to be rid of. He's looking at colleges that he'd have to live at, and I couldn't be happier to see him go. (I live at home and commute to school.)
This kid-- this kid-- thinks he knows everything. He thinks he's the third parent. Even when Mom or Dad, or even both of them, explicitly says that I am the one in charge, he tells me to my face that he refuses to submit to me, refuses to listen to me, refuses to respect me.
He respects no one.
He fears Dad, as does everybody, but he does not respect Dad.
He thinks he is in charge of everybody. And he is a horrible leader.
My brother's idea of teaching someone to do something is pointing out all their faults angrily and calling them stupid. My brother's idea of calming people down is speaking to them in a condescending tone as if our intelligence is barely on a human level of comprehension and saying all the most infuriating things possible. Sometimes I think he does it on purpose just to piss people off. And the whole time he makes it like he's the calm one.
He refuses to take responsibility for his actions. He avoids any sort of responsibility like the plague. He doesn't do his chores. He weasels his way out of them as often as possible, with the stupidest reasons. He won't go to bed on time, and then complains about being cranky and tired. No matter who tells him to get out of bed at a certain time, be it Mom or Dad or everyone including them, he stays in bed for at least another two hours afterwards and either yells at whoever reminds him to get up, ignores them, or comes to the door and puts on a sob show. He's so infuriatingly melodramatic!
All three of them are! It's like they all want to star in their own soap operas!!
I've never seen another man who is so quick to manipulate people with tears. Isn't that supposed to be a girl thing?! Mom says my brother is just sensitive, but it's not that. Sensitive is understanding women's feelings; sensitive is bringing women chocolates when those women are having a bad day; sensitive is sending his mother flowers on her birthday with a card saying "I Love You, Mom". Sensitive is a positive quality in a man... No, my brother is not 'sensitive'. He is a melodramatic crybaby.
It's going to be awfully funny watching that drama queen learn how to do all those chores the rest of us can do when he goes off to college. He'll have to do his own laundry, keep his own room clean... and he'll finally be out of the freaking house. It'll be just a bit more peaceful around here.
Hell, he's barely here half the time anymore. He locks himself in his room, playing his keyboard or listening to music, doing homework (the only responsibility he actually attends to), or sleeping (he sleeps way too freaking much!), and he's always listening to his music via headphones when he's not in his room. It doesn't matter if he's doing dishes, or if the radio is on. He's only not listening to his headphones when it's mealtime, and then he always has to demonstrate his unfailing knowledge of everything and why it's superior to anything the rest of us could possibly contribute to the conversation.
He says he can't wait to get out of here.
Well, I can't wait for him to get out of here, either. Good riddance!
If I'm so annoyed with my family, then why am I still here, you ask...?
Because for one, living in a dorm is rather expensive, and I happen to be within reasonable commuting distance of my college of choice. And for another, I do not want to live in a dorm if I can avoid it; I need my personal space, and that is hard to come by in a dorm. I am also a fan of peace and quiet; also hard to come by in a dorm. Another reason is that I would very much like to not move out until I have a job. My ultimate reality would be moving directly out of here into me and my husband's new house after our wedding, but of course, I have not found a husband yet.
But that's another post for another time...
Skepticism and Catholicism
Dear Internet,
My parents are Roman Catholic. My mom was almost a nun, and my dad was almost a monk, but they loved each other and got married instead. As such, they have old-fashioned, stiff-pants beliefs about religion, stuffy morals, stubborn ideas, traditional ideas...
They would disown me if I ever abandoned the faith, especially my father.
Which is why I haven't told them that I don't really believe anymore.
I never believed that the eucharist turned into the body of Christ, never believed that the cheap wine turned into the blood of Christ. I never understood how the priest, a man just like the rest of us, could perform a miracle every stinkin' Sunday by saying the same boring words, over and over again... words he probably isn't even paying attention to; I know I'm not.
I never understood sainthood. How can a team of men decide that someone long dead deserves recognition, that they should be prayed to? Why are we praying to dead people? We have no proof that an afterlife even exists, yet we pray to dead people who may or may not even be in Heaven? How do we know they were even sane? If the point is to talk to God, why not just talk directly to God?
That goes for confession, too. If I want to confess a sin to God, why not just talk directly to God? Why bother telling it to an old guy who may or may not keep with his vow to not tell anyone about what I said?
