Random Thoughts

New Glasses

2015-07-14T23:13:00.001-07:00

My new glasses came in the mail today.

Trifocals. I love that, now I can see in between close-up and far-away. Narrow band of vision there, but it's better than no band.

Photochromatic, too. That was unexpected. But I like it.

I had nothing at all to eat today that was sweet (ignore the doughnuts I had yesterday, and the day before, and the day before that). Yep, no sweets today.

I neeeeeeed something sweet! Chocolate! Yes! Chocolate cake with chocolate frosting!

Okay, okay. Nothing sweet tonight, either.

Ice cream? No?

Damn.

Later.

CAC & Property Taxes

2015-06-09T18:30:00.000-07:00

I read some opinions about the CAC property tax rate increase over a week ago.

One claimed it is taking our rights away. He says this is about our basic freedom to vote on issues that determine the future of this country.

My opinion of that is that if we the people had to vote on each and every item of governance it would be what is called mob rule, the majority would always get what they want. Just throw away the Constitution, the majority wouldn't need it, they already know what is best for everyone. Also, it would be impossible to manage all that voting.

One battle cry of the U.S. revolution was “No taxation without representation.” In this case we are represented, the members of the district Governing Board are elected, not appointed. And we each can still have input, just go to the meeting and tell them what you think. The proposed budget and time/date of the meeting is published on the website and in the newspaper every year.

Another opinion claimed it will raise all property taxes to $85 per $100,000 value. I wish my property taxes would be decreased to $85. My property is valued at substantially less than $100,000 and my property tax is several times $85, and then some more.

CAC employees getting a 4% raise must be evil since it will happen while CAC operates with less revenue than in 2015. It seems to me it must be a reasonably efficient operation for that to happen.

I wonder if either of them looked at CACs budget and noticed that it is 4% less than last year, that's $4,420,000 less.

The property tax rate did increase by 43.9%, but the money CAC receives from State appropriations decreased by 96.2%. Also $20,000,000 of the 2015 budget was from the sale of bonds, not happening in the 2016 budget, that's a 100% decrease.

My question here would be, which would you prefer, an increase in property tax, sales tax or income tax? And don't even think about claiming that only property owners pay property tax, renters pay it also, via their landlords (if the landlords are making a profit the renters must be paying the property tax).

I also noticed that a lot of people complain when taxes are increased but not when they are decreased. Even if there was a recent decrease they will still whine about an increase.

As evidence I include a couple of paragraphs from the CAC website (just click the link if you want to read more):

Today, Central Arizona College (CAC) is formally known as the Pinal County Community College District, receiving a large portion of its funding from the taxpayers of Pinal County. Because of its successful educational and fiscal management styles, the 2007-08 budget reflects a tax reduction for the fourth consecutive year.*

The institution is overseen by the Pinal County Community College Governing Board, a leadership group elected by voters* to help guide the institution’s growth. The five-person board is comprised of county residents* selected from specific geographic areas with a president annually chosen by the board members to lead the organization.

Here are a couple from the Arizona Revised Statutes (Arizona Laws):

ARS § 15-1461. District budget; annual estimate; computation; notice; hearing; adoption

E. The governing board of each district shall prepare a notice fixing a time not later than June 20 and designating a public place within each district at which a public hearing and special board meeting* shall be held. The governing board of each district shall publish a notice of the public hearing and special board meeting not later than fifteen days before the meeting. The governing board shall publish the proposed budget on its website and present the proposed budget for consideration of the residents and the taxpayers of the district at such meeting.

G. The governing board shall publish the proposed budget and the notice of the public hearing and special board meeting a second time not later than five days prior to the meeting. Publication shall be made in a newspaper of general circulation within the district.

Beginning in fiscal year 2013-2014, within seven days after the adoption of the proposed budget presented before the governing board, the budget finally adopted under this section shall be accessible in a prominent location on the district's official website and the final adopted budget shall be retained on the website for at least sixty months.

Naturally someone has to complain about the illegals getting a free education.

What part of U.S. Citizen or eligible non-citizen (it means legal) is so hard to understand? Of course, that only applies to Federal Financial Aid, what about scholarships?

Scholarships do not count towards bitching about property taxes because scholarships are paid by the company, foundation or organization that provides the scholarship.

