About these ads
News

Random Thoughts: 3/29/2012

  • Why the hell would the birth of a child cost $1 million anywhere?  That is just freaking ridiculous.
  • Here’s a list of the best anti-aging products you can get for under $20.  Query:  Why is everyone so ashamed of their age?  Everyone gets older.  Accept it and get over it.  Enjoy your life instead of freaking out because of a fucking wrinkle.
  • Hey, did you know that J-Lo wore a neon dress out in public or that Clay Aiken had plastic surgery?  Who gives a shit?  Honestly, why is this news?
  • Here is a list of 9 things you should never say to your boss.  Noticeably absent were such phrases as:
    • Fuck you.
    • That’s not my job.
    • Get off your ass and do it yourself.
    • You’re an idiot.
    • Why do you make more than me when you don’t even know how to do my job?
    • What are you doing over here?  Is Facebook down?
  • Last week, Spike Lee retweeted what he thought was George Zimmerman’s address.  It was actually the address of an elderly couple who now fear for their lives.  What I can only assume Lee was trying to do was to get someone over to Zimmerman’s house for some vigilante justice.  I understand the anger this case has fueled, but honestly, how is doing what Lee did any different from what Zimmerman allegedly did?  You’re condoning the same actions for which you are upset at Zimmerman.  Hypocrite.  People need to settle down and let the authorities do their jobs.
  • Wow, sometimes stupidity is amazing.  Some idiot in Austria who felt he was too sick to work and didn’t like the jobs he was being offered cut off his own foot with a mitre saw in an attempt to get unemployment benefits.  What an idiot.  I hope this guy gets declined for the benefits as this is obviously fraud.  This is so stupid I just don’t know what else to even say about it.
  • A Denver dad whose 12-year old son stole from him is forcing his son to spend spring break holding a sign in public that says he’s a thief.  Bravo, dad.  We need more parents with the courage to discipline their children.  Unfortunately, this article got some comments from some idiotic psychiatrist who disagrees with the father’s discipline.  “The taking-responsibility part is cool, but the rest of this is not cool,” Florida psychologist James Huysman told the paper. “This is about shame. In the old days, we used to just shame people, hang signs around their necks in public.” Huysman said Jose is too young to gain any “insight” from the punishment.  First of all, yes it is about shame.  If you’re a thief you should be ashamed of it.  Secondly, for this idiot to suggest that the child is too young to gain any “insight” from the punishment is an insult to the child.  My children are 12 and best believe if they received this punishment they would understand why they received it and why what they did was wrong.  Psychiatrists in general are more a detriment to society than helpful I think.  They are the reason we are always looking elsewhere for blame instead of where the blame should lie.  It’s always someone else’s fault, right doc?
  • So, a church will invite you to its service if you’ve drowned and killed all of your children, but will refuse to give communion to a lesbian because living with another woman is “a sin.”  What.  The.  Fuck.  Now, I know the priest who publicly denied the lesbian communion was punished, but the church said that he was punished for other actions, not for his (mis)handling of the lesbian.  What does it say about the church that it values murderers over gay people?
  • As I predicted when I heard about this law initially, a judge has struck down an Oklahoma law requiring women to have an ultrasound before having an abortion.  As I have also stated in the past, I am against abortion but give it up people.  It’s legal and it’s never going to change.  There are more important things to worry about.
  • Well, it appears that Christian oppression has exists beyond our borders.  A Filipino high school student was banned from attention graduation ceremonies at her Catholic school for posting a picture online in which she has a cigarette and is holding a bottle of liquor.  This is apparently immoral.  Where exactly does it say in the Bible that you can’t smoke or drink?
  • From the “what the fuck is wrong with people?” file, here is a 76-year old man who shot his 49-year old wife and his two dogs because one of the dogs shit on the floor.  Really?  Is that a valid reason to even punch somebody, let alone kill them?  What an idiot.
About these ads

About Twindaddy

Sometimes funny. Sometimes serious. Always genuine.

