Someone's homophobic

One of my family members is on grindr, an app dedicated for homosexuals to find other homosexuals or bi's in a given area, and noted that one of the kids that we knew through our parish was on it. The moment went like this:

"I think so-and-so is gay.  He's on my website (grindr). Look ... "

Shows picture. 

"Okay,  this is weird."
"Someone's homophobic ... "

No,  someone is rather tired of hearing a certain someone make comments about their disorder and other remarks,  such as this: 

"A female conducter. Oh what is the world coming to!"

Liberals/progressives/modernists are more immune to being trolls

I say this because there's at least one of them trolling on a conservative/right-leaning libertarian blog - not every site I stumble upon, though. The conservatives who post on liberal sites are almost non-existence; if they do they're not nearly as assholish - they're quite benign, really.

Take mud _rake for instance. On his (now-defunct) blogger profile, his occupation states "unattached to any monetary-based entity" and the "introduction" warmly says "Dislike bigots and Jesus-pimpers most of all and freely give them dope slaps at every opportunity." I take that he has grandchildren because they're listed under "interests."

Yea, I wonder who was the lucky lady he impregnated and I wonder what's his relationship with his kids (mostly likely the response is "Absolutely amazing," or something like that).

Back in 2011 he asked "Are you a Christian too?" to a diatribe of a post on a blog entitled "The Anti Liberal Zone." It turns out the writer of the blog isn't really religious. The post which mud_rake responded to never even mentioned religion nor Christ. He just immediately thought "wing-nut ... probably Christian." If the writer indeed self-identified as a Christian I don't see much of a problem, but then again I'm biased.

Here are some of mud_rake's responses, devoid of any substance, insight or meaningful rebuttal (though the Christian poster who did engage with him didn't do so well in terms of apologetics) -

AntiLib answers, Am I a Christian?
No, I consider myself more of a warrior-poet

Oh, that's a relief. For a while there I thought that maybe you WERE a Christian but, with all of that 'hate' stuff that you posted, Jesus would weep bloody tears at your anti-Christian rhetoric.

I suppose that none of the other people who commented here are Christians , either, seeing how they all agree to hate other human beings.


Like you, I feel that it's good to hate. Nothing like a good, fat HATE session to purge oneself of all of the nasty toxins that build up within. It's a cathartic experience from time to time.

Do you feel refreshed after a good hate session, AntiLib? Raring to go, bright-eyed, optimistic about tomorrow- new challenges, fertile ground to plow?

I'd urge all of those who comment here to do their own hate-session from time to time. Quite cleansing of body, mind and soul.

The "that's very un-Christian like of you" card. The guy's a Gnu Atheist (check out his wordpress blog). I like it how he emphasized on the HATE session - like a snarky d-bag. "Ohhh boy I caught you now you right-wing nut bags, getting all mad!"

Mud_rake is an atheist so hating, according to him - when it's done by him, isn't so much hypocritical. Also, in italics (emphasized by me) notice the egging on of the hate session. Notice that he never actually tried to defend one perceived misinformation or accusation.

And this one -

Read the book of Revelations? Good joke, Tenth. I gave up reading Fairy Tales a long time ago, about the time I lost my first tooth.

I'll bet, Tenth, that you like the christian hymn, 'Onward Christian Soldiers.'Marching as to war.

In your fantasyland I'll bet that you play medieval crusader- fighting to free the Holy Land from the godless Muslims.

Are you, Tenth, a 'soldier of Jesus' in your bubble universe? Do you recall your European history class while in the GED program? Recall the idiotic Wars of Religion? I'm guessing not.

I'll let you go back to your World of Delusion now, Tenth. Remember though, that Jesus taught, "Love one another."

Let me count the idiocy:
1. Calling Christianity (religion in general) "fairy tales."
2. The "wars were justified in the name of religion" card when used by an atheist ... nuff said. (I haven't heard of the hymn before, but I did look it up and I sort a like it.)
3. Calling those who mix their faith and patriotism as a fantasyland. Immensely ironic given how he's of old age and his political leanings let alone his (type of) atheism.
4. He assumes the Christian poster failed to graduate high school, hence the jab at GED holders. He is appealing to the popular notion that the (Christian) religious believers are stupid.
5. Pulls the Wars of Religion card in an attempt to discredit the "mixing faith and patriotism."
6. Appeals to "love one another" when met with a stubborn opposition. How about all the "tolerance" almost universally touted by liberals/progressives/modernists? I'm guessing he forgot.

