Funniest Quote Ever II

"The one thing mental illness and drugs have in common is that they both can make you have auditory or visual hallucinations, such as hearing voices that tell you to kill your son or seeing a fiery bush that does not burn."--Michael Foster

Spooky, and spookier? Part II

Harry Potter was okay (I still think the ending sucked, but WAY TO GO NEVILLE!!!) and Phobia was scary enough. Can't wait to go to the haunted house at Moody...Last year it ROCKED!

Spooky, and spookier

FINALLY going to see Deathly Hallows II today, then it's off to WA for Phobia. What is going to be more chilling, the ghost house or the weather?

re: I Should Know This By Now...

Okay, here's the situation: I was invited to a public speaking forum that, as it turned out, was actually a competition of sorts. There were three of us involved; me, and two other "guests" of existing members, one of whom was a member of this organization's Atlanta chapter (Not to mention that "Ms. Atlanta" had that very day paid the dues for her daughter to join the Valdosta chapter). One by one we approached the lectern, received our topic, and with no preparation whatsoever gave our respective impropmtu speech. Ms. Atlanta, who was first, received the topic, "Would you rather go back in time and speak with your great-grandfather, or go to the future and speak with your great-grandchildren?" Her response was (paraphrasing), "I would like my daughter to find a good man, settle down, and have children because I look forward to spending time with my grandbabies...blah-blah-blah." She never once even attempted to answer the question as it had been presented. I was the second speaker, accepted my topic of, "What drive has provided you with the most beautiful scenery?" My response was centered around going to my father's grave after an eleven-year absence, and how, as I drove, my "scenery" was all the wonderful memories that filled my head. From there I wenrt on to state how we humans tend to romanticize the past, but how that is a good thing because it allows for us to let go while still holding on. The third speaker was asked what view she would most like to see from her back door, and she stated that since she was from the Carribean and lived on the beach, she had already had the most beautiful view she could ever hope for. So, Ms. Atlanta won the "competition," which does not surprise me for the reasons already mentioned. As I stated in my previous post: It is not what you know, or how well you perform, but who you know...and in this case ponying up the dough was a big help as well, I am sure. I am not "crying" over "losing," but I am saying that in an organization that wishes to present a fair image of itself, this one has seriously faltered. It was bias plain and simple. I suppose my only validation comes from the fact that the club's president approached me after the meeting had ended and told me that regardless of what the concensus was, mine was the best speech.

I Should Know This By Now...

Today was yet another reminder that it is not what you know, or how well you perform, but who you know and what gratuities one may expect from that. **SIGH** I'm sure I'll get suckered in again in the not-too distant future.

Who Will Mourn Me?

When I leave this world, who will mourn me?
     The children who never call?
     The siblings who never write?
     The parents who never held me?

When I leave this world, who will mourn me?
     The friends who have lost touch?
     The acquaintances who will most assuredly find other things with which to occupy their minds?
     The co-workers I did not impress, or maybe even outshined?

When I leave this world, who will mourn me?
     The zealots who speak of eternal damnation?
     The philosophers who speak of wasted opportunity?
     Those who know not themselves, thus, know not me?

When I leave this world, who will mourn me?
     Who will mourn me?

Of Hemmingway, Rogers, and Atheism

"All thinking men are atheists."--Ernest Hemmingway.
(Paraphrasing) "When expounding your beliefs, be respectful of others'."--Carl Rogers.

          I really do not care for Ernest Hemmingway's style of writing. He took (perfected?) the notion of minimalism and applied it almost to the point of absurdity in most of his stories. That being said, I must offer kudos in his statement concerning atheism.
          Carl Rogers was a noted psychologist who is credited with the "Rogerian Arguement" (named after him), the overall point of which being that as one expresses their beliefs, they must remain respectful of the beliefs of others. I had done this several times in my life, ignorant of the fact that there was even a name for it.
          Approximately nine months ago I made public the fact that I am an atheist. The more I look to the sciences to explain life as I know it (in this way I differ greatly from the Deists), the more I am convinced that science provides the answers. I do not need the figurehead of any religion to substantiate my existence; I was created when a sperm cell entered an egg. At that point the genes from my parents were passed on to me, and as I grew older social and cultural influences helped shape me into the being I am today. I am an extremely analytical person, so Hemmingway's quote holds true for me.
          I am a Rogerian atheist in the sense that the motto "Live and let live" applies to my philosophy concerning this topic. I do not try to cram my belief(s) down anyone's throat, and I certainly do not get angry when someone expresses their belief in a faith or religion, or even attempts to tell me I am wrong for believing the way I do. No one has to like what I believe, but I do ask that they give the same amount of respect for my views that they want for theirs.
          So what is the point of this newest entry into my blog? Quite simply, it is to inform--and hopefully change--the mindset of the faction of hostile atheists that have made atheism their religion. These individuals are not content to allow anyone to have their own beliefs. No, they ridicule and aggressively pursue Christians (and why Christians only I do not know. There are several belief systems in the world) to the point of "being offended" by the Christian belief and way of life.
          On any given day I read one story or another on how atheists are offended by a cross in the middle of a desert, or on a municipal building, so they protest until the cross (or other religious symbol) is removed. Then there is the rumor that Pepsi will not include the words "under God" on their products that will display the Pledge of Allegiance for fear of offending someone, when in reality they will have offended several religious organizations by omitting it, and as a sidebar to that, as one individual pointed out, "...they certainly don't mind accepting money that says 'In God We Trust' when the item is purchased." The ideology of not offending anyone is ridiculously out of hand, for, as the saying goes, you cannot please all of the people all of the time, and organizing a crusade against someone or something for the simple reason of having something to argue over ("Rebel Without a Cause" syndrome, perhaps?) should not be viewed only as an exercise in futility, but a complete and utter waste of time as well.
          These hostile atheists are fanatics in their own right, and just like all fanatics, give a bad name to those of us who wish peace, prosperity, and happiness among all. I certainly do not get caught up in the game, and I never go elephant hunting with a B.B. gun. There is no injustice in allowing someone to believe in the god or gods of their choice. I am reminded of a scene from "Corina, Corina" where the daughter of Ray Liotta's character mentions that she has been "...talking to Mommy in Heaven." Liotta's character says (paraphrasing), "Honey, Heaven is a made-up place that people convince themselves is real so they can feel better about things." The little girl then says, "So? What's wrong with that?" That is the question I now put forth to all atheists who feel it is their obligation to keep stirring the pot: What is wrong with that? If it gets someone through the day, why should you be offended? If it is your contention that Christians or any other religious group are too weak-minded to see the truth, just allow this to substantiate that belief. Live and let live. Believe me, when all is said and done, none of this really matters anyway.