Is the Past Just in the Past?

Hey everyone, I apologize for the lapse in posting, but I've been really, really lazy as of late and haven't gotten around to writing up one of my ranting opinion pieces. However, here is one again!

Today I want to talk about a concept that has been plaguing me off and on for a while now. What I refer to is illogical dwelling on the past. What I mean here is when a person things about events in their past or those of people close to them and gets upset for some unknown reason.

First of all, I feel as if these feelings are absurd. I've thought about things in my past that have no bearing on the present, but for some reason I make them. By getting upset about these generally unfortunate events, I cause them to affect my present. Why? I have no clue. Out of nowhere I remember an event and I get sick to my stomach thinking about it. Why the hell should a break up in my past or a bad grade from 3 years ago upset me so much? That's mostly what I want to know from you, the reader. Do any of you every enter into a similar state when useless quarrels manifest themselves into anguish in your present? If so, how does one solve this problem?

Another strange thing that can cause me strife (I know maybe “strife” is a bit too extreme, but it fits) is the past of others. Why should the though of any girl I like' past relationships bother me? Again, it makes almost NO SENSE to be anguished by the thought of someone I have feelings for every having had a relationship with someone else. Again, I ask why. Why the heck does that bother me so? I don't know you tell me.

Why should a friend's past medical history worry me, even when they've been cured for years and there is no chance of a relapse? Why does the thought of my grandparents being divorced still bother me? Its an event that happened before I was born and I grew up with: I have accepted it as a fact of life. It gets to be a real problem in life when the past worries you more than the future.

Despite all the questions I may have and the answers I may be seeking, I think I may have learned something. The past is done with, its never coming back and we need to accept it. I've had break ups, and so have most of the people I've taken interest true. I've gotten poor grades, but those are behind me in the distance. My friends are healthy and my grandparents are still divorced. Only when you can wholly accept them and not be worried by them can you truly move on and embrace the future.

Sadly, for some reason unbeknown to me I'm still hindered by my past and the thoughts of the pasts of others. With a little help from my friends I think I can overcome these obstacles. Question is, are you all willing to help?

The Craziness of Pants

Hey all, I'm gonna be kind this time and keep the blog short. Well, as short as I could actually make a blog. As you can infer from the title, this article will discuss how ridiculous it is that our society makes it so pants are the only acceptable lower-body clothing for men.

It make you wonder whose idea this was. It has only been in the last about 500-600 years of human history that men have worn pants. Why? I'm not really sure. What I do know, however is that it doesn't make sense. Pants are restricting to male anatomy. Yes, you can figure this one out for yourself. They are, how do you say....restricting. They are significantly less comfortable for men than other more "free garments."

Now, there are various other garments a man could wear that are less restricting and MUCH more comfortable. The first one that comes to my mind is the kilt. Yes, that fantastic Scottish garment. Those 8 yards of pleated material make for a very comfortable wear for any true man. The kilt has a capacity for modesty, yet maintains maximum comfort at all times. Just ask any man who wears a kilt and he'll tell you about how fantastic they are. They only reason he may not wear it all the time is because of the ridicule associated with wearing a "skirt" all the time.

Speaking of skirts, guys might as well wear long peasant skirts as well. Again, they are very conducive to male anatomy, and at the same time will provide men with warmth even in the winter months.

So, I challenge men to adopt one of theses practices. Free yourself of pants and trousers and slip into something with a bit more comfort. Wear a kilt, and if you can't get one, go to your local store and purchase a nice long skirt. You'll probably get made fun of...that's a given. But, when you stop caring what other people think, it will improve your self confidence significantly.

The only way to eliminate pants is to stop wearing them. Don't wait until others start then hop on the bandwagon. JUST DO IT! Trust me, if you are confident in yourself, and are seeking comfort, you will be fine wearing any type of skirt.

Why yes, we do have civil marriage in the U.S. Whoda thunk?

As many of you may know(and for those of you who don't follow politics-shame on you) that 53% of the State of Maine has voted to ban same sex marriage in their state. I want to give you all a very brief history of marriage in this country. I hope that all of you can learn something from this, especially my fellow Brothers and Sisters in Christ who may oppose same sex marriage.

I would like to begin our discussion here with the Puritans. Yes, the Puritans--that same group that formed one of the most oppressive forms of Christianity this country has ever seen. Well, their marriage practices are the basis for civil marriage in the United States. Can you guess why? That's because the puritans believed in CIVIL marriage, not religious marriage. Speaking of which, last time I checked marriage is only a sacrament in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions....but that is a story for another day. That's right, our country was founded on the precept of civil marriage. Puritan legislatures even went as far as to ban marriage sermons from being read at weddings. The objective was to keep these events completely secular (and also to help cut any ties with the Anglican and Catholic Churches.)