Discussion

16 thoughts on “Random Thoughts: 3/29/2012

  1. Your list of things to not say to your boss is better (and I say that as a boss); Spike Lee’s actions were incredibly stupid — that poor couple; the Catholic Church really does seem to be trying to piss folks off; the ultrasound in Oklahoma may have been struck down, but Arizona just put a stronger one on the books — either way there are real, legitimate, non “oops I got pregnant” reasons for terminating a pregnancy which are never taken into account by the fanatics proposing and passing these bills.

    Last but not least, I bet that man’s wife is really glad that it’s so easy to get a gun in the US that you can use whenever you are pissed off. (TwinDaddy, you KNEW this one was coming!)

    Like this

    Posted by Elyse | March 29, 2012, 1:43 pm
  2. I’m ashamed to admit that the past two Sundays I actually watched the Celebrity Apprentice and witnessed Clay Aiken in all his glory. He is such an enigma to me. I can’t stand his voice/music, but he’s actually pretty funny on apprentice.. mostly because he’s always shooting the other contestants down and making snarky-ass personal digs towards them. he’s got an especially big hate on for Penn of Penn and Teller. its awesome.

    Like this

    Posted by breezyk | March 29, 2012, 2:48 pm
  3. I know how much you hate the Catholic Church, but tying the lesbian at communion incident to Andrea Yates is uncalled for.

    First of all, the church Yates wants to attend is not known — it may not even be Catholic. If it’s not Catholic then you certainly can’t blame the Catholic Church for another church’s actions towards Yates.

    For the sake of argument, let’s assume she does want to go to a Catholic church. Attending a church service is not the same as receiving communion. Anyone is permitted and encouraged to attend a church service, but the Church teaches that only confirmed Catholics who have confessed their mortal sins are permitted to receive communion. I don’t think Yates is a confirmed Catholic (and it appears as if the lesbian wasn’t, either) so both would not be allowed receive communion for that reason. Even if Yates is somehow a confirmed Catholic, according to the article you linked to, Yates is apparently remorseful of the murders (i.e. she is presumably repentant and would confess it) which would make her eligible for communion. On the other hand, even assuming the lesbian was Catholic, the Church teaches that she is not eligible for communion if she is unrepentant and hasn’t confessed (which the priest presumed she was — we’ve been over this so I won’t rehash it).

    Actually, the fact that Yates wants to attend church is wonderful news. The Good News is that, no matter how bad your sins are, through Christ you can be redeemed and receive God’s forgiveness if you repent and ask for His forgiveness. This is easily seen in the story of the two men who were being crucified next to Jesus — one mocked him and asked him why Jesus couldn’t save them all but the other asked Jesus for forgiveness of his sins, and Jesus told the one who asked for forgiveness that he would be in Paradise with him later that day.

    The Church’s teaching is consistent and the Church does not value murderers over homosexuals.

    Like this

    Posted by Null | March 29, 2012, 4:39 pm
    • No, most of what the church does is uncalled for.

      At the bottom of the article the lawyer for Yates says that she “would just like to get back into a stable church whereby God and Christianity become a role in her life.” So it appears that whatever church it is, it is a Christian-based church.

      I’m well aware of the church’s teachings on sin and how you can pretty much do anything you want and be forgiven as long as you’re remorseful. It’s still galling to me how the church treats gay people especially in light of the way that they’ll invite someone who murdered her children back to the church. How about a few months ago when a church in rural Kentucky banned interracial couples from attending?

      The church’s hypocrisy is what gets to me. They go on crusades against gay marriage and abortion yet do nothing when complaints of sexual abuse are made against their priests, like in Philadelphia. They need to clean up their act before they tell others how to live their lives.

      My whole problem with all Christian based religions is their contention and adherence to the Bible, which they claim is the word of God, but was written by man. The only words actually written by God (that I know of) are the Ten Commandments, words that a lot of church goers ignore.

      Finally, I’d point out that in this article her lawyer states that the extreme preaching of an Oregan preacher may have contributed to Yates’ insanity as she killed them because she didn’t want them to go to Hell. What was this guy telling her?

