I’m going to go all geek for a bit

Since Thor first appeared on the big screen, the debate about Mjolnir, his hammer, has raged. Most recently, we’ve seen running jokes about Age of Ultron, Thor: The Dark World, The Avengers, and so much more. But there’s a key part people are missing or ignoring, sentience. In Thor: The Dark World, he hangs Mjolnir (M-yol-near – as two syllables) on a coat rack, and the debate begins.

You see, in Thor, Odin says (and I’m paraphrasing here) “Whosoever holds this hammer, be he worthy, he shall possess the power of Thor.” Basically, Mjolnir can evaluate people, and decide if they should be able to wield a weapon as powerful as one forged in the heart of a dying star and imbued with Odinforce. This brings in the biggest question, how much does the hammer actually weigh? You see, if it was just weight, Thor would have to work out to be physically stronger, but strength doesn’t mean worthiness. We saw that in Captain America: The First Avenger, where the bigger guys were not worthy, as they’d abuse the power if given that boost, while Steve, a scrawny kid was given the power, which gave him strength to use in conjunction with his other powers (morals, mind, etc).

So, in essence, Mjolnir weighs nothing to someone who is worthy, and more than the Earth to one who isn’t. We saw the Ultron trailer where Captain America gets the hammer to wiggle, and Thor doesn’t know how, but only Thor (I won’t spoil Ultron for you, so I’m going with everything up to Thor 2 and Guardians, if you’ve seen Ultron, just respect others and don’t spoil it) can hold the hammer, and only after learning that there are things more important than his own life.

So, Thor could hang Mjolnir on a thumb-tack, and it would stay, but even Halfthor Bjornson (The Mountain from Game of Thrones) couldn’t move it with help from all the tech on Earth.

OK, my geek out is over, anyone else wanna weigh in on this?

Please follow and like us:

Interesting, isn’t it?

It seems that while businesses run by Christians who stand by their faith are being run into the ground, those run by homosexuals are protected from the same laws. This story appears to be one where a Christian wanted a cake showing a Bible that had “God hates gays” on it. The customer claims that isn’t true, and points to two scriptures they requested. Nevermind that the verses were not what the baker said, the judge ruled that a bakery can discriminate against Christians. The verses?

Psalm 45:7 – You love righteousness, and hate wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you, more than your companions, with the oil of joy.

Leviticus 18:22 – You are not to sleep with a man as with a woman; it is detestable.

Now, what I find interesting is that the customer claims that they did not request “God hates gays” but say that the first scripture is “God hates sin.” Yes, you could interpret that verse to say that, but it’s a stretch. They go on to claim the second is “God loves sinners,” a stretch many wouldn’t go for.

This looks like a setup to me, either with a group trying to make one side or the other look good or bad, but it’s clear the customer has not read their Bible. I took less than 5 minutes to find, read, then type both verses here. My Bible is not an online version, but a printed copy I’ve had for many years.

I do not believe God truly “hates” anything, and I do believe he loves sinners, as we all are sinners. I believe God is saddened when anyone chooses a life of sin over a life of righteousness, or the attempt. We can never be truly righteous, but we can try to live as He wants us to.

Now, before anyone decides to point to anything in the Old Testament as my need to not eat pork or shelfish, or to bury adulterers up to their neck and stone them to death, remember that I follow Christ. He that stood in the temple and proclaimed that the prophecy and scriptures were fulfilled in Him. Christ that stood against a crowd trying to stone an accused prostitute and said “Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.” Christ, a Jew, who was kind to Gentiles, while others were not. Who befriended tax collectors and healed lepers.

This is what I believe. I am to feed the hungry, help the sick, and I try every day to do this. Why then, when I uphold what Christ did, in this case that homosexuality is a sin and therefore something I must not promote, as in the case of a baker making a cake, am I to be forced by law to do this or go out of business, while a baker who is homosexual can tell me they won’t serve me because I’m Christian?

I don’t want a nation where people are forced to violate their beliefs, nor a country where the government can force much of anything, if anything at all. If you are a business owner and choose to turn away a segment of the population, and your business fails, obviously you are in an area where the majority disagree with you, and the market will decide your fate. But that isn’t the country we have today. Rather, we now live in a country where a single customer can force a business to close, when if the market decided they would flourish, simply because that one customer was “offended” or their “rights” were violated, ignoring the rights of others, or that their winning a court case offends many others.

So, do you want a country where a miniscule portion of the populous can force their views on the rest? Or do you want a country where people are free to decide for themselves? If that decision is such that they fail in their business, it’s only their fault, but if they flourish, it’s obvious the majority agree with them, and you leave it at that? The first sees the majority as needing to be FORCED TO CHANGE, the second, well, it’s the one where every individual is free to decide for themselves.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

It’s Friday, time for a rant

I’ve posted about little more than society and the hypocrisy coming from so called “disenfranchised” groups, for a good while now. Each time I comment or post about this, I generally get little more than what I would expect from a toddler when you tell them candy isn’t good for lunch, or a tantrum to be more precise. Basically, the go to argument is “oh yeah, well you’re an intolerant bigot, so you don’t count” or something similar. If they don’t go to that, they instantly go to challenging everything you said in a way that can’t be done to prove yourself right, or comparing your points to other points so idiotic that they have “proven you to be crazy.” If you don’t believe me, look at my post where I link to a story about an athiest’s response to an article about someone simply suggesting Christ may have lived in a newly discovered home in Nazareth. Their main points are “well, there’s no proof that Mark Twain hired a hooker in the home I now own, but there’s no proof against it,” or “there’s no proof aliens live in my closet at night, but there’s no proof against it.” Basically, they counter anything that they don’t agree with using the most idiotic points, so as to “prove the Christians idiots for even believing in a higher power, when it’s obvious that we atheists are smarter and better.”

So, the point of the rant. If you want to debate, learn how to do it first. You don’t just challenge a point made, you bring logic, researched proof, and stay respectful. I recently commented on a thread about gay marriage. I first asserted that marriage is not a right for anyone, as well as believing that, even if only at a subconscious level, homosexuality is a choice. The only response? “Marriage is a right when the government gives you benefits, and try being gay if it’s a choice.” No logic, just a “you’re stupid so I’m going to reply in a way to make you look stupid” response.

Marriage is not a “right” even if it automatically “grants” anything. Yes, a spouse is assumed to be next of kin, given power of attorney if not otherwise assigned, and so on. Guess what, you can grant those to anyone you choose, and no, it’s not “different because marriage does it.” When you get married, you still have to assign those things to your spouse, you still have to put them on your insurance, and so on. Civil Unions were created not too long ago, but they weren’t accepted because “it wasn’t marriage.” So, to me, this suggests that it’s not the power of attorney or other benefits that the gay marriage lobby wants, they want the WORD marriage.

