Category Archives: Rants

On Born Again Christians

Ladies and gentlemen, if I may, an external link to a website written by Colin Melbourne of “Born Again Christian Info.” (LINK)

I think reading this, now, I am even more disgusted by the idea of being born again.

First, I disagree that we were all born sinful, or evil. That seems to be a way simply to separate the believers from the non-believers. I believe we are all born neutral and that whether we decide to become good or bad people, or somewhere in between, is partly to do with how we are raised and partly to do with our life decisions.

Secondly, I take offense at the notion that by buying into something completely unknown, your previous actions can be totally erased. For instance, it mentions that those who do not accept the lord (JC,) yet do good, are still sinners. This sounds like a basis for persecution on abstract ideals rather than action if I’ve ever heard one. Conversely, this tells us that no matter how bad you have been, or even if you are about to die, you can be saved. Really? Then why not just go do all my bad stuff, and then, when convenient, say before death or campaigning for political office, be saved? Seems like an excuse to live an evil life for as long as you want and then be allowed to say a simple sorry and have your slate wiped. This is foolish. The choices we make reflect upon our character, period. I’ve done bad and I’ve done good – I live with it. I would never wish to exonerate myself from all my previous mistakes, willful or not, just as much as I wouldn’t wish to believe that all my future actions, having taken the oath, would be above scrutiny.

Third. Christ was persecuted back in the day, in an age where, compared to our relatively enlightened state of being now, people were very narrow minded on both sides. Christ suffered, but that’s about all I’m willing to accept. So, if you have sinned, Christ did not pay for your sins. How could someone who was killed in the past have already atoned for what you have done in the present? It’s a foolish concept. If you have sinned, you must pay for your sins. Likewise, if you are guilty, you are guilty, not Christ. If you are sick or infirm, Christ will not make you better. Though he may give you the spiritual warmth which will in turn give you the courage to muster forward, medicine and science will go just as far if not further. And, if you are lonely, Jesus did not die to be your friend. If you are lonely, you need to do something about it – as harsh as that advice may seem.

Fourth, the idea that in order to be saved and become a good person destined for heaven, all one must do is turn to Christ, smacks of little more than idolatry. Just believing will bring you redemption? Jeez. If they had said that you had to jump though a few hoops, perhaps I’d take it a little more seriously.

What bothers me about this whole mode of thinking is that it values thought and intention more than action. What we do, not what we think in private, determines how others, and perhaps even some deity, look upon us. To be good is to be rational, driven by reason and respect for others, and attempt to do good for ourselves and others. This is not a difficult theoretical task. To do good is to take pride in your work and to hold yourself to the highest standards, all while seeking no harm to others. Those who fight and kill in the name of Jesus Christ, Allah, or what have you, are not good people. To make a strong case for belief by making one’s life follow the dictates of these beings or others is the only legitimate way, I see, to proselytize.

It is really simple in theory. But in real life, following the simple dictates of reason and personal responsibility are difficult. We will all fail at times. But our goal is to not fail, and that takes hard work and determination on our part. The responsibility is ours, as is the burden. If we can accept that nobody can absolve us for sins committed past present and future, then perhaps we will work harder to not commit them in the first place.

Matt’s Premium Blog Entry

The word premium has been completely over-used to the point where it is no longer at all meaningful.

For instance, McDonalds now offers its patrons “Premium Salads.” Wow, if I wanted a salad, McDonalds is the last place I’d go. And for McDonalds to even use the word at all in regards to any of its products is just absurd.

Outlet Shopping: A large outlet center in my state is owned by a company called “Chelsea Premium Outlets.” Wow! Granted they are outlets, but they are premium outlets. I might as well be shopping on 5th avenue, who knew?

Personals: Gay, Straight, Flexual, whatever. No matter what personals site you visit they will all offer you a free account! That’s right, free. But, a minor drawback of said account is that you wont be able to: view pictures of other eligible and interested singles, send them an email, or bookmark them for later perusal. It’s like a computer without a monitor. The computer, in theory, works just fine, but you have no way of knowing that. Sign up for a premium account and ye shall see the light!

CNN.com: Streaming Video = Premium content. So basically, instead of the web being this great democratizing force where everyone can access information, you now have to pay to watch the news. Premium news? Give me a break! Considering how bad the American media already is, why would anyone pay to listen to such tripe.

From now on I’m going to follow the model that, obviously, was received so positively in focus groups across the board. As of today, I am creating a Premium section of this website. I can’t tell you what is in the Premium section, because if you knew, there’d be no reason to sign up. And on that note, because this is the initial launch of the Premium section, the sign up fee will only be $19.99 a month, 32% off regular price.

As for you plebeian fools who chose not to sign up for Definition:Premium, all I have to say is “Ha-Ha!” From now on, you will only be able to read the first sentence of all my blog posts, and view only 30X30 pixel thumbnails of any images posted therein. While you are all squinting and squirming, I’ll be sitting here in my premium leather chair chomping down on a premium McSalad while watching premium Wolf Blitzer. So long, suckers.