Then there's poster "RD" - Christian - who doesn't really like the hate being thrown around by some of the Christians -

10th generation...I can't agree with you there.
I don't support homosexuality, and I don't believe in abortion.
I read my Bible every day and the only thing you wrote that was actually in the Bible was to turn the other cheek.

If you want to publicly disassociate yourself with Christianity, go ahead. It is obvious you have no understanding of the Bible anyway. Jesus did not raise up armies. Paul did not overthrow Nero...

I'm taking issue with the tone here. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

Do you want to enact change? Run for office, volunteer for a candidate you believe in. But to hide on the internet and spew hatred...it's just cowardly and you guessed it, evil.

So venting on the internet is evil. So setting up a blog, even if it's entitled "anti" is evil. So sharing ones thoughts on the internet and allowing people to comment on any given post is evil. So writing a blog to express ones thoughts, even if it's considered hatred is cowardly. 

I have to agree with the poster "10 generation" when he says "I am tired of all you candy ass Christians saying turn the other cheek. The old timers that came before your old timers would think you're a pussy."

Gotta love Yahoo! Answers.

A response to "Why do some liberals support the murder of children but hate war?" (written in 2008).

Nice try, but Liberals (and the rest of the pro-choice crowd) don't 'Support the Murder of Children', they simply believe that abortion should be legal, safe, and rare.

Illegalizing it won't stop it - because if a girl or woman wants an abortion, they will get it someplace, or end up using a coathanger. If it were up the pro-life crowd, even a woman who had been raped would be forced to give birth to the rapists baby. They would also require a woman with medical problems that could possibly be fatal to give birth.

I am not a woman, nor have I ever impregnated a woman other than my wife, who gave birth to our beautiful baby girl who is going to turn 8 in May. Neither of us ever considered aborting it for a second. I would hope that no woman should ever have to make that decision, and I definitely do not support using it as a form of birth control.

It doesn't affect me, nor does it affect you. All of this 'but what if your parents had chosen abortion' crap is a null and void argument.

Now, meanwhile - war is a necessary evil. There are times when there is no other choice but to authorize the use of force against another country or group of people. This is what was done before the US went into Iraq. There was never a declaration of war (which shoots a few holes in the preznits 'wartime power' claims). Going into Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein may have been a noble cause, however the pathetic way in which the aftermath has been handled and the rampant corruption and cronyism will haunt some members of this administration for years to come.

There was an election last fall - and the people spoke. Dubya and his pals need oversight. Badly.

So far Dubya and Co. are still acting like they have a mandate. It will please me greatly to watch them fall one by one, and as they turn on each other.

Though six years old, I think the same defense still stands amongst those who do support abortion. Abortion is given a noble name change: Pro-choice. Let's hide "I support abortion" because rarely, in my experience, has anyone said "I support motherhood." And don't forget the rape fallacy. Rare? I'm too lazy to look up accurate numbers, but I'd wager that rare isn't really "rare" but more common. Dubya's admin hasn't turned on each other, yet; Obama's on the other hand ...

This is my favorite -

Why would you spend your time baiting liberals, rather than finding solutions that work for everyone? Just because they place their priorities on different aspects of the same problems you face, doesn't make them the enemy. Political parties are not sports teams- the only way one can win is if both win. Mindlessly arguing with emotional rhetoric isn't going to change any minds, and you know it. Why waste time dividing the country further?

A Straw Man argument is a type of logical fallacy, used to derail the topic by putting the other side on the defensive. The best you can hope for in employing such a tactic is a tie; because it forces you off topic too. Do you ever want to get anything done, or do you simply enjoy trolling for unproductive arguments?

 Oh. Dear. Lord.

Oh.
Dear.
Lord.