Consider this, until roughly 500 to 600 years ago, marriage was largely (if not purely) a religious affair. It was only when the government saw they could use it either to control the population or make money, that they got involved. We know that during the Scottish fight for independence which killed William Wallace, the English would use Prima Nocte, in an effort to breed English blood into Scot lines. Others used it as a way to control families or clans. Eventually, it just became a cash machine, in that you had to pay for a license, then you had to get a blood test to “make sure your fiance knew if you had any disease, and to ensure you’re not already related” which you had to pay for. So, it’s not just being able to say that they have a spouse, or life partner, in the sense of insurance and such, it’s the actual word marriage that they want.

I’ve been ridiculed before, and likely will again, for suggesting this is only the first step, and before long a Church will be sued for refusing to marry a gay couple. We’ve already seen a bakery forced to close because the owner, acting on his faith, refused a customer, yet when a bakery owned by a gay man or lesbian turns down a straight customer, or worse, becomes verbally abusive, nothing happens. So, how long will it be before a Church is sued, or worse, a Pastor arrested for “denying the right to marry” to a gay couple? It will happen, it’s just a matter of when.

Finally, my point about choice. Notice my comment had “even at a subconscious level” but that was ignored. So answer me this. You grow up in a small town, surrounded by family who never eat pork, root for only one pro and one college team, and everyone drives only Chevy vehicles. You go to that college, driving a Chevy, have never eaten pork in 18 years, and still watch that pro team every game. Did you “choose” to do any of that? Or, did you grow up having those teams, the dislike of pork, and the preference for Chevy just be all you saw. Well, that’s my point. Kids are growing up today being shown homosexuality in a very different way than even 10 or 20 years ago (where it just wasn’t there on TV or in Movies). Schools are teaching that it’s “natural” for two men or two women to be lovers (and it’s not, as two members of the same sex cannot reproduce, and thus, it’s not natural) and parents who complain are ridiculed and threatened with having CPS called on them. My point is this, we all “choose” things every day that we aren’t even aware of. The natural order of any living being is to stay alive and reproduce. Reproduction requires something from a male and something from a female, so that is “natural.”

So, I’ve ranted, what do you think?

Smokey Out

Please follow and like us:

Thursday thoughts

Those who have read my blog for any amount of time will know that, while I am personally rather conservative, when it comes to government involvement in the lives of Americans, I want as little as possible. The Constitution lists not only the rights protected (not given) and also the process to change that, yet people call for new “rights” almost daily. The very first amendment to the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, speech, the press and assembly, yet we see calls to silence this group or that, to restrict this church or that one, or to deny someone or some group a permit to hold a rally, because they are “hateful” or “bigots,” while others that actually advocate hatred or worse, violence, are allowed to do anything they want.

Phil Robertson (Duck Dynasty) was asked his personal opinion on homosexuality, and gave it, only to have people who likely never watched the show all but sue A&E to remove him. Only finding that the show wouldn’t go on without him, that it would be A&E who breached contract, and thus, they’d lose a lot of money, caused A&E to change their minds. When Dan Cathy was asked the same thing, there were calls for all but the firebombing of Chic Fil A restaurants. Yet, let a homosexual group demand a pastor be jailed, someone be fired, simply because they donated money to the GOP or another group that they don’t like, even 20+ years ago, and it’s “free expression” or “just voicing an opinion.” Why the difference? Why the hypocrisy?

Simply put? The government and the media want the country divided, as it allows them to play groups against each other, hoping that group a won’t watch speeches given to group b, so they can promise both groups everything, then blame each group for failing to deliver. The media wants higher ratings, so they jump on racism, sexism, or other issues that whip people into a frenzy, and damn the consequences. Had the media not gone gaga over the Ferguson, MO situation, it’s possible that the white police officers who have been targeted and murdered would still be alive. But, rather than be responsible, we were given constant coverage of weeping relatives, crowds “disgusted” by the “miscarriage of justice,” and the fact that a grand jury, which was called and assembled LONG before Brown robbed that store and attacked a cop, found the evidence said the officer was justified in his actions. Now, however, a man’s life has been ruined, his family has been threatened, and he has had to leave the state he lived and worked in, all because the media portrayed a thug who was shot while trying to take an officer’s side-arm as a “misunderstood teen gunned down by a racist cop.”

So, how do we fix this? The answer is the same as it’s been every time I’ve asked it. Stand up, demand accountability in the media, demand those who sensationalize things to the point of what we saw in Ferguson be fired, demand our elected officials actually represent us, and when they don’t, vote them out! But, that requires that people stay informed and actually accept that they can’t just demand something and get it, or call someone a bigot because that person wouldn’t bow to them, so I’m not holding out much hope.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

Freedom for those who do what we like

Indiana and Arkansas have been in the spotlight recently, having passed laws stating a private business owner can deny service to anyone they choose to. This is, in the simplest terms, saying they have a right to TURN AWAY MONEY. Nowhere is sexual orientation, race, gender or religion mentioned. What it does is protect a baker who, due to religious conviction, decides he won’t bake a cake for a gay wedding, or a restaurant owner who refuses service to vegetarians because he uses all kinds of meat in his cooking, or a lawn care professional when they tell someone who happens to be gay, or a different race, or a different religion, they can’t mow their yard because their booked.

We used to be a society where, if you were denied service and felt it was wrong, you told your friends, they told theirs, and so on. If enough people believed your version, the business just began to lose money, and either changed their practices, or went out of business. You affected them simply by convincing others, without whining on TV or suing, to avoid that business. It’s the same as a restaurant that serves bad food, people find out and just don’t go there. Today, however, we live in a society where, despite the First Amendment, and now two states passing additional laws, people who feel “discriminated against” sue to “punish the bigot.” I’m sorry, if I went to a bakery owned by a gay or lesbian couple, and asked for a cake honoring traditional marriage, and they said they won’t do it, I WOULDN’T WANT THEM TO at that point, for fear they’d not do as good a job as they do on other items. Second, I wouldn’t sue them for turning away customers, I’d simply let it be known that they turned me away due to my faith and my request, and let people decide if they want to do business there, leaving it to the market who succeeded and who didn’t.

To show how this is not the case any more, and how one group has decided to force another to not only tolerate, but to accept them, I give you two cases. First, a court ruled that a baker had “illegally discriminated” against a gay couple. Keep in mind that this is a private citizen who decided to turn away a paying customer. Rather than simply letting their friends and family know, and instead of simply encouraging anyone they could to do business elsewhere (free market economics) they sued, and a judge ruled that a private citizen could not act on their beliefs. This case however, is the opposite, and not about only one baker. No, in this case, thirteen bakeries turned away a request to make a cake with a message that stated gay marriage is wrong. Nothing was vulgar or profane about the message, it was simply a message that a majority of people, based on their religious affiliation, agree with. None of these bakeries were sued, some of them were very insulting, one even saying they’d made the large cookie, but they would “put a phallus on it.” How is it that the first instance of a private business turning away a customer is “illegal” or “wrong,” but not the other thirteen cases?