First Blog Rant

Just saw a funny South Park about how the whole town falls prey to the “gay chic” fad. It got me thinking about a book I read for my sociology class last semester. It’s called “All The Rage” by Suzanna Danuta Walters. It was one of the more interesting non-fiction books I have read regarding gay culture. Her thesis is pretty simple; although gay visibility has increased in the mainstream media, such visibility can not be equated with true acceptance.

The South Park touched on another theme Walters mentions regarding the acceptable gay types. Citing heavily Will and Grace, she demonstrates that most gay characters are either 1) effete and flagrant, or 2) straight wannabees. Walters is afraid that the public embrace of homosexuality is really, for most, an embrace of these very rigid stereotypes. So gays become either the exotic other, or the guy next door.

I’m at this point in my life where I am questioning how I’m going to make sense of all of this. At college I deliberately pushed peoples’ buttons at times, and was pretty flagrant. That was fun. I needed it, and Trinity certainly needed it. But on the other hand, I never wanted that to be it. All the while I felt the need to be strong in other areas, like academics and the Tripod, etc. etc… I guess for those four years I had my cake and ate it too. I could be in your face, but I could never be accused of just being that and nothing more – i.e. both the brain and the wardrobe were kickin’.

But now that college is over, and I’m attempting to be an adult, I’m thinking about how I re-channel things. I guess one of the tangible indicators that has brought this on is my dress. I have an internship downtown, and dress pretty reasonably – basically I feel like any other straight guy. I could totally get away with dressing it up at this place, but I’m hesitant to do so. Why? Because frankly I’m tired of the accusations that “minorities” get special treatment. Well, not quite accusations, but just turn to others’ blogs, and you will see that many think it even if they dare not utter it face to face. I don’t want stupid detractors to have that over me.

So is the option to become a total straight square? Well, in a way that sounds like a total capitulation to the conservative forces that be. “You should be ashamed!” they claim, and therefore I clean up my act. That’s totally unacceptable. I’m lead to the same conclusion that I’ve come to many times before. The simple truth is that if you are going to be out, you have to be better. Okay that’s really vague. What I’m saying is this: Being out is a good thing. However, because people will question the legitimacy of your accomplishments simply because you are out, those accomplishments must be genuine and better than most others’. This way you win on all fronts, you get to be out (cake,) and you can put the “special rights” people in their place (eating it.)

Some may find it unfortunate that in order to just be, and to be taken as seriously as the next guy, they have to be better than the next guy. Perhaps it is. But then again, being out is both privilege and responsibility. People hate me for saying this because it pits me against things such as affirmative action. Perhaps I’m not sensitive enough, and I’d like to be. But I’ve had a class taught by a black judge who got his position in no small part thanks to AA; the chip on his shoulder was evident in everything. It is kind of sad to see individuals in positions of such great honor forced to prove themselves to people half their age. With black people, the sad truth is that one can’t hide one’s skin color, and for at least our lifetimes, it is going to mean something to a lot of people – a lot of cultured, educated and powerful people. So blacks have to work harder to truly be perceived as equal.

Perhaps instead of being a point of divisiveness between the black and gay communities, this idea can be a bridge. We should consider ourselves so lucky that we have the choice of whether or not to take on this struggle. I personally say do it, perhaps because I’ve always been an overachiever. But there are others who won’t wish the burden or the skepticism, and will remain in the closet (or at least for the most part.) Black people can’t decide not to be black.

I think a more realistic approach to sexuality would be to say the following to kids around high school: “Some people are straight, some are gay. If you are gay, you now are lucky to live in a country where you will, for the most part, not face blatant discrimination based on your sexual orientation by authorities. However, no matter how many legal victories are won, the court of public opinion is still out deliberating. This means that while some people will wholeheartedly embrace you, others will not accept you. There is, though, another category of people who will publicly embrace you but privately comfort themselves by believing that anything you have accomplished is due, in some significant part, to your self-identified status as a minority. To these individuals, rightly or not, a self-professed minority status is seen to equate with victim hood. Thus viewed as a victim, they will see your accomplishments as thanks to scraps of good will or pity bestowed upon you. These people, not the blatant homophobes, will be the most difficult ones for you to deal with. You can chose not to address these concerns, but if you are sensitive to how others perceive you, you will have to. Although you may not feel that it is just, in order to do so, you must be doubly sincere and hard working in all that you do. We have created a culture in which self-professed minorities have to prove themselves above and beyond their individual abilities. This is not always easy, but is the route to openness and equality.”

Okay, I’m starting to repeat myself – so what do you guys think on this one… I know I’ve covered a lot of ground, but if you don’t know by know, that how I think, outwardly and expansively rather than inwardly. Simplify! Banks! Can’t trust em!