Tuesday, February 24, 2004

It's actually the 25th now, but I started this entry yesterday, saved it after I started, and then had the computer freeze up on me about five times, preventing any further progress. I don't even remember what I was writing about last night, so it must not have been very important.

It probably had something to do with how irritated I was watching the local news and seeing nothing but investigative report after investigative report. Now, I'm not too fond of the local news anymore anyway, but these reports irk me beyond belief. I'm all about exposing legitimate scams and such, but I do find it a bit overdone nowadays.

I remember back when all the investigative reports started out, it was maybe once a wee, it was genuinely helpful, and it wasn't completely overwraught. Now, there's at least one on every station during every newscast and just about all of them follow the same formula. Find someone who "allegedly" has done something wrong, dig up all the dirt you can on them, and then get a camera in their face and ask them intrusive questions.

I can understand these things if it's actually helping someone who maybe was ripped off, hurt, or worse in some cases. I can't understand it if it's something that's completely silly. Most of the time, it seems that these reports are done just to get the ratings up and give stations more clout, usually resulting in panicking people with the stories.

Lord knows anytime there's some study done on a prescription drug that "could" be a threat to your health (in other words, not even remotely true or proven), we get inundated with calls from panicked customers who think that they're taking something that's bad for them.

It's really, really annoying.

And since I'm on the attack tonight, how about all these activist groups out there who try to protect their fellow citizens by trying to get everything but toothbrushes banned (and it's only a matter of time before someone says that a toothbrush is a choking hazard, thus calling for a recall of all toothbrushes). It's a nice gesture, it really is, but I don't really need someone stepping up to help protect me from some harmful product.

I'm talking directly about groups such as the ACLU, PETA, the NRA, and any other association that has an agenda to push. While I'm at it, I'm going to include most religious groups as well, although I tend to mostly target Christianity when I do that.

While I'm on it, I want to take some shots at professional athletic unions as well, specifically baseball's players union, of which the term "grossly powerful" can be applied to.

First off is the ACLU, who seems to take an interest in just about anything they can get their noses into. They seem to take particular glee in suing major companies when they fire someone who's done something wrong, but it's supposedly unjust. They also seem to stick their noses into anyone who's on a personal crusade of some sort, whether it be in the matter of the government, protecting people's rights (no matter how illegal the practice may be), and the little matter of free speech.

I also find PETA to be rather annoying. Now, I love animals as much as the next person, and in general PETA doesn't bother me, but when you get some of these members who are vegetarians and hell-bent on making the entire human population follow suit, I tend to get a little aggravated.

The argument that we're killing and eating defenseless animals is, well true. I won't argue that. However, I wonder why they don't go after the other animals in this world who eat meat. Why have we not seen PETA in Africa, challenging a cheetah to stop its horrific practice of running down a gazelle and eating it on the spot? I want some answers here PETA! If we are so inhumane when we eat meat, why isn't the standard the same for any other carnivore on the face of this planet?

Oh wait, I think we're supposed to be better than that, right? I'm supposed to give up an age-old practice because you find it offensive. I got news for all you meat-haters out there. If you don't like what I eat, then I suggest you go in the other room, especially if it involves ribs, cause it ain't gonna be pretty!

Now then, on to the NRA.

I have a particular problem with this group, not because of their insistence on the right to bear arms, but rather their repeated attempts at stopping any kind of gun safety laws so that some of this violence will ease up a bit. I want to know what a member of the NRA would've done if they had been in Columbine on that fateful day many years ago? I already know their argument would center around the idea that they'd be able to defend themselves that day if concealed weapons would be allowed, although I feel that kind of defeats the idea of trying to eliminate firefights in schools.

I'm not against guns, but I find it silly that we need a group to try and make sure that every human can carry a gun for protection if they want. We already have enough problems with violence from guns, yet they don't want stricter laws because lord knows what'll happen if we can't carry a gun into a public facility.

I wonder if someone from the NRA would feel the same if they or someone they knew would be shot by one of the snipers that have roamed the country the last year or so? Would you still want every person to be able to get a gun, or would you start to think twice about the issue? Again, I'm not against guns. I would like to have a gun in the house someday for protection reasons, but I don't think you can let just anyone get a gun, nor should you just be able to keep it wherever you please.

It's like giving a five-year old a firecracker. Chances are good they'll throw it away from themselves, but there's also the chance that they'll blow their hand right off. In other words, it's pretty stupid.