Simply put, the media and too many in government have decided that only one group is protected. This isn’t the only situation either. We have seen instances where people state only whites can be racist, only men can be sexist, and believe it. This is the problem today. If you claim to want equality, then you cannot do anything the other guy can’t, and then expect him not to react as you would. If you can call someone evil, ignorant, a bigot, or worse, then they can call your “lifestyle choice” wrong, or immoral. If you can turn away a customer wanting a cake supporting traditional marriage, then he can turn your request for a cake for a gay wedding away. Simply put, no one can have a “right” that others do not have. That is called privilege, rights are for everyone, and too many today have either forgotten that, or chosen to remain ignorant in their demand for “rights” that only they enjoy.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

Two for today

It seems that I am not commenting as much on actual news and politics any more, as I am on people who fully expect the world to do as they demand, while they do as they please, and no one is allowed to question them on it.

The first for today, is once again something from DC, in this case, Harry Reid responding to someone pointing out that he blatantly lied about Mitt Romney during the 2012 elections. During a speech in the summer of 2012 Reid said “Let him prove that he has paid taxes, because he hasn’t.” referring to Romney, accusing him of never paying taxes. Romney, of course, responded, and I believe, made his returns available. Now, having been proven to have lied, and never responded when Romney called him on his statement, his only responses is “Well, they can call it whatever they want. Romney didn’t win, did he?” after being called a “McCartheyite” (referring to Senator McCarthey from the 1950’s). I’m sorry, had a Republican accused Obama of never paying taxes, only to have Obama prove he had, there would have been calls for all but public hanging, yet Reid jokes about ruining a man’s election run, and nothing is done?

I believe there are good people in the House and Senate, but they are in an extreme minority, their voices silenced. Sadly, there is little to be done, as to impose term limits, or have any legal action when our “illustrious leaders” break the very laws they pass, must be put in place by those same people. We are left with but one option, vote someone else into their office. I personally worked on a campaign in Tyler, TX in the 2004 election, where an incumbent Democrat was defeated. For those who don’t know, that area is a largely Democrat part of Texas, and Mr. Sandlin was the incumbent, which in a national election means you normally need to work very little to be re-elected, but he was defeated. So, the question here is simple, is it worth enough to you to work to oust those simply working to keep a cushy job and power, or not?


Next, we move to more of a societal issue, that being the attitude of (most) atheists today. Like any group, it’s not 100% of them believe or act as this next bit demonstrates, but sadly, those who simply want to live their lives are lumped in with the bad apples, and most of the “not bad apples” do little to nothing to correct the view of their group. In a great display of irony, these are the very people who trumpet the “not all XXX are bad” line regarding groups where horrible things are done in group XXX’s name. They say nothing about those members of the group who do those things, just “they’re not all bad, so stop complaining,” but when it comes to a lone Christian making a comment, or a lone wacko doing something terrible who might have been Christian, they jump all over “Christianity did this” completely ignoring their previous mantra of “it was a small percentage of the group” and so on.

In this case, it was an article postulating the possible discovery of the childhood home of Jesus of Nazareth. Note, from the author’s words, no claim that “this is Jesus’ house” was ever made. The question was asked, the evidence presented, and theories presented, that’s it. From there, the “Friendly Atheist” begins to liken this article’s theory to pure lunacy. Yes, I can say that while there is no proof that X happened in my home 100 years ago, there’s no proof it didn’t, so it may have, about anything, and as you can’t prove the negative, well, that’s the point. However, this “friendly” post about the article ridicules Christians and the entire article, all but saying “Jesus is a myth, so to find his home is impossible,” while comments simply spiral out of control attacking the mere fact that there are people who are Christians.

I have personally been called stupid, ignorant, and worse, simply because I am a Christian (also for being a Republican, a Conservative, and simply for being from the American south, but those are topics for a different day) as if this ends all discussion. So, my question is this, why is this even tolerated? The very people screaming that I, as a Christian, must “tolerate” people who believe differently than I do, or who’s “lifestyle choice” (and it’s not a choice either) is not in accordance with my beliefs, but for me to point out the childishness of their words is “attacking them on a personal level.”

Yes, I am a Christian, and no, I am not a scientist, so I can’t, and thus, won’t speak on the science behind the origins of life on this planet, or how humans have gotten to the place we are today, based on historical evidence of physical and mental changes. I don’t argue for or against the “big bang” for two reasons, there will never be fool proof evidence without time travel, and as I point out regularly, the physical act of creation could very well have been exactly what is called the big bang, simply caused by God commanding it to happen. I don’t question that humans have changed, or evolved, over time, because we are now on average taller, less hairy, smarter, and so much more, but I do question abiogenisis and the “we just evolved, there is no God” argument. When I do, I often get the “no one alive today was there? Great argument idiot” response, no reasoned discourse, but animosity and hateful attacks.

In a nutshell, you want respect, you earn it, you don’t demand it. I respect the Office of President of the U.S., just not the man in it right now. Second, to claim that “life just appeared and evolved to where we are today,” in my mind, is to boil human life, and all life on the planet, down to a “cosmic accident,” which to me, is just wrong, and often leaves me wanting to slap the living daylights out of the person refusing to act like an adult, then simply say “you’re an accident of the cosmos, so I choose to slap accidents of the cosmos” to simply get them away from me, but I then choose to remain an adult, and let them show themselves for the intellectual infants they are.

I am an educated and, I like to think, intelligent man, and I welcome civil and reasoned debate. However, when you stoop to name calling and emotional attacks on someone, you not only prove to be that same intellectual infant, you take all credibility away from your argument. Research, bring facts, use logic, and remain respectful. You’ll find more often than not, while you and the person you’re arguing with, or debating, but you will be able to part amicably, and continue your debates. Who knows, you both may just learn something, even if neither of you ever convinces the other.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

Welcome to the ADD News!

First on the list, budget proposals by the self declared emperor Obama. Is it any wonder that a budget that, primarily is “more taxes and more spending” with little substance outside of that is rejected? We can only expect Obama to begin decrying the House and Senate for “taking food from babies” or “denying help to those who need it” while those he speaks of helping are those who WON’T WORK not those who can’t, as we’ve all seen his ignoring of our Veterans who WANT TO WORK, but can’t, and still get nothing from his administration.

Next on the block, an idiot who didn’t learn fast enough. It seems a man who had a six figure salary with a seven figure stock package decided to attack Chic Fil A many times. He went through the drive through multiple times, only ever getting a free cup of water, only to then video his berating of the poor person at the window. He told her she was working for a hateful company, told her he wanted to slow down the line, wanted to take money, wanted to hurt the company, because he felt they were hateful. The girl in the video? She was courteous and gracious, and even accepted his apology. He was, however, fired from his job after the video he tried to delete went viral, then fired again when his new employer found out who he was. Now? Well, he’s in an RV on food stamps trying to sell his memoirs. Seems to me he came off as the hateful jerk, and Chic Fil A the company just trying to serve their customers.

