--
Thursday, March 29, 2012
News and entertainment that's been going on as of late
--
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Two hits in one on something very near and dear to me
Now I know that I haven't posted here in a long while, and that's only because I've been working on my book (for which I'm finished with chapter 8 and am currently working on Chapter 9 right now), and so I've been mostly devoted to that, however when you happen to be where I'm at right now (which is homeless) and am subject to nightly service shots (meaning that you're getting forced to listen to the Word even if you don't agree with what they happen to be saying in the first place. However this morning I was listening to my radio station here in Fresno of Alice 96.7 (http://www.myalice967.com/) and a song came up that I just had to talk about not just on my Facebook page, but also here, on my blog as well. Though on my Facebook page, I put a link up to the YouTube video for everyone to see, the song was P!nk's "Perfect".
Now the reason why I'm hitting two, and I slightly went in on this in a previous posting, I did talk about religion (which is something that I don't happen to like to much, actually not at all, and I'll be explaining as to why here), but mostly on the political side of the whole thing. Now with what I have to go through at the Fresno Rescue Mission (since that's where I'm currently living right now by choice at least for a little while right now), is a nightly religious service that talks about everyone needing to be saved by God, however with how they do it, they expect people to come up to receive Him. Only problem to that is that you have those that go up there each night that happen to be the same people like crazy, and the thing that they will not get is that (and it doesn't help that the message is the same each night too), is that once you're saved, you're saved period, there is no turning back at all period (unless you're apart of a religion that says that if you screw up you have to confess and then resave yourself).
That's one of the reasons why I happen to hate religion, I have a relationship with Jesus, and the end result of that relationship is a far, far better understanding of his Word, and everything that's happening in the world around me. Now I know that there are people out there that will hate what I'm going to be writing here, but I'm only putting out the truth here and not against the people, just the organization. The prime example of religion is the Catholic religion, that religion right there says that they have a rep on Earth for the people in the form of the Pope, and that you must confess to a human priest in order to have your sins cleared. Sorry but that's not how things work at all in the least, you confess with your mouth to the Lord and savor Jesus the son of God Himself, confessing to a person isn't going to do anything in the least when it comes to getting rid of your sin, after all the only one that can get rid of your sin is Jesus, the true son of God. That's why I happen to have a relationship and not a religion, and I do pick on the Catholics a lot, but that's only because the organization is completely screwed up and they refuse to fix it ever (so yeah I'm going to peg on them when ever I always get the chance, like I said the organization not the people, the people are just the innocents that have been duped over the centuries (and if any of the Catholic higher ups see this and say that I'm excommunicated from God, that's kinda hard when I have him in my heart and a relationship and not a religion, plus I'm Christian and not Catholic at all).
Now when it comes to the song that I heard P!nk's "Perfect", that song brought to mind everything that's been going wrong lately when it comes to teens (boy or girls doesn't matter which sides) thinking that they have to try and primp themselves up, actually they don't. They are perfect no matter what they do in life.
Back in school (elementary through to high school and beyond), I got picked on and teased a lot, all to the point that at times I was in tears. Mostly it was teasing, but that doesn't matter it was still bullying and that's why I happen to hate bullying today, not only because it's gotten worse these days, but because it's still around. Students are being made to think that they have to be something when in fact they can be anything that they want to be in life. My life is a perfect example of that behind the scenes that no one ever knew about at all.
Back when I was in school, no one knew how bad things were at home, then again I never talked about it that much either. I was constantly shifting between what I wanted to do when I grew up (though it wasn't till I was nearly out of school that I realized what I would end up being, of course no one really saw it coming in the least), and the one person that was constantly putting me down on that was in fact my own mother who was always saying that I would never actually get anywhere in life with what I wanted to do at all. Believe me, getting told that you're not going to go anywhere in life is not only crushing, it tends to make a kid think that they're worthless, and about 90% of the time, that's in fact what I was thinking. Hell I couldn't get to either go to or get to do most of what the other students at the time were doing, where I lived at I couldn't go anywhere on Sunday's at all because I had to travel by the bus system only and they never ran on Sunday's, and then most of the time when I went any place with my mother even she was putting me down, though never in front of others ever.
Then what ended up hurting the most was the nick name that I had gotten back in school, which I will not write here, but those reading this will know that nick name, it was very scaring, and when mom tried talking to the teachers about what was going on, we'd end up in a loop since the teachers actually wouldn't do anything saying that kids would be kids. I hurt a lot those days and I still bear the emotional scars from those times to, and with a partial photographic memory, I can never be rid of them either.
Teens these days don't need anything like that, they should be encouraged towards everything that they do no matter what it might happen to be, so that they can find something that they're good at and go for it with all of their heart and all of their mind and devotion. Personally I would love the chance to be able to go back to my high school and talk to the students about what they're going through since I'm often reminded of it my self, and they shouldn't feel like they need to compete in any way shape or form. They are perfect just the way they are, period.
'Nuff said!
--
Thursday, March 8, 2012
A subject that I've been trying to stay away from...
The establishment clause is "[t]he First Amendment provision that prohibits the federal and state governments from establishing an official religion, or from favoring or disfavoring one view of religion over another."[1]
Originally, the First Amendment applied only to the federal government. A number of the states effectively had established churches when the First Amendment was ratified, with some remaining into the early nineteenth century.
Subsequently, Everson v. Board of Education (1947) incorporated the Establishment Clause (i.e., made it apply against the states). However, it was not until the middle to late twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by the states. In the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion."[2]
Separationists
Everson used the metaphor of a wall of separation between church and state, derived from the correspondence of President Thomas Jefferson. It had been long established in the decisions of the Supreme Court, beginning with Reynolds v. United States from 1879, when the Court reviewed the history of the early Republic in deciding the extent of the liberties of Mormons. Chief Justice Morrison Waite, who consulted the historian George Bancroft, also discussed at some length the Memorial against Religious Assessments by James Madison, who drafted the First Amendment; Madison used the metaphor of a "great barrier."[3]
Justice Hugo Black adopted Jefferson's words in the voice of the Court, and concluded that "government must be neutral among religions and nonreligion: it cannot promote, endorse, or fund religion or religious institutions."[4] The Court has affirmed it often, with majority, but not unanimous, support. Warren Nord, in Does God Make a Difference?, characterized the general tendency of the dissents as a weaker reading of the First Amendment; the dissents tend to be "less concerned about the dangers of establishment and less concerned to protect free exercise rights, particularly of religious minorities."[5]
Beginning with the Everson decision itself, which permitted New Jersey school boards to pay for transportation to parochial schools, the Court has used various tests to determine when the wall of separation has been breached. The Everson decision laid down the test that establishment existed when aid was given to religion, but that the transportation was justifiable because the benefit to the children was more important. In the school prayer cases of the early 1960s, (Engel v. Vitale and School District of Abington Township v. Schempp), aid seemed irrelevant; the Court ruled on the basis that a legitimate action both served a secular purpose and did not primarily assist religion. In Walz v. Tax Commission, the Court ruled that a legitimate action could not entangle government with religion; in Lemon v. Kurtzman, these points were combined, declaring that an action was not establishment if
- the statute (or practice) has a secular purpose;
- its principal or primary effect neither advances nor inhibits religion; and
- it does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.
This Lemon test has been criticized by Justices and legal scholars, but it remains the predominant means by which the Court enforces the Establishment Clause.[6] In Agostini v. Felton, the entanglement prong of the Lemon test was demoted to simply being a factor in determining the effect of the challenged statute or practice.[7] In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, the opinion of the Court considered secular purpose and the absence of primary effect; a concurring opinion saw both cases as having treated entanglement as part of the primary purpose test.[6]
Accommodationists
Accommodationists, on the other hand, read the Establishment Clause as prohibiting the Congress or any state from declaring an official religion or preferring one to another, but hold that laws do not have to be shorn of morality and history to be declared constitutional.[8] As a result, they apply the Lemon Test only selectively, holding Justice Douglas' statement in Zorach v. Clauson, "[w]e are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being" 343 U.S. 306 (1952).[8][9]
As such, for many conservatives, the Establishment Clause solely prevents the establishing of a state church, not from publicly acknowledging God and "developing policies that encourage general religious beliefs that do not favor a particular sect and are consistent with the secular government's goals."[10][11]"
Now I know that there's a lot to read there, but it's actually well worth it considering all of the stupidity that is trying to be forced onto us these days. However with religion right now trying to get into just about everything, it reminds me of just about everything that the Catholic Church had done back in the day when it came to what was going on around the world. They wanted to control everything, and it ended up hurting most of the world when they did that, the thing was that they didn't mind being in control of a world that really didn't mind being simple minded robots. These days however, that time is long gone and there's people that are actually thinking for themselves these days. (Yes I've got a major thing against the Catholic organization considering all of the hypocritical things that they've talked about and done.)
Now on the side of gay rights, that's been something that religion has been trying to get killed for ages, but just like they want to say and think that evolution doesn't exsist, I hate to say it but to learn and expand is evolution. So to say that gays shouldn't have any rights, try putting them in your shoes and see how they happen to live. Plus they say that being gay is an option and that people don't have to be gay, that's another lie. Being gay is hard wired into those that are gay, and they are that way from birth and nothing can change that ever, no matter what people say.
Now I know that I've gone more on anti religion (that's because I have a relationship and not religion, I hate religion period and always will) than I did on gay rights, but that's mostly because of my lack of time currently. However I will eventually get back to this topic and more later, but this is at least a start here.
--Monday, March 5, 2012
The stupidity of certain fathers out there
--
Friday, March 2, 2012
A movie that's going to be hot!!!
--