      Like this

      Posted by twindaddy | March 30, 2012, 4:20 pm
      • “At the bottom of the article the lawyer for Yates says that she “would just like to get back into a stable church whereby God and Christianity become a role in her life.” So it appears that whatever church it is, it is a Christian-based church.”

        Right, but lots of churches call themselves Christian. Different Christian denominations have very different attitudes toward homosexuality — some say it is moral and others say it is not. We do not know the denomination of the church Yates wants to attend, but only if it is a Catholic church would the Catholic Church have control over both Yates’ attendance and the lesbian’s ability to receive communion.

        In any case, you’re forgetting an obvious difference between Yates’ case and the lesbian. The lesbian was allowed to attend the service, which is exactly what Yates wants to do. The only way you can possibly equate the two cases is if (a) Yates wants to attend a Catholic church (as opposed to a church of a different denomination) and (b) that church allows her to receive communion.

        “It’s still galling to me how the church treats gay people especially in light of the way that they’ll invite someone who murdered her children back to the church.”

        The lesbian was allow to go to church, too. She just wasn’t allowed to receive communion. We have no indication that Yates wants to go to a Catholic church nor that she would be receiving communion.

        “How about a few months ago when a church in rural Kentucky banned interracial couples from attending?”

        That is not a Catholic church (it is Baptist). Once again, you cannot hold the Catholic Church responsible for that.

        “The church’s hypocrisy is what gets to me…”

        That’s a fair criticism of the Catholic Church and one that is frustrating to me, too. But that doesn’t mean Catholic teaching is wrong.

        “My whole problem with all Christian based religions is their contention and adherence to the Bible, which they claim is the word of God, but was written by man. The only words actually written by God (that I know of) are the Ten Commandments, words that a lot of church goers ignore.”

        Actually, not all Christian denominations adhere to Biblical inerrancy. That is an important and difficult theological debate but the Bible does not need to be inerrant in order for Christianity to be true. We have historical evidence (i.e. outside of the Bible) of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection — and that is what determines whether or not Christianity is true.

        You say you “know” that God wrote the Ten Commandments. So you believe in God? Just not in Christianity?

        “…her lawyer states that the extreme preaching of an Oregan preacher may have contributed to Yates’ insanity as she killed them because she didn’t want them to go to Hell. What was this guy telling her?”

        I don’t know what he was preaching, but he’s not a priest and therefore not under the jurisdiction of the Catholic Church. You can’t blame the Church for that, either.

        Like this

        Posted by Null | April 2, 2012, 4:00 pm
      • In light of your misgivings about the Bible, you might be interested in this: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/inerrancy-and-the-resurrection

        Like this

        Posted by Null | April 5, 2012, 2:11 pm
        • Not sure what you want me to gain from this. This is one man’s opinion on what he thinks makes the accounts of Jesus’s death and resurrection the truth.

          Like this

          Posted by twindaddy | April 6, 2012, 11:55 am
          • You said your problem with Christian religions is their “adherence to the Bible”. That article discusses Biblical inerrancy and how inerrancy does not have to be true in order for Christianity to be true (i.e. we have evidence that Jesus died and was resurrected outside of the Bible). Of course, those non-Biblical sources were written by fallible men as well so the question is: what would you consider sufficient historical evidence for an event in history? In particular, what would you consider sufficient historical evidence for the death and resurrection of Jesus?

            You say that the article is merely “one man’s opinion” on the truth of Jesus’ death and resurrection. What is your opinion? What evidence do you have to defend it?

            Like this

            Posted by Null | April 6, 2012, 1:39 pm
          • When referring to the adherence to the Bible I’m not speaking of Jesus’ death and resurrection specifically, I’m referring to the fact that their beliefs (it’s sin to be gay, or that pre-marital sex is wrong) are derived from the Bible.

            Those beliefs are based on things that were written by man, not God. The problem is that most people believe the Bible to be the word of God, when it in fact is not. It is merely a book of stories compiled into one book, that was written not by one man, but by many.

            As for Jesus being crucified, I do not doubt that happened. Him being resurrected is tougher to believe, but that’s where faith comes in. There are others ways for that to be explained, as well.