How do we know that anything in the Bible is true? It's all based off of hundreds of years of oral tradition, aka people passing stories around by word of mouth. Humans have a tendency to exaggerate. How do we know how much they exaggerated, how much they twisted the stories, to spice them up? How do we know that the people writing about things before oral tradition, before language, even, were writing out of inspiration by God? How do we know that they were not just philosophers that got bored and decided to get their work published, to be read by the masses, or frustrated authors that wanted their work read? How do we know there is any truth to it at all?
And the Christians just tell me, frustratingly, that God says in the Bible that we walk by faith, but not by sight, that we should have blind faith, blessed are those who have not seen yet still believe, etc, etc.!! I'd point out to them that God and various authors of the Bible contradict themselves all over the friggin' place, but I don't think that would be taken very well by them.
Continuing on my skepticism of the Bible, the Bible was translated several times before we got the King James version, which is what we modified to get today's English version of the Bible. Some things are lost in translation between languages, so that's bad enough to make someone skeptical. But it gets worse-- not only is it a book based on oral tradition passed on for centuries, translated into several languages, and not only is the English version translated from a translated version and not directly from the original Hebrew, but the King James version almost assuredly embellishes on every frigging story in there. All the thees and thous, the repeated theme of three of everything (three was very in vogue at the time), the dragons, the imagery-- all of it is so dazzling, so obviously from that era! And we did not bother to look back at the original Hebrew and see how much of that bedazzling and embelleshing they did. We just read it as if it's absolute truth, dragons and all.
How do we know that Jesus rose from the dead? How do we know what he said, what his conversations were? How is there dialogue in the Bible? How can we know that's really what he said? Who was there, who told who? Did someone make it up? Is it basically historical fiction that was extremely embellished? Is there any truth to it at all?
Here's another thing I don't understand or believe-- Adam and Eve. How do we know those were their real names? How do we know there was a Garden of Eden, with two of every freaking animal on Earth? Doesn't that discount dinosaurs entirely? Why is there no spot on Earth where there are bones of every creature on Earth? The easy excuse they give is that the gates were closed and blocked off so none could return-- but what about the surrounding area? Wasn't it just as nice? Where did all the animals go? Did they just randomly wander off in different directions and somehow manage to go all over the globe? Why are there no dinosaurs today? If a meteor knocked them all off the surface of the Earth, how did everything else survive? If it was a disease, why did it only affect dinosaurs, and not other reptiles?
Another problem with them is that there were only two people in the world in that theory. Which means that the entire human race is a product of incest, which is strictly forbidden in the Bible. (Paradox!)
What of all the different colors of skin, the different locations of people, the different languages (Bible says: Tower of Babble! --but nothing about skin color). Did the skin color just sort of happen, depending on where they lived? --Okay, if that's the case, why the different eye shapes? Why the different kinds of hair?
Then someone said that it says in the Bible that Cain and Able married women "from other lands". Okay, and why are they not included in the creation story?
Mom says that there are creation stories similar to that of Adam and Eve all over the world. That every culture has one, so that must mean we're all united somehow, right? That this proves Adam and Eve existed? --I think not. Given the egocentricity of humans throughout history (thinking that the Earth was flat, since that is how it appears to us; thinking that the sun revolves around the Earth; thinking that the Earth is the center of the universe; thinking that the sun is the center of the universe, etc.), it would be easy to see how every culture would like to think that humans originated there. And yet, even if we did all originate from a couple of each ethnicity, how do we draw the lines to know how many ethnicities there originally were? How many original couples were there? And if there were so few people to start with, we are all inbred to some extent. And inbreeding is expressly forbidden in the Bible.
All right, so where did we come from? I do not believe in evolution, either. We did not descend from apes. If we did, then that would mean that there was an original form of ape which had a bunch of mutated babies, some of which became chimpanzees, some of which became gorillas, some of which became humans, depending on biological factors. And incest is still involved, because how else would such drastic mutations occur? We do not even have the same number of chromosomes or genes as other species of primate. That is a major genetic issue.
Going back even further, if that ape descended from an original mammal, which evolved from a mutated fish, which evolved from an intelligent bacteria... the whole story sounds stranger and stranger as we go. And it always involves drastic mutation and incest.
And if we did evolve, if I am wrong about evolution and it did happen, then why are we the only 'intelligent' life forms on this planet? What makes us so special? Why are there not other 'intelligent' life forms evolving and learning languages, speaking with us, communicating with us in some way? Why is there no further evolution of species? Why have we stopped at this particular point? What is so special about the way things are now that we have frozen the evolutionary chain of events here?