Here is a little more information from the CAC website:

Central Arizona College presently offers the following federal financial aid programs:

Grants
- Federal Pell Grant
- Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant
- Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership Grant
Work-Study
- Federal Work-Study
Loans
- Federal Direct Stafford Loan
- Federal Direct PLUS Loan

Student Eligibility for Federal Financial Aid Programs

To be eligible for federal financial aid, the student must:

have financial need, (except for some loan programs)
have a high school diploma, General Education Development (GED) Certificate
be admitted as a "regular" student according to the admission requirements listed in the college catalog
be a U.S. citizen or eligible non-citizen*
have a valid Social Security number
maintain satisfactory academic progress
sign a statement of educational purpose and a certification of statement on overpayment and default (on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, FAFSA)
register with the Selective Service, if required
file your income tax return with the IRS, if required

I believe I have done a reasonable job of dispelling some myths, incorrect assumptions, jumping to conclusions based on factless opinions, etc. I do not expect this to diswade everyone from believing what the talking heads tell them, but maybe a few will check the facts before publishing their opinions.

Any questions? Comments?

*The bold with * is my doing.

Blog Posting

2015-06-09T18:25:00.001-07:00

It has been a long while since I posted anything here. I am going to try again.

U.S. Copyright Laws Are Wrong

2014-08-05T15:33:00.002-07:00

U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8

Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 8 - Powers of Congress

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

The above is only one paragraph of Article 1, Section 8, the paragraph that is relevent to this post.

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts," - it seems to me that the The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and some other copyright laws, are actually in place so the corporations that have the copyrights can profit from them in perpetuity, and are restrictive to the progress of science and useful arts, i.e. unconstitutional.

"by securing for limited Times" - copyright in the U.S.A. was originally fourteen years. Now it is variable - life of author, creator, inventor +70 years - 95 years from publication or 120 from creation, whichever is shorter - renewable.

Yes, these are limited times, except for the renewable part. Doesn't that make it potentially forever?

"to Authors and Inventors" - When did publishing companies become authors? Or corporations become inventors? Sure, the corporations money and supplies are used to facilitate inventions and publishing companies use their money to publish works by authors, but this does not give them rights to them. They spent money on behalf of the authors and inventors and should make a "reasonable" profit for doing so, but not the rights (which are supposed to be 'exclusive'), nor the lion's share of the profits, to the works and inventions.

"for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;" - How can a copyright, or patent, be for the life of the author, or inventors, plus 70 years? The constitution specifies exclusive right to authors and inventors, how can the authors and inventors have exclusive rights to anything after they are dead?

It appears to me that what has happened, and still is happening is:

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and/or other greedy, obsolete organizations are trying to stop progress and turn back the clock by
spending a lot of money on lobbying, bribery or blackmail in order to get these unconstitutional laws passed instead of using that money to find new ways of doing business that reflect the realities of the modern world.
And/or our lawmakers have kowtowed to international organizations and other countries and passed these laws in violation of our constitution.

Or:

Our esteemed lawmakers can't read, interpret or understand one simple sentence in the U.S. Constitution.

The reality is probably all of these in varying degrees.

I remember (surprise) being taught in school that if the rulers of the U.S. want to do something not expressly allowed in the Constitution they had to make an amendment to the Constitution allowing it, not just pass laws that violate what is written there or pass laws not expressly allowed.

Oh, wait, that is actually written in that same Constitution. Another Constitutional violation.

We are losing our Constitutionally granted rights faster and faster because money speaks louder than the people.

Republican Barbie

2013-10-26T21:56:00.001-07:00

I just had to post this... it's just too funny to pass up.

How Many Times Next Year?

2013-10-24T13:43:00.000-07:00

Everybody should know by now that the government is back in full operation for a few more months.

I wonder if the Tea Bagger Republicans are planning on shutting down the government again? At a cost of how many more billions of dollars for us taxpayers to owe?

I would like to know when the next tax increase is going to happen, and it will, and how much it will be.

I can't think of much right now. I'll be back soon.

Hillary Clinton for President!

Government Shutdown

2013-10-15T14:05:00.000-07:00

I just don't get it.

The Republican-led House has tried to kill the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, over forty times, without success.

Someone once said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. By this definition the Republicans in the House must be insane.

They are still proving their insanity.

They tried extortion this time. Defund Obamacare or we'll shut down the government.

The Senate called their bluff and the government is now partially shutdown.

So what do the Republicans do? They keep trying to get changes to the ACA or they'll keep the government shutdown.

They've even gone further. Now they say, make changes to Obamacare or we'll cause the U.S. government to default on it's debt.

Still trying extortion to get their way. Insane, I tell you.

What the Republicans should do is immediately eject all the Tea Party Republicans from the Republican Party. They already consider themselves a separate political party, hence the name 'Tea Party'. Let them do their own thing.

Then they should vote on and pass a 'clean' Continuing Resolution and increase the debt limit. Nothing about the ACA should be included.

Then they can start talking about changes to the ACA.