The poster that plays the moderate card and later resorts to fallacy cards. I guess if a straw man argument is a fallacy that puts the opposite side on the defensive (which it's not) then every person on trial should be let go. High school debate teams should cease to exist. Logic - ahem - should not be allowed. Everyone should win because ties don't ever determine a winner; we're all winners. Also, not sure how a tie was in anyway productive because sooner or later one of the opposite sides takes control. It's like how objectivism is touted like it's actually a state of mind when it's not. Trying to be objective is more like it.

There are other brain grenade answers directed at the question, so if you're up for it click on the link.

If you don't get pass MEPS you're good as dead to us. Gur-bye.

"They'll accept almost anyone in the military."

Not really. Besides major criminal backgrounds and large tattoos in certain areas, it's the medical exam that turns away most potential servicemen. It's natural selection at work.

An interesting observation towards disqualified applicants during MEPS (Military Entrance  Processing Station) when pleading their case -

Serving is not a right, but a privilege. True.
You don't meet (medical) standards so get over it. True.
There are other ways to serve your country. True, but those who say this never list the other ways.
An overall attitude of "too bad, boohoo, get the f_ck out of here, stop wasting our time ... Oh and I served two tours in Kuwait." Good for you. Did you save a life? No. Then I won't suck your dick. Nor will I be impressed with your "achievement" and "good conduct" badges.

Passing MEPS isn't so much an accomplishment (like one serviceman said during swear in) as it is being born with no disqualifying medical issues, or being lucky enough to avoid life incidences that puts you on the disqualified list. It's like being blessed with good genes in terms of looks and height. If you decide to become a model it shouldn't be counted as an accomplishment than good fortune that allows that person to pursue that career path.Then again I don't count a career in the glitterati world so much an accomplishment, if you want to call it that, as in good fortune and sadness masked as happiness.

Some of the medical issues that I've read about that permanently disqualified an applicant:
- having one testicle since the age of four
- suffering from a concussion at the age of 17 from being tripped

They aren't just barred from the branch that they want in, they're barred from all military branches.

It would be nice if some of the people saying "too bad" would admit that such applicants are a health liability when out on missions/job-site, that a perfectly normal, functioning body is what it is needed than any "blue chip" applicants. If you say "but I - " they'll just give the hand and say "get over it." That's okay. Until they get hurt by an IED and complain about TriCare. Well, soldier/airman/Coastie/Marine/sailor: Get over it. Decent health care isn't a right, but a privilege. You knew what you were signing up for, so I am in no way obligated to massage your now stump of a leg or arm, or say your now burnt face is "beautiful" (because it ain't, you could pass as Freddy Kuger's heir or something, seriously).

Nor should a serviceman be put in front of another applicant just because he's a military guy looking for a job once back to civilian life, especially those who were infantry all throughout their military career, straight out of high school, who probably know nothing but to aim and shoot. Do what my Marine friend did after his four year AD was done - go to college and major in a degree that is more marketable than art history (no offense to art history majors) and send your applications to HR like the rest of the civilians hoping for a job.

Also, the doctors & nurses who do the MEPS screenings are looking for potential candidates to weed out. A potential Marine candidate was put on the temporary disqualified list for an ingrown toe nail, so he had to get that toe taken of before he passed the medical exam. Given that the military currently downsized, medical waivers are much harder to come by.

If you don't suffer from any health issues,  don't have any large tattoos, and meet the minimum ASVAB score you're practically in. But the most important thing, besides that ASVAB score: a perfectly normal healthy body. My first college roommate flunked out with a 0.0 GPA. He failed all of his classes his first semester (failed it again his second semester when he was given academic probation) and later joined the U.S. Army. I don't think he made it pass Basics.

Question for gamers

and those that have anime characters as their avatar:

Why do so many - not all - of you adhere to the feminist mentality and left/progressive politics? Besides being rather "ew" towards religion (or believing in some god that actually looks like a fairy), and rather pasty in skin color (see the sun much?), I can't help but sense this demographic would form their own lunch table in high school.

One anime avatar dude I was talking to said that ISIS wasn't really a threat. He said maybe, but not entirely.

I mean, go ahead and dress up as anime characters wishing you were in Japan, and fighting for LGBT "rights." It's like you guys never fully developed and matured, day dreaming of what picture you should draw to put on deviantART.

