Archive for April 10th, 2008

In Moderation

Due to a minor heated discussion I had with a wealthy VP in my company today, I want to break from the news and go into a discussion about moderation and tolerance in this country.

As in it is my opinion that we’ve become a nation of vast extremism in the last 12 years.

People always yammer at me about the founding fathers and their intentions, always skewed towards their position. I hear people quoting religious texts, again skewed in their favor. Then I hear opposing views that are just being contrary because they feel slighted by the other extreme view point (thus taking the opposing extreme viewpoint).

If I had to divine the intentions of this nations founding fathers, I would go no farther than the Bill of Rights. No document preaches their beliefs more faithfully. The very essence of that document is tolerance and balance.

The freedom of speech. Always my favorite example of a need for tolerance and balance. On one hand, no person should be prevented from speaking their mind or expressing their artistic talents. On the other hand, every person should be somewhat mindful of the impact of their expression and understand something about tact and boundaries. Lately, all I hear from either side is that we should either A) abolish all tact and law that brings balance to our society through relatively lenient governance, or B) govern everyone’s expression to the point that it cannot be obscene or offensive in the slightest. Both are totally assinine positions and causing fights over the stupidist things in government. Video games, for example. That’s a PARENTING ISSUE, not something government should be spending millions on regulating.

The freedom to bear arms. I totally understand that people should be allowed to have weapons to protect themselves. There’s no reason why – in public where I can be robbed – I should not be able to carry a gun for my safety. I also feel that weapons of an excessive nature should be prohibited and regulated to some degree. There’s no reason a person needs to own a bazooka or tank. Those things have one purpose – to conduct war. People in our nation should not feel like they have to declare war on each other. It’s ridiculous. On the same note, people who own guns have total responsibility to learn and teach proper gun useage and restraint.

The freedom of religion. This is where I always counter people who say this country was founded on Christian principles and needs to force more Christian morals and laws on people. If that was our forefather’s intent, then why does this portion of the Bill of Rights even exist? If our forefathers meant everyone to be Christian, they would have just passed a law that said, “Christianity is the national religion.” Everyone has the right to believe in what they want, and expect people of a like-mind who represent them in government to stand up for their rights within boundaries. I absolutely hate people who say that tolerance is not an acceptable answer because their religion does not teach it. Well, your religion may not believe in tolerance, but IT IS THE LAW and A RIGHT of people in this country. Religious people trying to destroy atheists, and vice-versa, seriously need to get their heads examined. I’m almost certain that 99% of the extremist belief in a person is selfish. It usually boils down into a selfish need to be absolutely right and eltist against the opposition. And selfishness goes – in most religions – against the Creator. Atheists should just know better than to be pricks.

My final rant is about capitalism (this is the original topic that brought me to write this). We’re so out of balance in our capitilistic ways that we’re hurting our country economically and socially. I don’t know why wealthy people feel the need to be apathetic to the less fortunate population. I admire your ability to make money, your intelligence to create and provide, and your leadership qualities to direct success. But I think if you don’t try to help the lower classes, you are just being an asshole. “But they’ll just spend charity on booze/drugs/etc.” That’s a lame-ass excuse to be a selfish fucktard. I asked the VP if he ever considered the fact that if more wealthy people helped the poor, maybe the poor wouldn’t feel the need to do drugs or be alcoholics anymore. These people are humans. They have to find solace in something, because they don’t have the life advantages rich people do. It’s great if you can go to the gym and work out to relieve stress, or watch TV, or go hunting, etc. But if you don’t even have a house to live in, or sufficient clothing, or food, you’re going to turn to the most available and potent source of relief.

There’s no reason a multi-billionaire can’t give a lot of money to help the poor. Build more schools, fund more schools, create low-rent housing, pursue rehabilitation and job training facilities, etc. Nothing pisses me off more than the billionaire who says, “I gave you what I could – half a million dollars.” That’s another selfish excuse. You gave up to what you could write off to the government in your taxes. It’s not charity if you give and expect to get something from it. There is no BONUS for charity, except to feel better and help society heal and advance.

I’m going to laugh the day that the dollar plunges so low that the short-sighted rich people in this country fall into the lower classes because their millions are now only worth tens of thousands due to the dollar being less valuable than a peso. I applaud the wealthy Americans who understand the reality and work with less fortunate people as a nation and not as individuals.

Fuck you people who look out only for yourselves. I’d turn around and end you if it meant your money and possessions would go to the poor, there would be a bigger benefit to society, and it wasn’t considered murder.

That’s all I gotta say.

/end of line

Read Full Post »