A Word of Explanation/Warning.
Here may be found many and varied things; among them rants, ramblings, opinions, views, perceptions, and expressions. These may at times be interesting, amusing, possibly intelligent and insightful, but more likely just rambling and incoherent. Thou mayest find out things about me here, and thou mayest find out more than thou had'st wanted to know. But such is the nature of rantings. I invite thee to comment on these to me via email.
I shall begin, I think, with something that has been called "profound," "relevant," "cogent," and "a prime example." I call it "Friendliness With Jesus, or Christians that Hate." I first posted it on the "Spirituality" message board at DrDrew.com.
I always wanted to write something with an alternate title, like "Moby Dick, or The Whale."
Anyway, a message to Christians that hate on friendliness with Jesus. First of all, I put this here primarily because I don't know anywhere else to put it, and not because I think that the Christians here are particularly hateful; on the contrary, I have found them to be very nice and tolerant, and a good example unto their brethren. That being said, I shall begin.
As most of you know, I am not a Christian in the classical sense (though I do believe in God, and that Jesus did live), but I have studied the Bible somewhat, and I have drawn from it what seems to me to be the definition of a true Christian. The first and most important part, I think, is from John 13:34, which I have quoted before, but I will again, because of its importance: "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another." Going with this is where Jesus says that in order to be his friend, you must obey him. Now here is where I get my definition of a True Christian. Here it is: A true Christian is one who is Jesus' friend. It is easy to love God and Jesus, and accept him as one's saviour, but it is a bit harder to be his friend; just as one may love one's brother, but not be his friend. So in order to be Jesus' friend, one must love all other people, because although Jesus was speaking to his disciples, he really, I think, was speaking to all of humanity. This is where the "Christians that Hate" part comes in. A "Christian" who hates anyone, or judges anyone (forbidden in Mat. 7:1), is not a true Christian. My favourite example of one of these "Christians" is Daniel Carver, a Klansman who occasionally reviews movies for the Howard Stern Show. In Mr Carver's opinion, African people (particularly African Americans) are "obsolete farm animals" and they should be "sent back to Africa, where they belong." It is also the opinion of Mr Carver that "Jews are the devil." He says, "the Bible tells me that." He also hates all other non-white people and he believes that "faggots should be put to death." Now, I don't have any statistics in front of me, but I am going to say, for the sake of this example, that there are one billion white people on earth. Figuring that about 15% of those are homosexual or bisexual, that leaves 850 million. So Mr Carver hates about 5.15 billion people. He, then, according to my view, or perception, of Christianity, would go to hell, no matter how devoted he was to God and Jesus, unless he stopped hating all those people.
I would appreciate the opinions of Christians on the way I perceive Chrstianity to work. I would especially like to hear from any "Christians" that hate people, and hear why they think they are right, that I might ridicule and deride them.
Love to all, especially haters.
—Antinous, Deus Stupri, et Vir Doctissimus Semini
I think it is generally agreed upon by all that abortion is not a good or fun thing to do. Some people will still do it, however. And some people will still do it even if it is illegal. and they will go to have it done by people who don't know what they are doing, and they will die. Therefore, it must be legal, and people must have the right to choose, because they will choose anyway, so it might as well be safe.
People debate about whether or not abortion is right, but almost no one seems to want to talk about the consequences if its being illegal. Abortion has been illegal in this country in the past, and many women died because of botched illegally performed abortions. You talk about the death of the fetus, you say that that is bad, and it is, but when the woman dies too, that is worse. So there's your choice: kill one, or kill both. Less killing should be preferable, shouldn't it?
Furthermore, on the topic of choice, liberty of choice: this country was founded upon the fact that all people "are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
Abortion ends a Life, but the Liberty of choice frees another Life to Pursue Happiness, and with the usurpation of that Liberty, both Lives might very well end.
Making things illegal does not stop them. Has drug traffic stopped because it is illegal? Has murder stopped because it is illegal? Did abortion stop when it was illegal?
The way to stop abortion is through education, and through the ready availability of contraception. Focus on that if you want abortion to stop. Don't tell people to stop, but show how it can be avoided, and educate them about abortion, so they see before they even consider having one that it is a bad thing.
—Antinous, Deus Stupri et Vir Doctissimus Abortioni
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And upon the earth, and throughout the Cosmos, God created the Forces of Nature. And the Forces of Nature gave rise to the Living Creatures, and God bade them Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill up the earth. And so it was.
And the Living Creatures of simple form begat others of complex form, and God saw that it was good.
And Australopithecus anamensis begat A. afarensis, and A. afarensis begat A. garhi, and A. garhi begat Homo habilis, and H. habilis begat H. ergaster, and H. ergaster begat H. antecessor, and H. antecessor begat H. heidelbergensis, and H. heidelbergensis begat Homo sapiens.
And Homo sapiens filled up the earth, and subdued it, and polluted it, and blew it up, and killed his fellow H. sapiens in the name of God, and God became disgusted.
And God spake unto H. sapiens, saying, Hey, assholes, settle the fuck down!
And H. sapiens blatantly disregarded God's command, and He smote them with plagues, and famine, but H. sapiens is a stubborn old cuss. And God caused an asteroid to shift slightly so that it would hit the earth, and there was much death and destruction, and God saw that it was necessary.
And H. sapiens was still impudent, and paid no attention to God, and God caused the earth to fall unto the Sun, and it was burnt and all the inhabitants thereof died, and God cast them into Not-Heaven, where they were cold and lonely for ever and ever.
On DrDrew.com, someone asked,
"What happens to people who never here the
gospel? Why aren't they given a chance to be
People that never hear the gospel are no better or worse off than them that have. The judgement of God cannot be based upon religion, or even belief in Him. Divine judgement would have to be based upon who a person is, and what they have done in their life to help and enrich the lives of others. Any other form of judgement would be wholly unjust.
God cannot be anything less than perfect, or as perfect as any entity may be within the constraints of logic. Therefore, God cannot judge anyone differently based upon their religious beliefs. The very fact that there are people who haven't heard the gospel shows that there is no true religion, no religion that is the only way into heaven. If there were such a religion, God would not have told only the Hebrews about it. If there were such a religion, and God wanted to tell anybody at all about it, He would have to tell everyone, that they could all have an equal chance to get to heaven. The fact that God has not done this suggests that any path to spiritual enlightenment leads ultimately to God.
—Antinous, Deus Stupri et Vir Doctissimus Semini
I've talked about Paul before, but I've been reading him some more, and if you didn't think him crazy before, you just might now.
Let's start with Paul's first book, Romans. "Hmm," thinks Paul to himself, "whom shall we condemn in this letter? How about the gays? And the fornicators, proud boasters, disobedient to parents, yeah, this is good stuff. For they know the judgement of God, that they are worthy of death. (1:26-32)
"And we mustn't forget the judgers! Thou art inexcusable, O man that judgest!" (2:1).
Except, oh, wait, what was Paul doing in the previous paragraph?
Then Paul goes on to say that there is not, nor has there ever been a righteous person (3:10-12). I guess he forgot about Noah, Job, Zechariah, and Elizabeth.
Let us go now to Galatians: "O foolish Galatians" (3:1), says Paul. He forgot that Jesus said that if you call someone a fool you are in danger of hell fire.
Then Paul says that people who follow the law are cursed (3:10), but he also said before that everyone must submit to the governing authorities, which means obeying the law (Rom. 13:1).
This is one of my favourites; Paul contradicts something he said earlier in the same paragraph. "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ" (6:2). "For every man shall bear his own burden" (6:5).
Now we pass on to Titus, in which Paul tells us not to listen to "Jewish fables" (1:14), like the ones in the Old Testament.
Of course, women should be chaste and obsequious, "that the word of God not be blasphemed" (2:5).
Paul says we should avoid genealogies (3:9), like the ones in Genesis, I Chronicles, and Luke.
In Hebrews 10:30-31, Paul is talking about how mean and vengeful God is, he says "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." What happened to the forgiveness and the mercy?
Paul can't even keep Abraham's sons straight. In Gal. 4:22, he says that Abraham had two sons, and here, in 11:17, he says Abraham "offered up his only begotten son."
There's more, but I'm sick of Paul now. Maybe you are too?
—Antinous, Deus Stupri et Vir Doctissimus Semini
This Rant removed because I no longer agree with it.
Generally, my rants go in chronological order of when they were ranted, but this one was written before I started this page, and I had forgotten about it until last night, and then today I decided that it would go well here. I was planning to translate it into English, but I'm lazy, and am not going to do it right now.
Prohibición no funciona porque gente siempre puede obtener lo que quiere. Un buen demostración de esto era la prohibición de alcohol en los Estados Unidos desde 1919 hasta 1933. Durante aquellos años, aunque era prohibido, alguna persona podía comprar alcohol fácilmente en una ciudad. Y hoy en día es fácil comprar marihuana en la ciudad; siempre hay alguien que la cultiva, y alguien que la importa, y alguien que la vende.
Ya que el alcohol ya no es ilegal, la marihuana no debe ser ilegal tampoco, porque los efectos negativos de marihuana, aunque diferentes, no son más graves, en adultos, que los del alcohol, y los efectos negativos en el cuerpo no son mucho más graves que los de tabaco. Pero con sus efectos malos, hay muchos efectos buenos, como citado en un estudio español publicado en Nature Medicine que ha demostrado que algunos tumores del cerebro en ratas de experimentación se mejoraron con el uso de tetrahidrocanabinol (THC), el ingrediente activo en marihuana (El Mundo). También este artículo dice que THC posee propiedades analgésicas y "ayuda a reducir los dolores crónicos provocados por múltiples patologías."
Incluso descubrieron que este droga reduce la presión intraocular y previene ceguera en personas que sufren de glaucoma. Además, dice el artículo, especialistas obsevaron que el cannabis alivia la pérdida de apetito, pero no sé porque es necesario tener especialistas para observar esto.
Todos estos son efectos provechosos, pero hay que mencionar los efectos adversos también, especialmente los efectos en los jovenes. El cerebro de un joven que tiene menos de 15 años no está completemente desarrollado, y el cannabis puede causar que el lóbulo derecho del frente del cerebro se pone más pequeño. Este región es importante para el desarrollo de las capacidades cognoscitivas como razonamiento abstracto.
También, si uno fuma marihuana por mucho tiempo, puede causar enfisema crónica, y posiblemente cáncer de los pulmones, pero esto es totalmente especulativo. No creo que alguien haya fumado suficiente para causar cáncer.
Y, por supuesto, hay el problema de adicción. Adicción de marihuana casi siempre occure en personas con una historia en la familia de alcoholismo, pero algunas veces, personas con esta historia no tienen la composición genética para la adicción de marihuana. Las personas con la gen de adicción usualmente no están afectados por la marihuana en las primeras veces que la fuman, pero generalmente en la tercera vez tienen una experiencia enormemente eufórico, y cada día después, quieren repetir la experiencia.
Para restorar el sentimiento, los adictos usan más y más de la droga, y a veces descubren otras drogas, como anfetaminos o alcohol como otras maneras para reproducir la experiencia.
Eventualmente, el efecto eufórico de la marihuana se disminuye y causa depres-ión, ansiedad, y olvido. Esto puede acontecer en cualquier tiempo entre 1 y 20 años de fumar marihuana (DrDrew.com).
Sin embargo, el alcohol causa los mismos efectos en personas con la gen de alcoholismo, y también causa cirrosis y cáncer del hígado, y daño en todas partes del cuerpo, porque es un veneno, pero es legal, y no tiene tantos efectos provechosos.
Hay aspectos buenos de la legalización de marihuana. Si fuera legal, el gobierno podría ganar mucho dinero imponiendo impuestos en las ventas, y ahorraría más dinero si no encarcelara los vendedores y fumadores de marihuana. También habría más espacio en los cárceles para criminales violentos, como asesinos y violadores.
También, ha habido mucha información incorrecta sobre la marihuana: en los años 30, fue dicho que "el uso de la marihuana era la principal causa de homosexual-idad, que los negros y mejicanos (por razones inherentes a su raza) se convertían en asesinos psicópatas tras consumir cannabis" (La Buena Hierba). Pero, hay que recordar que en el Internet, a veces gente no dicen la verdad en total. En el mismo Website, hay información que no es comletemente verdadera: "Estudios actuales sobre seres humanos consumidores de cannabis han demostrado que no existen daños cerebrales de ningún tipo." Hay información cortraria arriba, y yo sé por seguro que aquella información es la verdad, porque Dr. Drew es un médico certificado, y un especialista en la medicina de adicción.
Para continuar, el cannabis tiene otros usos que como droga. Se puede usar el cáñamo para hacer cuerda y tela, y el aceite de las semillas de cannabis es un buen lubricante, y es bueno para cocinar.
De hecho, George Washington y sus hombres no habrían sobrevivido en Valley Forge si no tuvieron ropa de cáñamo, que conservan más calor que algodón, y son más durables.
En conclusión, mientras la marihuana tiene efectos malos si está abusada, también tiene muchas propiedades provechosas, y usos medicales, industriales, y recreacionales, y no debe ser prohibido por ningún gobierno, pero con la libertad, es necesario haber reglas sobre el distribución y el consumo, como hay sobre alcohol y tabaco. Si una legalización va a funcionar, necesitamos aceptar responsibilidades, y si podemos hacer esto, el planeta será un lugar mejor.
1. "UN ESTUDIO . . . REALIZADO CON RATAS QUE REVELA EL PAPEL TERAPÉUTICO DE LA MARIHUANA EN LOS TUMORES CEREBRALES" ; El Mundo ; 4 Marzo 2000. http://www.mir.es/pnd/doc/document/prensa/mar2000.htm
2. Pinsky, Drew: Frequently Asked Questions: Differing effects of marijuana use ; 1999. http://www.drdrew.com
3. "La Buena Hierba" ; Abril 1997. http://www.planetavirtual.com/usuarios/bh/bh.html