Interstellar was Awesome

SPOILERS

But there's one tiny thing that is bothersome to a group of people. Apparently the flag of the U.S.A. being stationed on planets is considered "tribalism" - which alludes to an archaic mindset (my gosh, why can't we just be One World!?) - and that it was a bit too much of "Rah Rah Americuuuh!"

The objection is birthed because the earth, being met with a devastating fate, would forgo their "us vs. them" and adopt the "work together" mindset, dropping the provincialism.

As much as I liked Interstellar there's one thing, amongst a handful, playing off this "One World" line, that I had an issue with is the "no war" part. Besides the dysfunctional family relationships showed, there was little conflict outside the communities, everyone, more or less, got along.

So a point for the common sense for planting the American flag on the planets because the astronauts were from NASA, but a minus a point for the somewhat peaceful human existence on earth -- no wars, no riots, no "let's fuck this shit up" mentality. 

Minus a million points for the people who think it's irritating that NASA decides to put an American flag on a potential habitual planet, let alone dress the NASA office with, ya know, "American" stuff like the country's flag in the background. The horror. The madness.

Dear dear tumblr

I personally get a laugh on how the media - SI, some guy reporting for SI and John Stewart - try to spin the victim hood card with Michael Sam. Just look here. Apparently the poster is a self-proclaimed feminist. Go figure. (Note the "fist pump" a poster gave as a sign of embrace and agreement.)

There's more madness ... and more laughter. A supposed Canadian take down towards those who voted for the GOP instead of the DNC this past November election has been circulating amongst those under 30 with a tumblr account, all with a Dwayne Johnson gif, even though in real life Johnson probably wouldn't agree with the fools.

I laugh for many reasons. 20% to mock, 30% out of disgust and 50% of the reason I I laugh is because it's just plain funny how stupid & naive "open minded" people are.These are the people who consider themselves fighters of the oppressed, the downtrodden and the weak. These are the people called Social Justice Warriors.

The site that hosted the article about the Canadian disappointment of the November election is called American Against the Tea Party. Within their "about us" section this is what is written:

The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

as well as this as the site's mission -

The hatred, division, virulent, unpredictable anger, violent threats and posturing by the Tea-Baggers present a real danger to the lives of President Obama, his family, his administration, Congressional Democrats and liberals and  progressives of all stripes.  Americans Against The Tea Party is a group committed to exposing the Tea Party’s lies, violence, racism, ignorance, intolerance, bigotry, and corporatist-fascist efforts to subvert our democratic process – and organizing together to defeat Tea Party/GOP candidates on the ballot everywhere.   We support the Occupy movement.   WE ARE THE 99%.  WE ARE AATTP!

Cliche after cliche after cliche.

Poster James Richy seems to agree with the writer of the site and Richard Brunt -

I am sure America can look to Canada for political inspiration of what not to do.

Plenty HumanWear: Brand

Inspired By All -

PLENTY HUMANWEAR is a streetwear company for men and women which first got inspired by the lifestyle put forward by counter-cultural sports such as snowboard, skateboard and surf. We are also highly influenced by all artists who could die for an idea, who live solely to create and who, just like riders, grow to the beat of their passions.

Again with the "artists" + ideas + passion cards.

The thing is I like streetwear; during certain night outs and if the occasion calls for it I'll wear what's considered streetwear. But what I'm finding, when I peruse street wear brands and their philosophy is that besides the font on their logos, they blend in together. I see it when a new raw jean company opens and pulls the heritage/tradition line ... like the half dozen companies before them did. Way to practice individuality. I thought the head of marketing gave you the memo that heritage/tradition line has been used, abused and recycled before the owners decided to practice their indignation towards mall brands and fashion conformity (not that streetwear brands & the people that make them are devoid of this dreaded conformity, oh the irony).

Into the Wild = Into the Predictable

This is a joke, right?

Unfortunately the book didn't turn into an American classic like On the Road, and the feedback to Chris' actions were met with negativity and not with adulation and youthful yearning that were bestowed on the mentioned book. That's okay. Apparently the sisters' of the now-dead young man withheld a chapter that came before the romanticized bus adventure of their brother: He was abused by his parents.

Like I didn't see this coming. (I didn't, really, but it strikes as too convenient.)