Moving on, a child is forced to shave his head due to a “distracting” hair cut that HONORS HIS MILITARY FAMILY! Yes, a child is forced to shave his head or be suspended because he had a “high and tight” hair cut. I’m sorry, but I’ve worn this cut for more than a decade! I also watched as students in my graduating class (20 years ago, yes) had hair cuts that wouldn’t pass at even the most lenient of jobs. I can’t help but ask, had he braided his hair with pink ribbons to support gay rights, would they have done the same? Also, notice the district throwing the school under the bus, and the too late apology, as the CHILD WAS FORCED TO SHAVE HIS HEAD before they acted.

This one’s just for a link. It seems Ted Cruz is signing up for Obamacare. I can’t help wonder what his campaign speeches will be like.

This one needs no introduction, other than, what did we expect? It seems a passenger was BEATEN for not blindly praising Michael Brown. According to this story, a passenger on a bus was asked about the Brown case, and when he responded that he hadn’t thought about it much, he was BEATEN by the questioner. Yes, we now live in a world where someone can ask you about a case where someone tried to take a Police Officer’s weapon, and was subsequently shot, and when you don’t side with the CRIMINAL THUG, you are beaten. Notice the photo, they’re smiling! I can’t help but wonder, if I was ATTACKED AND HAD GUNS PULLED ON ME, only to react to save my life, would I be jailed based on my attacker’s race? Apparently, we must ask this now.

Not much to say on this one. It seems that while schools FORCE Christians to hide their faith, they also FORCE children to read the quran. This one is about a US Veteran finding his grand-daughter was being forced to learn islam, and his reaction. Personally, since so many people sue for less, I’d have demanded the ISD pay for a private school education for my child or grand-child.

Finally, we explore the idiocy of the left. It seems Kroger has publicly said they will simply follow the laws of the states their stores are in, but that isn’t enough for some. In open carry states, Kroger refuses to deny those who embrace their rights entry into the stores, so “Moms demand action” is putting out ads comparing someone with an assault rifle (which no open carry advocate carries, only those trying to make 2nd Amendment supporters does) to a child eating ice cream. They cite incidents at Kroger stores where guns were used to kill, ignoring that the people who killed others should not have been free at all. But beyond all of that, they scream about “rights” when it comes to gays or something else the majority of a state doesn’t want, then scream to stop something the majority does. It’s very simple folks. If your state has a law you don’t like, vote against it and/or those in power supporting it. If you lose, accept that you are in the minority or move away. If a company does something you don’t like, don’t shop there, and encourage others not to. If the company does well, accept that you are in the minority or act like a toddler denied candy, and hurt your argument/side.


I don’t expect anyone to comment other than in agreement or to say how ignorant or bigoted I am. If the latter, remember that by not engaging in reasoned, civil and logical debate, you only prove yourself a mental 2 year old, but after all, calling me names is all you have, right?

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

Here we go again

We’ve seen many instances of people being labeled “bigots” or worse simply because they believe differently. I have personally experienced this in a few ways, being told I’m an “intolerant bigot” because I believe homosexuality is not natural. Speaking from a purely biological stance, it’s not. Two men or two women cannot have a child without assistance from the other gender, it’s as simple as that. I’ve been called a bigot and zealot by a total stranger for simply praying over my meal in a restaurant. And the highlight of my life so far, I was actually called an insensitive racist jerk in a debate over Keynesian vs Supply Side economics in a class!

In regards to an Anti-Gay bill

That is a post about a bill in Indiana that would protect business owners who refuse service to someone based on their religious beliefs. Personally, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, in my mind, does that very thing, but as we’ve seen a baker sued into closing his business because he wouldn’t take someone’s money, and pastors threatened with their sermons being labeled as “hate speech,” so we know that the push for “equality” isn’t above denying the very freedom they scream for to those they disagree with.

But, it’s simpler than that. When a bill comes up that you support or don’t, VOTE or if it’s not on a ballot for you, call your elected official(s) and let your views be known. I’ve seen people screaming that this law or that, which “should be law to protect groups who need tolerance” was “stopped by bigots who hounded the House/Senate,” but when it comes to a law they don’t like, they simply demand their way be the only way. You can’t have it both ways, you can’t demand all laws you like be passed and enforced without question, while demanding all laws you disagree with be stopped without question. If you don’t like what those in power are doing, vote them out! If you don’t like that way the popular vote seems to go each time in your area, sadly, your choices are to move or just deal with it.

Finally, every private business has one right that needs no law, the right to refuse service to anyone, at any time, for any reason. If you don’t like who they aren’t serving, don’t spend your money there, and encourage others like you to do the same. Help a business you do support compete, economics will either force them to change or to go out of business. But, suing and forcing someone to either fold or go away does nothing to strengthen your cause, it just makes you look like a petulant child throwing a tantrum because you couldn’t have more candy.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

Why is this OK, but even suggesting different is “wrong” or “bad?”

It seems that not only are the “enlightened” members of the anti-gun lobby happy to simply vilify all gun owners, they’ve now moved to outright scare tactics, although I’m not surprised in the least, nor does the setting surprise at all. It seems that a group recently set up a “gun store” in New York City, one of the bastions of gun control with signs about “being there to help” on the door, only to start telling tales of how each gun was used in a crime (video in the linked page,) so aside from how they are selling firearms that were used in crimes, or at least should have been confiscated by Police, why is this OK?

I get angry at this for multiple reasons, yet it seems that no matter what, these idiots are praised by the media and the idiots in DC. First, this is blatant misinformation and manipulation, yet when anyone suggests that young girls considering abortion be shown images of their child via sonogram, to prove the child has a heartbeat and brain activity, we’re “forcing our views on children,” or “manipulating them so they choose what we want them to,” which is bad and wrong, naturally, while their choice to blatantly mislead and manipulate people is “working for a better society.”

Yes, I am pro-Second Amendment and pro-life, so naturally, my own beliefs go against the people I’m referring to above, but beyond that, the blatant hypocrisy astounds me almost as much as the “confusion” those same people show when you point this out. I have no doubt that they would claim that removing guns is more important than anything so they’re allowed to do anything they must to do so, while my believe that life begins at conception (which many doctors share) is “just belief and I shouldn’t force it on others.” Why is what they think and believe so much more important than those who disagree with them? Simply put, because the media and the government share their agenda.

Let’s look at their agenda versus those against them. This article highlights that their stance is firmly in the disarm everyone who isn’t in the military or law-enforcement camp. Never mind that they are the same ones screaming for more accountability every time a cop has to use any form of force, they want only cops and soldiers to have guns. Statistics are also useless, since these are the same people who will tell you they’d rather watch their entire family tortured and killed, then die themself, rather than “dirty their soul by using a gun.” Crimes committed while also using a handgun to aid in the commission of said crimes are relatively low these days, and that is somewhat in part due to more and more people legally owning and carrying weapons of their own. Think about this, what would you do if you wanted to rob a store, go to the one where the owner has a shotgun on the wall behind him, or the one where you know the owner actively supports gun-control? Criminals know that they are more likely to succeed when their victims can’t fight back, and that number is dwindling, so why is it that the gun-control people don’t mention it, it hurts their case, simply put.