            What it boils down to is this: a lot of what the church considers to be morally wrong I don’t consider to be morally wrong. I look at it from a perspective of how things affect society. They see everything in black and white and decide what things are right or wrong based on an archaic book written by men long dead.

            For instance, I look at being gay this way: who does it hurt? What makes you think it’s wrong? If a gay couple gets married, how does that contribute to the deterioration of society? What makes you think that God considers that to be a sin?

            I question things and form an opinion on those answers.

            You look at a gay man and say he’s a sinner just because and old book says so. Or the church says so based on the writings in that book.

            There are many people who use the Bible as a justification to hate and persecute others who they deem to be sinners. Here is one example (http://mackquigley.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/race-mixing-is-a-no-no/#comments)of a guy who found a verse(s) in the Bible to justify his stance that God does not condone interracial relationships. The God I was brought up to believe in loves everyone and wouldn’t ban two people who love each other from being together.

            So, yeah, I have a problem with the church telling people the Bible is the word of God when it’s not. The article you linked to even states that it was written by men and that the stories for the New Testament weren’t officially collected until roughly 200 years after Jesus died. Do you know how much a story could change in just 200 years?

            Look, if you want to believe in the Bible that’s great. But I’m not going to take anyone’s word for it that the Bible is the word of God when it was clearly written by fallible men. Men who likely put their on spin on things.

            We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. I will give you credit that you’re one of the few Christians who are not judgmental and I thank you for that because in my experience those are few and far between. Perhaps if more Christians were like you my disdain for them wouldn’t be quite so strong.

            Like this

            Posted by twindaddy | April 6, 2012, 2:40 pm
          • I brought up Jesus’ death and resurrection because that is really the bare minimum for Christianity. If that is true then Christianity is true, whether the Bible is inerrant or not.

            In all honesty, I’m not sure about Biblical inerrancy. I’ve heard good arguments both for and against inerrancy, and you’ve mentioned several good arguments against it. The problem, I think, is that people are very good at taking verses out of context and twisting them to “say” what they want them to say.

            It is interesting you brought up the use of the Bible to try to ban interracial marriages. I have encountered almost that exact problem personally. My mom’s parents (mostly my grandmother) did not approve of my father primarily because he is Hispanic (also because he is Catholic, and my grandparents are Baptist). My grandmother tried (among other things) quoting Bible verses to say that my parents shouldn’t get married. My mom’s parents did not attend their wedding.

            Needless to say, I’m well aware that people twist the Bible to try to suit their own purposes.

            I’m sorry to hear that you’ve had such bad experiences with other Christians. Please just keep in mind that the failure of “Christians” to be good ambassadors for Christ does not mean that Christianity is not true.

            Like this

            Posted by Null | April 7, 2012, 12:45 pm
          • I’ve never stated that Christianity is or isn’t true. It’s a matter of faith. I just don’t have enough faith in mankind to blindly believe everything that’s written in the Bible. Men lie. They embellish. They want people to believe the same as they do. That is why I’m skeptical of the Bible. That’s why there are so many variations of Christianity today. People broke off from the church because they decided they believed something else.

            As I said earlier, I was taught growing up that God loved everyone regardless of who they are or what they’ve done. Sadly, many of the people who taught me those very things didn’t reflect those teachings with their actions. So I quit going to church.

            I still believe in God I just don’t believe everything that the church teaches.

            Like this

            Posted by twindaddy | April 7, 2012, 1:47 pm

We don't tolerate scum.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

About these ads

Follow Twindaddy!

Twindaddy on Twitter! Twindaddy on G+!

Bloglovin’!

Follow on Bloglovin

Blog for Mental Health

Blog for Mental Health

My Cause

Out of the Darkness

Please click here to donate

Don't have enough junk in your email? Not to worry, we can help! Click the link below to have even more stuph sent to your inbox.

Join 3,697 other followers

Revis’ Latest 33 Grams: 33 Grams of Blog

We cannot load blog data at this time.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,697 other followers

%d bloggers like this: