Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
| Blogs > passer58by > Passages |
America
|
America “So have you been following this year’s presidential election?” “How could I miss it? Even if I didn’t want to, somebody, hell everybody is talking about it.” “Isn’t that a good thing?” “I suppose.” “So, what do you think about it?” “It’s crazy.” “Why?” “There are hundreds of reasons.” “Can you give me a couple?” “Sure, first off, you’ve got Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other and they each have to nominate one person to be their candidate.” “That’s how it works.” “I don’t think it works all that well.” “Why not?” “Well, because the Democrats tend to be liberal and the Republicans tend to be conservative.” “That’s true.” “Of course it’s true. I wouldn’t say it if it weren’t true.” “Okay. Go on.” “But most people, people whose lives aren’t ruled by politics tend to be mutts.” “Mutts?” “Yeah, mutts.” “How so?” “Well, most people, at least the people who have real lives, do jobs, have families, you know, people who actually think, they tend to take issues individually and not swallow the political party bullshit.” “Can you give me an example?” “Of course, do you think I’m an idiot?” “Um, no. Of course not.” “Most people take each issue as it comes at them. Abortion, gun control, immigration, whatever issue you want to talk about, people, on their own without the influence of outside agitators will reach a sort of middle of the road solution. They might be against abortion but for gun rights. Or vice versa. They want a strong national defense, but still believe in abortion rights. It’s the outside agitators who are causing the problems. And those agitators tend to be politicians.”“Can you give me an example? Say gun control for instance?”“Sure. Guns are cool, guns are fun. Guns are effin’ dangerous, too. Not everybody should have a gun. But some people should be able to have a gun.” “That makes sense. I suppose.” “Of course it makes sense. A perfect example is the idiocy surrounding the gun issue at the parties’ conventions.” “What gun issue?” “Well, there’s a petition floating around to allow open carry at the Republican convention,” “What do you think about that?” “Arm every one of those bastards and watch the fireworks. It’s called ‘thinning the herd’. Nothing bad would come out of it” “You don’t really believe that, do you?” “Nah, I was kidding. But logically, and yes, I know that’s not a word that should be used lightly when describing politics or politicians, but yes, logically, if you truly believe that guns are the answer to security issues then there absolutely should be an open carry policy at the convention. Hell, the NRA should open a booth on the sidewalk outside the building and give away free handguns to anyone who wants one. No, check that, they should be selling them. Giving them away would be communism and we can’t have that. Gotta make profit or it’s communism.” “Don’t you think that would be a potential problem, having guns all over at such an emotionally charged event?” “Of course it would be a problem. And don’t think for a minute the NRA and the Republican Party don’t realize that. They know that not everyone should have a gun and that there needs to be laws to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. If they truly believed the bullspit they spout then they’d be fighting, no make that demanding, that open carry be allowed on the floor of the convention hall. They aren’t doing it and won’t do it. They are hypocrites of the highest level. Anyone who denies that is either blind or with them.” “Wow.” “What. ‘wow’? You asked.” “Yes, I guess I did.” “Don’t think the Democrats are getting off the hook on this issue, either,” “They’re not?” “Hell no. They like guns as much as the biggest flag waving NRA gun nut around. That is when it comes to their protection. They love them some guns. Like at their upcoming convention. You can bet the Secret Service and any security they have will be packing.” “Would you expect otherwise?” “Hell no. And I wouldn’t want it any other way. But just as the Republicans are wrong about arming everyone, the Democrats are wrong about taking guns away from everyone.” “Not all Democrats want to take all guns away. They want sensible guns laws.” “And that’s the problem with politics. In order to get the nomination for their party they have to appeal to the fringes. For the Democrats it’s the left and for the Republicans, it’s the right. Most people lie somewhere in the middle. When they get their nominations is when they start trying to win over us folks in the middle. The abandon their core, which only serves to piss off their people. It’s all bullspit, like I said.” “Back to the guns, what’s wrong with sensible gun laws?” “There’s nothing wrong with gun laws. The problem is the word ‘sensible’. When people get