On my topic, abortion, you see plenty of coverage of protests and marches for the “pro choice” lobby, signs with “not your body, not your choice” or the like all over the place, simply because anyone who dares disagree is quickly shouted down and hounded out of the area. Yes, I know it’s not my body, but I also know that the pro-choice lobby lies more than anyone else, and I can’t abide by that. Planned Parenthood was begun in the 1960’s as a way to control the African American population, but saying that now is “twisting history to deny women a choice that could save their lives.” Likewise, suggesting that students be taught abstinence ALONG SIDE CONTRACEPTION is “forcing religion on them.” Never mind that the screamers instantly accuse you of wanting to teach “abstinence only, forcing Christianity on students” which is not what most people suggest, and never mind that abstinence is the only 100% effective way to not get pregnant, any attempt to suggest that anything they say is biased is twisting the facts and they are just working to protect choice.

So, the question here is simple. Will you sit and continue to be lied to and manipulated, will you just ignore that a large percentage of your country is being lied and/or lying, or will you stand up and demand that those who scream for equality and tolerance begin practicing what they demand of others? It’s not an easy road, as when you point out that they are intolerant you’ll be branded a bigot, racist, chauvanist, or worse. Pointing out that they are lying, or even minimally twisting the facts to suit their own agenda is “accusing them of being evil and you should be shot for it.” The world will only get worse until enough people stand up and demand that those screaming for something practice that. Those who want to take something from the populous “for their own good,” no lie to do so.

So, what will you do?

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

Everyone is equal, minorities and women are more equal

George Orwell almost got it right. In his book, Animal Farm, the pigs got to a point where they were “more equal” than the other animals, simply because they “ran things” and “things would fall apart without them.” Well, while this has happened before, and likely will again, we are now moving toward a society where it’s not that they’re in charge, but that they’re not white, or not male, that makes them “more equal” than everyone who is a white male. I find it amazing that not only is this being all but ignored as far as discrimination, racism and sexism is concerned, as the media can’t shut up when it’s the other way, but that the idiots actually believe that only a white person can be racist and only a male can be sexist. Not only would you be laughed at or attacked for suggesting that women can be sexist or non-whites can be racist, I’ve actually see a comment to the tune of “how cute, you still believe the dictionary has definitions of words.” Yes, you read that right, I have seen an argument where someone actually said that the dictionary definition of racism is incorrect, and when asked why, they said “because that’s how it is.” This is where we’ve come to, a society where because women WANT it to be a certain way, we’re expected to make it that way. The idiots scream about equality, then also want to be treated special by men. Or, as actually happened to me, they will start screaming that they “don’t need a man to hold a door for them” (I was actually holding it for several people, men and women,) only to then scream about how rude you are if you close the door so they can do it themself. Well, I’m tired of it, and I’m tired of it being shoved down my throat from all directions. Look at the Superbowl commercials if you want more proof.

Click here to view the Always Superbowl Commercial

Always put out a commercial where they show both men and women (teens mostly or very young adults) perpetuate the stereotype of running like a girl, throwing like a girl, and fighting like a girl. They then go on to show young girls, simply running, throwing and so on. A young boy is asked if by showing the stereotype, if he just insulted his sister, showing that the point of the commercial is that we shouldn’t teach that boys and girls are different. Sorry to say, THEY ARE! I’m sorry, despite a VERY small percentage of women on the planet, men are physically bigger and stronger, while women are (mostly) better at nuturing jobs such as nurse or teacher. It’s just the way it is. I’ve seen women do things that, physically, I’d have a hard time doing, and I’ve had male nurses and teachers, but those are exceptions, not the rule. This doesn’t mean we should make fun, or not respect each other. Just because I’m a foot taller and able to lift more in a dead lift from the ground, doesn’t make me a “better person,” it means I’m physically stronger and larger, that’s it. Why do we need this “don’t say this or that” to take priority over math, science, history, and so on? Simply, because we are now being forced to do so, because a small portion of the population want us to.

Moving to another example, on the opposite end of the spectrum, we have T-Mobile’s wi-fi calling commercial.

Click here to view the T-Mobile wi-fi calling Superbowl Commercial

Right up to the end, this was a somewhat chuckleworthy commercial simply showing two celebrities competing over who could wi-fi call from the most remote bit of their house. At the end, though, Silverman hands the child to the parents and says “sorry it’s a boy.” Now, I’m sure we’ll soon be told she only mean sorry she’d not paid attention to them, or “sorry, I got distracted,” but having watched her “comedy” and such, I have a hard time with that. Add to this, she didn’t pause, so it wasn’t “sorry, it’s about” as if “sorry, I should have done this sooner” but rather “sorry it’s about” as if the parents should be upset they have a son. Why is it that today we are inundated with “don’t say this” or “you can’t say that” when it would be “offensive” to females, but no one cares about verbalizing anything up to out right hatred for males? The current push for “equality” is no different than it was when it started, it’s a push for supremacy. There are many sub groups, from the mild who simply want the right to say what they want to and also to censor others, to the extreme who support forced castration of all males, after they gather a sperm sample to use for artificial insemination (yes, there are people who support that,) and no one cares. But, let a male say something completely in jest and the world explodes! Plain and simple, men and women ARE DIFFERENT! I am physically stronger and larger than most of the women I know, so by default, I can lift more than them, and perform strenuous physical activity longer than them. On the flip side, women are generally more nurturing and caring, so tend to do well in careers such as medicine or education. This is not the rule though. I’ve had male teachers, been seen by male nurses, and seen women perform physical acts that made me wonder if they weren’t a robot.

You want equality and tolerance, that’s fine, but you can’t demand others tolerate everything from you, while trying to keep them from saying anything you don’t want them to. Remember, it’s Liberty and Justice for ALL, not only certain groups.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

Welcome to the new world of business

It seems that, recently, Hershey filed a lawsuit due to international candy, some of them at least, having extremely similar packaging/names. This story actually has an image of the British candy, where two of them are almost copies of Hershey brand candies. As a part of this, the story also points out that British candy will no longer be imported to the US, but this is NOT about “squashing competition” but rather, it’s about not importing candy that VIOLATES COPYRIGHT LAW! Let me put it a bit more clearly. You create a product named World’s Best Chocolate Bar, with a specific design on the wrapper. Later, you find a product made in another country with the same design/colors, and named World’s Best Chocolate. You then push to not have it imported, so that your consumers are not confused by the chocolate that mimics yours. Why are you the bad guy? That’s exactly what happened here, as you can see in the image in the story that there are British candies named Maltesers (as opposed to Malteser), KitKat (not even trying now), or Toffee Crisp using a font that is very similar to what’s used for the Reese’s candy bar.

