Society


Society21 Apr 2005 11:06 am


On my way home tonight I ended up behind a Chevy with a “bumper sticker” in the rear window… Actually, “bumper sticker” isn’t the best way to describe it; it was a corrugated cardboard yard sign held in place with blue painters’ tape. It was smack dab in the middle of his rear window - there was no way for him to see out around it.

This is all odd enough by itself, but what really caught my eye was what the sign said. The sign said, “Jesus Is Lord Not Allah”

I sat and blinked a few times, wondering if I had misread his vehicular missive to the world. It distincly said “Jesus Is Lord Not Allah” - my eyes were not deceiving me.

It’s exactly this sort of religious intolerance that keeps everyone at each others’ throats over petty, stupid differences.

Someone I know is fond of pointing out, “But that just shows the bad side of christianity - they don’t speak for the majority of us.” Well I have to say - shame on all the christians who’ve had this thought, let alone those who would actually put a sign like this on their vehicle or applaude someone who would.

I know it’s not just christians who are intolerant, but it’s rather in fashion right now given the current radically religious conserativism that’s sweeping the country.

However, people wonder why religions are perceived badly? I think it just takes one glance at a statement like this to show us - vividly - why.

Humor and Society10 Apr 2005 10:09 pm

I was reading our city’s local liberal rag (primarily because nothing else was available) and rather than get my blood boiling by the outragious liberalism spewed forth by their “staff writers”, I flipped to the back of the magazine to scan the personal ads and help wanted section.

As I was reading the help wanted section this advertisement caught my eye. It read: “If you’ve been referred to as Hippie, Liberal, Environmental-Waco, Progressive or a Non-Conformist, we want you!”

I thought, “Okay, at least they know who they’re looking for.” Then I read the very next line (I swear I’m not making this up): “Sleep Late 2-10:30“.

I thought to myself, “Huh, that about says it all doesn’t it?”

I’m sure there are some liberal, hippie, environmental-wacko, progressive non-conformists out there who aren’t slackers and generally lazy bums, but I’ve never met one.

I realize that this is my own bias towards left-leaning people, but I feel some vindication that even those who would target the way-left-leaning has to admit their shortcomings.


Humor and Potpourri and Society16 Dec 2004 08:30 am

The FCC announced Wednesday that it would lift its restriction on cell phone useage in planes. As you can imagine, this has caused a flurry of stories on radio and TV promising, “It’s coming reaaaal soooon nooow, you’ll be able to use your cell phone on an air plane!”

Pardon me? I don’t want people to be able to use their cell phone on a plane. That’s just rude to everyone who has to suffer through one half of their conversation.

I feel qualified to make this statement because I was once a cell phone junkie too. There was a time - in the not so distant past - where I was never without my cell phone. I didn’t hesitate to hand out those seven little numbers to anyone who showed the slightest interest in the ability to get in touch with me at any time.

I carried my cell phone everywhere and I always had it near. I had home chargers, office chargers, travel chargers, car chargers and spare batteries. There was no chance I would not have a full battery and be able to make or take any call that was beamed, over the aether, to my phone.

Oh, I tried to be polite and not use my phone where it would have gotten me killed. Movie theaters, libraries and job interviews were right out! Almost anywhere else though was fair game.

I lived like this for about 4 years. Making and taking calls, being a “mover and shaker” and being universally available. There was a period of time in the late nineties where I didn’t bother to have a home phone. I was far ahead of the “no-phone-but-a-cell-phone” trend that’s so popular now. The only difficulty at the time was ordering a pizza from Pizza Hut, but since their pizza is terrible I actually came out ahead - no more Pizza Hut brand pizza!

Over time I slowly noticed something; some of the people I knew who were die-hard cell-phone junkies like me were being a little less faithful to their phones. Each week they would have their cell phone around them less and less. I wouldn’t be able to catch them running out the door to a meeting; I wouldn’t be able to catch them on their way to dinner with the family. They were slowly “de-phoning” their life.

And you know what? It really didn’t cramp my ability to talk to them. They would call me back or I would catch them at the office and we would have our conversations. They were getting by just fine without a cell phone all the time, and I was getting by just fine without them having their cell phone all the time.

At first I was mad, “How dare they not be reachable twenty-four hours a day?” I would cry. But then I had to face the reality that while they may have been available twenty-four hours a day, I couldn’t recall any times I had needed to contact anyone at 3 a.m. - only the possibility existed.

So I slowly began to evaluate my own cell phone habits; were they healthy? I was definitely fitting in with what society called a “normal” cell-phone user, but is being “normal” compared to society as a whole a good thing?

Very gradually I started to be a little less available by cell phone. It was painfull at first, I had seperation anxiety. I would think, “What would happen if an emergency blew up and I wasn’t available to deal with it?” I had to come to the painful realization that the planet and civilization had managed to get along without my help for a looooong time, and they would probably be okay without me at the helm for a Sunday afternoon.

So I began to leave my phone behind. I would go to the movies without it instead of having it on “silent” mode right next to me. I would go to dinner without it. Slowly, I started making it through whole weekend days without my phone clipped to my belt.

I had broken myself of a bad habit, and I had turned the corner. I realized that things kept running pretty smoothly without me. There were a few times I missed a quasi-important call, but nothing worth worrying about which is what I would have done in the past.

I felt liberated, I felt free! The cell phone was no longer a burden and I was no longer its master. Last year I switched to a new provider and took a new number (against my will). At first I was annoyed because I would have to update everyone to give them my new number. But then I started really thinking about who needed my number in the first place. I was able to cut down who had my number, and only hand it out to a select few people.

By doing that, I reduced my call volume which actually allowed me to carry my phone even less!

I’m not completely free of the cell phone. I still carry it during the week while I’m at work. I carry it if I’ll be out late so my wife can reach me. It’s still in my life, but not in control anymore. If I forget to charge it I don’t worry so much. If I miss someone’s call I know they’ll call back if it’s important.

So the FCC may lift their ban on cell phone usage in the friendly skies but we need to pray that the FAA doesn’t lift their restriction. Ahh, what’s that? The FAA? Yep, there are actually two bans on cell phone usage in the air. The FCC’s ban was to ensure that ground interference was minimized and the FAA’s ban was to ensure that the radios in the cell phones wouldn’t cause a problem with the air plane’s electronics. The media isn’t making a big deal about the FAA angle.

Fortunately for us all the FAA’s commissioned study results aren’t due until 2006. So we should have at least another year of peace and quiet in the great blue yonder.

Society01 Dec 2004 10:14 am

Life is full of double standards, but what makes people tolerate one outcome and villify another? Case in point, Debra Lafave’s “exploitation” of a 14 year old student. This past summer she had sex with a student and is now facing criminal charges since, well, it’s illegal to have sex with minors.

The double standard? She’s a she and she’s an arguably attractive “she” at that. The arguement could be made, “Well, what 14 year old wouldn’t want to have sex with a hot, 24 year old teacher?” This is the very arguement I heard thrown out on a radio show this morning. The radio show’s point was most people could look at a young, attractive woman and her crime and be a little leinient because…well…what 14 year old wouldn’t want to make it with a hot, 24 year old teacher?

The problem I have is this; suppose the teacher was a very attractive 24 year old man, and the student was a 14 year old girl. Is it the same thing or worse? I would submit it’s worse. When innapropriate sex occurs between a man and an underage girl it’s pretty universally vilified, but if it happens the other way around…well…it’s not so bad.

Why is sex, and the thought of sex so perverted and full of double standards like this? Either it’s just as bad both ways or it’s not as bad both ways. I know why we protect our children, but when we promote - and let society promote - these double standards it doesn’t do any of us any good.

Debbie LaFave

News and Politics and Society14 Dec 2003 10:35 pm

Today Saddam Hussein was captured in Iraq. The first pictures I’ve seen show him as a haggard, unkempt, and rather pathetic looking man…and that’s my fear.

Will people look at this image and feel sympathy and compassion for Saddam? I’m heartened to see that the “man on the street” clips being shown on cable news are overwhelmingly supportive of making Saddam pay for his actions. I’ve not yet heard anything about taking it easy on him.

What really bothers me is that now that we do have Hussein in custody, the few democrats I’ve seen get face time have been very supportive, like they had been rooting for this all along. It’s standard run-of-the-mill politicos, but it irks me to no end.

So today gets an A for its historical significance. Washington dems gets a C- for their predictable liberal spin they they are happy with our military action…today. And, hey CNN take note, when I see Al Sharpton as a talking-head you get an F!

Society13 Dec 2003 10:38 pm

Who creates late night infomercials? They make them all so damn seductive; is there some burgeoning realm of psychologists that do nothing but dream up new ways to sucker people out of their money?

Actually, I don’t think it takes much to sucker people out of their money. It’s easy to deceive — all it takes is a little spit and polish — and people will throw money in a vain attempt to become like the people the infomercials show as being wildly successful.

What I want to know is; how can the people who pander to the lowest common denominator sleep at night? Of course, that’s a dumb question to ask because the psyche will allow a disturbing about sleaziness in most people. Is it a built-in feature of our gray matter or is it a result of our culture and society?

All I know is I need to keep the hell away from my MasterCard when I see how the “SuperSlicingKitchenChef” will complete my life while it chops any household vegetables I might throw its way.

« Previous PageNext Page »