December 2009 – Page 2 – Zombies Uncensored

You might be a Aryan, Racist, Birther, Fanatic if…

This video reminds me of Jeff Foxworthy –”You might be a redneck if” jokes. If you are against government health care reform, you might be an Aryan, racist, birther, fanatic.

I’m against government health care reform/takeover and against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. So in Jeff Foxworthy speak – I might be: an isolationist, Aryan, pinko, racist, unpatriotic, birther, terrorist sympathizer, militia member.

The goal is simple; pile on the straw-man attacks until people are afraid to speak out for fear they’ll be labeled an extremist.

Sexual Dislikes are not Chosen

I watched a documentary about pornography – The Price of Pleasure Pornography, Sexuality & Relationships. The film makers claim the film is honest and non-judgmental; to me the main message was to point out that some people find pornography degrading to women. The film used similar arguments used by social conservatives to describe the homosexual agenda, in that cultural acceptance and normalcy of pornography is damaging perceptions about sex and several social problems can be attributed to pornography.

Both the anti-pornography and the anti-homosexual arguments say there is too much pornography or homosexuality promoted or viewed positively in popular culture. The underlying argument seems to be if a certain form of sexuality is promoted, then the sexuality will become more popular or at the least be seen as normal. Several questions come to mind – Who decides what a sexual perversion is? Why is it seen as a sexual perversion? Can sexual perversions be promoted?

I’m starting with the assumption that what people like sexually is not chosen–that sexual preference is biological. If what people like sexually is not chosen, then what people dislike sexually isn’t chosen either. Sexual dislikes can be equal biologically to likes. Example – the “two girls one cup” video was so distasteful that videos were made just showing viewers reaction to the movie. When there were several viewers watching together, usually one person became ill and left the room, while others just sat and watched unaffected by what they were seeing. People that enjoy scat are a very small portion of the population. I imagine they did not choose or seek out enjoying scat. I don’t think anyone who becomes ill upon seeing scat videos chose their physical reaction either.

Over the years, I’ve watched several documentaries about swingers and group sex. In several of the documentaries were statements that if what they were doing didn’t appeal to you, then you were sexually repressed or prudish. I thought calling someone prudish because they didn’t share the same sexual proclivities was unfair; it may not be their cup of tea. Repeating from what I said earlier, sexual likes as well as dislikes are not chosen.

Openly expressing sexual preferences often enough might cause some people to become numb or just not shocked or surprised by it. For others openly expressing sexuality in public might always create a feeling of repulsion. Back to the “two girls one cup” example – I don’t believe I will ever react differently than I do right now and that means with revulsion. I can’t control the urge to vomit; I’m not sexually repressed or prudish. If feces are present, my lunch will soon be present also.

I hope people will not judge others too harshly for their sexually likes and dislikes. As powerful as the media can be, it is not powerful enough to change human sexuality. Please don’t demonize sexual preferences you find repugnant for fear others will be persuaded to participate.

I would also ask you to keep in mind not everyone is comfortable with every form of sexual expression. Just because you can openly express sexuality in public doesn’t mean you should. I’d like to thank all with the scat fetish for keeping it private. I do not wish to see bowel movements become a social movement.

Animal Farm America Style

This commune is Twin Oaks Community. The video kinda implies the commune is something new, but its been around since 1967. Basically its a hippie commune that has survived 40+ years by firing non-productive members and becoming capitalist to keep it going. One of the founders, Kathleen ‘Kat’ Kinkade, died July 3rd, 2008. The Washington Post has an article about Kat’s life here. From that article – “Although she was involved in founding two other income-sharing communities — in Missouri and Virginia — she told The Post in 1998 that communal life had not measured up to her expectations.”

“My mother was disappointed that Twin Oaks did not turn out to be the model for what the rest of our society would be,” said her daughter, Dr. Josie Kinkade of Louisa, Va. “When she found out that it was really just a nice place for some middle-class people to live, she was disappointed.”

This group reminds me of the polygamist communities that claim to be self-sufficient and yet receive state welfare. I didn’t find anything on their site about food stamps, but its a safe bet the residents qualify for government cheese. From Twin Oaks FAQ “Because of our income-sharing, our members often qualify for state-subsidized health care at medical facilities in the area.”

I imagine this commune’s revenues are down just as most business revenues are down. I wouldn’t be surprised to see some less-productive people asked to leave so a younger more productive person can take their place. If you are young and hardworking, they might have an opening on the slave-owned plantation.

Generous? What Have you Done that’s Generous?

The health care debate has brought the movie Labyrinth to my mind, especially the part where Jareth said to Sarah, “I ask for so little. Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave.”

The line did not make sense to me until recently. How could slaves be slaves to each other? Slaves can’t be slaves to each other because it’s a double negative. It gave me a headache just trying to make some sense of what Jareth meant. Now I see Jareth was just trying to trick Sarah into believing he would do just as Sarah asked, but in reality wanted to keep the baby and enslave Sarah.

The US government uses the “I’ll be your slave if you’ll be my slave” trick just as Jareth tried on Sarah. The federal version of this line is, “We are here to serve you; if you’ll just give up X amount of your income you’ll have freedom from the current need”.

The slave of a slave trick is not new; Franklin D. Roosevelt delivered a speech January 6, 1941 spelling out 4 freedoms. “The third is freedom from want–which, translated into universal terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants–everywhere in the world.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt left out the part of how to accomplish freedom from want. The US government does not manufacture anything. There is no government factory churning out medicine or food or houses. You have to be willing to give up another portion of income to receive any commodity. The only way a government can provide freedom from want is if you are willing to fear, love, and do as the they say.

Government doesn’t have a factory that produces freedom. Freedom is something we are born with and we are the only source of freedom. You have to be willing to sacrifice some freedom because you’ll be expected to follow the government rules to receive the benefits you want. If you choose not to follow the government rules, you’ll find out there are real consequences. Declare you are not a slave, that the government is your servant, and you’ll be banished to the Bog of Eternal Stench.

When anyone is offering to be your slave if you’ll be their slave, please remember Sarah’s response to Jareth: “For my will is as strong as yours, my kingdom as great…You have no power over me.”

I am Real and You are Not

When politicians and pundits use phrases like “real Americans,” “real voters,” “real people,” “everyone agrees,” or “vast majority,” there are two underlying arguments – if you share the same values you are real, and if you don’t share those values or don’t agree, you are not real.

On the flip side of there are these words – “manufactured, sheeple, robot, and zombie.” All these words are implying the people in question are not real or have no brains.

I’m setting aside the name calling for now and just focusing on the nullification of others.

This nullification works equally well for both the left and right. Example – At the tea party protests the phrase “real Americans” was used by the protesters, implying there were real and unreal Americans. People that disagreed with the protesters views were the unreal ones. When the tea parties were mentioned by politicians and pundits the tea party protesters were referred to as Astroturf.” Astroturf implies that the tea party protesters were fake or unreal.

This pattern of nullification repeats with every contentious issue.

Side 1 – If you don’t agree with us you aren’t real. “Real American”

Side 2 – How dare you say we aren’t real, when clearly you aren’t real? “Astroturf”

Side 1 – Side 2 has the audacity to say side 1 isn’t real. “That is un-American”

The ball bounces back to Side 2 and back and forth until everyone has been nullified.

Nullification allows the luxury of not bringing up or discussing opposing views. How could you have a serious discussion about something that doesn’t exist? Why waste time thinking about the unreal? People don’t have serious debates about the Easter bunny, so why should we bother to think about the opposing unreal views?

So I’ll go between the horns and agree with both sides; I am real and you are not.

Putting Homophobia in the Closet

Scott Brison, a member of the Canadian Parliament, sent out a Christmas card to his constituents. The card shows Brison and his husband, Maxime St. Pierre.

The Globe and Mail posted the card on line and then shut down their comments section over what they called “an overwhelming number of hateful and homophobic remarks,” explaining “we can’t allow our site to become a platform for intolerance.”

I would like to welcomeThe Globe and Mail to the internet. They opened up a comment section to find out what people thought about the card. A good rule in life and internet communication is “Don’t ask questions when you really don’t want to know the answer”.

This intolerance of intolerance only serves up more intolerance. The only way to get rid of a bad idea is by openly exposing the idea to ridicule. Now that the comments have been censored, I have no way of deciding for myself if the remarks were hateful or homophobic. If I had a disagreement with a statement, the opportunity to disagree has been removed.

Fighting homophobia with censorship only feeds the hatred. The comments on the internet about the homophobic views are littered with dehumanizing adjectives such as troglodytes and trolls. Homophobes can now claim they are being persecuted for their views because only popular views are allowed to be expressed.

Putting unpopular views in the closet doesn’t make the views go away because you can’t confront what you can’t see.

Zombies Angry About Being Drawn into Global Warming Debate

I’ve received many complaints from zombies that they do not wish to be compared to mindless humans. The comparisons are most prevalent in the global warming debate. Statements such as “skeptics are brainwashed mindless zombies” or “AGW believers are alarmist’s cult of zombies” are fueling zombie resentment towards humans.

As one zombie put it – “We have no brains to wash! We are zombies; we don’t know how to organize. Where do humans get off calling us a cult?! The only thing zombies are alarmed about is a brain shortage.”

I asked a zombie for his take on the global warming debate and was surprised by the candid answers.

When asked about graphs showing a rapid increase in global temperatures the zombie had some passionate and unexpected responses.

“Hockey stick bad, hockey stick hurt, hockey stick should be baaaaaaaaanned.”

I then showed graphs showing no change or temperature drops.

“Looks like broken glass. Urgh. Hurts to look; take away.”