all caught up in their emotions, whether it be anger, or fear or whatever you want to call it they go blind, they lose sight of all sensibility. That’s not good. You can’t make good decisions if you are blind to the facts and anger and fear makes you blind.” “But there are those who say the constitution protects their right to keep and bear arms.” “The constitution also says something about a well-regulated militia, but they tend to leave that out or ignore it.” “Why do you think that is?” “That’s what people do. We ignore the parts we don’t like, or creatively interpret them along the lines that we want.” “How do you mean?” “The Supreme Court ruled something along the lines that because of a comma somewhere in that amendment, it meant that the framers wanted people to be able to arm themselves for their defense. That is, to put it bluntly, crazy. It seems obvious to me, now I’m no Ted Cruz level constitutional scholar, but unless I’m completely off the rails that amendment has to do with a well regulated militia and duck hunting or shooting an intruder don’t have anything to do with being a part of a militia.” “Are you suggesting outlawing duck hunting?” “Are you nuts?” “Probably. It was just a question.” “Have you stopped beating your wife?” “What’s that supposed to mean?” “It was just a question.” “Okay, I get it. Anyway, about duck hunting?” “Yes, no. I’m not advocating banning duck hunting or duck hunting with guns or any hunting with guns. What I am saying is that the constitution doesn’t prohibit banning guns for personal use. It’s the supreme court which has set the parameters based on their own political agenda.” “Are you saying the Supreme Court is political?” “Here we go again. Are you that….nah, I’m not going to insult you. I like you. Yes, the Supreme Court, like any sort of human gathering involving more than two people who have to make a decision is political. It’s inevitable and unavoidable.” “You said the Constitution doesn’t prohibit the banning of guns. Do you believe that?” “Yes I do. But that doesn’t mean that I believe guns should be banned. As I said before. I like guns, guns are fun. But we live in a world where there are some people who shouldn’t have guns and we should be able to keep them out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them.” “That makes sense” “Of course it does. Now, I have no idea how to accomplish that. But I do know that it will never happen the way we are going.” “The way we are going?” “Yes, like with the convention example, the extremes are wrong and we have to find a way to talk through it. Find a common ground and it’s not going to happen as long as people are shouting instead of listening. And, unfortunately I don’t see that happening.” “Why not?” “Because we’re too busy demonizing ‘them’.” “Them?” “Yeah. Lieburuals. Teabaggers, Socialists, dildonians, protesters, muslims or whatever derogatory names you can come up with for people who may not look or think like you.” “What does all of that mean?” “It means that we can’t talk about the issues if we don’t look at people as people, if we see them as the enemy. Look at the way the army trains soldiers to kill. They do it by dehumanizing the enemy. If you see the enemy as a name, a derogatory name, not as a person it’s easier to kill them. The same is true in politics, if you don’t see someone as a person, it’s much easier to support a hurtful cause.” “Can you give me an example?” “Of course. The deal with the sex change folks and their bathroom habits.” “Yeah.” “Yeah, well. The way I see it is that the folks who are living as, well whatever they are living as, should be able to use whatever restroom they want.” “But what about the concern of having men in ladies rooms. That has to be a concern” “Is the problem that a man is in there, or is the problem that a sexual predator is in there?” “What do you mean?” “If a man goes in the ladies room and does whatever he has to do and gets out, who gets hurt? Nobody. He’s done what he’s needed to do and got out. Now if a sexual predator goes in the bathroom and assaults someone he’s committed a crime and needs to be punished. Going to the bathroom is a necessity and shouldn’t be punished.” “But some people are uncomfortable being in a bathroom with someone of the opposite sex.” “I can understand that and so am I. But so what? The world isn’t and shouldn’t revolve around whether or not I’m comfortable in all situations. Or offended for that matter. It’s funny how the same people who seem to revel in the fact that their political opinions offend some people are outraged at the thought that they may find themselves in an uncomfortable position in a restroom.” “An uncomfortable position in a restroom? What are you doing in these restrooms?” “Very funny. The same things, or at least I hope it’s the same things that you are doing in a restroom. I don’t know you all that well, so I don’t know what secrets you have.” “No secrets, here. At least no restroom secrets. Well, except for that one time…” “Please, keep that secret. I don’t want to know.” “But aren’t their some genuine concerns about trans people using whatever restrooms they want?” “I’m not seeing it. And, just so you understand, I don’t get the whole “trans” thing. It doesn’t register with me. I’m a man, well, male anyway.” “Man? Male? What’s that about?” “Well, I say an article the other day about how if you were a Bernie Sanders supporter you couldn’t be a real man.” “Are you a Bernie Sanders supporter?” “If I was would that mean I wasn’t a real man?” “No, that’s foolish.” “And that’s my point. It goes back to my point about the lack of ability to discuss issues calmly without resorting to name calling.” “There are those who say that’s been going on in politics forever. That it was worse back during the days of Jefferson and Adams.” “I’m sure it was. But that doesn’t make it right. Or so people keep telling me that just because we used to do it that way doesn’t mean we should keep doing it that way.” “No, it doesn’t.” “No, it doesn’t. And that’s why I think we have to let people use whatever bathroom they choose to use. I’m sure that trans women, if that’s the right term for women who were born male and decided to live as men, were forced to use a men’s room they would have problems. Especially in a high school.” “Why would you think that?” “Really? You have to ask that question? Unfortunately there are people in this world who love to torment anyone who is the least bit different. And, when they are given the opportunity to harass or antagonize someone they will jump at the chance. Especially in high school.” “So you think that would be a problem?” “With all the publicity, all the emotional publicity around this issue, I don’t have any trouble imagining a group of teenage boys ganging up on one of their more effeminate classmates who’s forced to use the boy’s room because of this ridiculous law. It would be even worse at the college level.” “Why can’t we just stick with the old rules, if you have a penis use the men’s room, if you don’t, you use the ladies room?” “Times change, my friend. Who’s going to check? Are we going to have potty cops? And what about those truly<b> androgynous </font></b>people, you know what I’m talking about. Those people who you truly can’t tell whether they are male or female. They could walk into either bathroom and you wouldn’t know if they were going into the right one or the wrong one. Are you going to ask them to prove their sex?” “I’m not.” “No, neither am I, but unfortunately, there are people who would. And those are the same people who are trying to pass these laws. Just leave them alone to do their business. If they cause a problem then sure, have them arrested. But I really don’t believe they are going to cause any more problems that Republican politicians in a men’s room stall.” “I see what you did there?” “You like it?” “Meh?” “Aren’t we entitled to the pursuit of happiness? If living as a man or woman is what we feel is right for us, then why shouldn’t we be allowed to do it?” “There are those who say that’s messing with God’s plan for us. That God intended for us to be of the sex we were born and that we can’t change God’s plan.” “That’s fine for them, if they choose to believe that, then great. No one is making them get a sex change.” “We shouldn’t encourage people to interfere with God’s plan.” “The constitution is the law of the land. Not the bible.” “But we are a Christian nation.” “We are a nation with a Christian majority. But we are not now, and have never been, a Christian nation.” “The founders were Christians.” “Some of them were, some were deists. But none of that matters. They wanted a secular nation, that’s why they put in the separation of church and state.” “Separation of church and state is not in the constitution.” “You’re right, it isn’t. But ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’ or something along those lines. That sounds to me like they don’t want religion interfering in government.” “The original settlers were here for religious freedom. That’s one of the foundations this country was built upon.” “No doubt. But the founders also knew that they couldn’t trust each other to respect the religious tenets of another religion. They would try to force their beliefs on others. They saw it in England and Europe, that’s why they left. And then, when they got here, they saw it repeat itself. People tend to want the freedom to follow what they believe. They also want the freedom to get you to believe as they do, or make your life miserable. It’s still happening today.” |
||||
|
grins widely mind if a pimp this? oui You cannot conceive the many without the one.
|
Become a member to create a blog
