Under Cover of Mid-Afternoon We'll Escape In the Largest Car In the County
Somehow I managed to get through all weekend without getting on here, which may be for the best since I seem to have been pretty well outta whack when I wrote last. Course I always seem to be out of whack. Anyhow, here it is a little bit after Future Studies. And the verdict is -- I'm staying. I am staying because I want more than 9 credit hours, because even though he says some very strange things from time to time and I know we have differing world veiws I think he's open enough to my close-mindedness to pass well. Ha! He mentioned last week some things I though strange and so I really didn't know what to think. Like how science has proven tachyons. You know, that faster than light particle. I would have thought should that actually have been done every physicist in the the world would know about it and be talking about it. Alas, last time I talk to one about it they still thought it a mere hypothesis. Or how about the unexplanable energy of the pyramid shape -- like the one at Giza. Has to be specific, not just any ol' pyramid. He claims to have built one (and no longer has it) and conducted all kinds of experiments. Like put a 5 pound bag of sugar inside it, seal it up and the next day it won't weight 5-lbs. *shrug* I can't say that it won't, but that was just a little out there for me. Today we were a little more mundane and talked about time and how as we've become more "civilized" we have created more and more divisions of time and how even today different cultures view time differently. All in all I think it will be interesting and I will be able to cope.
On a wholly different note -- last week before Japanese one day Bush came up and at least one individual at the table said "Well who likes Bush, anyway?" Of course I replied that I did. He asked why. I said something to the affect because he has morals and values. I could not believe the response I got. I really was shocked. He said, "Choosing leaders based on morals is foolish." Excuse me? We didn't get into it because class was starting, but I was (and am) shocked. He did claim it was wrong because everyone is a hypocrite. Chad-o-tron, I'd love to hear your take on this as you seem to be good at writing about that whole political side of things.
My take on it -- if we aren't choosing our leadership on moral values, what are we choosing them on? Because they look good on the tele? Yeah, that's a good way to get things done. That's a good way to keep the country from sliding into oblivion. Now I will have to grant that personally I think this fellow has some slightly messed up morals. The day before he was talking about his Japanese boyfriend with whom he lives. Well, guess what guys, I'm not all that politically correct -- being homosexual isn't okay. Thinking it is, well that's one of those moral issues I'm talking about. Not taking a stand against something we know to be wrong is a sin of omission. I did think that very afternoon that it would be a perfect opportunity for me to learn/ practice some charity (the Pure Love of Christ type of charity) -- in otherwords, remember that he is a Child of God too and that though God abhors the sin he loves the person the same as everyone else and that's how *I* should do it. I know I need to work on that, I think for me it'll be a lifetime project.
So anyhow, back to the issue that was at hand. Choosing leaders. Nobody is perfect. Not one of us is, you know. That being said, if we don't choose people to represent us who stand for something we believe in what are we doing? Giving them free reign to do whatever they wish, make laws that don't protect, but rather line pockets. If we don't choose on some sort of moral grounds we mine as well not exist. If there is no law, there is no punishment. If there is no right, there is no wrong. I guess some people want that. If there is no law to break, then I can do whatever I wish without consequence.
One of the biggest problems amongst those who do want some sort of standard arises from just what set of morals we use to make those laws. People talk about separation of Church and State. And while I agree we ought not have a national religion defined by law, you can not avoid the FACT that this country was founded on a set of religious values and you can not *remove* those values without *destroying* the country. Certainly a theocracy can (and will) work. But what it takes is a perfect being (or one who at least follows the dictates of God impeccibly). Until Christ comes again to reign, I'll be content with the Republic we have, so long as we can keep it as focused in on those morals and values.
And so it goes, I should get hitting the books. I'm staying on campus until I get my HW done. Fewer (though as you can see here) still some distractions. I did a good clip of it earlier with that in mind so off I go to get it done. Either way it's going to be surface streets home being ½ past 2 already.
Until the cows come home, or Tokyo is rebuilt again--
~Gojira
On a wholly different note -- last week before Japanese one day Bush came up and at least one individual at the table said "Well who likes Bush, anyway?" Of course I replied that I did. He asked why. I said something to the affect because he has morals and values. I could not believe the response I got. I really was shocked. He said, "Choosing leaders based on morals is foolish." Excuse me? We didn't get into it because class was starting, but I was (and am) shocked. He did claim it was wrong because everyone is a hypocrite. Chad-o-tron, I'd love to hear your take on this as you seem to be good at writing about that whole political side of things.
My take on it -- if we aren't choosing our leadership on moral values, what are we choosing them on? Because they look good on the tele? Yeah, that's a good way to get things done. That's a good way to keep the country from sliding into oblivion. Now I will have to grant that personally I think this fellow has some slightly messed up morals. The day before he was talking about his Japanese boyfriend with whom he lives. Well, guess what guys, I'm not all that politically correct -- being homosexual isn't okay. Thinking it is, well that's one of those moral issues I'm talking about. Not taking a stand against something we know to be wrong is a sin of omission. I did think that very afternoon that it would be a perfect opportunity for me to learn/ practice some charity (the Pure Love of Christ type of charity) -- in otherwords, remember that he is a Child of God too and that though God abhors the sin he loves the person the same as everyone else and that's how *I* should do it. I know I need to work on that, I think for me it'll be a lifetime project.
So anyhow, back to the issue that was at hand. Choosing leaders. Nobody is perfect. Not one of us is, you know. That being said, if we don't choose people to represent us who stand for something we believe in what are we doing? Giving them free reign to do whatever they wish, make laws that don't protect, but rather line pockets. If we don't choose on some sort of moral grounds we mine as well not exist. If there is no law, there is no punishment. If there is no right, there is no wrong. I guess some people want that. If there is no law to break, then I can do whatever I wish without consequence.
One of the biggest problems amongst those who do want some sort of standard arises from just what set of morals we use to make those laws. People talk about separation of Church and State. And while I agree we ought not have a national religion defined by law, you can not avoid the FACT that this country was founded on a set of religious values and you can not *remove* those values without *destroying* the country. Certainly a theocracy can (and will) work. But what it takes is a perfect being (or one who at least follows the dictates of God impeccibly). Until Christ comes again to reign, I'll be content with the Republic we have, so long as we can keep it as focused in on those morals and values.
And so it goes, I should get hitting the books. I'm staying on campus until I get my HW done. Fewer (though as you can see here) still some distractions. I did a good clip of it earlier with that in mind so off I go to get it done. Either way it's going to be surface streets home being ½ past 2 already.
Until the cows come home, or Tokyo is rebuilt again--
~Gojira
posted by Godzilla at 2:07 PM
1 Comments:
Semantics. Of course we all choose leaders based on morals. What's foolish is to say we don't. If we DREW STRAWS to choose our leaders, that would still be an expression of morals, OUR morals. Morals and choices cannot be separated. Neither can consequences and choices. I get tired of the clouds of confusion that hang thick and smothering, like some smelly atmospheric inversion. You know how they say those inversion days are dangerous for the unhealthy and the frail down in the valley? The same kind of choking hazard threatens when there's a moral inversion. Oh, to get to the top of a mountain and BREATHE!
Post a Comment
<< Home