Tuesday, January 31, 2012

A Couple of Quick Things

First off, it would seem that the internet overlords at my place of employment have deemed it necessary to life the restriction on my blog.  So now, I can spew my profanities and what not at work, once again, when I should probably be working.

(It's more likely that they realized the accidentally blocked the entire blogspot domain, and they're probably trying to figure out how to block just mine)

Yesterday, I came across a search term used to find my blog, and I about shit myself with laughter.  It read:

"diet?  fuck that shit"

I don't know why, but apparently Christian Fearing God-Man was found not once, but 26 times yesterday under that search term.  I find it fairly fucking hilarious.

Also, since Larry over at PR is not able to blog much due to some family issues, I'll be contributing to PR a lot more until he's able to get back into it.  So I'll likely be posting there on Wednesdays and Saturdays.  "But Jack, why can't you show that much initiative on your own blog, you lazy asshat?"

Good question, hypothetical nay-sayer.  The answer is because, as one would assume, I'm a lazy asshat, and I can't be bothered to do shit sometimes unless it's for a better purpose other than my personal enjoyment.  So at least we can say that I'm being altruistic with this, right?

Lastly, I've had something on my mind lately.  Doesn't it seem like Twitter is this big waste of space where celebrities and people of note go to have childish back-and-forth public discourse with each other?  Maybe some of you use Twitter to, I don't know, post news things or your random thoughts, but it seems like it's just another way for famous people to feed their massive egos.

That is all.  Enjoy your Tuesday, and check out Political Realities if you don't already.

Monday, January 30, 2012

Dumbass Idea of the Week: Kid as a Drug Mule

Well, at least the drugs were in his backpack and not some other unsavory place.  A 4 year old kid whipped out 9 backs of pot during snack time at school.  When the teacher tried to confiscate the contraband, the child responded with "bitch take yo' hands off mah shit."

Okay, that last part is completely fabricated, thank God.  The kid had no idea what the hell he had going on, which would be fortunate if he didn't already have 9 bags of pot stuck in his bag.

Parents: if you're going to sell drugs, you probably shouldn't use a 4 year old to do it.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

"Fair Share," and "Class Warfare": Please, make it stop!

 just might off myself if I don't stop hearing about all this "fair share," bullshit, and this goes for both sides.  One group of people says that rich people aren't paying their fair share, and the other side says that it's all somehow class warfare.  Well guess what, I think you're both wrong.

First off, let's tackle why it's stupid to say that rich people need to pay their "fair share."  The so called "1 percent," foots about 30% of the tax burden.  That's a pretty good chunk for a small group of people.  So yes, in terms of proportionality, rich people are paying their fair share.  Now, some people might think that 30% is not enough, but that's an entirely different argument.  If we strictly look at proportion, they pay more than their fair share.

Now, for those of you who claim that they already pay their fair share, and that taxing them further will stifle growth, I think you're fairly off base with that assertion, too.  Why are rich people rich, and why do they continue to be rich?  Because they're smart with their money, and they've invested in the American economy over the years.  A perpetually slow economy means that they stand to be not so rich in the future.

So I think we can all agree that investment is the key.  We want them to put their money into the economy so it can turn some sort of growth that benefits everyone.  Knowing that helping the economy helps them, why do you think that they would suddenly invest less and stifle growth just because 5% more of their income goes to taxes?

Look at Warren Buffet, for example.  He's insanely rich and writes $49,000 checks to the treasury on a whim.  Do you honestly think that a savvy businessman like him is really going to say "holy shit, I pay 5% more of my income to taxes!  I have to seriously tighten my belt, or my entire lifestyle is going to crumble around me!"?  Do you honestly think that 5% is going to be more than a minor annoyance to someone as rich as him?

Logically, no.  But I get the sense that a lot of rich assholes have convinced a lot of people that that's how they think.  The mega-wealthy likely don't give two shits about losing 5% more of their income.  They will still invest, probably even invest the same amount that they were investing before.  I mean, how much of their income goes to investments anyway?  I think it'd be interesting to see.

And they might actually invest less just so that they can get what they want.  Investing less because they pay more taxes has more with them being greedy assholes than it does with wanting to take less risk.  Don't believe me?  Well then you've got a *lot* more faith in human nature than I do.

So here's an idea: lets stop using bullshit catch phrases like "fair share," and "class warfare."  The real issue is that middle class Americans pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes, and they're the people who need that money the most.  What's that?  Do I hear the whispers of "flat tax," on the wind?

If I'm required to pay 25% of my annual income to taxes, then some guy who makes millions more than me should be required to pay the same proportion.  It's only fair, isn't it?  Sure, he needs to invest his money, but I need to eat and raise two children.  So as your logic goes, because I don't have enough money to invest, I should get to keep less for myself?  Doesn't that seem just a little bit on the stupid side?

Anyway, we all know that the 1% can very, very easily continue to invest at their current rate even if they cough up 5% more of their income to taxes.  Stop kidding yourselves on that one.  Now, how that money is spent is a completely different story . . .

Monday, January 23, 2012

Dumbass Idea of the Week

So I would have posted this morning, but my place of employment decided to restrict my blog as "adult/mature content."  So I guess I'm going to have to figure something out.

But fuck you, place of employment which shall remain nameless.  Fuck you and your bullshit standards!


Something tells me they're right to restrict browsing my blog . . .

Sunday, January 22, 2012

Joe Paterno: Gone to that great bowl game in the sky

Joe Paterno has died.  I don't give two shits about what many people have to say about him: the man is a legend.  For over 60 years he was a living embodiment of what honor and integrity meant.

Some of you will continue to shit allover his name due to the Jerry Sandusky scandal.  Many of you probably think that Paterno should have done more.  Hell, even he regretted not doing more.  But what I find funny is that Joe Paterno did more to positively impact thousands of lives than any of his detractors have done.

It's kind of ridiculous that we live in such an all-or-nothing society, where one mistake suddenly washes away an entire lifetime of service to one's fellow man.  At a point in his life where his health was beginning to fade, bones breaking, and enduring the stress of coaching a Big 10 football team when most people are retired, JoePa didn't know how to handle the situation.  He thought that the people he had turned the situation over to, those actually legally obligated to do something about it, would take care of it.

He was wrong, and people looking for blood because they can't handle their emotions sought his.  The funny part is that he actually did do something about it.  He didn't sweep the allegations under the rug.  He told his superiors who in turn notified the Penn State police, who then dropped the entire investigation.  Jerry Sandusky raped those boys, not Joe Paterno, but this scandal will forever tarnish whatever reputation he had preceding it.

Well, it won't for me.  I'm the type of guy who doesn't pretend to know what I'd do in someone else's shoes.  Do I believe that a lifetime of good absolves anyone for a moment of sin or weakness?  No.  But I do understand that all human beings are flawed.  I mean hell, Joe Paterno was so concerned with being ethical that he once reported himself to the NCAA for a violation that he committed (he saw a player working out in his free time, which is a no-no due to practice regulations in the NCAA).

So say what you want about him.  The man was a much better person than 90% of the population, and he didn't actually do anything wrong.  Some people are just angry because he "didn't do enough."  It's not like he raped those boys.  It's not like he murdered someone.  Hell, JoePa didn't even break the law.  But I know that doesn't matter to a lot of people who put emotion ahead of rational thought.

Anyway, for those of us who don't act as though we're impeccable saints, raise a glass for a man who truly had a positive impact on society; one of the few men in this world that actually believed in words like "honor."  If you'd like to read a much better tribute to him, here's a good link.

Friday, January 20, 2012

So Gary Busey walks into a bar . . .

. . . and asks the bar tender what the happy hour specials are.  The bar tender says "the only happy hour special we have is jack and coke."

Gary says, "okay, I'll have the happy hour special."  The bar tender nods, and then gives Gary a jack and coke.  Gary gives the bar tender an indignant look and says to him, "what the hell man?  I asked for the happy hour special."

The bartender, bewildered but ultimately intrigued because it is Gary Busey after all, replies "but Gary, I told you what the special is.  Like it says there on the sign, the only happy hour special is jack and coke.  I gave you jack and coke."

"No," Gary argued, "you said that the special was gin and tonic."  Pointing at the sign, but not looking at it "and that sign says it's gin and tonic you dumbass.  Can't you read?"

As the bartender looks at the sign, reading in little chalk letters "Happy Hour Special: $3 Jack and Cokes," he is starting to feel the irritation build up, especially since Gary insulted his intelligence.  I know I said Jack and Coke, he thought to himself.  Mustering up the will to remain cordial, as he wants Gary's continued business, the bartender answers "of course I can read, Gary.  The sign clearly says 'Jack and Coke.'  Did you read the sign?  Did you listen to me when I said 'Jack and Coke'?"

Gary immediately becomes incensed.  "How dare you insult my intelligence.  Of course I read the sign, and of course I listened to you.  The sign clearly says 'Jack and Coke,' and that's what you told me.  But you've given me a gin and tonic."

Unable to hold back his irritation, the bartender barks "I didn't fucking give you a gin and tonic.  It's a Jack and Coke.  It doesn't even look like a gin and tonic.  You asked me what the special was, I told you Jack and Coke.  You asked me to give you the special, so I gave you a Jack and Coke.  First you claimed that I told you the wrong special, and then you admitted that I told you the right special.  Now you're claiming that I gave you the wrong drink.  If you taste it, you will see that it's clearly a Jack and Coke, which is the special today."

Gary gives the bartender an obstinate look, but tastes the drink anyway.  It's clearly a Jack and Coke, and the bartender can tell that Gary realizes this.  Gary takes a moment to formulate a response.  The bartender looks at him with a hint of satisfaction, because he knows he's proven Gary wrong, but he is met with disappointment.  Gary looks at him and says "well I don't understand why you're getting so upset and insulting me.  I asked for a Jack and Coke, and you gave me a Jack and Coke.  Now you're insulting me and telling me that the special is Jack and Coke."

At this point, the bartender is in disbelief.  He's unsure whether Gary is just messing with him or if Gary has completely lost his mind.  The bartender, seething with rage at Gary's impertinence, collects himself long enough to make a final plea.  "Gary," he says, "I never once said that gin and tonic was the special.  From the very beginning, I said that Jack and Coke is the special.  I even showed you the sign that says so.  When you asked for the special, I gave it to you.  At no point did I say 'gin and tonic is the special.'  At no point did the sign ever list 'gin and tonic is the special.'  And at no point did I ever give you a gin and tonic.  So what is your problem?"

"My problem," a visibly perturbed Gary Busey replied, "is that you can't take yes for an answer."

The bartender, seeing that he was not going to get anywhere with Gary Busey, simply served him his drink, and walked away to help the other customers.  Surely, he thought, not everyone in this bar is a moron who can't admit when he's wrong and changes an argument in a desperate attempt to always be right.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Responding to Fan Comments: Protecting Ravenous Wolves

Robert Felton, I'm sorry to do this.  Please understand that this is not meant to ridicule you in any way.  I was not expecting someone to disagree with me so vehemently on my post entitled "Protecting Ravenous Wolves: Has the world gone bonkers?"  I feel as though our responses to each other should be brought to the forefront for discussion.

Here is Robert's response:
What a crock of extreme right Christian fundamentalist horse shit. No, humans don't have the right to decide which species should stay and which should go...natural selection (baby)?!
Are you, perchance, on medication?
I feel like there's a lot wrong with what was said there, and I wrote a lengthy response.  So here is how I responded to Robert (who I hope still visits and criticizes me).

Robert,
Thanks for visiting Christian Fearing God-Man. I always welcome new perspectives and readers.

First of all, I think it's clear that you haven't read much of my work here, or else you never would accuse me of being a "extreme right Christian fundamentalist." I don't even have the slightest of inclination towards that persuasion. Maybe you ignored the title of my blog?

Secondly, what is fundamentalist about the notion that if a population of ravenous beasts is starting to kill off your livestock that you have no right to defend it?

Your statement "humans don't have the right to decide which species should stay and which should go" is a logical fallacy. If we don't get to decide which should die, why do we get to decide which should stay?

Answer me this. If you're a livestock owner, lets say cows, and those cows are your livelihood, would you simply stand by and let the wolves tear your cows apart, essentially destroying the things that make you money and put dinner on your table?

Let me guess, you're John Rambo, right? You'll go out and hunt the specific pack of wolves tearing your shit apart.

Oh, you're not Rambo? You're not a hunter? Well then how will you deal? Just get a "real" job right? No, you'd probably ask the government to help you out, just like these livestock owners have done. Pretend you're in charge, and a bunch of the citizens of your town are coming to you asking you to help control the wolf population ravaging their livestock and making it unsafe to go out at night. What do you do? Do you ignore them and tell them that their livestock must die to serve some sort of higher moral principle?

Here's a question. Are you pro-choice?* I bet you are. If so, then how can you tell me a human has the right to decide whether or not another human is allowed to be born, but a human is somehow not allowed to (A) decide whether a vicious animal lives or dies and (B) is not allowed to protect his the lives of his livestock?

*Disclaimer: I'm pro-choice, before you go lumping me into the "extreme right" category.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Rick Perry on the Desecration of Bodies: Not a Criminal Thing

I think it's time we face facts and ask ourselves if we really are as bad as some people say we are, and by we I mean Americans.

Of course, the actions of a few dumbass marines is not representative of an entire people, but sometimes I have my doubts.  Four marines are being investigated on criminal charges for desecrating the bodies of their enemies.  The asshats apparently videotaped it, and thought that it'd never get out I guess.

Now, the descration of the fallen is nothing new.  We know it goes on, and has probably since the dawn of man.  But that doesn't make it okay, even if the enemy is horrifying.  Although I can understand why a person would do it, there really is zero excuse for it if you call yourself a civilized human being.  If you're someone who has lost someone in a war, how would you feel if you saw a video of your loved one's corpse being pissed on by your enemy?  My guess is you'd probably feel fairly shitty.

I think it's a good thing these guys are going to be brought up on criminal charges, and Rick Perry saying that such a concept is "over the top," goes to show what a shit head he is.  Perry must not understand that any and all misconduct at the hands of our troops are used to bolster the ranks of terrorist organizations.  Not to mention, it also makes us look like a bunch of douchebags.

Yeah, we fight for freedom, and liberty, justice, and all that jazz, but deep down we're just as shitty as the next group of human beings.  The best part is that some of you will likely disagree with me.  An argument I can see coming is "those douchebag, lowlife terrorists deserve that.  They're subhuman, and they got what was coming to them!"

Well, isn't it funny that the terrorists likely think the exact same thing about you?  I know, I know.  "Well we're right Jack!  We stand for liberty and justice!  They stand for opression!"  That may very well be, but nothing excuses such sickening behavior.  My guess is that the Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at such talk. 

People don't want to seem to believe it, but in light of shit like Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and now this, we have to face the fact that when the chips are down, many of us are little better than our enemies.  How many of you enjoyed watching US troops being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu?  Ah, but that's different.  It's okay to sacrifice everything that makes you a decent human being so long as such horrors are being committed against someone designated as our enemy.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Dumbass Idea of the Week: Iran's Barbie Doll Crackdown

For the record, I realized several months ago that I should give a subtitle to my Dumbass Idea of the Week series.  I was stubborn though, and for some inexplicable reason I held off until now.

Anyway, western civilization is threatening sanctions against Iran for being assholes.  Go figure, right?  Whether it's over nukes or the Straights of Hormuz, Iran is always saying/doing some stupid shit that gets it in trouble with the rest of the planet.

So how are they getting back at the west for such an affront to their sovereignty and national well-being?  Banning Barbie Dolls of course.  Yes, Iran's morality police have been out in force to toy stores allover Darius' kingdom forcing vendors to remove Barbie Dolls from their shelves.  So Iran seeks to win a cultural victory by banning toys.

In another stroke of hilarity, Iran has also been promoting the sale of toy versions of the UAV drone they captured some weeks ago.  Now that is actually pretty funny.  Well played Ahmadinejad.  Well played you beautiful bastard!

And now, in the spirit of moral depravity and lewdness, here's a picture of a girl that I happen to be madly in love with.  And by "in love," I mean I lust after her like a vegan loves a veggie burger.


I wonder if it's illegal to be smoking hot in Iran . . .

Friday, January 13, 2012

Political Conversion: I think I'm a Libertarian

A good friend of mine posts comments here occasionally (the anon that calls me Jackie).  He and I have known each other for about 12-ish years now, and we've had plenty of conversations about politics over the years.  For as long as I've known him, he's always been a staunch Libertarian.  When I was younger, I didn't understand it.

Admittedly, I thought that Libertarians were kooks bent on anarchy and apathy towards societies unfortunate and disenfranchised.  After reading a lot of what Ted over at Country Thinker has written, I've come to the realization that I'm probably a Libertarian, too.

He wrote a piece about Gary Johnson, governor of New Mexico who may run for president as the Libertarian candidate.  He listed his official platforms, and I agreed with all of them save one.  In a nutshell, I'm a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. 

I think the government needs to let free market principles take their course rather than try to steer the economy (as the steering has been about as bad as an 80 year old blind alzhiemer's patient behind the wheel of a mack truck).  We've created a huge welfare state which I believe seeks to perpetuate itself for the purpose of keeping the poor on the dole forever.

I also think the government needs to keep its nose out of our personal lives.  That means the government shouldn't tell women whether or not they should have abortions, the government shouldn't concern itself with what kind of food we eat or how much salt we ingest, and it sure as shit shouldn't be the judge of what groups of consenting adults are allowed to get married.

Although I am a strong advocate of a powerful military and impenetrable national defense, I don't think that we should be involving ourselves in so many world affairs.  I'm not advocating isolationism, but rather a smaller geopolitical footprint.

And if people want to come to this country to have a better life, let them.  As long as they go through the proper legal channels and either get a visa or some sort of work permit, or if they work to obtain citizenship, then no one should stop them from pursuing a better life (afterall, many of us owe our very existence to immigrants).

I can't really consider myself to be a Republican anymore, because I think the party is completely broken.  It's broken because there's no sense of ideological or theoretical consistency.  You seriously cannot believe in freedom of religion and at the same moment call this a "Christian Nation," and say that we need to get back to our "Christian Roots."  You can't believe in freedom of choice and the right to privacy while simultaneously trying to bar women from getting abortions, using birth control, and banning gay marriage.

Also, you can't tell me that there's such things as natural rights and human rights, but think that such concepts only apply to American citizens.  You can't say that we were right to stop the human rights violations in Iraq, but we're also somehow justified in violating the rights of people that we deem to be "combatants."  You can't honestly tell me that every human is created equal, and say that it's okay to protect the right to a speedy and fair trial for some but not others.

I just can't do it anymore.  The mainstream parties are no longer concerned with anything that even closely resembles an intellectual approach to politics, and all they do is play on the fears and passions of the people to get votes.  I can't be a part of a movement in which its adherents are totally okay with contradicting themselves, and worse convinced that there is no contradiction in their beliefs.

So, if Ron Paul doesn't get the GOP nomination, I likely won't be voting for a Republican this November.  I'll probably "throw my vote away," to Gary Johnson should he be the Libertarian nominee.

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Occupy Hollywood

The inspiration for this article comes from and article on Capitol Commentary yesterday.  We've got it pretty good here in America, where the worst that most people have to worry about is whether or not they'll be able to do yoga with their dogs.

But here's a quote to put into perspective what I'm going to try to convey.  "You and your friends are going to wonder how you ever lived so large while leaving so little for the rest of us."  That's a quote from Anne Hathaway in the Dark Knight Rises trailer.

What made me think of this?  I heard on the radio yesterday that Jay Z and Beyonce dropped $600,000 on a solid gold rocking horse, $20,000 on a crystal encrusted high chair, and $10,000 on a crib or some shit.  Altogether, that's $630,000 dollars that could have gone to something along the lines of, oh I don't know, malaria vaccinations in Africa.  Maybe they could have fed a poor family in El Salvador for like the next 10 years.  Oh I know, they could have given like 5 kids full rides to college for that kind of money.

But instead, they decided to spend it on their child, on opulent frivolities that symbolize the very essence of decadence and greed.

I'm a capitalist.  I believe that it's not immoral to be rich, but I also believe that it's hard to be rich and *not* a selfish, greedy asshole.  A rich person is entitled to live whatever lifestyle they want, but they have to realize that that lifestyle comes with a caveat.  I'm sure Jay Z and Beyonce know that there is horrific suffering going on in the world, but they think their little brat so important that it would be better to blow all that money on bullshit the kid doesn't even care about rather than to allevaite that suffering.

You know what that says to me?  They don't give a shit about the human condition.

Don't get me wrong.  If I somehow struck it rich, I wouldn't give up everything I had just to help other people.  I'd find a lifestyle that I'm comfortable with (I'm a fairly simple guy, so I likely would not live in a lavish mansion, but rather something spacious and comfortable while not being too ostentatious), I'd set aside enough money to sustain that lifestyle for the rest of my life, I'd put some away for my children, and then I'd give the rest away.

I seriously would give the rest away.  First to my family, then to my friends, and then to charity.  But that's because I've got a different idea as to what a "good" lifestyle is.  My rich life would not consist of silly shit like that.  I could never, ever morally justify the expenditures these fools drop and sleep soundly at night.

But what I find funny is that these asshats, these douchebags apathetic to the plight of their fellow man, somehow dodged the bullet on the whole Occupy movement.  These entertainers and their cohorts are all part of the 1%, yet no one occupied their shit.  Why?

Probably because celebrities are, for the most part, notoriously liberal.  It's okay to be mega-rich so long as you say you give a shit about everyone else.  Nevermind the fact that, while Justin Beiber is making more money than 99.9% of American citizens can even comprehend, there is some child out there dying of malaria because he didn't have access to vaccinations.  Forget about the fact that as Blue Ivy (Jay Z and Beyonce's kid) is shitting in his crystal encrusted high chair, there's an infant who is dying of starvation.

Occupy Hollywood, a land filled with some of the biggest, cocksucking, assclowning hypocrites to ever grace this shithole slaughterhouse of a planet.  You're free to live whatever lifestyle your financial means allow, but that doesn't mean you're absolved from being a douchebag should you decide to live a life of obscene lavishness while others suffer.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

A Few things on My Mind

I've been trying harder to produce more of the outstanding content that my readers have come to expect from me.  And in that, I've realized something . . .

According to my stats, I got over 600 page hits yesterday.  Granted, a lot of that is from image searches, but I know that more than 16 people read my blog, yet somehow I've only got 16 followers.  What in the hell is that all about?

To those of you who publicly follow my blog, thank you for your support.  Silverfiddle over at Western Hero always has my latest and greatest updated on one of his sidebar things, and that makes me fairly happy.  Be that as it may, with as many hits as I get per day, one would expect that I'd have a larger following.

Sadly, I don't.  Fortunately for all of you, the web browser here at work sucks major ass, so it won't let me see who my actual followers are.  When I get home tonight, however, I will add a list here personally thanking each and every one of my faithful people.

As for the rest of you, what gives?  The best explanation that I can come up with is the fact that many of my readers are generally conservative.  Now, with the exception of people like Harrison over at Capitol Commentary, many conservatives who call themselves Republicans are also very spiritual Christians.  So my question to you is: Are you afraid to publicly follow my blog because of the name?

Or am I being punished because I'm not part of the almighty, world-wide orgy that is Facebook?  I've given it a lot of thought lately.  Larry over at Political Realities, a wonderful piece of internet space to which I contribute occasionally, is on Facebook, and he's got a bunch of followers.  I know that if I started a Facebook for Jack Camwell, I'd probably get a lot more exposure.  But fuck that.

I suppose it could also be that although some people enjoy my content, they don't want to be seen supporting some of the horrifyingly foul language, innuendos, and references that I produce.  I suppose CFGM can be fairly lewd.  I mean, I do post pictures of rather scantily clad women on holidays, even religious holidays (nothing says "Celebrate the birth of Jesus" like a nice pair of tits).  And of course, I freely say words like "tits."

Anyway, most of that is just me being silly.  It doesn't bother me one way or the other who decides to follow my blog publicly, and I just like poking fun at people.  All I care about is that people are, in fact, reading and that my message is getting out there.

But I will admit this: I want this blog to go places, and it can't go places without people supporting it.  So if you're not afraid, follow this awful patch of internet space.  If you are afraid, just tell me so!  If you simply think I'm full of shit and you'd rather that my message not spread, then don't be scared to tell me that either.

Lastly, I'm going to get back into the habbit of posting pictures with funny captions.  I've been super lazy these days, and although my page hits have gone up even with my lack of activity, I think I owe it to those who have remained faithful.

So here's a little something to offend everyone!


For my Christian audience: Nobody fucks with the
Jesus.

For those offended by foul language.


For the atheist crowd.


And for those of you offended by boobs and tattooes.
Double whammy.



Tuesday, January 10, 2012

If You're Famous, Don't Show Your Religion

That is unless, of course, you're Tom Cruise, and then you're allowed to be all about Scientology.  And it's okay to take a knee in the endzone to praise God for the touchdown you just scored . . . unless of course you're Tim Tebow.

I'm not really a Tebow fan, but I find it more than a little aggrivating that people get upset or make fun of him for his devotion to his religion.  I mean, people are acting like this is something new in pro-football.  For as long as I've been alive, the whole kneeling and thanking God in the endzone has been around.  And within the last 10 years at least, whenever a reporter on the field interviews a player, many times the first thing he says is "first off I'd like to thank God."

So what makes it so different and so much more laughable when Tebow does it?  Why do people deride him and not Terrell Owens, or any other player that displays his belief in God on the field?

I honestly don't know, but I'm sure it has a lot to do with double standards.  Yes, Tom Cruise gets made fun of for being a wacky Scientologist, and even criticized, but that still begs the question of why?  I get that religion has to be sepparated from government (to an extent, of course.  Tell me that NO ONE in government makes decisions based on the morality he or she was taught growing up).  Does that mean that religion needs to be struck from the public forum altogether?

I think the answer is a whole-hearted no.  Celebrities are not elected government officials.  Sure, they enjoy a more visible platform than most people, but that doesn't mean they are somehow less deserving to exercise their freedom of speech.

"But Jack, they're so influential, and people might take their messages more seriously than they would if it was a non-celebrity espousing religion!"  So what?  If someone is inspired by celebrity's faith, then it is certainly their prerogative to be so inspired.  If someone finds God, Jesus, religion, or whatever because they saw Tebow take a knee in the endzone, then so be it.