However, I also do not believe in the Big Bang theory. For one, there cannot have been nothing in the beginning, and then suddenly a dense ball of matter appeared and exploded and caused life to spontaneously form and mutate drastically. That is just ridiculous. (That, and science still has yet to explain how it was possible; there are even scientists who will say they can prove it is not possible.) Well, if that is not how we came to be, then that means that we must have been shaped by something divine.
But what?
Why are we here? Who is God, if there is one? Is there such a thing as fate at all, or is that just an idea we made up to comfort ourselves? Does God really care about us, does he really help us, or is he cold and unfeeling, observing us as if we are some kind of experiment? Does he reach out and help particular individuals with particular circumstances because of some grander plan? Is there a grander plan? Or is everything spontaneous, affected by our actions? Do we write our own futures completely by ourselves? Does God look over our shoulder and give us hints? Is everything we do pre-determined? Why give us free will if there is fate?
These and many other questions way heavily on my mind, and have done for some time... I shall leave you for now to ponder these.
My parents are Roman Catholic. My mom was almost a nun, and my dad was almost a monk, but they loved each other and got married instead. As such, they have old-fashioned, stiff-pants beliefs about religion, stuffy morals, stubborn ideas, traditional ideas...
They would disown me if I ever abandoned the faith, especially my father.
Which is why I haven't told them that I don't really believe anymore.
I never believed that the eucharist turned into the body of Christ, never believed that the cheap wine turned into the blood of Christ. I never understood how the priest, a man just like the rest of us, could perform a miracle every stinkin' Sunday by saying the same boring words, over and over again... words he probably isn't even paying attention to; I know I'm not.
I never understood sainthood. How can a team of men decide that someone long dead deserves recognition, that they should be prayed to? Why are we praying to dead people? We have no proof that an afterlife even exists, yet we pray to dead people who may or may not even be in Heaven? How do we know they were even sane? If the point is to talk to God, why not just talk directly to God?
That goes for confession, too. If I want to confess a sin to God, why not just talk directly to God? Why bother telling it to an old guy who may or may not keep with his vow to not tell anyone about what I said?
How do we know that anything in the Bible is true? It's all based off of hundreds of years of oral tradition, aka people passing stories around by word of mouth. Humans have a tendency to exaggerate. How do we know how much they exaggerated, how much they twisted the stories, to spice them up? How do we know that the people writing about things before oral tradition, before language, even, were writing out of inspiration by God? How do we know that they were not just philosophers that got bored and decided to get their work published, to be read by the masses, or frustrated authors that wanted their work read? How do we know there is any truth to it at all?
And the Christians just tell me, frustratingly, that God says in the Bible that we walk by faith, but not by sight, that we should have blind faith, blessed are those who have not seen yet still believe, etc, etc.!! I'd point out to them that God and various authors of the Bible contradict themselves all over the friggin' place, but I don't think that would be taken very well by them.
Continuing on my skepticism of the Bible, the Bible was translated several times before we got the King James version, which is what we modified to get today's English version of the Bible. Some things are lost in translation between languages, so that's bad enough to make someone skeptical. But it gets worse-- not only is it a book based on oral tradition passed on for centuries, translated into several languages, and not only is the English version translated from a translated version and not directly from the original Hebrew, but the King James version almost assuredly embellishes on every frigging story in there. All the thees and thous, the repeated theme of three of everything (three was very in vogue at the time), the dragons, the imagery-- all of it is so dazzling, so obviously from that era! And we did not bother to look back at the original Hebrew and see how much of that bedazzling and embelleshing they did. We just read it as if it's absolute truth, dragons and all.
How do we know that Jesus rose from the dead? How do we know what he said, what his conversations were? How is there dialogue in the Bible? How can we know that's really what he said? Who was there, who told who? Did someone make it up? Is it basically historical fiction that was extremely embellished? Is there any truth to it at all?
Here's another thing I don't understand or believe-- Adam and Eve. How do we know those were their real names? How do we know there was a Garden of Eden, with two of every freaking animal on Earth? Doesn't that discount dinosaurs entirely? Why is there no spot on Earth where there are bones of every creature on Earth? The easy excuse they give is that the gates were closed and blocked off so none could return-- but what about the surrounding area? Wasn't it just as nice? Where did all the animals go? Did they just randomly wander off in different directions and somehow manage to go all over the globe? Why are there no dinosaurs today? If a meteor knocked them all off the surface of the Earth, how did everything else survive? If it was a disease, why did it only affect dinosaurs, and not other reptiles?
Another problem with them is that there were only two people in the world in that theory. Which means that the entire human race is a product of incest, which is strictly forbidden in the Bible. (Paradox!)
What of all the different colors of skin, the different locations of people, the different languages (Bible says: Tower of Babble! --but nothing about skin color). Did the skin color just sort of happen, depending on where they lived? --Okay, if that's the case, why the different eye shapes? Why the different kinds of hair?
Then someone said that it says in the Bible that Cain and Able married women "from other lands". Okay, and why are they not included in the creation story?
Mom says that there are creation stories similar to that of Adam and Eve all over the world. That every culture has one, so that must mean we're all united somehow, right? That this proves Adam and Eve existed? --I think not. Given the egocentricity of humans throughout history (thinking that the Earth was flat, since that is how it appears to us; thinking that the sun revolves around the Earth; thinking that the Earth is the center of the universe; thinking that the sun is the center of the universe, etc.), it would be easy to see how every culture would like to think that humans originated there. And yet, even if we did all originate from a couple of each ethnicity, how do we draw the lines to know how many ethnicities there originally were? How many original couples were there? And if there were so few people to start with, we are all inbred to some extent. And inbreeding is expressly forbidden in the Bible.
All right, so where did we come from? I do not believe in evolution, either. We did not descend from apes. If we did, then that would mean that there was an original form of ape which had a bunch of mutated babies, some of which became chimpanzees, some of which became gorillas, some of which became humans, depending on biological factors. And incest is still involved, because how else would such drastic mutations occur? We do not even have the same number of chromosomes or genes as other species of primate. That is a major genetic issue.
Going back even further, if that ape descended from an original mammal, which evolved from a mutated fish, which evolved from an intelligent bacteria... the whole story sounds stranger and stranger as we go. And it always involves drastic mutation and incest.
And if we did evolve, if I am wrong about evolution and it did happen, then why are we the only 'intelligent' life forms on this planet? What makes us so special? Why are there not other 'intelligent' life forms evolving and learning languages, speaking with us, communicating with us in some way? Why is there no further evolution of species? Why have we stopped at this particular point? What is so special about the way things are now that we have frozen the evolutionary chain of events here?
However, I also do not believe in the Big Bang theory. For one, there cannot have been nothing in the beginning, and then suddenly a dense ball of matter appeared and exploded and caused life to spontaneously form and mutate drastically. That is just ridiculous. (That, and science still has yet to explain how it was possible; there are even scientists who will say they can prove it is not possible.) Well, if that is not how we came to be, then that means that we must have been shaped by something divine.
But what?
Why are we here? Who is God, if there is one? Is there such a thing as fate at all, or is that just an idea we made up to comfort ourselves? Does God really care about us, does he really help us, or is he cold and unfeeling, observing us as if we are some kind of experiment? Does he reach out and help particular individuals with particular circumstances because of some grander plan? Is there a grander plan? Or is everything spontaneous, affected by our actions? Do we write our own futures completely by ourselves? Does God look over our shoulder and give us hints? Is everything we do pre-determined? Why give us free will if there is fate?
These and many other questions way heavily on my mind, and have done for some time... I shall leave you for now to ponder these.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Wanted: Cover band
Dear Internet,
I want to sing in a cover band. The only problem is, I don't know anyone who is in one... and I don't know how to find one. I've tried Google, but it's not very helpful.
Internet, if you know anyone that is looking for a soprano to cover classic rock, 80s, 60s pop, love songs, country music, and anything but modern pop music, let me know. Especially if they live in Michigan.
I want to sing in a cover band. The only problem is, I don't know anyone who is in one... and I don't know how to find one. I've tried Google, but it's not very helpful.
Internet, if you know anyone that is looking for a soprano to cover classic rock, 80s, 60s pop, love songs, country music, and anything but modern pop music, let me know. Especially if they live in Michigan.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Thoughts On Modern Music
Dear Internet,
Okay, maybe I'm just picky, but it seems to me that modern music has just deteriorated over the past 20 years or so. Seriously, what the heck happened? I mean, I'll give it to Lady Gaga, she's definitely unique- but her music itself is still kind of generic. I don't even touch pop radio. Whenever I'm forced to listen to it, I'll like maybe one song per hour-- if I'm lucky. If not, it's nothing but the same generic crap. Synthesizers, auto-tuned vocals, mindlessly repetitive lyrics, and lots of sex- that's what I hear.
What happened to the days when pop radio played good stuff, music with actual lyrics and actual meanings? What happened to songs with more than five notes? And here's a question-- what happened to actual SINGING? Is it all just rap and synthesizers and auto-tune now? I'll grant there's the odd exception that actually sings most of their stuff and only uses computers to tweak their voice here and there (for example, Lady Gaga), but most of them are not even really singing anymore.