When did the world get to a point where protecting your copyrighted brands is bad? Why are we expected to let anyone do whatever they want, rather than standing up for what is our? I’ll tell you, when students were no longer taught right from wrong, it started. When they were taught that simply trying out for a team means you got on the team, it got worse. When students saw everyone getting a ribbon, and no one being marked as better than others in a competition, it was almost done. But when the idiocy got to a point where you actually have people disqualified from a contest because they win too often, or students being allowed to not study, then successfully say they failed because the teacher hates them, rather than them being lazy, it was over. We now live in a world where we are expected to let others have our stuff, let them do whatever they want with our ideas, and not complain. Personally? I’m tired of it, and I say we start calling out the idiots who demonize a company for doing exactly what they would do if they were in Hershey’s place. I plan to keep buying Hershey products, even if just to spite the idiots who feel anyone should be able to use any name they want and steal ideas that are protected.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

“Tolerance” today

Southpark mocked the tolerance push years ago by showing a situation where Mr. Garrison, a very out homosexual got worse and worse, while the children upset by this were sent to “tolerance camp,” run as a concentration camp. In the end, it was actually Garrison who flipped, saying he wanted to be called out so he could sue and get rich, but also pointed out that there are limits to what we should be forced to tolerate.

I have had many friends from all walks of life in my 37 years, and while there are some I don’t discuss certain topics with, I don’t judge or hate them for something I disagree with or believe wrong. There are also parts of the current push that I actually agree with. Sexual orientation, gender, race, none of these should be used when hiring, save the very few jobs where you will work for a religious organization. Yes, a Church can refuse to hire you if you are gay, and it’s against their beliefs. Likewise, they can hire only those who are of the same faith, or even more, only those who attend that specific church, and it’s legal. Likewise, a private business can turn away any customer they choose, yet we have seen a bakery forced to close completely because the owner simply stood up for what he believed in.

I’m going to make this as clear as I can. The First Ammendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Yes, it goes on to address freedom of speech, the press, and more, but that’s the ONLY mention of religion. If I choose to not take your money for services I provide, because I believe you are living an immoral life, that is NOT ILLEGAL! It’s a business choice, and could cause me to go out of business due to lack of customers, but it is NOT a reason for the business to be driven out by the government. Likewise, it is not a violation of the First Amendment to have a cross, or nativity scene, or menorah, or star of David, on public land. Simply put, the First Amendment states that the US Government cannot give preference to one faith over others, nor can they in any way restrict anyone from fully embracing their faith, PERIOD!

Today, sadly, there is a push for “tolerance” from groups such as Code Pink and their ilk. They want to silence all dissenting voices, even trying (and they may have succeeded) to have Christians arrested for simply speaking NEAR (not at) a rally they organized. In the base meaning of the word, to tolerate literally means to endure. You tolerate an unruly or obnoxious child at the supermarket only as long as it takes to get away. You do more than that when it’s your child.

Now, on to what prompted this little rant. I have seen this before, and likely will again, but the image below circulates, and never fails to get people talking, often with those who believe the “activists” throwing items and screaming at the Priest are in the wrong shouted down.

In that image you see a Priest sitting and enduring an assault on his person by “tolerant” gay activists who are, in fact, breaking the law. Why are they not arrested? Because to do so would be “wrong” or an “attempt to silence them” or “deny them their rights.” We’ve been told this for so long that today, when the homosexual community wants the “right” to marry, people believe it’s a right for others already, and it’s not. I do not have a “right” to get married, why do they get that right put into law? Now that it’s there? While many will say I’m trying to stir up unrest or worse, we WILL see a Church sued, and likely have their 501C-3 status revoked for refusing to perform a gay wedding. This is not about freedom, it’s about doing what many claim others want to do, forcing beliefs on others.

I could care less what you do in the privacy of your own home, but when you tell me I’m not allowed to even think it’s wrong, you are nearing nazi brownshirt levels of ignorance and hate. I am a Christian, and I believe that homosexuality is wrong. I’m also a college graduate, and I know that, biologicaly, two men or two women cannot, without the use of technology, and something from a member of the opposite sex, reproduce. Yes, the act of sex is physically enjoyable, but it’s sole purpose is procreation! So, how is something that completely prohibits reproduction, without the help of others from the gender you don’t find attractive, not wrong? Answer? Ask that of any “activist” and they’ll point out frogs that change gender, or how animals all over the world have homosexuals in their ranks, or the fallacy of Greek pedophilia and homosexuality (rant for another time), or they’ll just start screaming at you for being ignorant.

We need to reclaim civil society people. Be who you want, I will believe what I believe, and you won’t do anything to change that by attacking and insulting me. Will I let my beliefs influence me in hiring/firing? Only if I work for a religious organization and I’m told to. If I’m in a situation where I’m hiring for a secular company, my sole concern is can you do the job, and can you do it better than others applying, THAT’S IT!

All of this said, remember one point. All of the examples of “gays striking back at their oppressors” are aimed at Christians, period. They refuse to discuss that Christianity preaches that homosexuality is wrong, but that we are not to hate them, while ignoring that shariah law still demands homosexuals be BURIED UP TO THEIR NECK IN THE STREET AND STONED UNTIL DEAD! Why is this? Could it be that they know Christians won’t attack them, and often will just walk away, while islam will KILL THEM? That is exactly it, as well as our current government and the “main stream” media screaming that islam is peaceful and all but saying Christians are doing everything and rigging it to blam islam.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

An open letter to Congress, the Supreme Court, and all of America

I have recently found myself in debates more and more often regarding the Constitution which forms the backbone of our government, and sadly, all too often, people will adamantly defend that their version is the only correct version. Having studied history, which includes a good deal of political science, and I am disheartened when I hear more and more people argue that a word that has been in place for over 200 years now means something different. We have focused on education for more than a decade, but it seems we need to do more.

The latest debate I was in regards the first amendment. The text in question, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” is very specific and was done deliberately. When read as it’s written, simply put, it means that a law cannot be passed by Congress giving favor to one religious group, or restricting a citizen’s ability to exercise their faith. This does not apply to a city park allowing a nativity scene or menorah or any other religious display, yet this has been done more and more in recent history.

While I will agree that it’s not right for a city to target one or more faiths and exclude them, such as only allowing protestant Christian faiths permits, but that would not be an issue of the 1st amendment, as it is still not Congress passing a law. The authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights specifically used language that is as direct as possible, so as to not only limit the power of a federal government, but also to stand the test of time, rather than changes in society making it moot.