I will agree that religion should be primarily a private matter.  Jesus did instruct his desciples to pray behind closed doors, and to not flaunt their religion, but ultimately that doesn't really matter.  Religion doesn't have to be a private matter for people.  Although I don't particularly like it when some idiot tries to tell me that I'm going to hell because I'm Catholic, they're more than welcome to be vocal about their own hypocrisy and lack of understanding.

Similarly, if someone is so into his faith that he feels the need to express it, then go for it.  Just as someone is free to find it inspiring, you're free to ignore it.  But don't shit allover the guy just because he's gay for Jesus (yes, I said that to be super inflammatory, but I also meant it facetiously). 

People need to stop trying to make religion a taboo subject in the public forum.  It's been a part of the human experience for as long as human history has been recorded, and it will likely never go away.  You can mock Tebow for ignoring Jesus' teaching about humble service to God, but don't get offended for expressing himself, especially when the idea he is expressing is fairly harmless.

If you have to get upset over freedom of speech, then direct your ire at assholes like the KKK or the Westboro Baptists who spread messages of hate and asshattery.

Monday, January 9, 2012

Dumbass Idea of the Week

In this day and age it's hard enough to get away calling an African American person "black," without someone, somewhere getting all pissed off, let alone actually calling someone a racial slurr.

Some asshat at a Papa John's pizza place apparently didn't get the memo.  This idiot thought it'd be a good idea to write "Lady Chinky Eyes," on one of his customer's receipts.


Woops.  What a giant dumbass.  Of course the guy was immediately fired.  Thanks to his asshattery, we have a great dumbass idea of the week.  Enjoy!

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Only Americans Get Rights

Something has been troubling me a lot lately about the subject of "rights."  There are a lot of people who have turned a blind eye to the injustice that has been caused to many of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, but whenever an American citizen might lose his or her rights, those same people get ready to start a revolution.

I bet the same people say that it was right to stop Saddam from slaughtering his people.  They'd probably also condemn any other country for detaining people and holding them without trial.  I guaranfuckingtee that if an American citizen was declared to be a potential danger and snatched up by a foreign country and held without trial indefinitely, that there would be a huge uproar with many Americans.

I can see it now.  "His rights are being violated!"  Well, according to the logic of some people, apparently only his American rights are being violated.  Apparently, it's totally cool to violate human rights and natural right theory so long as the person you're boning is not a citizen of your country.

I hate to say it, but I see this as fairly black and white.  If you believe in natural rights theory, then you have to believe that every human being, regardless of citizenship, has those rights.  You would then have to believe that any violation of said rights cannot be excused.

But if you think it's okay to violate the natural rights of non-citizens, then you actually don't believe in natural rights.  That is, unless, you think that non-citizens aren't human.  If you think they don't count as human beings, then sure, it's cool to do whatever you want to them since they have no rights anyway.

I would LOVE for someone to take me to task on this one.  Comments are highly encouraged.

Monday, January 2, 2012

Dumbass Idea of the Week

I'm sorry for being so lazy the past month or so.  The call to Star Wars: The Old Republic is a strong call.

Anyway, what a better way to kick off the New Year with a story about how the Italians celebrate it.  Apparently, they're all about setting off fireworks, but they're also apparently too fucking stupid to do it safely.  This year, 561 people were hurt, and two died, from firework related accidents.

One dumbass thought it'd be a great idea to light a firecracker inside his house.  Of course, he got hurt when he couldn't throw it outside before it blew.

So congratulations Italy, you're the first dumbasses of the year (at least in my book anyway)!

For being morons.

Sunday, January 1, 2012

Happy One Year Closer to Death!!!

Here's wishing everyone a happy new year, and best wishes in fulfilling your resolutions (if you're into that sort of thing).

And to assuage those hearts weary from being cognizant of the inevitable fate of every human, here's a bit of eye candy for your visual pleasure =)