Now I'm not alluding that parental abuse is fine and dandy. I'm not. But the lengths that Chris took to supposedly get away from his parents just doesn't sit right. It's kinda like how LGBT kids run away from home and say the reason why was because their parents rejected them when they probably are having a hard time coming to terms with their kids disorder, so the kid - seeing that parent isn't all "Run into my arms my child where I shall shower you with kisses!" - gets all indignant and cooks up some fantasy that makes them into some victim of narrow-mindedness and oppression. Like I said: convenient.

And I still think what Chris was mightily stupid and selfish; whatever he wanted to prove he massively failed. But hey, can't let character assassination by people like me ruin the memory of your brother, isn't that right sister McCandles?

Chris: "I'm gonna live in a bus in the wilderness to get away from society."
Sisters: "Chris was abused by our parents that's why he lived in the woods."

So which is it?

You'd think Chris would just move away, like any other sane person, to another state or city or maybe two hours away to avoid his supposedly horrible parents. But no, he moved into the Alaskan wilderness.  

Even the homeless have their romances

INT. Morning. City library. Dimly lit.

GRA is upset the file that was saved had turned out corrupted. A woman sits across, head down, trying to get sleep.

Homeless Man: Excuse lady, may I talk to you?
Homeless Woman: Yes.
Homeless Man: I just want to say you look lovely today.
Homeless Woman: I had an accident outside.
Homeless Man: What happened?
Homeless Woman: I peed myself.

Man seems uncomfortable; shuffles in spot.

Homeless Man: Uh, um ... What's your name?
Homeless Woman: Annette.
Homeless Man: Well nice to meet you, Annette. I've seen you around here and you never talk to me. Maybe one day we'll sit down and have a conversation to get to know each other better. How does that sound? Is that okay with you?
Homeless Woman: Yes.

Man walks away.

___

This is a true story. It happened just a few minutes before I wrote this, as I sit in my city's library where it attracts the homeless. They seek a warm, clean and dry place. It's quite - no one can disturb their sleep; the loud ones know they won't be asked to leave the premises. Often times the chairs they sit in  and desks they use tend to smell afterwards (I feel really sorry for the unfortunate person who later occupies the seat that Annette now sits in, unaware that its previous user was soaked in her own urine).

What humbles me is the sheer respect the Homeless Man had for the Homeless Woman for a potential "date." The only times I hear this type of respect is when someone addresses a man sir or mister or a woman miss or mam. Now the dialogue isn't exact, but dang, the Homeless Man was a gentleman. Straight up. If I hadn't turned around in my seat - since the moment I heard his voice I was sort of suspicious - I would've thought he was a well-dressed man wearing a suit and a fedora by just the way he talked and the timbre of his voice. But he wasn't well dressed - he wore a dirty old blue jacket, on his head was a dirty old blue winter cap - and that's okay: he was charming and courteous.

Compare this "getting to know you" with today's modern dating norms. It's worlds apart. It's old-style. This type of approach would be considered downright silly and pathetic, but it's neither one of those things. It's the complete opposite: manly and profound. This "getting to know you" was "friends first sex partners later." I'm not sure if the man and woman will engage in sex afterwards or maybe after two sit downs or so, but I'd wager, just the way he spoke and his demeanor, that it won't happen anytime soon, that such actions would be "off the list" so to speak. Of course, I could be wrong. 

I hope he eventually finds Annette again, in a much better state, and they have that sit down he asked. They're conversation has made my heart glow.

Election Day

Bruce Rauner was leading with about 20, 000 votes then a few minutes later Pat Quinn gained the lead. Then Rauner gained back the lead. Gotta get a wrist sweat band... It's getting hot in here.

A New Start

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/money/world-trade-center-reopens-for-business/ar-BBcGY5x?ocid=ansnewsap11

NEW YORK (AP) — The resurrected World Trade Center has again opened for business, 13 years after the 9/11 terrorist attack — marking an emotional milestone for both New Yorkers and the nation.

Some staffers of publishing giant Conde Nast began working at 1 World Trade Center on Monday. The 104-story, $3.9 billion skyscraper dominates the Manhattan skyline. The publishing giant becomes the first commercial tenant in America's tallest building.

slut shaming

I sorta support it.