Graphs indicating climate change supporting man made climate change or graphs disputing climate change were met with similar pained expressions.

“Make it stop, all look the same. No more graphs, you sadist. I’m just a zombie. How the Hell should I know if the planet is warming?”

I was still curious to find out the zombie perspective on the global warming debate, so I pushed the zombie for more information by threatening to bring the graphs back out if he didn’t answer.

The consensus among humans is that climate change is real and man-made. Is there a consensus among zombies?

“Zombies like humans to argue about climate change because it makes their brains tender. Zombies don’t spend time deciding if something is popular or not, because zombies have never been popular.”

The zombie was very optimistic about climate change based upon the possible scenarios.

If climate change real and man-made

Human leaders develop plan to change human behavior.

Human leaders all agree on same plan. (Zombie chuckles)

All Humans follow the plan. (Zombie laughs up a lung)

Zombies rule!

If climate change real and some man-made

Humans argue and argue about what to do.

Climate warms, more humans die, zombies rule!

If climate change real and not man-made

Most humans not thinking about this. Some humans talk about it; zombies plan to eat their brains.

Zombies rule!

Climate change unknown

If all humans die…zombies die.

“Humans worry more about possibility than probability. There is a possibility life on earth could be destroyed by global warning while the probability over time that life on earth will be wiped out by an asteroid is near 100%.

“Humans could learn from zombie behavior. Once humans discover we have taken over an area, they band together and attack the local zombie hangout. They always forget the natural behavior of zombies is to wander; they forget to look in the cellars and abandoned factories which inevitably leads to a sequel.”

I began to feel a bit sorry after inflicting pain upon the zombie and decided to stop displaying the graphs. There is a strong consensus on the dangers of listening to mindless zombies, so I decided it was time to end the zombie’s pain and cut off his head with a chainsaw.

Stupid mindless zombie won’t get my brain!

Healthcare Debate – Abortion and Banning High-Heeled Shoes

The debate over abortion being covered under healthcare reform brought to mind the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. The act required states to legislate the age of 21 years as a minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcoholic beverages. If a state did not enforce the minimum age, the state would be subjected to a ten percent decrease in its annual federal highway funds.

While it wasn’t called prohibition for citizens under the age of 21, for all intents and purposes it was prohibition. When it came to equal rights for those 18 – 20 vs. billions of dollars, billions of dollars won. Rather than go through the trouble of amending the US Constitution (as the 18th amendment did to prohibit alcohol) congress took a shortcut by withholding highway funds for states that didn’t change their laws.

One of the big sticking points on healthcare reform is funding for abortions. The debate is cause for alarm about those “unforeseen” consequences of legislature, because the door opens for a host of social issues to drawn into funding for healthcare.

The objection for funding abortions is based upon moral values and fairness values. Bringing either moral or fairness issues into the debate will be the new political battleground for decades.

Here are some future moral and fairness values for debate. Should people be denied health care coverage or be charged a higher rate for any of the following?

Sexual promiscuity – should others have to pay for the consequences of promiscuity?

Not married –single people live shorter lives so there is probably a correlation to higher health costs.

Sports – football, cheerleading or any sport that could result in an injury costs more.

Smoking, being overweight, unprotected sex, not exercising, and drinking alcohol costs more.

Any action only a few people engage in could easily be added to the list if an unnecessary risk is vilified loudly enough.

None of these items listed would be made illegal; as in the congress didn’t make it illegal for those under 21 to drink alcohol; congress made it so states couldn’t afford to keep it legal. It’s not farfetched to believe an individual’s funding for healthcare could be cut off or be forced to pay more for each category they fall into. Of course you’ll still be free to pursue the activities listed above–if you are wealthy enough.

Some of the items on this list might seem silly at the moment. Keep in mind the political pendulum swings back and forth. Four or eight years from now, I can foresee a campaign speech calling for health insurance tax for bars because alcohol is a health risk and driving home from a bar puts others’ health at risk. Bars also promote the spread of STDs, so it only makes sense to tax them for enabling sex. The bar tax would be followed by the sporting arena tax….and on and on.

We could all turn into our neighbor’s unnecessary health insurance risk. Granted there are a few people who take no risks or have any vices and will benefit from this, but I’ll bet they aren’t much fun to be around.

Enjoy high-heeled shoes while you can because I’m tired of paying for your dangerous lifestyle.

Muslims of America – Camp Training Video

I hope Louis Theroux is planning a Weird Weekend with MOA/Muslims of America.

This is a test to see if Americans really believe in freedom of speech.

Free speech in America has been tested before; the MOA camp reminded me of the youth camp for the German American Bund – American Nazis in the 1930s.

If you haven’t seen the video below before, you need to be warned that it is real and not from a Star Trek alternate universe episode.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw4_xmUgo3w

Schumer Calls Flight Attendant “B-word”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5mKqYBK_K4

Those laws congress passes…didn’t mean congress had to follow the laws.