We are now in a position to either watch our country turn back to what we were only a short time ago, or to watch as it crumbles and falls apart. I have lived in this country my entire life, and I love everything that makes us the country we are, and what went into building this country, but if we don’t stop the pointless arguments about who has what rights, we will be the generation to see this country fall. The bill of rights is there for everyone, no matter race, creed, faith, gender, only citizenship has any bearing on the rights listed. Yet today we have groups demanding the “right” to marry, which is only given to them as a result, making it a privilege, not a right. We have then seen those groups sue businesses when their owners stand by their faith, yet a business asked to bake a pro-traditional marriage cake, when those owners say no and that they don’t believe in that, nothing is done. We have people who want to display their atheism and shout out how smart they are, who then want to demand silence from those who have religious views. We have children being told they cannot pray during free time, while schools require students to observe Muslim prayer time, with some even having the girls wear the hijab or burkha. When did this become acceptable? When did the 1st Amendment mean that Christians must stay silent and hide their faith, while others are not only allowed this right, but schools also help them by making others act as they do?

We stand at a crossroads, with one path leading to destruction and the other to restoration. What happens next depends not only on those who are in power, but also on those they represent. We must stand up and be counted, saying that I will not be silent and I will not hide my faith, but for that to work, we need our leaders to stand with us, and support us when we embrace the rights we do have. When Congress stands behind us, we will then be able to not only embrace our rights, but educate those demanding we stop.

We also need Congress to stand with us when it comes to our borders and laws. We are bordered by two countries that strictly enforce their border laws, yet we don’t. Mexico has ridiculed us for years when the issue of a fence on the US/Mexico border is discussed, yet they have a fence guarded by the Mexican military on their southern border. Why is any foreign country allowed to dictate our policy? We have people crossing the border illegally, but we are told not to mention that crime. When those same people rape, murder, steal, or commit any crime, we’re told we can’t expect them to know it was wrong because they come from a different culture, while a U.S. Marine, who all but begged to be allowed to turn back, was left in a Mexican jail when he had no choice but to cross the border into Mexico.

What this all boils down to is this. We must take our country back, and we must start now. Our legal system is broken, but not in the way the media would have us believe. Yes, racism is an issue, but we must only address the actual instances of it, rather than the National Bar Association and the DOJ deciding a Grand Jury was wrong. We must simplify many laws, while eliminating others, and we must return to the government our founding fathers built. If we choose to remain on this path, if we choose not to work to return our country to being that shining light on the hill, we will see more violence, more death, and we will see the United States cease to exist, save perhaps the name, within our lives, and that is something I pray that I don’t see, nor do I want even my great-great-great-grandchildren to see it.

I hope this hasn’t fallen on deaf ears, and I hope that you will truly consider what needs to be done.

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

And people still wonder why we have issues in society?

Not only did we, once again, witness one of the major issues with society today, that being “Black Friday,” but we also saw people completely ignore the rules of polite society.

Yes, there’s the old joke that, just hours after being thankful for what you have, you can elbow people to get a good deal on more stuff, but it’s true. I actually went to Wal-Mart Thursday night, as they had a few home appliances on a great sale, which I need for the house I’m building, and I watched as people almost trampled each other. I live in a “small town,” so we were spared the horrors that were seen in places like LA, NYC or Chicago, but why can’t people be courteous, rather than only screaming at others to be? I saw people literally screaming at others to not block the aisle, while they were doing that very thing, but if you suggest they take their own advice, you will be called ignorant, a racist, or worse.

Well, it seems that Michael Brown is being remembered, by people using his name to justify their refusing to even cooperate with police. In South Strabane, PA, a man was suspected of shoplifting, so the store manager at Wal-Mart called the police. When they arrived, this man refused to show ID and refused to allow the officer, who he all but yelled the name of, to see the receipt. He said “he knows who I am,” before admitting that the officer had arrested him before. This is strike one for me, as it shows a criminal history. In “showing the receipt,” he treated the officer like a child, telling him “look with your eyes, not your hands,” even after the officer told him he couldn’t read it due to moving. The idiot then said his hands were shaking because he was mad. As an officer, had a man who was larger than I am said he was “mad,” I’d have him on the ground, or at least in cuffs.

In addition to this, he had someone recording, so we hear him say that no one called, thereby accusing the officer of lying, and also suggesting he knows what the manager did, even though he has no way to know if the manager called or not. The alarm not going off means nothing, as not everything is tagged to do that. Finally, he walks around, yelling while holding his hands up, that he fears for his life and saying the officer is “trying to Mike Brown me” while the officer never even acted as if he was going to draw his weapon.

Here’s the video –

So, we have a black man, who, after robbing a store of cigarillos, and physically assaulting the store owner/operator, struggled to take a police officer’s sidearm, only to be shot. To be clear, the wounds showed that he was not running away, his hands were not up, and so on. Yet when the evidence showed that the officer wasn’t in the wrong, that’s ignored, and now, apparently, a way to get police to leave you alone when you are likely guilty.

A few suggestions for if you are approached in a situation like this. Show your ID, let the officer actually hold the receipt, and don’t act like this, instantly accusing the police of trying to kill you! You are in a private business, which means they or the police when called, CAN SEE AND HOLD YOUR RECEIPT, and it’s not racist or anything of the like!

So, all of that said, what are your thoughts?

Smokey out

Please follow and like us:

History repeats, again

Last night we all found out that the Grand Jury chose not to charge Officer Wilson with any crime, as the evidence showed no crime was committed.  This, however, is completely irrelevant to the “protesters” in Ferguson, MO.  Rather than standing outside the court house with signs, or going online or what have you with their complaints, they are destroying businesses that are not their own,  many of them owned and operated by black men and women, completely destroying their claim that they only want justice for the racist crime.  Since Brown was shot, they have screamed that he was running away, or facing away with his hands up, even after reports were released showing that the bullet wounds were impossible from that angle.  Once that happened, they instantly either ignored the reports, or attacked them as racist.  Never mind that exit wounds are larger than entry wounds, and this was born out on Brown’s body.  Video was released of the “innocent teen” robbing a store and bullying the man working there, but this was ignored and, just like Trayvon, only photos that would be favorable were used, while Officer Wilson’s either made him look bad, or were at least bad quality.  I fully expect Sharpton and/or Jackson to claim that a “white jury cleared a white man,” or claims that the jury was “stacked.”  Never mind that Grand Juries are formed each year, and that means it would have been done long before this was even a case.

This is exactly the problem we face today, selfishness and entitlement.  We saw riots in Watts in the ’60s where the people burned blocks down, and even had snipers to take out Firefighters trying to stop the fires.  If you look at history, the 1960’s are also when the changes began for many parts of life.  Granted, there were many parts of the country where Jim Crow laws were in place, and yes, discrimination was a major issue, but we also see teachers begin to move away from what had been taught for years, “examining history” as some now call it, while I call it re-writing history.  Only a decade later, the 1970’s saw the Founding Fathers portrayed as “slave owning white men who didn’t want to pay their taxes,” and students more concerned with sit ins, peace and love, and protesting the Vietnam war.  For the first time in U.S. History, we had young men burning draft cards (a crime as well as stupid), we had soldiers, who had been held in high respect spat on and attacked by citizens, and worse.