I can't let organized religion slip past me while I'm ranting. I have a particular problem with Christianity (not to be confused with having a problem with Christians; I love y'all, I just can't stand religion). Now, granted, we've moved past the "glory" days of this religion when it was not uncommon for people to go on holy wars to spread the wonders of Christianity (which back in the day meant spilling the blood of anyone who didn't agree with what you believed), and while there are still those who push their beliefs on anyone in ear-shot, for the most part, there's respect for other religions.

I still find a great deal of hypocrisy in religion though. They teach you that sinning is bad and clearly lay out what's a sin and what isn't, yet that doesn't seem to sway these church-going folk from cheating on spouses, abusing kids, gambling on just about anything, smoking, drinking too much, getting into fights at their kids sporting events, and any number of other things that you could consider a sin. I mean, what is the point of telling people about all of these things when no one really listens?

Catholics are probably the worst of the lot right now. Not only do we have all the sex-scandals going on, but the fact that the Catholic churches have tried to cover up these crimes only damns them even more. Which begs me to ask this: which is the greater sin? Molesting a child or lying about it?

Either way, it doesn't reflect very well on the state of the church.

Other religions seem to be okay, although some of the muslim ideals of fighting holy wars seem a bit out of whack. I don't know what it is, but anytime I read about a religion preaching peace and then read about someone killing in the name of their religion, I start to wonder a little bit.

Last but not least are unions, specifically athletic unions such as Major League Baseball's Players Union. Now there is a union that is much more powerful than it deserves. Not only does this union push to make its players take the highest offer of money, rather than weigh other factors when signing, but it has vehemently made drug-testing something it does not want to deal with. I can't understand it either. You claim that the players are not doing drugs or using steriods, yet you don't want there to be any kind of testing?

The baseball union has perplexed me for years now with the way it operates and it seems to be the reason why its players are so out of touch with the fans. It's the only union that hasn't given into some sort of salary cap formula (what, $15 million isn't enough for your players?) and it has stated repeatedly that it will continue to fight a salary cap despite the inflation of player salaries.

The other unions in sports aren't as bad, although I fear the NHL might not be around much longer with its problems. The basketball union is rarely heard from, as is the case with football. That speaks well of the peace that exists with those unions and their respective sports and willingness to work together to keep their sports moving.

Baseball's though, it just won't have that. It seems to be more of a power struggle than anything else though.

---

I don't know if I'll be writing much in the next few days. Part of this is because of my work schedule, and part of it is because I have things I need to try and take care of at the moment. My work schedule plays the biggest part however, since I am working six days this week.

I did begin work on the "Mystery Science Theater 3000" section of the site. Most of it is done save for the cast of characters page, the on-air history of the show, and what the show meant to me, but I anticipate it will be completed shortly. It's not going to be anything fancy, just my tribute to a show that almost changed how I look at life, movies, and humor.

I have been disconcerted with some of the things happening online lately though. I'm going through another one of those phases where I don't like to be online much. Part of it is because I keep trying to talk to people who don't know how to hold up conversations, part of it is the time of year. It's slowly starting to warm up, and as the temperature goes up, so does my desire to get outside.

That's part of why this site, and myself, is so inactive during the summer. I just don't like being indoors that time of year. I don't intend on being on much this year either as I'm planning on being more active and spending more time outside than ever.

That doesn't mean that I'm going to severe ties with anyone, but it does mean that those used to me being online all the time are going to have to get used to me not being on so much. The only reason I've been on so much lately has been because I've found some people that I enjoy talking to, plus the weather hasn't been that warm.

It's a cyclical thing with me though. Half the year I enjoy being online, the other half there are about half a dozen things I'd rather be doing, and if I manage to start hanging out with Sarah from work more, I'll be online even less.

Which brings me to Sarah. I don't really mention her in this site or online at all. She's a girl I work with and a girl I'd probably date if I had the chance, but it's a situation where a good friendship is developing and that's where I intend to keep things. She's a girl I think I can hang out with, have a few drinks with, and just have a good time with, but just on a friendship level.

A large part of this is because I work with her, but another part is the realization that I'm not her type of guy, and rather than just try and move away from hanging out with her, I feel I can benefit from it. There's the opportunity to meet new people, and who knows, some girls have this competitive spirit about them. You never know what would happen if a girl saw me having a good time with Sarah and decided that a move needed to be made. It may be wishful thinking, but it would be interesting to see develop.

She's a good person though and has a good head on her shoulders. She's another that will be quite a catch for the guy that gets her.

Comments