Now the question is this: why did no homosexuals choose to get married in the entire history of civil marriage in the U.S. until very recently? Well, the answer is this-- in the colonial times and in the United States, it was an exclusive cultural norm that a man and a woman get married, and that men should only have one life. This comes from a tradition dating strictly back to Charlemagne, yet prevalent in early Christian and Jewish cultures for millennia. It was just "what was done" here in America.

In the last two decades of the 20th century there was a major push for same sex marriage to be legalized in this country constitutionally, yet it was blocked by a not so nifty law called the Defense of Marriage act. Does anyone else find it ironic that this bill was signed into law by Bill Clinton? Just for your reading, these are the two basic principles of the law.

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) needs to treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state

2. The federal government defines marriage as a legal union exclusively between one man and one woman.

Why was this law passed? Well, it was passed because people have these skewed views that civil and religious marriage are the same thing. SURPRISE! They aren't....

Marriage in the United States is a social contract between two people who enter into a partnership and are entitled to pensions, health care sharing, property rights, ect. Nothing else really. Any emotional connection from marriage is all up to the discretion of the two people in the partnership. On the other side of this are religious marriages. Depending on your faith base, there are different parameters that are included as part of this. However, I really don't feel like explaining them because they aren't necessary to anything.

Oh, and I challenge those who claim it is the purpose of the government to legislature morality to find me proof. You can search the Constitution up and down but you wont find it, sorry.

Therefore, I think that homosexuals should be able to enter into civil marriages with no problem considering that it is a social contract here and not really a religious one.

Oh, and while we're at it, lets get rid of those "illegal cohabitation" laws we have in this country. Lets let the Mormons and Muslims have their multiple spouses. Why should the government care?

Think about it. It'd love to hear comments.

The Question of File Sharing

I always hear a lot of controversy surrounding the validity of “file sharing” especially when it pertains to music. Often it is argued that by sharing music with another person, you are in fact engaging in unethical behavior. Its an interesting topic and one I’d like to discuss.

Here is the question. Is sharing music files on p2p/torrent sites immoral? I would argue that no, it is not, but its on a variety of different reasons.

First, it is analogous to sharing a book that you’ve read with a friend. If you have ever read a book you truly love, I’m sure you aren’t the only one who reads the copy you bought. You may have given it to a brother or sister to read, maybe to your wife or husband. Are you violating the intellectual writes of the author by doing this? Of course not! You are merely sharing something you love with someone else who might enjoy it as well. You want to express to someone how great a book is. Granted, the author doesn’t get an extra book sale, but you don’t hear them complaining about it.

So, why doesn’t this same scenario apply to music? Really, if you love a band, you want to expose others to the music. And quite frankly, youtube and Myspace aren’t the best ways to demonstrate new music to other friends of yours. So, what do you do, you share the music. You give the cd to a friend. Yet somehow, the intellectual rights of the of the musician are being violated, I don’t get it. If you read a book and remember the plot and themes, isn’t that the same as storing the music files on your computer? I think so.

Also, I have another scenario for you. Say you buy a copy of the Beatles famous album Yesterday and Today with the Butcher cover still on it. You own the music files on vinyl record. However, after years, due to the rareness of the album, the price increases significantly. Now that the album price is much higher, you sell it. You make a profit off the album. Now, do you need to pay the royalties on the album because its price went up? No, no you do not. The same thing should apply to all music. Here the musician isn’t getting profit off of their album, but nothing happens to the seller.

So, all in all, it seems ridiculous to claim that one is violating the rights of the musician. You are merely sharing music with someone else, like you would a favorite book to a friend. You aren’t insulting the artist; you are rather praising them by expressing to others how great their music is.

Discuss ;)

My College Essay

Hey all! I apologize for not posting a blog in God knows how long. I've just been lazy over the past few weeks or so. Anywhoo, this blog post is actually my college application essay. Please please please tell me what you think of it. I really would love feedback. Thanks!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

College Essay

My family has never been considered a “church family.” I know I was baptized, there are photos and documents to prove that, but I had no personal part in it. After that, we didn't go to church until I was about 7. I received my First Holy Communion after about a year of classes, then stopped. That was the last time I stepped foot in a church on a regular basis for 8 years.

In this whole time, I always had a little voice, not inside my head, but rather in my heart, telling me to go back to church. Back then I thought it nothing more than my conscious: it wasn't until later on that I realized that it was the Holy Spirit working within me. God wanted me to go back to church. One day, while lounging around with my friend Colin, I heard his mother discussing with him how he would have to start classes for his Confirmation. This struck a chord with me. I asked his mother about the sign up date, and immediately called my mother. I told her I wanted to make my Confirmation. She agreed, and we signed up a few weeks after that. We walked down to the parish hall, filled out the forms, and then were instructed for me to attend the first class the following Sunday evening.

The dozen or so three hour classes passed in a flash not too unlike a bolt of lightning. I was excelling in my faith: learning about God, and his son Jesus and the love he has for all of us. In this time I definitely believed in God, and I knew in my mind Jesus was my savior, but I never felt it in my heart. I was waiting for my actual Confirmation, I had a feeling like that day specifically would solidify my faith in Jesus Christ. And after many a week of classes, the day finally dawned

I woke up at the nice hour of about 10 AM, which isn't too bad for a Saturday. I say “woke” up, but in all honestly sleep was not one of the things that happened that evening. I dragged my feet over to the bathroom, brushed my teeth, and splashed some water on my face hoping it would get the sand out from the corner of my eyes. Then I returned back to my room, and donned my thrift store blazer and white collared shirt that we had purchased just a few days before. Then, since I didn't know how, my mother awkwardly tied the tie around my neck. I was all set, now I had to play the waiting game.

We left for the Church at about 12:30. I was apprehensive beyond anything anyone could imagine. t. I wasn't sure what was exactly going to happen, but then again, it isn't really easy for someone to describe a life changing ceremony to someone else. We got to the church, my mother went up and took a place in a pew with my father and I proceeded down the unattractive linoleum covered steps into the basement parish hall. I saw many friends, all standing with their sponsor in large, wide open room. I was alone, however. My sponsor was my lovely great-grandmother, and at 89, she was too old to be walking up and down the steps so much. So, again I did more waiting, it seemed like sitting idly was going to be my theme for the day. So, the priest came down to us all, spoke a few words, and then we lined up to go upstairs. I knew the most important part of the day was coming soon.

I walked up the stairs, met with my sponsor, and walked down the main aisle of the the church. I was quite calm now, not truly worried, just anxious to get my seat in the pew and to have things start up. When we all were seated, the bishop and the altar servers proceed down the very same aisle I had walked and took their places by the altar. The bishop uttered a few words to us all that quite honestly, I do not remember. Then, we all got ready to renew our baptismal promises. The bishop asked if we rejected Satan. I said yes with my lips, but in my mind it came out sort of like “Yes, of course I do!” The process continued and he asked if Jesus was our savior and if we believed in the communion of Saints and the Church and again, I said yes, knowing this to be true. Then, we proceed up to the foot of the altar, it was time for us all to be anointed with oil. The first few people ahead of me went, then it was my turn, I was standing square in front of the bishop with my sponsor with her hand on her shoulder behind me. My sponsor said my confirmation name, Joseph, and the bishop then made the sign of the cross on my forehead and told me I was now sealed with the Holy Spirit. Then, it was if a dam broke loose.

At that moment a torrent of emotions filled my soul. It seems like at that moment, I truly understood what my faith in Jesus meant to me. For some reason I understood that being loving, compassionate, and caring to others is what Jesus wanted out of me. I was truly sealed with the Holy Spirit on that day. Now I know what the Prophets must have felt like when they were called by God to His service. Though I may not vocalize it, that one moment in time, when I was sealed with the Holy Spirit was the most important part of my life. From that day forward, I vowed to model my life after the teachings of the Bible, and use them to better myself, and to help others.

Do Reps Rep?

I bet at least once your mother (or some other figure of importance) once mentioned the adage "In causal conversation never mention religion or politics." Well, since this isn't casual conversation I'm gonna be talking politics. This will deal with two things: how our representatives in the House represent us and the issue of the direct election of Senators.

First-the Congressmen, because we need to lay a foundation for the second point I wanted to make.

The point of U.S. Congressmen is to directly represent the people, in small groups. This means you should be able to walk up to your congressman, give him a piece of your mind and return to your business. However, it is not like that nowadays. Members of the House of Representatives represent approximately 600,000 people each. Some more, some less depending on district size and "at large" reps such as in Vermont, Wyoming and Rhode Island. This isn't what the framers of the constitution had in mind. They wanted the representative to be humble people who do their civic duty then return to normal life. They are now political giants. The appeal of power was too great.

We now have Career Politicians as our representatives. These incumbents, through a variety of factors beat out challengers almost 90% of the time and continue to reign over their constituents. This is mainly in part to the allure of power that comes with being a rep. Even though you're elected to a 2 year term, you still have a plethora of constituents who are able to keep you in office. The allure of money and prestige has kept many of these men and women in office for term after term after term. This has ruined the very essence of being a representative: a self made man or woman who serves for a few terms than returns to normal life.

Does this seem right to anyone? It surely doesn't to me. Wouldn't you much rather have your representative be someone you've actually meet more than one. I don't say you need to know the person, but more visibility would be nice when it comes to someone making big federal decisions that affect your very life.

Now for something else: the direct election of U.S. Senators.

At the turn of the century Progressivism was sweeping the nation. It was a great thing for the most part, but a big error was passing the 17th Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment made it so U.S. Senators would be elected by popular vote of the whole state. You know I was talking about the lack of visibility with reps? Yeah, this is even worse.

Think about it. In the state of Massachusetts there are approximately 6 million people. Those 6 million people get to pick two of their own to be senators. Chances are they've never meet these people, they just hear their belifs on the news. This is very dangerous. These people have a huge responsibility to the state at large, but no accountability to individual people. If the method had stayed the same, we would have less of a problem with career senators making truckloads of money, manipulating the population and staying in office.

This is what used to happen. Your state's legislature would choose senators. Thats right, the people who represent the two or three towns around you would pick who was your senator. Doesn't this make a whole lot more sense? It seems to me that you would want someone from your community choosing the big wigs in Washington. They would have more accountability to the constituents, therefore the representatives would be more careful in who they choose, and a better stock of senators would currently be sitting in the chambers in the capitol building.

All and all, I blame people who took reform a little too far. The Progressive Era was fantastic for the country, but when people start steamrolling through reform, things like this happens. People take things a little too far and then we end up with senators serving for longer than my parents have been around.

I bet I'm gonna get some flack from this...so bring it on ;)

Jonestown Massacre. Murder, NOT Suicide

Ahhh, the Jonestown Massacre. Not really one of the most cheerful moments in our nation's history, but one that I believe should be talked about. Its an event that needs a lot of explaining too.

With all of this talk about one of the Manson Family murderer's up for parole, people have been talking more about cults, and how dangerous they can be. Yes, cults can be dangerous, but not all the people in them are psycho's that shave their heads and dance around airports with tambourines. No, sometimes, as in Jonestown, these people were manipulated by a charismatic leader and then forced to do heinous things that are often misunderstood. This brings me to what this post was actually about.

In 1974 the People's Temple lead by leader Jim Jones had a plan. This plan was to build a Christian utopia far away from the prying eyes of people who had challenged the cult. Actually, Jim Jones the leader was crazy and needed to run away and take his flock with him: but this post isn't about that. So, with some help from the government of Guyana, they were able to set up a colony on about 3,800 acres of land. The colony started off small, with approximately 50 members in 1977; this number rose to just under 1000 at its height in 1978. Then things started to get rough....

Jones grew increasingly paranoid. He feared that people would leave his colony and that he would loose power. He started forcing people to work all day on a poor diet due to the terrible soil on which the commune was built. This, coupled with isolation from the outside started to drive the colonists to the breaking point. They no longer loved their leader, but feared him and his armed guards that patrolled the grounds, making sure nobody would escape. On top of all this Jones would stage mock suicides on various days at night. These were to prepare the colony for immediate mass suicide if it was to be necessary.

Then, a real problem happened for Jones. In November of 1978, congressman Leo Ryan went to investigate alligations of abuse at the colony on behalf of member's families. When he got there, he found the people seemingly brainwashed, except for a few who wanted to leave. So, the congressman decided to bring some of the people back to the States with him. This did not bode over well with Jones and he had Congressman Ryan assassinated. Then, he called one of his famous "White Nights" or suicide drills. However, unlike the ones in the past this one was real. Jones' guards brewed up large batches of Flavor Aid with poison in them and made the colonists drink them. As a result almost every member of the colony died except for a few who hid under their beds in their cabins.

This is where things get interesting. Now that you have the back story, I have an actual point I want to make. And it is this....

The colonists didn't drink the poison willingly! This is a HUGE misconception on the part of many, and its truly important to understand. People were forced to drink this poison, and if they didn't, they would be shot. Children had the poison squirted into their mouths while being restrained. THIS WAS NOT A SUICIDE. People need to understand that when a manipulative leader comes along, people follow and it can have drastic consequences. These people thought they were going away to have a better, happier future, but in fact they were murdered. Anyone who believes that these people were a bunch of crazies is truly misinformed. These people had no choice but to die, and Jim Jones is the real evil one in this situation.

So, I want to send out a message and a warning to everyone. Cults are dangerous, and so are the charismatic leaders they follow. Many people in many types of cult suicides do not choose to do this, they are usually murdered. That is what people need to understand. Don't just look at something like this next time you see it on the news and thing "Bah! what a bunch of crazies." NO, these people are decent human beings who have just been manipulated, they are not truly at fault. Those who manipulate them are to blame.

I also want to say rest in peace to the 909 People's Temple member's who were killed and to Leo Ryan.

So please, I want to hear your thoughts on this. Its an important issue that many people happen to overlook.