It seemed to get better in the 80’s and early 90’s, only to have the spectacle of an impeachment trial for the President, and the circus that brought.  But, what wasn’t seen at that time was the effect of over 20 years of the new “education.”  I was lucky to have gone to school in a very conservative area, so what had been taught for years wasn’t just chucked out for the new ideas, and no, I wasn’t taught that evolution is dumb and the other crap some claim was taught.  Now, however, we have students graduating high school barely able to read or perform the simplest of math problems, yet they demand to be paid $15.00 an hour to run a cash register or flip burgers at McDonald’s because they’ve been told it’s their “right” to be paid what they “feel they deserve.”  When companies buckle to this, and then let half their staff go, because they can’t afford them, the company is attacked for “firing people rather than paying a living wage.”  Leading back to the culmination of this mindset eventually, the mindset that leads people to firmly believe that when a black person is killed by a white officer, it’s instantly murder, no evidence can change it, and the evil bigoted racist cop must be hanged at mid-day.  When the evidence is examined, the situation proven to be different, the one now dead proven to have been a thug, thief, and so on, riots break out “honoring the victim’s memory” and WHEN the rioters are arrested (or worse) it will never be their fault.

So, the ultimate question, how do we fix it?  It’s simple, and it’s not, but it must be done or society will collapse and we will all live in fear for our lives.  First, we have to stop with the idiocy of everyone makes the team, everyone gets a ribbon, and that kind of crap.  It’s a contest for a reason, and in any contest, there are winners and losers.  Yes, by all means, we must not denigrate those who don’t win.  I’ve seen track meets come down to less than 6 inches between 1st and 4th places, but 4th place wasn’t recognized at all, despite having done far better than many could have done.  I’ve seen spelling bees go on for hours, only to finally get a word most college graduates couldn’t spell for a child, which finally ends it, meaning that the “loser” can still spell words most of us never have heard before!  So, while we go back to contests having winners and losers, we must remember that just because you don’t win doesn’t mean you’re bad or stupid, it just means you learn from it and come back.  Along these lines, we need stop the idiocy of “little Johnny can’t compete in this contest any more since he wins every time,” as it shows only one thing, winners are punished, not the others encouraged to work harder.  This encourages kids to muddle through, and complain that so and so always wins, it’s not fair, as that gets the one who always wins punished, rather than them having to actually work..

Second, force students to actually learn.  There have always been stories of coaches intimidating teachers to pass this kid or that so they can continue to play, but those are more rare than you think.  No, students are taught the test today, not the material that would allow them to do better on their tests.  We allow students to speak in “ebonics” which would be laughed at by anyone still living in the regions of Africa these students claim to now be embracing.  We allow them to dress in ways that would have them suspended or even expelled only 20 years ago, girls are allowed to wear what wouldn’t be accepted outside of a night club, only to have them be confused when their dress and their actions end up with their being pregnant.  Yes, rape is a crime and there is nothing that makes it the victims fault, but when girls have sex and get pregnant, it’s not rape.  We have seen too many decide it was rape when it starts affecting their lives, ruining someone else’s life in the process.  We see women in their 20’s now screaming “no I won’t sleep with you” when a man says good morning or opens a door for her, and this is seen as normal.  Only when young people are taught that their actions have consequences, that they can’t “change their mind and make it someone else’s fault,” will we get back on the road we should be on.

Moving on, the current push for equality, which isn’t one.  We have groups of feminists who just want to punish men for daring to “eye rape” them when all that was done was a glance.  They scream when a man opens a door that they “don’t need a man to do that for them,” yet they will also claim that men need to be more courteous, complain that “chivalry is dead,” when men don’t treat them like a princess.  As a man, it’s very confusing when a woman screams at me like I’m trying to drag her away for smiling at her, tells me she doesn’t “need a man” to open a door, then minutes later when I don’t open the door for them to leave, I get told I’m a rude person and should be more courteous.  That’s not a push for equality, it’s a push for immunity from societal rules.  Women like that want everything, they want men to be chivalrous and kind, but also want to be able to scream and yell, possibly even attack, whenever they want and have no consequences.  Another group that is taking advantage of many things are the “gay rights” people.  They claim to just want equal rights, but marriage isn’t a right I have, yet they have the “right” to marry.  They couch it as rights to having the same  rights as married couples, but that doesn’t require marriage, it requires the government allow a same-sex partner be named next of kin, and medical power of attorney allows that.  It needs insurance companies to cover same sex partners, which can be done without marriage.  It means a change to tax code, which can be done without marriage.  They don’t want equality, they want special treatment.

For those who are curious about the rights that are protected, read the Bill of Rights, these are not granted by the document, they are listed there so that we know they are protected.  Sadly, even this isn’t enough, as the first amendment is cited when a school is sued for having a Christmas celebration, when the document clearly states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” meaning a school using the word Christmas isn’t even part of what is regulated, but no one cares, outside of when caring means getting what they want.  There is no right to food stamps, free phones, marriage, jobs, anything of the sort.  You can’t sue the Four Seasons Hotel for not hiring you because they don’t hire people with tattoos, and you have them, as long as it’s policy and written down, they aren’t “discriminating” against you, they’re following policy.  You don’t have a right to make more than some managers in retail stores immediately after you graduate high school and while working at McDonald’s, you have the option to go to college, or change careers, or both, so that you can make more money, but it’s not a right to have the easy job you want and the high salary you want.  And no, Bill Gates isn’t an evil person for not hiring you at $30 an hour to test XBox games, he’s a man who has worked for decades to build a company, and put his money and livelyhood on the line to get it where it is.  If you make him do that, then you can’t defend anyone who does exactly what Gates is evil for not doing.

It comes down to this, you are special, as there is only one you on the planet.  But that doesn’t mean you can demand others do something and then riot when they don’t.  You do deserve respect, but so do others, and you can’t scream at someone for doing something, then moments later, for not doing it.  If you want respect, earn it, when you act like an adult, you will be treated like one.  If you want to be heard, make your point in a civil and logical way, rioting is only good for destroying property that belongs to people who had nothing to do with what you feel was “done wrongly,” and will possibly lead to your own arrest or worse.  You don’t have a right to the salary you want, you have the right to work for it, and earn it, which may mean years of working to get where you need to be go get it.  Simply put, you don’t have any rights that everyone else doesn’t have, and those you do have, are clearly laid out, so you can read them.  If we don’t stop this push for “rights” and “equality” that ends up with the exact opposite happening, our country will be torn apart from the inside, with the groups who demanded these rights confused as to why the country is being torn apart.  They’ll scream that it’s the bigots being unwilling to honor their rights, when it’s companies going bankrupt and out of business.  They say it’s racists not wanting to give minorities a chance, when it’s really families who fear for their lives in areas were riots happen fleeing for another state.

Which future do you want?  The one where we watch America burn, or where she once again stands tall and proud?

Smokey out

Please follow and like us: