seretogis

This is an amazing app. Well worth the $1 I plunked down immediately for it, particularly when you forget to bring your dice to a D&D-or-other-gaming session. YouTube link

Reposting this fantastic amusing holiday message, because it has been stolen from the capitol building.

At this season of
THE WINTER SOLSTICE
may reason prevail.

There are no gods,
no devils, no angels,
no heaven or hell.
There is only our natural world.
Religion is but
myth and superstition
that hardens hearts,
and enslaves minds.

I fully agree with the bit about religion, but I am not a strict atheist, I simply don’t let the possibility of such supernatural unknowables affect my personal decisions.

Hopefully whatever small-minded jackass stole this sign is thoroughly lashed for denying thousands of their fellow citizens of their first amendment rights.

Let’s “celebrate” with an interesting dissenting post by Paul Varnell.

Below is a particularly interesting tidbit:

Many people seem to care more about AIDS abroad than in the U.S. President Bush has sponsored billions of dollars in funding to prevent AIDS in third-world countries, but said little abut AIDS in the U.S. Some evangelical churches are involved in helping to combat AIDS abroad, but show no interest in AIDS in the U.S. It seems clear that they are interested in helping heterosexuals abroad, but want nothing to do with homosexuals in the U.S.

Indeed, working toward the solution to a problem when the American public are concerned seems to be to distance it from homosexuality in general. It’s not filthy filthy fags having anal sex that you’re helping, it’s poor sick African children who contracted HIV from a blood transfusion! [insert sound of checks being written.]

This same approach was tried, and failed, in regards to Prop 8. Turning a gay rights issue into a civil rights issue [in television ads] doesn’t convince the religious bigots who are so dead-set against equal rights for homosexuals. They don’t understand it as a civil rights issue because they cannot identify the importance of it, as they do not understand what it is to have less rights than others. Even some groups who should, seem to be unable to reconcile these similarities.

Will Wilkinson has a good post up about libertarianism and coercion from which I extracted this delicious nugget:

These libertarians are also notoriously guilty of pretending that their favorite kinds of coercion aren’t. Threatening force to deny another person use of one’s land, or one’s house, is coercion. A system of private property is a system of coercion. It may be justified coercion. It is justified coercion. But then the question is: What justifies it? The coercive protection of property is justified because people do better with it than without it. If people do better in a system that defines rights to property a bit less strictly, and coercively guarantees an economic minimum, then that is justified coercion. It’s not really a philosophical question whether it is or not. Justified coercion, like the coercion in the protection of property, isn’t wrongfully liberty-limiting, but it does limit liberty.

If libertarianism is the view that coercion is never social or emotional, and that coercive limits to liberty are justified only in defense of private property, or in the enforcement of contracts, then libertarianism is false, and I am not a libertarian. If libertarianism is the view that human well-being is best promoted by ensuring “that every man may claim the fullest liberty to exercise his faculties compatible with the possession of like liberty to every other man,” then I am a libertarian. If this is a libertarian view, then the goal to minimize or abolish wrongfully liberty-limiting social norms is a libertarian goal.

I find myself in complete agreement. Living in civilization, I enjoy the benefits of being a short walk from a downtown metropolis and put up with what I consider a reasonable level of freedom-shackling. I certainly make efforts to minimize it, though, by a) not owning a car, b) renting, c) living in a state with no income tax. I also further voluntarily tax myself by trying to buy local when possible.

While this is all well and good, there are great (large, not good) ills which afflict us as a majority-rules society. One of them is taxes which target income rather than consumption. The so-called “progressive” tax is especially wrong-headed, but even the income tax pales in comparison to the horrifying ways that our tax money is used — the Iraq war, corporate welfare, and the destruction of our civil liberties with wiretaps and ever more overreaching federal agencies.

..which leads to this interesting snippet from a link in Will’s above post:

Free people do all sorts of things you won’t like, and they are no less free (in any libertarian sense) for it. Claiming free people aren’t really free until you see certain patterned outcomes you like is the root of all tyranny and rhetoric unbecoming a libertarian.

I must admit that I fall into this trap occasionally — perhaps frequently — because I don’t understand how people would a) not want the best (read as: most free) for themselves, or b) voluntarily give up rights of their own in order to make sure that party B doesn’t have them.

In the case of public education and school choice, while there can be state-sponsored alternatives like public schools they should not be forced upon those who would rather choose to send their children to a [better] private school. Doing so limits choice — freedom — for the sake of a lower quality product for all, and seriously limiting the ability of lower/lower-middle class parents from giving their children a higher quality education and enabling them to not be locked into that (for lack of a better word) caste.

I don’t understand why opponents of education privatization (or at least vouchers) would willingly give up MY freedom to affordably send my kids where I want so that they can shut their brains off and not worry about where their kids will go. I can’t understand the motivation of those who openly admit to being okay with sacrificing my rights. Come into my home yourself and do so rather than hiding behind a ballot. Want to force me to fight your war? You are going to have to do so with a gun to my head and my hands tied behind my back. I suppose it is easy to cowardly vote away the rights of others when you don’t have to look them in the face while you are doing it, when the victims are nameless and faceless statistics.