And why does music have to be so explicit? Is nothing to be left to the imagination anymore? I mean, I like sex as much as the next person, but really- there are CHILDREN listening to the radio! What happened to the days of INNUENDOS? Is the art of innuendos dead?
Another complaint: the music industry today is MUCH too focused on image. If you're not attractive, you're not gonna make it in show business. Even country music has grown more aesthetically pleasing! With today's standards, some of my favorite bands, such as Led Zeppelin, Journey, and KISS, might not have never made it simply because they are not beautiful enough. That's a damned shame.
Being a young adult, I feel a bit out of place with a lot of my peers. They all listen to pop radio and stay updated on the latest bands... but I listen to "the oldies", namely 60s pop, classic rock, 80s music (especially 80s rock, particularly 80s hair bands, my personal favorite genre of all time), and rockabilly. My taste runs usually about 25 years younger than that of my friends. Now, don't get me wrong- my friends enjoy the good stuff as much as I do- but when they want to talk about modern music, I'm out of the loop.
However, I am not overly tempted to get back IN the loop.
If there's ever a movement for hair bands revival, I will be on top of that. I will promote it and follow it- heck, I'll dress for it! Hairspray, leather pants, you name it! Bring on the Van Halen, the Bon Jovi, and the Ratt! Bring on the Poison, the Quiet Riot, the Cinderella!
It almost makes me wish I had been born a couple decades earlier.
Okay, maybe I'm just picky, but it seems to me that modern music has just deteriorated over the past 20 years or so. Seriously, what the heck happened? I mean, I'll give it to Lady Gaga, she's definitely unique- but her music itself is still kind of generic. I don't even touch pop radio. Whenever I'm forced to listen to it, I'll like maybe one song per hour-- if I'm lucky. If not, it's nothing but the same generic crap. Synthesizers, auto-tuned vocals, mindlessly repetitive lyrics, and lots of sex- that's what I hear.
What happened to the days when pop radio played good stuff, music with actual lyrics and actual meanings? What happened to songs with more than five notes? And here's a question-- what happened to actual SINGING? Is it all just rap and synthesizers and auto-tune now? I'll grant there's the odd exception that actually sings most of their stuff and only uses computers to tweak their voice here and there (for example, Lady Gaga), but most of them are not even really singing anymore.
And why does music have to be so explicit? Is nothing to be left to the imagination anymore? I mean, I like sex as much as the next person, but really- there are CHILDREN listening to the radio! What happened to the days of INNUENDOS? Is the art of innuendos dead?
Another complaint: the music industry today is MUCH too focused on image. If you're not attractive, you're not gonna make it in show business. Even country music has grown more aesthetically pleasing! With today's standards, some of my favorite bands, such as Led Zeppelin, Journey, and KISS, might not have never made it simply because they are not beautiful enough. That's a damned shame.
Being a young adult, I feel a bit out of place with a lot of my peers. They all listen to pop radio and stay updated on the latest bands... but I listen to "the oldies", namely 60s pop, classic rock, 80s music (especially 80s rock, particularly 80s hair bands, my personal favorite genre of all time), and rockabilly. My taste runs usually about 25 years younger than that of my friends. Now, don't get me wrong- my friends enjoy the good stuff as much as I do- but when they want to talk about modern music, I'm out of the loop.
However, I am not overly tempted to get back IN the loop.
If there's ever a movement for hair bands revival, I will be on top of that. I will promote it and follow it- heck, I'll dress for it! Hairspray, leather pants, you name it! Bring on the Van Halen, the Bon Jovi, and the Ratt! Bring on the Poison, the Quiet Riot, the Cinderella!
It almost makes me wish I had been born a couple decades earlier.
First Entry
Dear Internet,
I am new at blogging, but I want to put my voice out there, and this seemed like the most trendy way to do it... And as an added bonus, I get some weird form of anonymity. Which is nice.
As this is my first blog, I won't get into anything too weighty. I'll save that for my second entry (lol).
I hope people actually read this, and that my voice is somewhat more heard than it was before I created this thing. If not... well, I guess I'll keep talking to cyberspace.
I am new at blogging, but I want to put my voice out there, and this seemed like the most trendy way to do it... And as an added bonus, I get some weird form of anonymity. Which is nice.
As this is my first blog, I won't get into anything too weighty. I'll save that for my second entry (lol).
I hope people actually read this, and that my voice is somewhat more heard than it was before I created this thing. If not... well, I guess I'll keep talking to cyberspace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)