Friday, March 29, 2013

What is it with creationists and tax fraud?



(CNN) -- Actor (born again turnip) Stephen Baldwin pleaded guilty to repeated failure to file income taxes for three years and will pay $300,000 in back taxes.
Baldwin initially needed to pay $400,000 in back taxes, interest and penalties, but the court waived interest and penalties, which brought the total to $350,000, Yankwitt. The court then reduced that amount to $300,000, for which Baldwin was very grateful, Yankwitt said.

Deal Breaker - when to dump someone

This is the deal breaker -
Dumped

When you are upset about something in a relationship, and an argument ensues, do not do this:

Do not argue about ten different topics all at once. When I found myself in this situation, I employed the following strategy:

1. Isolate one topic within their argument, and no matter how much they want to complain about a million other things at the same time, I do not let them. I keep them focused on resolving that one topic until it has been resolved.

2. After the first topic is resolved, then we move on to ONE more topic. That is right, ONE topic. When that one topic is resolved, then move onto the next.

These guys want to vent their anger, not resolve an issue. So they start arguing about several topics at once. Once, I counted twenty different arguments withing a span of five minutes. Arguing intelligently and fairly is something adults are supposed to know how to do before they get into a relationship.

When someone does this - dump them. They will keep doing it, and it is relationship poison.

I found that my job was being the 'argument coordinator', frankly, that is not a role that I want to have. If a grown up cannot fight fairly, it is not my job to defend my position and structure the argument so that it remains fair.


Friday, March 22, 2013

If we can repeal the 18th amendment, why not repeal the 2nd amendment?


Thomas Jefferson is one of the most admired founders of American liberty, thought, and reason. He carried the Jefferson Bible, which was literally pages of the New Testament he cut and paste making his own mini-bible. He believed that the Constitution was a living document, and it should change as the people change. He understood that the culture two hundred years from now is not the same culture as today. Thomas Jefferson believed that the Constitution should changes as the people change. The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson gives considerable insight into his views, and helps to illustrate the vast gulf between his vision of a free society and totalitarian governments.


Sunday, March 17, 2013

Saturday, March 16, 2013

Steubenville Rape Case - Guilty

Why am I posting a blog, Saturday March 16th, 2013 at 11:00 Pacific Time, when the verdict is not supposed to be determined until tomorrow morning?

I am psychic - that's why.

No, seriously, I am writing this now, and publishing now because I think that these boys will be found guilty. After reading quite a bit of information online about this case - and I am not going over all of it in this blog now - I think that the judge will find the two boys guilty.

According to Fox News, The defense attempted to question two witnesses (the girls ex-friends) about the alleged victim’s past history, but the judge did not allow most of the line of questioning. Ohio, like most states, has a rape shield law that limits the amount of information of an alleged victim’s past that can be explored in court.

I also learned that the boys did not have "carnal" knowledge of this young lady - they inserted their fingers into her vagina, and humiliated her in ways other than sodomy or forcible rape. 

Before continuing this blog, I suggest you read the Revised Code of Ohio regarding rape. Know the law - ignorance of the law is no excuse. 

(c) The other person’s ability to resist or consent is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age, and the offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the other person’s ability to resist or consent is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of rape, a felony of the first degree. If the offender under division (A)(1)(a) of this section substantially impairs the other person’s judgment or control by administering any controlled substance described in section 3719.41 of the Revised Code to the other person surreptitiously or by force, threat of force, or deception, the prison term imposed upon the offender shall be one of the prison terms prescribed for a felony of the first degree in section 2929.14 of the Revised Code that is not less than five years.

Here we have two boys who allegedly digitally (fingering) raped a sixteen year old girl. By law - they are guilty.

What bothers me about this case is not that this poor girl has been hurt and humiliated. I care about her, as I know most decent people want her to hold her head high. I also care about these two boys as well. Yes, I know, they are the bad guys - they did something VERY wrong. But is it wrong to feel sorry for them too? I don't think so.

It was an alcohol fueled party where two teenage boys fingered a drunk girl. The boys were wrong for what they did, but I doubt that they are hardened criminals, or terrible, horrible people outside of these circumstances. I am wondering if these boys have a history of doing this thing before.

Young people and alcohol do not mix. This is why most countries have drinking ages. But then again, one of the reasons we have friends is so that friends stop us from doing stupid things.

Traci Lords is from Steubenville, and has been commenting frequently on this case. I have to wonder why, after twenty-seven years, the media insists on calling her a 'porn star'. The last movie she made was twenty-seven years ago.









Radio Show With Justin Vacula - Today



Good Afternoon Ladies and Gents,

Sunday March Sixteenth, 2013, I am scheduled to appear on Blog Talk Radio radio with host, and atheist blogger Justin Vacula. My segment will be about Thirty Minutes. We will be talking about Belief in the Unfalsifiable: Patriarchy.

Karl Popper is a very heavy topic, we may not be able to get to other topics.

You will have a rare opportunity to call into the show for a little Q & A.

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Mississippi: Bans Nutritional Information for Consumers


Before New York City's Super Size Soda Pop ban was expected to go in effect, March 12th 2012, State Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling invalidated the ban, stating that it was 'arbitrary and capricious.' Personally, I do not care what a person eats or drinks. The only thing people cannot do - or should not do - is poison their children with food. I think childhood obesity is the parents fault. 

The super size soda ban was overreaching. I agree with Tingling that the law is arbitrary. There are many other things that make people fat: watching television, not exercising, and eating the wrong things. There are many bad things that a person could eat. Why pick on the pop? I guess it was super size soda's unlucky day. 

It is no secret that the State of Mississippi makes my skin crawl. Down in the Seventh Layer of Hell - Jackson Mississippi, lawmakers passed legislation, what they call the "anti-Bloomberg law," that would prohibit local governments in the state from regulating the size of sodas or other sweetened beverages. But the law, which is virtually guaranteed to be signed by Governor Phil Bryant, goes much, much further. It also bars local officials from requiring restaurants to post nutrition information, portion size, and to restrict things like sodium.
Tony Smith, the state senator who co-authored the bill, told one local paper that the law was designed to “prevent misguided attempts to battle obesity.” I call bull on that one. The Mississippi lawmakers who signed that bill are acting like a spoiled little brother who says "no!" just because he can. That law is thumbing their noses at free thinkers and liberals. Being rebellious for the sake of rebellion is immature. 
According to the CDC, Mississippi has a thirty-five percent obesity rate. If Tony Smith wants to say that people should be allowed to buy and eat what ever they gosh darn please, I agree with him. If a person wants to eat 4000 calories, (when their body actually only needs 1800 calories), then far be it for me to stop them. 
Their 'lets be a rebel-n-thumb our nose at liberals' law also bars local officials from requiring restaurants to post nutrition information! Tony Smith wants the citizens of his state to be ignorant about the nutritional value of their food. Sodium is a major - major contributor to weight gain. How else are people suppose to know the calorie and sodium content of food, if the restaurants are not required to make that information available to them? I suppose this is another libertarian argument, "Whelp, maybe they can eat somewhere else - like a place that will publish nutritional information." 
Yeah - good luck finding that in Mississippi, the state of WalMart, Fast Food, and Baby Beauty Pageants  Like Mississippians are really going to find healthy restaurants in their city. 
Their state sucks as it is. Apparently it is not sucky enough, and their government want to make it just a little fatter, a little more ignorant, and a little worse. 
Congratulations Mississippi for voting for that fucktard Tony Smith. You may as well start reserving those supersize obese people caskets. 

Lets move on to show the hypocrisy of these people. Ladies and Gents, I would like to inform you about a weight loss drug that suppresses appetite. With the encouragement of healthcare lobbyists, Mississippi government supported legislation banning offshore pharmacies.  With that, I am going to take the same libertarian perspective, and tell my readers that they too should be able to ingest whatever they want. 

 In 2004, I obtained it by prescription in Manhattan because I needed help shedding an extra ten pounds before the summer. It is called phentermine - and it worked! I dropped 15 pounds and looked fantastic.  Phentermine is addictive, so you need to be careful with it. You take it in the morning with a protein shake. It will suppress your appetite. You will eat fewer calories and shed the pounds. 

Although I had medical supervision, you can order Phentermine from an off shore pharmacy. One of those international pharmacies that American big business does not like. Here is the link: Phentermine  The stuff is not cheap, and it will take couple weeks to arrive. 

If you are interested in getting a nice, natural tan without using UV beds or expensive spray tans that last only a few weeks? Order Melanotan II, it is very common in Great Britain. Check out the links.

Finally, if you have any interest in growing magic mushrooms for medicinal purposes, check out this site Magic. That site will sell you spores for growing your own mushrooms. 







Monday, March 11, 2013

My Dream about The Amazing Atheist Last Night

According to Web MD, "A new study shows creative, imaginative people are more likely to have vivid dreams during sleep and remember them when they wake up." The study went on to say, "When researchers looked at personality traits that contributed to dream recall, they found people who were prone to absorption, imaginativeness, daydreaming, and fantasizing were most likely to remember their dreams."

I did not look at the research method or materials, and cannot say whether or  not the study is correct. If it is true, I am one heck of an imaginative person because I remember my dreams all the time. I dream about my friends, family, children, the past, future, present and many other weird things. Last night, I had a weird dream about TJ. 

Friday, March 8, 2013

Fairness is part of Character

7:30 pm, Every Night at my house
Consistently

Other people do not always have the same opportunities we have, and it is not fair. My children are a good example of this. Every week they have story time at the library, a playgroup at the community center, and gymnastics at the Seattle Gymnastics Academy. In a few months, they will be going with me once every two weeks to the community garden where I will teach them how to care for plants. I have just enough activities scheduled to stimulate and develop my children, without over-scheduling them.

 Before I put them to bed, we have story time with books, songs, and art projects. The stories and songs are about fairness, respect, feelings, work and kindness.


We also take them to three different children's museums. They play in sand, water, climb rocks, and manipulate objects. We even have a membership to the zoo, where the boys learn about wildlife, pet farm animals, and enjoy puppet shows. Our children are privileged, not because they are more deserving than other children, but because they won a genetic lottery.

Monday, March 4, 2013

Intent is a Fargument


Yesterday I became aware of a recent philosophical debate that has flared up blogs, forums, and tempers. In the process of investigating this subject, I came to the realization that it was not even an argument - it was a fargument. Allow me to explain:

If a person makes an offensive comment to another person, yet the words were spoken with a pure heart, is that person still blameworthy for causing emotional harm? There have been some blog wars on this topic. I read three blogs and one forum discussion on this topic. First, I read Justin Vacula’s Blame and Intent, then I read Kinsey Hope’s Intent! It’s Fucking Magic. I read an Atheism Plus thread posted originally by Ginny: Intent is not magic, an Introductory Text, and finally finished with the Skakesville, Harmful Communication Part One: Intent Is Magic, written by Melissa McEwan. After reading the blogs, I slumped over on the sofa and fell right to sleep.

BRIÈVEMENT

Let’s keep the argument brief. The feminists and Atheism Plusers argue that intent does not matter, if someone says something hurtful to another person, whether they knew it or not, that person is still a bad person. Actually, bad person is not the language these ladies are using. Kinsey Hope refers to them as, “privileged fuckjobs, privileged asshole, and privileged fuckery.” I wish these angry women would use the F-bomb in a Biden sort of way, but we know that a sense of humor is in short supply these days.  In a follow-up post, Kinsey Hope stated. “This post pretty clearly is lambasting the usage of intent as a way to avoid accountability or to claim that you didn’t hurt anyone.” (See Image Below) Based upon the evidence presented, we can infer that Kinsey Hope is saying that sometimes men will say something very hurtful, and then claim that they did not actually hurt anyone because they did not intend to hurt anyone.

In all of my years on planet earth, I have never once met a person who made that argument. I have never known a person who actually – seriously – believed that emotional hurt does not exist unless there is mens rea. Emotional harm is now a strict liability crime, one is guilty even if they did not know they were saying something bad.

Justin Vacula responds to this argument, stating that sometimes people are unaware that their words are hurtful. Some people lack mental capacity, education, and some people have not been properly socialized. Sometimes, there are cultural misunderstandings at play.

If someone could not possibly know — for whatever reason — that a particular behavior may be construed as offensive, it is inappropriate to assign blame to that individual.

In the Atheism Plus Forum, the author made an analogy: “it's like you've accidentally slammed someone's hand in a car door, and then you stand there explaining that you didn't mean to do it, while their hand is still caught in the door.” That is a nice analogy - only I have never - never, never, never heard anyone EVER use that argument before.

FARGUMENT

In previous posts, I said that some of the feminists create arguments, defeat their own fake arguments, then congratulate themselves on being masters of the universe. Urban Dictionary has a definition for this behavior, it is called farguing. These women are getting angry over a fake argument.  Take a look at the test below, and tell me honestly if this is something you encounter once in a blue moon.

John Doe, “Hey you filthy #%%#, come over here and clean my shoes.”
Victim, “I am hurt and offended you called me a filthy #%%#.”
John Doe, “Oh, well you are not hurt because I did not intend on hurting you." - Ta Da, Win For Me

I think that discussing whether or not intent matters is important because we live in a world diverse world, where people can, and will, be offended by things they see and hear. If you study criminal law, work in law, or live in a society then you need to understand what your obligations are to other people. You also need to understand that intent does play a critical role when determining if someone is guilty or innocent of a crime. Even though these women have once again, constructed an amazing fargument that has already leeched away time and energy that could be devoted to more important things, truth be told, understanding intent and liability is important for everyday life.

Their intent is magic argument is another fake argument created by these women so that they can continue being the victim. I also find their argument very manipulating. Let me put it this way, remember when the Republicans were filling the airways with disturbing partial birth abortion back in the late 90s? They made partial birth abortion hot topic to so that people would have an emotional reaction, and be duped into thinking that abortion needed a lot more regulation. The fact, is that most abortions happen by aspiration – in the first trimester – when it is a lump of cells smaller than my little toe. Partial Birth Abortions are very rare, and happen only when it is almost certain the infant will die. So, why take something so rare and put it on the front page of every newspaper? To get attention, plug heart strings, and manipulate - that's why. Words become weapons, weapons become a message, and that message become reality until people smarten up, look at the statistics, and realize that it was all a word game. 

Kinsey Hope is saying that sometimes men will say something very hurtful, and then claim that they did not actually hurt anyone because they did not intend to hurt anyone. Okay: produce the names and contact information for these men who make this argument. Let's hear it from them. If these men are real, then these ladies will be able to back up their claims with evidence. 

Unless one is a complete sociopath, they are aware that other people experience emotions. It is hard for me to take sides in a fargument. In one sense, Justin Vacula is right that that the appropriate and charitable response is to give others the benefit of the doubt. Be open-minded. I am leaning in his direction. Yet, how can I seriously entertain an argument that belongs on Seinfeld, an argument these women completelytotallyabsolutely made up.




Friday, March 1, 2013

Greta Christina Angry about Oscars



This morning, after reading a blog by former attorney and political writer Dean Obeidallah, I decided to write a blog about Instant Outrage.

 “We live in a time of instant outrage. The explosion of social media and the demands of the 24-hour news cycle let us immediately express our self-righteous anger about any incident, while the content-desperate media eagerly report -- and repackage -- our rage.” 1

When I get an idea for a blog, I like to let the idea marinate for a while. After some thought, I was not sure if I wanted to write any entire blog about people who get their panties in a bunch for trivial crap. Most of you know the kind of people I am talking about. They manage to get pissed off about every little thing, and feel the need to tweet about it. Those people who are constantly streaming their Facebook status updates with things that pissed them off that day. We all know the type. I conducted a google search “ free thought blogs seth macfarlane”, when what to my wondering eyes should appear, but Greta Christina, whining about the Oscars like she needs another beer.