So sayeth former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr:

“The right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins.”

When it comes to religion, I think it is reasonable to expect religious organizations like the LDS to respect others’ rights and not just those of its members. Particularly if they wish to retain their tax-exempt status (which I think is bullshit to begin with.) You would think that a religious organization — particularly one which has been persecuted for their own unconventional take on marriage — would understand the golden rule and at least pretend to abide by it.

As my buddy Will states, we still have quite a ways to go..

America becomes no worse as it becomes more secular. And American atheists would be both happier and more cooperative if we were less marginalized by our culture.

Also, the fact that non-religious Americans (who don’t lie about it) are basically disqualified from high public office ensures that many of the most rational and intellectually accomplished people in our society cannot participate in electoral politics.

In closing, enjoy some wise words (and, caution, some eye-roll-inducing corniness) from a guy I typically dislike hearing the voice of:

This evening I shared dinner with a friend at one of my favorite restaurants. It was completely empty save for the two of us and the owner, Adam, who acted as chef and waiter as well. The mood tonight was already fairly somber as he had a deeply personal trauma to share with me.

As I was walking him to his apartment after the [superb!] meal, the news broke that Obama won the election. There was cheering in the streets, cars honking, etc. I couldn’t help but smile at people as I passed them while they celebrated. As a libertarian I had no horse in that race but was happy by proxy, that they felt hope for change and felt their hopes would now materialize.

I called Adam to give him the news, as he was looking forward to finding out who had won. Then, I got home and looked at the ballot measures.

Proposition 8, which bans gay marriage in the state of California, is currently passing with a wide margin. A similar proposition in Florida passed with 62%. Both blue states which voted for “change” and “hope.” A gay marriage ban in Arizona also passed with 57% and a gay adoption ban passed in Arkansas passed by another wide margin — both red states. As if there is any distinction when it comes to civil rights it would seem.

I’m glad that so many people can now be proud of voting for an African American President. It says a lot about how far we have come when it comes to race, right?

Unfortunately, the success of the gay marriage bans says more about the American people than whether they voted for or against McCain. They still don’t understand civil rights and the evil of taking them from others. Prop 8 is something I was particularly invested in opposing, and seeing the degree by which it passed was truly heartbreaking.

This energetic party in the streets, powered by the hope for positive change, was a celebration that I am not invited to because I am not heterosexual and have the audacity to want to be treated equally. My friend and I can only look on while success is declared — continue to wage war for our basic civil rights while Obama and his differently-bigoted minions give flowery speeches in front of his very own “Mission Accomplished” banner.

I came across an interesting read from the SF Gate about the major political candidates and where they stand on relevant-yet-largely-ignored issues.

Note how many times Ron Paul’s name is mentioned — he is the only candidate that had a consistent platform that valued freedom above all else. The others are all practically the same, and the difference between them as a slow-moving unthinking mass and Paul as a political revolutionary is striking.

An understandable motivation for any human behavior is the reasonable expected outcome. If you put a piece of fruit in your mouth, you will be rewarded with the reasonable expected outcome of a sweet tasting bit of food-deliciousness. We have no motivation to put a rock in our mouth because we have no reason to expect a positive outcome. However, someone had to have been the first person to do so and determine that, “hey, rocks aren’t very tasty.” Also, occasionally someone needs to test the socially accepted norm of rock-non-tastiness in order to ensure that it still is accurate.

Who are these people, the testers of social norms? While any great thinker clearly falls under that category, so do a wide variety of the mentally ill. What may appear to an outsider as a pattern of masochistic behavior could be a genius straining the boundaries of right and wrong as defined by thousands of years of human existence. It could instead be someone pounding their head against the table because they are unable to bear living a partially enjoyable existence. It could be a sign of a serious neurological/psychiatric disorder.

Outcome is key when it comes to self-destruction. To what end do you immolate yourself? Buddhist monks which set themselves aflame in protest gain nothing and sacrifice everything. Perhaps others may benefit eventually from it, but they themselves are simply ending their lives. However, occasionally we must — as a species, and as individuals — risk self-destruction in order to improve ourselves and our lot in life. Just as it is insane to set oneself aflame once we know the power it has, it is insane to never touch the flickering fire to begin with.

Yesterday I celebrated my first year-anniversary of moving to Seattle, and was convinced (after a couple of glasses of wine) to accept a free tarot reading.

Now, first off, I don’t believe one bit in psychic nonsense. I consider it simply another form of therapy or counseling, albeit with someone who doesn’t have any sort of “serious” book-learning. Granted, there likely are a fair amount of counselors and therapists who also have no serious qualifications.

Anyways.

The first card, which was supposed to represent me, was The Hermit, which described me fairly well. The second, to represent where I want to be, was the Princess of Cups. Also fairly accurate. The third, to represent my movement from my current situation towards where I want to be, was the Prince of Wands. The fourth, to represent the method by which I proceed towards my goal, was the Eight of Cups (Indolence). The explanation for this was fairly redundant with that of the Prince of Wands.

Finally, the “outcome card” was The Chariot which has a nice little description:

The Chariot alerts us to the fact that a conflict is arising. However, it also gives us confidence in our ability to meet it and defeat it. Energy, will power, and resolution are available. If all resources are focused on the job at hand the potential for success is high.

In the card a knight stands ready to fight. He has many shields behind him, representing the many battles he has won. Two watches stand on either side of him representing conflicting emotions or planes of thought. The promise of success is within his grasp, as portrayed by the rich green palm fronds in front of him.

Essentially, the summary version of his interpretation is that I am in a difficult situation and must remain emotionally strong to work my way through it to eventual success. Pretty good advice for just about any situation, really, and it has served me well this last year.

All in all, it was an amusing / entertaining little ritual to be involved in and I recommend you try it out if given the opportunity. I could certainly see how people who are less grounded than I may be taken in by it. The question I asked will remain triple-x top secret, but the fellow doing the reading did a good job of interpreting my reactions to various things and all in all told me what I wanted to hear. I am pleased.

One thing I’ve come to learn these past two years is how many unexpected things can occur when you allow them to, and how disappointing the expected is if you cling to it out of a desire for safety and security.

A few years ago the idea of moving across the country with nothing but a suitcase would have seemed impossible. I couldn’t imagine how to proceed or how I would survive. Clinging to the expected and the risk-free were things I did to avoid introspection. I knew what I was capable of because it was all things I had done already. A lack of challenge leads to a lack of ability to see any distance ahead. It was only when I set my sights on moving to Seattle that I was able to once again begin challenging myself in unexpected ways.

My primary motivation was thus: anything but here. I had hit the bottom and anything at all in Seattle would be at least a half-step above where I was before. Being in a place where I essentially knew no one would give me a chance to redefine myself by the challenges I faced and overcame. I had done what I had never expected of myself, and was free to continue on that path, exploring what I had as of yet not acknowledged the existence of. Each day I find myself waking up happier to be alive than I ever had felt in Minnesota, and excited about what lays ahead for me here.

All has not been champagne and roses, though. There has been drama borne of miscommunication and my own occasional boneheadedness. There has been heartbreak. All in all, though, the calculated risks have been well worth the cuts and bruises I’ve endured so far. I’d make some sort of mountain-climbing analogy but it wouldn’t be adequate, as you can’t really stay on top of a mountain and so it is an empty accomplishment. I’d say my move to Seattle is more akin to having been lost in the desert and finding a beautiful and lush oasis. That is really what Seattle is — an oasis for those of us who are tired of who or what we were and wish to become what we had thought impossible.

Each day I silently thank those who have helped me along the way. You should know who you are if you’re reading this, and now it’s on paper sotospeak. Thank you for putting up with me as I improve upon my former self, little by little. Thank you for introducing me to worlds of experiences that I otherwise would have avoided like the plague. Thank you for pushing me to succeed, and to enjoy that success.

And to cap this post, a poem from Robert Frost, appropriately titled “Happiness Makes Up in Height for What It Lacks in Length”

Oh, stormy stormy world,
The days you were not swirled
Around with mist and cloud,
Or wrapped as in a shroud,
And the sun’s brilliant ball
Was not in part or all
Obscured from mortal view–
Were days so very few
I can but wonder whence
I get the lasting sense
Of so much warmth and light.
If my mistrust is right
It may be altogether
From one day’s perfect weather,
When starting clear at dawn,
The day swept clearly on
To finish clear at eve.
I verily believe
My fair impression may
Be all from that one day
No shadow crossed but ours
As through its blazing flowers
We went from house to wood
For change of solitude.

Recognizably from the screenwriter of American Beauty, Alan Ball, Towelhead was a fantastic film for me to end my SIFF experience with.

Towelhead manages to tackle the difficult issues of racism, sexualization of teens, and molestation in a non-judgmental way. As charming as Aaron Eckhart is, I don’t want to sympathize with his 13-year-old-molesting character. He knew what he was doing, and did it not once but twice. He wholly deserves what is coming to him and while the film doesn’t reinforce that, thankfully it doesn’t actively attempt to paint him as a victim.

The casting, overall, was fantastic. The actress who played Jasira was great and the whole film rests on her shoulders. The actor that played the role of Jasira’s father, however, seemed a bit out of place. He provided a lot of comedic value, but in more of an uncomfortable and unintentional way. The character itself was someone I wouldn’t trust, even at the end of the film — he was two-faced to the core. Even so, my primary complaint is that even after having forty minutes cut from it, it felt like it ran a bit long. For a drama that is supposed to keep you hooked, that’s not a good thing.

A drama in a similar vein of American Beauty, you will definitely see this on DVD in the states and should pick it up or catch it on Netflix.

I rate Towelhead 4 out of 5 golden space needles. Happy end-of-SIFF.