Will they do anything I suggest here. I seriously doubt it.

Maybe after their bluff is called this time they'll realize they can't use extortion to get their way and do their jobs.

Space Exploration, Funding and Benefits

2013-10-07T23:37:00.001-07:00

I read comments on various websites from people that obviously do not research, or bother to learn anything about, the subject they are commenting about.

This wouldn't bother me much except that it seems to be very prevalent.

In this post I am going to correct some misconceptions in regards to space exploration, funding for space operations and exploration. This will, hopefully, shed some light on the benefits of space operations and exploration.

Some of these misconceptions are so obvious that I do not understand why anyone would actually believe them.

Comments:

Space exploration is too expensive.

The cost is not justified.

We have no business whatsoever using billions of taxpayers dollars going to space.

Space exploration is a waste of money.

We should be looking at balancing the budget first.

My response:

NASA's budget is such a small amount of the Federal budget with comparably large returns (benefits) that I don't understand how anyone could possibly claim that it is too expensive, waste of money, not justified, etc.

The largest NASA budget in it's entire history was in 1966 at only 4.41% of the Federal budget, the smallest budget was in 1958 when NASA was created at 0.1%. The budget for last year, 2012, was only 0.48%.

This is, undoubtedly, much less than the commenters thought.

Comments:

Use the money for jobs programs.

My response:

Year 2012 - Approximately 79,000 employed, NASA ~19,000, Contractor ~29,401.

Eliminate NASA and 79,000 people with good jobs will be jobless. Sounds like a great jobs program to me – NOT.

Comments:

We should be sparing no expense to develop renewable energies instead of spending taxpayer dollars going into space.

NASA scientists should be researching energy alternatives instead of gathering useless information about space to satisfy their own curiosity.

Takes funding away from other programs that improves living here on Earth.

NASA scientist should be working on solving problems that are here on Earth. Like eliminating hunger, limiting population, get rid of fossil fuels, prevent, repair environmental damage done by humans, restoring endangered animal species.

I would rather cut all funding to NASA unless they agree to work only on solving problems that are here on Earth.

My response:

The global investment in renewable energies in 2011 was $257 trillion US dollars.

NASA budget for 2012 was $17.77 billion. As mentioned above this was only 0.48% of the U.S. Federal budget. Also a large part of the NASA budget was part of that $257 trillion investment in renewable energies.

NASA has more than twenty satellites in orbit that are part of the Earth Observing System. These satellites observe the land surface, biosphere, atmosphere, and oceans of the Earth. Their purpose is to increase our understanding of climatology/meteorology. One of these satellites is the Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite, which is dedicated to, you guessed it, greenhouse gases monitoring in our atmosphere.

They also have satellites making observations of the Sun to help our understanding of heliophysics to increase our understanding of climatology/meteorology.

All of this helps us to learn more about the environmental damage done by humans, Earth's weather, global warming, etc. All of the satellites use solar power, the research done to improve it has had a direct impact on improving solar power, which is a renewable energy source.

Medical research in in space also has direct impacts on Earthbound medicine. One example is the Advanced Diagnostic Ultrasound in Microgravity Study. This studies techniques are already being used in professional and Olympic sports injuries. Remote guided ultrasound will be used on Earth in emergency and rural situations, where a trained Doctor may not be present.

NASA is working in cooperation with National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Did I see negative comments about NASA researching energy alternatives instead of gathering useless information about space and getting rid of fossil fuels? Here's your answer.

Cut NASA funding if the don't work on problems we have on Earth? You got your wish - they are, and have been working on Earthly problems.

Summary:

The scientific and technological innovations brought to us via space science have provided so many benefits that have, and will continue to, more than justify the costs. The satellites that provide us with global internet connectivity (without this you probably would not be reading this), navigation via GPS (may not mean much to you but a lot of people depend on this - like aircraft and ships, which could cost lives without it), television (without the satellites much of the programming that is available via cable would not be available) are all due to space science and space research, directly and indirectly.

For more information stop being lazy and simply repeating what you've heard others say and look up the information before you start bitching about something.

Abortion Rights, Or Not

2012-12-30T14:41:00.000-07:00

Abortion rights, or not, according to my interpretation of Amendment Fourteen of the U.S. Constitution.

The first paragraph of Amendment Fourteen states:

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

“All persons born or naturalized” – this says to me that to be considered a person someone should be born.

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” – this one should be perfectly clear to everyone.

“nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property” – this says any person, person having already being defined as someone that has been born.

Simply put, no State shall make ANY law that deprives any PERSON of life, liberty, or property.

Nothing is said about embryos or fetuses.

But to deny an abortion to someone who's life is endangered by not having the abortion is tantamount to depriving that person of life.

Denying an abortion is also depriving a woman of her liberty by denying her the right to do with her body as she wishes.

In addition to my assumed definition of person found in Amendment Fourteen I will provide definitions of person from three different sources. I found all three via Google search.

According to these definitions a person must have a rational nature, be a thinking intelligent being. A person is a man, woman or child. An individual capable of free choice. A self-conscious or rational being. Have an individual personality.

None of these definitions include fetus or embryo. All require birth to be a prerequisite of personhood.

Therefore one must have been born for the right to life, according to the U.S. Constitution, to apply.

If you, for whatever reason, think laws should be made to protect fetuses and embryos from abortions, which still will not guarantee them life, you should be trying to get the U.S. Constitution amended to deprive life and liberty to women that need or want abortions.

Definitions of Person:

1828 edition of Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language:

PERSON, n. per'sn. [L. persona; said to be compounded of per, through or by, and sonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the state.]

1. An individual human being consisting of body and soul. We apply the word to living beings only, possessed of a rational nature; the body when dead is not called a person. It is applied alike to a man, woman or child.

A person is a thinking intelligent being.

2. A man, woman or child, considered as opposed to things, or distinct from them.

A zeal for persons is far more easy to be perverted, than a zeal for things.

3. A human being, considered with respect to the living body or corporeal existence only. The form of her person is elegant.

You'll find her person difficult to gain.

Webster used the Christian Bible as the foundation for his definitions.

CARM – Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry:

Person

A variety of definitions can be offered from a human being to a legal organization with rights. In biblical reference it is generically a fleshly individual capable of free choice. In reference to the Trinity as three persons, the word refers to the attributes of personhood: self-awareness, choice, can reason, love, possessing a will and consciousness, etc. Humans possess these attributes as well.

Dictionary.com:

person

noun [pur-suh n]

1.a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.

2.a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.

3. Sociology . an individual human being, especially with reference to his or her social relationships and behavioral patterns as conditioned by the culture.

4. Philosophy . a self-conscious or rational being.

5. the actual self or individual personality of a human being: You ought not to generalize, but to consider the person you are dealing with.

6. the body of a living human being, sometimes including the clothes being worn: He had no money on his person.

7. the body in its external aspect: an attractive person to look at.

8. a character, part, or role, as in a play or story.

9. an individual of distinction or importance.

10. a person not entitled to social recognition or respect.

11. Law. a human being (natural person) or a group of human beings, a corporation, a partnership, an estate, or other legal entity (artificial person or juristic person) recognized by law as having rights and duties.

12. Grammar. a category found in many languages that is used to distinguish between the speaker of an utterance and those to or about whom he or she is speaking. In English there are three persons in the pronouns, the first represented by I and we, the second by you, and the third by he, she, it, and they. Most verbs have distinct third person singular forms in the present tense, as writes; the verb be has, in addition, a first person singular form am.

13. Theology. any of the three hypostases or modes of being in the Trinity, namely the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Legalize Marijuana

2012-12-19T20:22:00.000-07:00

I can certainly raise my voice against absurdly classifying cannabis along with crack cocaine and crystal meth, both of which, in an addicted victim, can produce a lethal spiral into violent paranoia and a potentially lethal withdrawal syndrome. Pot, on the other hand, can lead to the giggles and “munchies.” This is akin to lumping a Mickey Mouse cartoon together with “Snuff Flicks” and hardcore “kiddie porn.”

Quote from Robert Clendenning, MD, CCFP(EM)

Things No One Tells You

2012-06-06T01:17:00.000-07:00

political-linguaphile:

Things no one tells you:

Having sex doesn’t make you a whore.
Not having sex doesn’t make you a saint.
You don’t have to have kids if you don’t want to.
You are the only person who has rights over your body.
You are no one to judge others.
“Femininity” is not anti-feminist.
Verbal harassment is not flattery.
If something makes you uncomfortable, you don’t have to endure it.
You don’t owe anything to anyone.

Snatched from http://lacigreen.tumblr.com/ (originally from: viva-la-vulva-zine)

Working

2012-05-19T12:03:00.000-07:00

I forgot to post here that I have a part time job working at Copper Mountain Self Storage.

Copper Mountain Self Storage has climate controlled indoor storage.
Indoor and drive-up storage
Boat/RV/vehicle storage.
State of the art security.
All storage units are individually alarmed.
Computer-controlled gate access.
Low rental rates and online discount coupons.

We proudly invite you to come in and see for yourself why Copper Mountain Self Storage is the premier storage facility in Casa Grande, Arizona.

I Highly recommend it for your storage needs.

I know it looks like an advertisement, but what can I say?

Slippery Bottles

2012-05-09T20:09:00.000-07:00

I discovered something last week. All the shampoo, conditioner, sunblock, etc. bottles are slippery.

No, I am not talking about when they are wet and have some of the contents on the outside of the bottle. I am talking about brand new, unopened bottles in the store.

The reason I made this discovery recently, instead of years ago, is that I haven't used shampoo or conditioner for a very long time (need hair to use them) and I seldom use sunblock... yes, I know that's stupid but I just never got in the habit.

I noticed it because in doing my job I have to handle the bottles in the store and I found they are hard to hold on to.

In my opinion it is counterintuitive to make those particular bottles slippery. They are going to be used in showers, baths and when going into water in other circumstances, as well. If the bottle is already slippery it is going to be almost impossible to hold onto when it is wet, your hands are wet and the stuff is all over your hands (slippery stuff).

The manufacturers of those bottles should be making them less slippery, if for no other reason than to protect our toes from dropped bottles in the shower. It can be done. We do have the technology.

That's my thought for today. I'll be sure to let you know when I have another.

Citizenship and Humanity

2012-04-30T23:56:00.000-07:00

It recently occurred to me that it is really strange that some of the same people that claim, or accept, that corporations are legally people do not consider illegal immigrants as people.

Some of them don't even seem to accept anyone that doesn't fit their own close-minded idea of human as people. Wrong religion, wrong political party, no religion, wrong color skin, dress wrong, talk funny (or speak funny, depending on your viewpoint).

But corporations are people. I guess I'm just really strange because I don't think corporations are people, and should not be legally considered as such. But I do think that if you are a biped that can think and communicate abstract thoughts, in other words are human, then you are a person. You are people. Corporations are not. People have human rights, civil rights. Corporations should have corporate taxes, not civil rights.

And that is my thought for today. I might have another thought sometime in the near future.

Solar System or star system?

2012-04-15T13:55:00.000-07:00

It looks like the media is determined to make the name of our star, Sol, as generic as they did the name of our natural satellite, Moon.

Moon is now used as the generic term for natural satellite all the time. Example: the moons of Saturn. Moon was originally the name of Earth's natural satellite in one language. Now it must be referred to as the moon or our moon for it to be understood that it is Earth's satellite that we are talking about.

Luna, a name for Earth's satellite in another language, has become the proper name of our satellite.

Now the media keep calling other planetary systems, solar systems. There is only one Solar System, it is the one we live in. The name of our star is Sol. Generically, it is a planetary system. Specifically, it is the Solar System.

If there are planets orbiting Betelgeuse it would not be the solar system of Betelgeuse, it would be the Betelgeuse System, which would be a planetary system.

I have noticed that it is not just the media doing this. There are other guilty parties, also. Some book writers, fiction and non-fiction, have done it. I think I have heard some of the scientists that should know better doing it, also.

Here is an example of what I am talking about:

Nine planet solar system found, with room to grow

The correct title of that article should be “Nine planet planetary system found, with room to grow.”

Feel free to comment on this, or anything else in this blog.

Infographic: Wack Weed Attitudes

2012-04-15T00:36:00.000-07:00

Via: TakePart.com

In My Head

2012-04-08T19:23:00.000-07:00

Since I can not seem to finish a story, even though I am constantly coming up with great ideas, I have decided to simply tell what happens inside my brain. I know some of my readers (?) would like to know.

I will start with something I remember from yesterday. I can't remember most of what I thought today because there was way to many things that zipped through for me to remember them all. So all you get to enjoy are the highlights, well maybe not the highlights, just what I can remember.

At least once yesterday I thought I should just stop paying on the house mortgage, start saving most of the money that is used for the mortage so I can buy a travel trailer to tow behind my pickup truck, and just live here until they foreclose and evict me. This decision is made at least once each day when the money gets really short, which is almost every day.

2012-04-06T19:15:00.000-07:00

Natural Ordermage by L.E. Modesitt Jr.
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Finished it a few weeks ago. Good like all the rest. Can't be sure without looking back in the other ones but some of the natural laws of order/chaos seem to have changed just a little bit from the early books of this series.

Outstanding book all the same. I am now reading Mage-Guard of Hamor, which is the continuation of this one.

View all my reviews

Health Care in the U.S.A.

2012-02-22T17:04:00.000-07:00

What do some people see as the problem with National Health Care?

It appears to me that most of the conservatives in our governments and the more vocal opponents of National Health Care view it as an infringement on their rights and as redistributing wealth.

These are the same people that are against abortion, pro-life they call it. Some are even against birth control.

They care so much for a small cluster of undifferentiated cells called a fetus, but don't seem to care if a human child dies because they can't get the medical care they need. Or if a woman has to suffer years of chronic pain because she cannot afford the medical care or medications necessary to diagnose and treat her.

Most of these same people claim to be Christians. And yes, according to the Bible, Jesus said the poor will always be with us. Does that mean we have to treat them badly?

We have, within our grasp what has not been possible for most of the time this world has existed. The wealth and technology to produce, transport and provide enough food, housing and health care for every man, woman and child on this planet. Apparently, not enough of us have the will or desire.

This should not require the redistribution of wealth. It would only require those that have that wealth to provide a little more of it, they would still have the wealth – no one is asking them to give up their riches, just to show some compassion.

Now how would, or is, National Health Care stepping on any rights?

The U.S. Constitution does not grant the U.S. Government the right to be involved in our health care?

In the Declaration of Independence it is written that we have the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. These are the ones specifically mentioned.

My question is: who is stepping on who's rights when someone is denied the right to life because they cannot afford medical care because so many self-righteous people claim that national health care is infringing on their rights? How about liberty? How much liberty does one have when they spend most of their time in bed with chronic pain because they cannot get the health care they need? Pursuit of Happiness? Right, can't pursue happiness when hurting or dead. Selfishness is what is denying these people their rights.

You don't want the government involved in your healthcare? News bulletin, they have been involved for decades. We have Medicare, Medicaid, SSI and other government healthcare programs. Nobody wants those taken away.

The U.S. Government also dictates which drugs may be used as medicines and what procedures, like surgeries, laser and sonic treatments, etc., may be used as medical treatments.

Why not use the Commerce Clause of the Constitution since it is used as a catch all excuse for every thing else the government wants to do that the Constitution doesn't mention specifically, like making marijuana illegal without the Constitutional right to do so. Or trying to control whether we can have backyard vegetable gardens.

And finally, as far as rights go, why not make a Constitutional amendment to grant that right? Which is more important, forbidding gay marriage, denying women birth control that may be for other medical purposes or providing health care to those that can't afford it?

Let's have some compassion here. We're not talking about boob jobs or sex-change operations, only necessay health care. People can pay for their own boob jobs and sex changes.

I didn't mention the creeping socialism argument this time. Maybe I'll address that later.

Keep cool under your collar and remember this is my opinion and you are free to agree or disagree.

Something I Recently Read About Arizona

2012-02-17T17:24:00.000-07:00

The National Archives provided the following historical background on Arizona's rise to statehood:

The path to statehood for Arizona was anything but easy. For many years, the people in the New Mexico and Arizona Territories petitioned Congress seeking admission into the Union. During the late 19th Century various members of Congress introduced bills in support of Arizona and New Mexico statehood, but none were approved. Despite widespread concern over Arizona's constitutional provision for the recall of judges, Congress passed H.J.Res. 14, "to admit the territories of New Mexico and Arizona as States into the Union." On August 15, 1911, President William Howard Taft vetoed the statehood resolution in large part because Arizona's constitution allowed for the recall of judges, a provision that he stated went against the need for an independent judiciary.

Immediately after Taft vetoed the resolution providing for New Mexico and Arizona statehood, Congress passed S.J.Res. 57, admitting the territories of New Mexico and Arizona as states conditioned upon Arizona voters' adoption of an amendment to the constitution removing the judiciary recall provision. President Taft approved the resolution on August 21, 1911. On February 14, 1912, Taft signed the proclamation making Arizona the 48th state, and the last of the contiguous states to be admitted to the union.

Creative Stuff and Freelancing

2012-01-29T17:11:00.000-07:00

I updated my Linkedin profile.

I am researching the field of Creativity (writing, graphic design, etc.) and freelancing, two things I've always been interested in.

That's it for this post. More soon.

My Resume

2012-01-15T02:22:00.001-07:00

Okay, here is the first promised update.

I added a link to my resumé and am about to add a link to my Linkedin page. I just joined in on Linkedin yesterday.

I need a job. Anyone out there know where I can get some work without relocating?

Okay, more later.

Blog Update

2012-01-13T19:54:00.000-07:00

I looked at my blog for the first time in a long time and realized just how long it's been since I put anything here. I don't have the time right now, but I will be posting something in the next day or two. Until then.

Story Of An Atheist

2011-02-18T23:28:00.003-07:00

I would like to clear up some misconceptions about what an atheist is, and is not.

First, an atheist is not someone that disbelieves in God. Disbelief is defined as "the unpreparedness, unwillingness, or inability to believe that something is the case." This obviously requires someone to believe something, then deny that belief. It also has the implication that the something to be believed, or disbelieved, is actually true.

An atheist is actually an unbeliever. Unbelief is defined as "failure to believe; lack of religion." This does not require any previous, present or future belief. It also does not imply the truth of what is not believed.

I will use myself as an example.

I grew up not even thinking about God. When God was mentioned in our house it was an abstract word that had no true meaning. "God damn it." "God bless you." These phrases were used, along with others. This is abstract use, it does not describe or define God. It was just a word.

When we visited my grandparents we were obligated to attend church. This taught me nothing about God. It was a time to have fun. Go to Sunday school where I got to color in the coloring books, all religious stuff but I didn't care -- they were coloring books, that's the only meaning I saw. What the Sunday school teachers were teaching was meaningless to me, I just wanted to color.

When we were in the church proper the only thing that was fun was putting money in the collection plate, the rest was boring, adult stuff.

I didn't actually think about God until I was an adult. Then it was mostly reactions to the religion dealers -- like drug dealers, only trying to get me addicted to religion, instead of drugs. Like drugs there were many different kinds. The difference was they wanted me to use theirs exclusively, where drug dealers will sell you whatever, and however many, they can.

The way so many of the religiosos also interfered with my life by inflicting their beliefs on me by way of rules, regulations and laws that were based on nothing more than their religion also caused some reactions.

My father was career Navy and I joined the Navy just a few months after he retired and made the Navy my career. Even though the stereotype of the typical sailor is not true there was still not a lot of religious influence on my life in the service. It seems that very few evangelical types joined the military back then (don't know about now, I retired from the Navy in 1991). When I joined the Navy the forms ask what my religion was, I had to ask my dad. He said Protestant, so that's what I put. I didn't even know what it meant.

So, since religion had very little, infrequent impact on my life, I simply did not think about it.

Then I retired from the military.

In civilian life I found religion has a bigger impact on my life. More people praising God, more people talking about God, more people pushing God (each with their own form of the God drug).

It started to affect me. I thought I might be missing something. I bought a Holy Bible. I researched some churches to see just what they believed, what they taught, what they required of their attendees.

I was disappointed in all the churches I checked on. They all had rules, requirements and beliefs that I just couldn't abide by. They seemed not only unnecessarily restrictive but they were also counterproductive, ridiculous and mentally constrictive.

To the bible I went. Read it, I thought, see what it's all about. Don't let the churches decide, make up your own mind. After years of repeated attempts I still had not managed to read the thing, it was just to boring and unbelievable.

Talking to my father one day the subject came up and I told him how I couldn't read it and the reasons why. Knowing I love science fiction books, he told me it was the greatest science fiction book ever written and to read it as science fiction, not fact, then think about it and decide. It worked. As fiction it is interesting. I managed to read it.

Of course, the result of that was that I simply couldn't believe it was anything other than fiction because it was just to ridiculous and contradictory to be true.

There were others around me that believed it, though, so I started thinking a little more like them. I started wanting to believe it (peer pressure, I guess, you're never too old for it). I started trying to uncontradict the contradictions. I ask questions of the "experts". Some of the contradictions were uncontradicted. Some by my original misunderstanding, most through judicious use of circular reasoning and twisted pseudo-logic. Most of the contradictions remained contradictions.

A few years of that and I finally came to the conclusion that my original reaction to what the Bible said was correct. It is fiction. It was written to support the bloodthirsty rule of the nomadic Hebrew leaders, then the settled Hebrew leaders. The new testament was written as a tool to start a revolution that didn't happen.

If people wanted to believe it was true, that was okay with me.

But I got tired of being a persecuted minority when it comes to religion. If I said I was an atheist the reaction was disbelief (there's that word again), if I said nothing I had to listen to all the God talk. If it was known that I was atheist I got all kinds of preaching (attempting to convert me), pity (why?), lack of understanding of why I seemed to be a nice, law-abiding person, etc. If I allowed the assumption that I believed in God I got all kinds of preaching (attempting to convert me to their version), pity (because I wasn't in their religious camp), lack of understanding of why I could believe any denomination (sect) other than theirs, etc.

Then I started paying more attention to politics and discovered we have religious fundamentalists (christian, islam, jew) trying to turn the whole world into a global theocracy of their particular version of religion.

In the U.S. religion and government are not supposed to mix (supposedly to prevent the country from becoming a theocracy). However, the Christian fundamentalists are trying to change that.

The same thing is happening in the middle east with Islamic fundamentalists.

And what do most of the Chistians and Mulsims that are not fundamentalist do? They rage about what the others are doing in other countries. What about the fundamentalists of their own religion (not sect or denomination) in their own countries? Don't they know they will push their version on all others, not just atheists? Are atheists the only ones that seem to realize this?

This is just the story of one atheist. I wrote this to clear up some misconceptions about atheists and to demonstrate why we are so outspoken. We are simply reacting to the religious. We really don't care what you believe, or don't believe. We just want you to stop caring what we believe (or don't), stop forcing your religious viewpoints on us. Stop telling others how to live when it is something that doesn't affect you. And we will gladly revert to letting you believe without comment. Well, most of us will, anyway.

If I got a little sidetracked and off subject here, sorry about that.

The Negative Impacts of Religion on the People of The United States of America

2011-02-11T02:28:00.003-07:00

This opinion piece is based on personal observation and news derived from television news, news articles from various sources such as newspapers, internet news, magazines, etc. and various articles about research into many subjects.

It is my contention that all religions that allow the belief that ethics and morals based on religious beliefs should or may be dictated to others is detrimental to society, including members of that religion. I also claim that all members of these religions, not just fundamentalists, are complicit in causing the negative impacts that are detrimental to society.

Since I believe the last statement will cause the most vehement objections I will address it first.

Some people will undoubtedly claim that since they personally do not evangelize, nor do they vote for or in other ways actively support legislation to impose their beliefs on others that they are therefore not guilty of my accusation.

I disagree. By supporting and encouraging others in their religious beliefs they are complicit. Without support or encouragement those that do actively try to legislate their belief system on others would probably not make the effort.

As to why all religions that allow their beliefs to be dictated are detrimental instead of only ones that actively try or encourage it, the answer can be found in the previous paragraph.

On to the primary subject. Why religions are detrimental to society.

G.W. Bush stated that it was God's will that he be President. God's will that so many disasters should be caused by the President? Obviously a negative impact. He also claimed God told him to invade Iraq. Another negative impact. The list goes on.

Why are these detrimental? Huge increase in national debt (understatement). Unnecessary death, maiming and other injuries. Creating more hate and discontent. Increasing, or creating, divisiveness within the country as well as amongst other countries.

There are also the events of 9/11. Radical Islamists crashed passenger planes into buildings, causing many, many deaths and other injuries, as well as destroying a hell of a lot of property. That's definitely detrimental and we are still getting negative impacts to it years afterward.

Discriminatory laws have been passed based on religious beliefs and no other criteria.
*It is illegal for anyone to marry someone of the same sex in some States, causing discontent, financial hardship, and impacting the health of many people.
*Embrionic stem cell research has been set back years, probably impacting the health of thousands or millions of people.
*Opposition to teaching science in public schools, i.e. evolution. This has a negative impact by teaching children that science is like religion in that it is something to choose to believe or not. Science is, whether one believes it or not.
*Attempting to get religion taught in public schools as fact, i.e. creationism/intelligent design. This is not what all religions believe. Our schools cannot function if every religious myth of creation and the ascendency of Man is to be taught as fact, there are simply not enough hours in a day to do it. Which should we choose? To have a positive impact instead of negative we should teach none of them as fact. Teach them in theology class.
*Legislation to control what people may or may not do with their own bodies, i.e. anti-abortion laws. This is negative because it causes unnecessary pain, injury, death and psychological damage.

I am sure there are many other laws or attempts at legislation that are faith-based and detrimental. This is just a sampling to make my point.

Have you ever wondered how a Doctor, nurse, orderly or other health professional might feel after spending hours, days, weeks, months, even years attempting to save a life or restore someone to good, or at least better, health only to hear friends, relatives, even the patients themselves thank God for saving them? No thanks to the medical professionals that did all the work, and are the ones that actually saved the patient, restored their health or patched up their injuries. That is a negative impact on society. Many people do things that help others in inumerable ways, only to hear God get the thanks when God did nothing.

How about when that injured patient that God gets the thanks for saving was in the automobile accident that caused the injuries? No, God didn't do that! The driver of the other car gets the blame! Definitely a double standard that is as discriminatory as racism!

Children having children. Why? Because God says you aren't supposed to have sex until you get married so let's just tell them to not have sex and don't even mention condoms. Definitely detrimental. STDs, anyone? Condoms can prevent them. Oh, that's right, God said don't have sex so we don't need them.

Look at the large number of people that have screwed up attitudes toward something as natural as sex. Because God said it's a sin unless done exactly right and only for procreation. God forbid that you enjoy it (literally).

That's all I can think of right now, and I think it's enough for this post.

Feel free to make any intelligent, well-reasoned comments you desire.