10.13.2009

Gosselin Fan? You Need a Life...

I was originally going to do an article on the National Equality March. What's that you say? Well it's a mile stone in the gay right's movement. It's really not as important as people say it is. Granted, not discriminating against homosexuals is just as important as not discriminating against other religions even if it means violating the First Amendment. Still, it's a little overdone. I'd say give all 50 states a Proposition 8-style choice. The states that want gay marriage will have it.

You live in a state that doesn't allow it? Easy, just go to a neighboring state and get one. When you move back... you'll still be married! It's in the Constitution (Article IV, Section 1).

Anyway, what I'm actually doing an article about is John and Kate Gosselin: two people who need to shut the fuck up. Honestly, I don't understand the fandom that seemed to have materialized around these two completely normal people who managed to first have twins and then sextuplets. WOW. AMAZING. TELEVISION SHOW.

Honestly, I've never seen an episode of John & Kate Plus 8 so it probably detracts from my journalistic integrity... I guess I should take the time to do that now.

One
My Face Just before starting John & Kate Plus 8

OK, I'm still watching the show now. And I can honestly say that there are far more interesting things to do with my life. In addition to watching this incredibly boring show with a woman who has failed to realize that there are people in the world whose bodies refuse to have as many kids as she did and simply don't know how to handle kids as well as she can.

Two
My face after watching the first video.

Kate takes her parenting like a woman who applied for the job of being a mother. John takes to fatherhood like a man who simply does not want to be there. For every word that John says, Kate says about 800,000 more. Her kids are like poor, little, money-making machines for the Gosselins. Kate seems to LOVE doting over her children... but I'm terribly sorry. There's no reason she gets to take millions of dollars from a bullshit TV show when my sister and her husband are an infinitely more interesting couple and my nephew is probably the cutest little boy to ever exist.

I have to say though, in this video (about 4:48 in), Kate is once again going on and on about her extraordinarily ordinary life with a bizzare number of kids when she talks about how "I told John which parts need to be brushed better."

She looks at her husband as if he actually gave a fuck. He promptly wakes himself up and then says, "Uh... the back... and..."

Kate then takes over and lists every part of her mouths. In other words, Kate is a controlling bitch and John was pretty much doing nothing beyond sticking the brush in his kids' mouth and just wondering where these mythical things called "teeth" were. I'm serious, this show could not have been John's idea. He takes no interest in the show and Kate is the least interesting human being I've ever seen on camera.

Photobucket
My face just before I decided to start watching Sunshine instead of John & Kate Plus 8

Being a person who's life has been destroyed by divorce, the Gosselin children will probably see it as the saving grace of their childhood experience.

10.10.2009

In keeping with the new and improved policy of updating this blog daily, I will now talk about something very dear to my heart...

Downloading music ILLEGALLY.

If any of you know me, you will know that I have amassed a music collection of absurd amounts (38,209 song and counting) gathered almost entirely through "illegal" methods. (I do own around 200 cds though.) I am proud of the fact that I download illegally, and no government agency is going to stop me.

Wow, thanks Jon. Didn't know that. Can I come steal some music sometime? Sure, but I may have had a change of heart.

I have recently run into arguments against downloading music that challenge my belief in the free market system. A poster on the forum I frequent by the alias "Nolan" has lately left me dumbfounded with his statements. Here are couple samples...

Pinkk - "Hey guys, I just downloaded a Beatles albums, guess Paul and Ringo have to live on the street now."

Nolan - "Let's all steal a Ferrari because they are a successful company and therefore we have no moral obligation to trade value for value.

Anyone who claims to be for individual rights and the free market cannot honestly be okay with piracy.

Or better yet, Pinkk, let's just tax the rich more because they can afford it, right?"

---------------------------------------------

Nolan - "Why should all art be free (ie: valueless). Money is a store of value, it gives physical form and measure to the abstraction of value.

What defines art? To me, a Ferrari is a piece of art. I assume you're saying everything should be free... That is not idealism, that is, at best, stupidity, and at worst pure evil.

If an album is not worth $10 to you, then please don't listen to it."

----------------------------------------------------------

Nolan - "If intellectual property is not protected, we will enter a second dark age.

Why should someone, for example, spend thousands of hours and millions of dollars researching new medication, when they won't be able to get any return on their investment?

Whether you want to admit or not (or think it's right or not--it is right), people are driven by profit and the potential for profit. Stated in a different way: People expect to be able to trade value for value.

If I do something that other people enjoy, and they want to enjoy it, I expect value in return from them.

This is not "evil", but rather it is the greatest good possible."

-------------------------------------------

Most of these posts are taken from this thread and this one.

Some of his arguments are admittedly shaky, but I feel everyone should take what he says into consideration. I myself, one of the biggest 'stealers' of music anyone knows, will be taking this into account myself.

I will leave you with a humorous shirt of an era long ago.

Photobucket

But will this be true for illegal downloading?

Do comment on this post. Let's get some discussion going.

10.09.2009

Other Nobel Peace Prize Winners

Hello all!

It's been an exciting few days in the world of Lawrenceville, NJ. No really, it has. But things are more exciting in Washington, D.C.! As I'm sure people have heard, United States President Barack Obama has been nominated and will be accepting the Nobel Peace Prize.

Let me congratulate the Nobel Peace Prize commission for finally dropping the standards of an award that is supposed to congratulate leaders who make significant progress toward world peace to basically an "eh, well he's trying."

For those that aren't aware, Barack Obama has been President for eight months. In eight months what he's done has amounted to virtually jack shit. I've seen him on advertisements for George Lopez's new television show*, acting like a fool on Jay Leno, as well as on the Colbert Report (while of course, that's mildly acceptable given he was supporting the troops, still... shouldn't he be busy governing?). In addition to all that, he went to Copenhagen to proposition his home capital of Chicago for the 2016 Olympics (an important Presidential function) as well as remained completely ambiguous in regards to the Gulf War II. Saying we need to stay at war "as long as necessary" does not qualify one for a "peace prize."

*I saw a commercial while watching The Office two nights ago. I haven't been able to find a Youtube clip yet.

Of course, this isn't a recent Nobel Peace Prize phenomenon. Al Gore was awarded the Prize in 2007. Which makes less (if that's possible) sense. Al Gore was awarded for "promoting awareness of Global Warming." Which makes as much sense as the basis that Obama gets one for "promoting nuclear nonproliferation."

To help out the Commission awarding these nonsensical Prizes, I've compiled a list of candidates that SHOULD have received awards...

Nikita Khruschev

Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971)


Deserves the 1963 Prize for not engulfing the world into a nuclear winter.


Mao Zedong
Mao Zedong (1893-1976)

Deserves the 1959 Prize for trying extremely hard to help put China on the path of Stalinist prosperity. And succeeding!

Charles G Dawes

Charles G. Dawes (1865-1951)

Deserves the 1924 Prize for marrying one of the least sightly women on the North American continent. Charles Dawes: the man who knows the value of charity.

Adolf Hitler

Adolf Hitler (1889-1945)

Yeah, I went there. Deserves the 1938 Prize for not butchering the fuck out of Czechoslovakia and just taking it peacefully.

Fidel Castro
Fidel Castro (1926-Is it just me, or is he immortal?)

Deserves the 1960 Prize for overthrowing the vicious dictator Batista and liberating the Cuban people... wait, Castro's still alive! There's still time to give him the award! Hurry up Norway! Here's your prime candidate for 2010!

In other news: I now have a twitter. Don't ask what compelled me.

10.08.2009

Tiglath-Pileser III, Shalmanesar V, and other cool names you learn in the Bible

Assyrian Kings have BADASS names. Seriously. Besides the two above, here are some other names you definitely should name your children after.

Sennacherib
Puzur-Ashur I
Shar-Kali-Shari
Ashur-Uballit II
Ninurta-Tukulti-Ashur
Enlil-Kudurri-Usur

Future generations should definitely consider using hyphens to add meaningless length to already absurd names.

Why do I know this? Because my Old Testament class has assigned me work which involves learning the names of EVERY CHARACTER IN BIBLICAL TIMES. I must have looked up about 200 names on wikipedia in the past hour alone. Thank god for Intro to the City.

Anyways, this blog has now earned me enough money to purchase a venti pumpkin spice latte at Starbucks. If you wish to indulge my obsession with Vanilla Bean Frappachinos, do continue to visit this blog. Follow it, bookmark it, click the hilarious ads, or just humor me with your response on Facebook once I post this.

I will leave you with a picture of me and my partner doing what we do best...

Photobucket

...act incredibly homosexual together. Cheers

10.07.2009

Back. In Black... well Gray and Red.

Hey all, as my friend already said, yes it's been a while since either of us posted, but as you can see we have a wicked layout and tons of thought provoking professors (... kinda) to post new things about. Of course, while he's in the exciting world of New York City (Population: 8,363,710), I'm toughing it out at Rider University in the middle of Bumfuck, New Jersey (sorry, Lawrenceville, New Jersey. Population: 4,081).

Lawrenceville, New Jersey is honestly one of the worst places I've ever been. Actually, now that I realize it, I've pretty much hated anywhere north of the Mason-Dixon Line (this summer I went to Salisbury, Maryland for about 20 hours. It was gorgeous).

Seriously, I've been sick three times in the past month. One month. And this was after the doctor's appointment where the physician told me I'm one of the healthiest people he'd ever seen. It can't be just a coincidence... can it? I mean, how come I've only been sick once yearly, and now it's been the third time in a month? It just blows my mind.

So here I am, lost in the middle of New Jersey, attending a school that is trying so desperately hard to kill me. I finally realized why: I'm a writer. I'm doing anything I can to make a living doing what I do best: write. Technically, we're making money off this blog (like... .33 cents per click or something), and this Saturday I'll be competing for $500.00 at Rider's annual poetry slam. Meanwhile, I'm working on my novel that literally requires more effort than every one of my classes combined.

Unless one takes into account the effort it takes to stay awake for Science of Light and Color PHY-103. So far, I've stayed awake for two classes. One out of sheer will power and a good night's sleep. The other because we were taking a quiz and were allowed to leave as soon as we finished.

Speaking of which, can you believe there's an actual organization that's the "international authority on light and color." I'm dead serious. They're called the Commission internationale de l'éclairage, or CIE for short. To basically sum up what they do, they get to decide what's a color and what's not. Yeah, because that's not total bullshit or anything.

Whatever. Let the French have their colorful thought police and we'll do things our way. The American way. The Anarchist way.

Damn right. Justification is back, baby.

10.06.2009

We're Back! (With a megalong book review)

Well it has been quite sometime since either me or my partner have written on this blog. A good 7 months has passed, and a LOT has changed for the both of us. I'll leave Louis to tell his own story but I'll gladly reveal mine.

In the space of a few months, I have graduated high school, worked all summer to save up money, and am now attending The King's College in New York City. I now reside in Midtown Manhattan, where Macy's and The Empire State building are literally less than a block away from my apartment complex. Studying Politics, Philosophy and Economics with some of the best professors I have ever encountered is truly a rewarding experience, but even more rewarding are the current students. Brilliant, bold, and innovative, I am constantly being challenged in ways I have never thought possible.

Since I rarely have free time to write anything personal of my own, I will take the liberty in posting a book review that I did for my Intro to Politics class. The Scandal Of The Evangelical Mind was one of the most pleasurable reads in recent memory, but I will let my book review speak for itself. As lengthy as it may be, do read it, as I got quite a high grade on it. Also remember this was done in a specific essay format, so it is NOT typical blog writing.



"The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (written by Mark Noll in 1994 and published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing) focuses on the subject of declining intellect among the evangelical Christian population. Noll himself believes in evangelical Christianity, but he feels compelled to speak out on a subject that has bothered him for quite sometime. Throughout the book Noll devotes time to various parts of the scandal, the history of it, the influence it has on Christians, and whether or not evangelicals can hope to redeem the future of the movement. Above all, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind confronts the ugly past of the Evangelical movement in America, diagnoses its problems, and ultimately shows the path to restoring the movement back to its original glory.

As a professor of history and theology at Wheaton College, Noll holds nothing back in his opening statements. Perhaps the most biting comment of the book is when Noll professes that the main problem with the mind of evangelical Christianity “is that there is not much of an evangelical mind” (3).Also, Noll notes that despite the growing numbers of evangelicals, they have little to no influence on the culture of the country they inhabit. Noll has no qualms attacking fundamentalism, and he devotes an entire chapter to “The Intellectual Disaster of Fundamentalism.” Noll devotes his case chiefly to the fall of intellectualism through out the history of Christianity in America.

Accordingly, Noll builds his case chapter by chapter, much like a detective. He devotes the first part of the book to defining the scandal as it exists today and explaining why society cannot undervalue its importance. As the text progresses, Noll delves into the history of the evangelical movement from its beginnings with The First Great Awakening and an explanation of how Jonathan Edwards unknowingly paved the way for the future mentality of evangelical Christians. Noll reserves the third section of the book for the consequences this scandal has brought upon Western culture, especially with respect to science and politics. Finally, he dedicates the last portion of the book to determining whether or not evangelicals can resolve this situation. Noll masterfully writes all of these parts with great clarity and ease, though some would argue that he writes with an overly technical and heavy-handed style.

Ironically, though he directs his book towards an audience that has supposedly lost the majority of its intellect over several generations, Noll writes in such an intellectual manner that one would wonder if his style defeats the purpose of his work. Nevertheless, the book remains well written. Supplemented constantly by lengthy speech quotes, footnotes, and Scripture references, Noll’s arguments attack from every angle. He dismantles his opponents’ arguments with ease, and yet he has no problem admitting that evangelicals do have their intellectual strengths, though few. He praises and lifts up prominent intellectuals in Protestant history such as Martin Luther and Billy Graham but he looks down upon the right wing fundamentalists. Although Noll penned his book fifteen years ago, the text still remains relevant to today’s Christian culture. Although quite wordy at points, Noll never comes off as overly pretentious. In the end, Noll writes a well-supplemented, well-structured book.

Historically, Protestantism has fostered a long line of intellectuals. Arguably the most important theologian of the millennium, Martin Luther’s intellect served him well in his creation of the Protestant movement. The Anglican Church also played a key role in the pursuit of higher learning. And finally the Puritans, who laid the foundation for Jonathan Edwards and the beginnings of Christianity in America, were highly intellectual people, though some may question their methods and interpretations of Scripture. Noll describes that sadly, after Jonathan Edwards, the church declined into its current state. He argues that the emphasis on revivals in the church, something that Jonathan Edwards supported, spurred the decline of learning within the church. “Revivals called people to Christ as a way of escaping tradition, including traditional learning” (63), Noll writes. Noll argues that, through this gradual cycle of reliance on revivals for spiritual growth, evangelical tradition ultimately met its downfall.

Furthermore, evangelicals’ absence in science and politics troubles Noll the most. Noll outlines in great length the formation of modern creation doctrine and the theology’s relative newness. Unlike today, Protestants did not believe in the typical, seven-day account of creation for centuries. In the early twentieth century Seventh-Day Adventists invented the theology, which the evangelical movement gradually adopted into its own doctrine. In fact, Noll argues that "creationism has done more than any other issue except abortion to inflame the cultural warfare in American public life” (192). He also finds that evangelicals place far too much emphasis on moral activism in politics, while failing to see the implications and blessing of the separation of church and state. Noll also notes the absence of any evangelical college with the credentials to match the likes of Harvard and Yale, universities once devoted to furthering Christianity. Noll ultimately concludes that if we save the whole world, but do not save its mind, then we really have not saved anybody.

In conclusion, Noll’s book challenges both evangelicals and non-evangelicals alike. The challenges and arguments he makes to the evangelical community are not only inspiring but also stirring. Yet Noll offers great hope in his final statements. He maintains that evangelicals’ talk about Christ contains “potential beyond estimation” (252). Though evangelicals have abandoned intellect, Christ offers eternal hope and redemption. Overall, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind uses its thorough examination of the topic to greatly challenge the reader to think more critically about the intellectual level of the evangelical Christian movement."

Followers