Metal Up Your Ass

All Good Things...

2005-05-10T12:09:00.000Z

Well here we are, end of the line for this Blog. I have to admit that although I haven't enjoyed the module overall the Blog has been a saving grace for it, even if I have had to write it in the presence of Neanderthals at times. So in this last entry I'll sum up my attitude towards transgressive behavior and my studies of it over the last couple of months. Things I have decided are "Being Bad" in no particular order are:

The Catholic Church and Christianity in general expressing counter-productive opinions on world issues and people's personal lives, as well as excessive news coverage of the change in Pope. Also Christians preaching about their religion. At all.
Infidelity, when there is no major factor to excuse it.
Bullying. Under all circumstances it should be punished and punished hard.
Tabloids trying to convince us that computer games will turn us into murderers.
Illegal downloading of music. Despite the fact I did it just last night.
Football Hooligans. Idiots.
Non-smokers telling smokers how to live their lives.
Having my time and money wasted with this module.
People who make the resource center like Hell's waiting room when I'm trying to work.
Not in the blog, but still, people getting body modifications they have no idea of the meaning of, especially when it offends another culture to whom the modification belongs.

And things that I have decided could be "Being Bad" but aren't are:

Infidelity, when the relationship somebody is in already is an abusive one. (and of course, they are the victim of the abuse)
My anti-Christian attitude.
The movie "Kids". It wasn't shocking, it wasn't enlightening because I have my eyes open and I pay attention to the news. Putting these things in a movie does nothing to make me think them any worse.
Violent video games.
Comedians who offend people. Sometimes I think people watch them to get offended so they have something to complain about
Metallica, and all heavy metal. Hundreds of millions of records have been sold by metal bands, if they were so against societies standards that wouldn't be the case. Anyway, I want to finish this and get home, I had new Metallica and Maiden DVD's delivered last night.
Frank W. Abagnale Jr. His life since his prison sentence justifies his 5 years of multi-million dollar fraud and life of criminal excess. Nice work ripping off that high class hooker too.
Masturbation. There's nothing wrong with it despite the churches best efforts to say otherwise. To them I could say, "try it, you might like it." Except I can't since they are human beings and almost certainly have anyway and got up afterwards to tell us we're going to Hell for it.

So there we go, there's what I learned or in the case of most of it, wrote down for the first time. I think the time has come for profound parting words that will sum up the whole experience of this for me:

"PH1000: Being Bad - Never Ever Again"

Very Annoying People

2005-05-10T11:49:00.000Z

Ok, I'm closing in on the end of the Blog and I thought I'd share the major annoyance I had writing it. Despite the fact that the module as a whole has irritated me as I've covered elsewhere, what has really annoyed me about the Blog has been typing it out in the Learning Resource Center. I've had to use this facility since my own computer decided it had just about had enough of this "functioning properly" lark and decided to pack it in. Why so hostile towards the Resource Center? Believe me its nothing against the facility or its staff but rather the other people "working" in it. I don't know if it's just my bad luck but every time I come in I always manage to sit somewhere where two minutes later a group of people decides it wants to congregate next to. The consequence of this is I get treated to twenty or so minutes of absolutely useless babble while I write my blog. The absolute worst people that do this are couples having arguments. I wouldn't have thought that the Resource Center would be such an attractive place to discuss the problems with your relationship but evidently it has some hidden appeal because they just keep doing it. Then you have the gossiping women (and on particularly bad occasions their male lapdogs) who sit down and engage in conversation so loud and crude it would surprise a glamour model. Then occasionally you get a group of blokes who seem to have mistaken the building for Molineux, and proceed to behave like they're at a football match after more than few beers. These people fit our modules idea of "Being Bad", of that I am certain. What I don't know is why they can't sod off and amuse themselves in whatever foul way they see fit somewhere else.

Peer Response 3: Sarah Lane - "Masturbation"

2005-05-09T10:16:00.000Z

I was looking back over my posts and realised I neglected to post about masturbation which was one of the more interesting lectures of this module. Therefore I've gone through people's blogs at random to find a masturbation blog to post a comment on. Sarah Lane's can be found here: http://thisissarahsblog.blogspot.com/2005/03/masturbation.html. Sarah says she finds it embaressing to talk about and I do partially agree. Although I don't have a problem talking about it, I'd rather not. Why is this? Possibly it may be some remnant of my lamentable relationship with the Catholic Church who will of course send you to Hell for such an evil crime. But to be honest, there's nothing wrong with it. Normally in an argument would say there are two sides but frankly the Church is just flat out wrong on this one. I don't know why we're taught to be embaressed about this aspect of our sexuality but we shouldn't be. Increasingly though, as Sarah says, masturbation is finding its way into normal discussion along with the rest of sexuality and that can only really be a good thing.

Frank W. Abagnale Jr.

2005-05-08T11:34:00.000Z

(image link: http://radio.weblogs.com/0104723/My%20Pictures/catch%20me%20if%20you%20can%20copy.jpg)

I recently read the autobiography of Frank W. Abagnale Jr, upon whom the movie Catch Me If You Can (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0264464/) is based. He passed millions of dollars in fraudulent cheques and impersonated an airline pilot, a doctor and a university lecturer. He was a wanted man in every state in the USA as well as the majority of Europe. But can his actions be justified? In his book Abagnale states that he never ripped off an individual with his cheques (with the exception of a high class prostitute he ended up making a $400 profit on an evening with), he only targeted major corporations like banks or airlines. It could be said that what he was doing never really harming anyone. Also, since his capture Abagnale has been a key figure in advancing anti-fraud measures. He has become a very useful member of society which would not have been possible without his previous crimes. I would say that his actions can be justified because ultimately, they have benefited society including the companies he ripped off.

more on Frank W. Abagnale Jr: http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/scams/frank_abagnale/index.html?sect=27

Being Bad IS Being Bad

2005-05-07T22:45:00.000Z

Well, we're approaching the end of Being Bad now and I can only really think of one thing to say to that:

THANK GOD!!

Ok, so maybe not, as I've covered elsewhere I'm not a fan of God. But the sentiment that I'm happy to be finishing Being Bad is 100% true. To say I havn't enjoyed this module just wouldn't do it justice. I have resented studying this, I feel like I've had my time wasted. Two lectures have stood out for me as being worthwhile: Masturbation and Body Modification. My attendance for Being Bad is 100%. I wish it wasn't. Two lectures in the whole module covered anything that was new or interesting learning to me. Not being funny but I pay money for this course. This blog for instance, what have I been taught about half of the issues I've raised in it? Nothing, thats what. Yet I'm going to be assessed on it. And the first assignment was due after a couple of lectures, there was hardly any option for topics. This module, in my view, is a joke and a waste of time and money.

Peer Response 2: Joanne Hill - "Smoking"

2005-05-06T22:24:00.000Z

For my next trick, I'm going to post my thoughts on Joanne's blog on smoking (link: http://lamb-star.blogspot.com/2005/04/smoking.html).

I have to say that reading this blog was an interesting experience. I'm not really one to constantly point out the evils of smoking but I have done it once or twice and I havn't really thought about how irritating it could be. I'm slightly more dubious about Joanne's claim that smoking is a good thing for the NHS, but I can understand why people hate being talked down to by people who think theyre wonderful because they don't smoke. Sometimes I feel concerned about the damage that my friends might be doing to themselves but it is their choice to do that. The only thing I really hate about smoking is when I have to breathe other people's smoke and I don't have a choice for instance in a pub, but that is a rapidly declining factor in life these days. If I breathe tobacco smoke now it's typically by my own choice.

Metallica

2005-05-03T11:51:00.000Z

(image link: http://www.evsc.k12.in.us/schoolzone/schools/bossehs/students/skeelsj/metallica_logo.jpg)

As I have mentioned before, my favorite band is Metallica. They are one of the most successful heavy metal bands of all time and one of the top concert draws in the world. Metallica's music and their past lifestyle fits into most people's ideas of transgressive behaviour. At one stage of their career they were nicknamed Alcoholica due to their massive appetite for intoxicating drink.

(image link - http://metallica.users.cg.yu/alcoholica.jpg)

Their music has covered several controversial themes, such as the death penalty, war, drug taking, depression and religion, with their traditional fast paced and very loud music. They have never taken care to avoid controversy and have covered songs by other artists that could be considered to be immoral notably So What, by the Anti Nowhere League (lyrics: http://www.lyricattack.com/m/metallicalyrics/sowhatlyrics.html) and Last Caress by The Misfits (lyrics: http://www.lyricattack.com/m/metallicalyrics/lastcaressgreenhelllyrics.html). However despite behaviour and an attitude that many would find abhorrent, Metallica have continued to be one of the most successful bands on the planet. They are I think, an excellent example of how so called bad behaviour can be appealing to people.

Football Hooligans

2005-05-01T20:10:00.000Z

(image link - http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v666/lepermessiah_001/football2.jpg)

I'm a big football fan, specifically of Arsenal. I spend silly amounts of money on replica shirts and stress myself silly over just about every game, but most especially over ones against Spurs or Man United. Yet in spite of this I have never got into a fight over football, and I've never really wanted to. Yes, granted there are few bigger irritations than opposing football fans in a pub during a match (especially Chelsea fans), however I dont think I could ever be compelled to actually have a fight over the fact that I support a different team. But there are idiots out there who practically devote their lives to it. The problem has risen to such a level in the past that England's football teams have had to deal with the threat of exclusion from international football. Now there is no debate as to whether these peoples behaviour is acceptable here. It isn't. End of story. These idiots have no real interest in football, they want an excuse for a fight. I fully support the authorities efforts to clamp down on people like that. The lesson to be learned here is that there are some elements of our society that need to learn to grow up.

(image link - http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v666/lepermessiah_001/_756664_ruck300.jpg)

Peer Response 1: Nick Westwood - "Popes And Monsters"

2005-04-29T21:08:00.000Z

This evening I thought I'd post my thoughts on Nick's ideas about the news coverage surrounding the change of Pope (link - http://darkwinterthorn.blogspot.com/2005/04/popes-and-monsters.html). Now as I covered a bit earlier in my blog I am not a Christian and never wish to be, additionally I hate having the religion shoved down my throat. So I do agree with Nick, the amount of news coverage given to the events between the old Pope's death and the new Pope's election was excessive. On the night of the late Pope's death BBC 1 and ITV 1 were given over entirely to coverage of it for several hours. I have to wonder if this was really necessary. For one thing both BBC and ITV have 24 hour news channels for exactly this kind of thing, and whilst not everyone has access to these, that was no reason to eliminate an entire evening's programming.
I have a lot of respect for some of the things that Pope John Paul the Second accomplished, but there are a lot of things he did which I thoroughly disagree with, such as his insistence that restriction of the AIDS epidemic sweeping Africa was no justification for the use of condoms. To me, that kind of thinking is a pretty good example as to why the Christian Church and Catholicism in particular should keep its opinions to itself in matters of global importance because more often than not they are unhelpful, impracticle and even in this case, dangerous if followed. And worryingly the new Pope is supposed to be more hardline on Catholic values. If the old Pope was less so I dread to think what kind of drivel is going to pour forth from the Vatican in the future. Yes the death of a Pope and the election of a new one warrants news coverage, but as much as was given to it? I think not.

Oh and Nick was right, this new Pope does indeed resemble Uncle Fester, I direct you to these pictures:

(image link - http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v666/lepermessiah_001/Uncle_Fester_3.jpg)

(image link - http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v666/lepermessiah_001/_41069561_benedict_index_afp.jpg)

as to the origin of the wig, I can shed no light.

Internet File Sharing

2005-04-28T10:05:00.000Z

(image link: http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/02/12/napster.decision.05/story.napster.metallica.jpg)

The internet offers a lot of new possibilities and one of them is the ease with which one can access media. Several peer-to-peer file sharing programs such as Kazaa (http://www.kazaa.com/us/index.htm) and iMesh (www.imesh.com) allow people to access downloads of popular music and other media for free. The obvious problem with this is that it is illegal. But is it morally unacceptable to download media which people have put hard work into without paying? On the whole, I would say that it is. Despite the fact that I have downloaded music for free, I don't think I was right to do so. Many supporters of peer-to-peer file sharing say that they use it to download an album or track to sample it before buying, however I have always been against this argument for two reasons: firstly if you want to sample a track on an album they can be purchased legally for a reasonable price on sites like itunes (http://www.apple.com/itunes/) or if you wanted to sample a film many sites offer legal downloads of clips and trailers. Secondly no matter your intentions if you download a song or a movie for free you are breaking the law. You wouldn't open a chocolate bar in a shop to take a bite to see if you liked it before you bought it, and the same applies in this situation.
There are however, two sides to every story and a valid complaint peer-to-peer fans often make about media companies is that they charge too much for their products. Although the above-mentioned itunes does allow individual tracks to be bought at a pretty reasonable price, albums in shops are simply too much. You could very easily find an album with eight tracks on it that costs £15. That is a little much if you ask me. My favourite band is Metallica who very famously launched a lawsuit against the peer to peer program Napster (for more information: http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/02/12/napster.decision.05/) and were influential in getting it shut down. Ironically, the only Metallica track I have ever illegally downloaded was the one responsible for beginning the dispute between the band and Napster (the song was leaked onto Napster before its release) and I did so because it was on the Mission Impossible 2 soundtrack which cost £15 and the Metallica song was the only one I liked on the whole album. So although I believe that downloading media for free is wrong, I do think that media companies could do more to compromise with their customers and charge fairer prices.

(image link: http://bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2000/6/download_this.jpg)

Being Bad and Comedy

2005-04-27T00:23:00.000Z

(image link: http://www.coldstate.com/dvddebate/smallpics/eddie7.jpg)

Today's lecture was on being bad in comedy. I will admit the lecture went over my head a bit, I didn't follow a lot of it. However, I thought I'd do a bit of a blog on the subject. I guess you could say a comedian was "being bad" if they use issues that could cause offence in their acts. An example is Eddie Murphy, who has heavily employed racial humour in his act in the past. It is possible that some may find his act offensive for that reason. Billy Connolly is another comedian who has come into controversy for some of the content of his act (for example in this news story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/3717462.stm). The question is, do these acts require censorship? I would say not, after all even though people may find a comedian or a joke offensive they are not forced to watch the act or listen to the joke. This shouldn't stop people who enjoy the same act from enjoying it. People's enjoyment of comedy is down to personal taste and I don't see why anyone should be able to dictate others tastes in this case.

Violence In Video Games

2005-04-25T00:10:00.000Z

Having just spent a rather unhealthy two hours of my life playing Grand Theft Auto, I thought it might be interesting to do a blog on violence in video games. Violent video games are a favourite of the tabloids; they like to blame anything and everything on them. It took twenty four hours after the September 11th attacks for a tabloid to try to claim that Microsoft Flight Simulator allowed the terrorists to perfect their technique for the incident.
Far more commonly though, the charge levelled by the tabloids and others at video games is that they cause incidents like high school shootings and other violent crime, particularly in young people. Now I can only speak for myself here but having just spent quite some time playing one such game I feel no compulsion to go out and carjack somebody on my way to shooting someone else in the head. However as sick as some may say it makes me, I do enjoy doing that very thing on a computer game. I would point to the fact that I am fully aware of the difference between the real world and a fantasy computer game world, and that the actions committed in the game are utterly unacceptable in real life as the explanation for this. Is my behaviour in playing this game out of line? I don't think so, but what I do disagree with is panic-mongering tabloids that would have us believe that computer games are nurturing a generation of murderers.
I am not saying there is no need for censorship in video games as they are always becoming more realistic and detailed (see the picture below), but I think the games industry is taking all the steps it can to make sure that more adult themed games only reach that audience, however no system is infallible.
Recently the game Manhunt was withdrawn from sale in this country because it was claimed its violent content was a cause of a brutal murder (full story: http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/07/30/uk.manhunt.storeban/index.html). I have to wonder though, if someone is capable of such an act, is it really going to matter if they've played a certain video game or not? Not having seen a particular piece of media is not going to make a difference to the fact that they want to kill someone.

(image link: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v666/lepermessiah_001/blood.jpg)

Two Hours Of My Life I'll Never Have Again

2005-04-20T11:02:00.000Z

Today's lecture was the cinema showing of the movie Kids, and I was amazed at how shocking it wasn't. Before the film we were shown a variety of comments from viewers of the film from the internet movie database. You can read those comments and others at this site: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113540/usercomments?start=0. There are many people who find the film or parts of it shocking, but I am unclear on what these bits are meant to be. Am I meant to find it shocking that these characters indulge in illegal drugs, or drink underage, or get into fights with little provocation? Or even, horror of horrors, have underage sex? Or maybe what I was supposed to find shocking is that somebody put all these things which I'm fully aware are present in teenage culture into a film and presented it for people to watch. I have to wonder what point was trying to be made in the film. It might prove an eye-opener for somebody who lives under a rock, never reads newspapers or watches the news but I fail to see what is accomplished by this film that hadn't been done elsewhere even at the time of the films production.

Bullying

2005-03-29T00:53:00.000Z

A little late night post I thought i'd put up, this is on the subject of bullying.

Bullies are a real hate of mine. School bullies to be specific. People that select those that are weakest and cant fight back and make them miserable. Physical or Mental attacks, it doesn’t matter. Bullies are the scum of the earth. I think that methods of dealing with bullying are pitifully weak, especially here in the UK. The punishment for severe or long term bullying should be the bully (or bullies) being expelled from school at the very least. I personally think that schools efforts to deal with the issue are absolutely laughable, I think it should be a police matter. Bullies should be handed a real punishment and I'm not talking about the pitiful anti social behaviour orders that are impossible to enforce and no effort is made to anyway, I feel that being put into a Young Offenders Institution depending on the severity of the bullies actions would be appropriate . Bullies should be left with a criminal record to show for their actions, after all a victim of bullying could carry the effects of the ordeal with them for the rest of their life, why shouldn’t a bully have to deal with a black mark of a criminal record?

If you want more information on bullying, the BBC has a great website dealing with it which you can find at the following link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onelife/personal/index.shtml?bullying#topics
I particularly recommend the section where you can listen to the accounts of victims of bullying, which you can reach by clicking on this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onelife/personal/bullying/bullying_real.shtml

I Hate Christians

2005-03-14T17:21:00.000Z

Ok, I don't hate all Christians but there are many I can't stand. I don't mean this as an attack on the Christian world in general but on those who try to force the religion on me, with particular reference to e-mail chain letters which I seem to receive a hell of a lot of for some reason.

Near enough everyone I've ever met knows I am not a Christian and that any effort to convince me to be one is woefully doomed. Nether the less I receive little Christian chain mails all the time. My inbox tells me I have had at least one a week from various people I know every week since January. Here is a copy of the latest little gem to land in my inbox.
=============================================================

In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny, it's intended to get you thinking..............

Dart Test

THIS IS A POWERFUL MESSAGE. PLEASE READ ALL OF IT. I AM PASSING IT ON BECAUSE I AM CERTAINLY NOT ASHAMED TO DO SO.

Dart Test...

A young lady named Sally, relates an experience she had in a seminary class, given by her teacher, Dr. Smith. She says that Dr. Smith was known for his elaborate object lessons.

One particular day, Sally walked into the seminary and knew they were in for a fun day.

On the wall was a big target and on a nearby table were many darts. Dr. Smith told the students to draw a picture of someone that they disliked or someone who had made them angry, and he would allow them to throw darts at the person's picture.

Sally's friend drew a picture of who had stolen her boyfriend. Another friend drew a picture of his little brother. Sally drew a picture of a former friend, putting a great deal of detail into her drawing, even drawing pimples on the face. Sally was pleased with the overall effect she had achieved.

The class lined up and began throwing darts. Some of the students threw their darts with such force that their targets were ripping apart. Sally looked forward to her turn, and was filled with disappointment when Dr. Smith, because of time limits, asked the students to return to their seats. As Sally sat thinking about how angry she was because she didn't have a chance to throw any darts at her target. Dr. Smith began removing the target from the wall.

Underneath the target was a picture of Jesus. A hush fell over the room as each student viewed the mangled picture of Jesus; holes and jagged marks covered His face and His eyes were pierced.

Dr. Smith said only these words... "In as much as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto Me." Matthew 25:40.

No other words were necessary; the tears filled eyes of the students focused only on the picture of Christ.

This is an easy test; you score 100 or zero. It's your choice.

If you aren't ashamed to do this, please follow the directions.

Jesus said, "If you are ashamed of me, I will be ashamed of you, before My Father."

Not ashamed ... pass this on.

Ashamed ... delete it.

One day Satan and Jesus were having a conversation. Satan had just come from the Garden of Eden, and he was gloating and boasting. "Yes, sir, I just caught the world full of people down there. Set me a trap used bait I knew they couldn't resist. Got 'em all!"

"What are you going to do with them?" Jesus asked.

Satan replied, "Oh, I'm gonna have fun! I'm gonna teach them how to marry and divorce each other, how to hate and abuse each other, how to drink and smoke and curse. I'm gonna teach them how to invent guns and bombs and kill each other. I'm really gonna have fun!"

"And what will you do when you get done with them?" Jesus asked.

"Oh, I'll kill 'em," Satan glared proudly.

"How much do you want for them?" Jesus asked.

"Oh, you don't want those people. They ain't no good. Why, you'll take them and they'll just hate you. They'll spit on you, curse you and kill you!! You don't want those people!!"

"How much?" He asked again.

Satan looked at Jesus and sneered, "All your tears, and all your blood."

Jesus said, "DONE!" Then He paid the price.

In light of the many perversions and jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny, it's intended to get you thinking.

Billy Graham's daughter was interviewed on the Early Show and Jane Clayson asked her "How could God let something like this happen?" (regarding the attacks on Sept. 11).

Anne Graham gave an extremely profound and insightful response. She said "I believe God is deeply saddened by this, just as we are, but for years we've been telling God to get out of our schools, to get out of our government and to get out of our lives.

And being the gentleman He is, I believe He has calmly backed out. How can we expect God to give us His blessing and His protection if we demand He leave us alone?"

In light of recent events...terrorists attack, school shootings, etc. I think it started when Madeleine Murray O'Hare (she was murdered, her body found recently) complained she didn't want prayer in our schools, and we said OK.

Then someone said you better not read the Bible in school ... the Bible says thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as yourself. And we said OK.
Then Dr.Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide). We said an expert should know what he is talking about. And we said OK.

Then someone said teachers and principals better not discipline our children when they misbehave. The school administrators said no faculty member in this school better touch a student when they misbehave because we don't want any bad publicity, and we surely don't want to be sued (there's a big difference between disciplining and touching, beating, smacking, humiliating, kicking, etc.). And we said OK.

Then someone said, let's let our daughters have abortions if they want, and they won't even have to tell their parents. And we said OK.

Then some wise school board member said, since boys will be boys and they're going to do it anyway, let's give our sons all the condoms they want so they can have all the fun they desire, and we won't have to tell their parents they got them at school. And we said OK.

Then some of our top elected officials said it doesn't matter what we do in private as long as we do our jobs. Agreeing with them, we said it doesn't matter to me what anyone, including the President, does in private as long as I have a job and the economy is good.

Then someone said let's print magazines with pictures of nude women and call it wholesome, down-to-earth appreciation for the beauty of the female body. And we said OK.

And then someone else took that appreciation a step further and published pictures of nude children and then further again by making them available on the Internet. And we said OK, they're entitled to free speech.

Then the entertainment industry said, let's make TV shows and movies that promote profanity, violence, and illicit sex. Let's record music that encourages rape, drugs, murder, suicide, and satanic themes. And we said it's just entertainment, it has no adverse effect, nobody takes it seriously anyway, so go right ahead.

Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates, and themselves.

Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it out. I think it has a great deal to do with "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW."

Isn't it funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world's going to hell.

Isn't it funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but question what the Bible says.

Isn't it funny how everyone wants to go to heaven provided they do not have to believe, think, say, or do anything the Bible says. Or is it scary?

Isn't it funny how someone can say "I believe in God" but still follow Satan (who, by the way, also "believes" in God ).

Isn't it funny how you can send a thousand jokes through e-mail and! they spread like wildfire, but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing.

Isn't it funny how the lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene pass freely through cyberspace, but the public discussion of Jesus is suppressed in the school and workplace.

Isn't it funny how someone can be so fired up for Christ on Sunday, but be an invisible Christian the rest of the week.

Are you laughing?

Isn't it funny how when you go to forward this message, you will not send it to many on your address list because you're not sure what they believe, or what they will think of you for sending it to them.

Isn't it funny how I can be more worried about what other people think of me than what God thinks of me.

Pass it on if you think it has merit. If not then just discard it... no one will know you did. But, if you discard this thought process, don't sit back and complain about what bad shape the world is in!

Will YOU pass this on? .... I did.
=============================================================

Right then, did you read that all? I certainly didn't when I opened it because the first thing that connected in my mind was that it was yet another Christian chain mail. Then I had to, because I decided to have a go about it to everyone so I had to be informed about what I was criticising. The e-mail asserts that people receiving it would forward it to only a few others because they would be worried about some people's reaction to having it land in their inbox. If only. "But when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing,” The e-mail moans. I have a veritable sack of e-mails to the contrary (although the mass deletion my e-mail has recently undergone has reduced their numbers).
Now then, at this point I can see a mass coalition of onward Christian soldiers and political correctness madmen marching out to wage their holy war upon me. I'm sure that this attack of mine on the freedom of Christians to spread the word about their faith would not sit too well with them. But consider this: In my day to day life I am only hounded about what I should or should not believe in by one religion: Christianity. I certainly do not get e-mails from Muslims preaching about the glory of Allah every week neither do Buddhists persistently encourage me to live my life to achieve eternity in a state of Nirvana rather than be reincarnated as a slug. This particular e-mail administers a stern bollocking upon us all for the decay of our society although it reaches the height of ridiculousness in places; I refer you to this particular extract:

" And then someone else took that appreciation a step further and published pictures of nude children and then further again by making them available on the Internet. And we said OK, they're entitled to free speech."

The author has evidently not been informed that that the ownership, publication and distribution of the pictures of which it speaks are among the most serious crimes under the law of both this country and the United States (and as far as I am aware every single civilised country) where this piece appears to have been written. Nobody in any position of any importance ever said that such crimes were OK as those that committed them were entitled to free speech. If they did I can't imagine that a long tenure in their posts was in their future.

That particular extract was probably the most ludicrous as it had no base in reality whatsoever. But the e-mail tries to assert that the growing elimination of "compulsory" Christianity is responsible for all the problems in western society. The fact that study of the bible is no longer a necessity for all children (I went to a catholic primary and secondary school, I did not escape such studies) is, according to this e-mail, the reason that kids run around lawless and without thought for others. It blames the growing lack of forced religion for high school shootings and free contraception of all things (free contraception being possibly the most sensible idea of recent times as regards personal safety amongst young people) The e-mail even says our lack of faith brought September 11th upon us which I think is just downright disrespectful to those that died that day and a disgrace to Christians everywhere.

But then, I'm used to the statements of these e-mails not really adding up in any meaningful way. The points they make are flawed and ultimately not the issue. The point, as I have said on other occasions on which these e-mails have annoyed me is that in this wonderful society of ours everyone is entitled to believe what they wish free from harassment or criticism from others. I imagine you could say harassment and criticism is exactly what I've just done to the Christian(s) who wrote this e-mail. I'm not. If this is what these people believe than let them believe it, what they think is just as valid as what I think. However what they are not entitled to do is say to me that the way I live my life is not up to scratch with what it should be. It says I must be "Ashamed" if don't pass it on to others to demonstrate my faith in God. That quite frankly is out and out pure crap. I can believe I want and I can choose NOT to believe what I want without fear of people trying to convert me or whatever else because by their standards I'm not good enough. An old friend of mine is a devout Christian and one day we were debating faith and lack thereof and she told me her life was better than mine because she had faith (in god and Christianity presumably) and I did not. I used to be a Christian when I was younger; my life is a lot better now that I'm not a Christian than it was when I was one.

I’ve had a go at people for passing on these e-mails a few times now. I believe in God, and I believe I don't like him/her/whatever God may be. Some people seem to think I'm a Satanist when I say that I don't like God. I'm no Satanist, I don't like him either. I prefer to live my life in the fashion that I think is right, not what anyone else thinks is right or what anyone else tries to tell me is right.

Infidelity

2005-03-07T19:34:00.000Z

Ok, so the entries a bit late, I'm a disorganised person, sue me. Right then, infidelity. Infidelity is no straightforward issue, many people have different ideas about what constitutes it, and whether it can be justified. On the first matter I feel the question of what constitutes it is not down to whether you have sex with someone else other than your partner. I think more than any physical factor what is relevant is the betrayal of an emotional bond that you have with someone else. During the lecture on infidelity betrayal was a word that came up a lot so I feel safe in assuming I am not the only person who believes this. In a caring relationship one partner being unfaithful can cause the other to feel insecure, inadequate and hurt that they apparently do not mean as much to their partner as their partner does to them. These are obviously terrible things to do to someone you are in a relationship so can they ever be justified? My answer quite simply is yes, you can justify infidelity in spite of the pain it may cause someone else, at least in certain circumstances. The example I will use is of an abusive relationship. If one partner is physically or mentally abusive to the other, I cannot say I would blame the victim for seeking affection and comfort elsewhere. In fact if it were a friend of mine I would encourage it. Every person is entitled to be happy in their lives, and though it may hurt an abusive partner if their victim were to be unfaithful to them, they have taken even less care with their partner's emotions. However I do not feel that the argument "every person is entitled to be happy in their lives" could be used to justify infidelity in a normal, healthy relationship where both partners care about the other equally. If one person in such a relationship would be happier with someone other than their partner then they owe it to them to be honest and not to abuse the trust they have shown by entering into a relationship with them in the first place.

First Entry

2005-02-16T11:49:00.000Z

I'm supposed to use this entry to suggest a destination for the module field trip however nothing is really coming to mind, and since I have now typed an entry I'm going to post this.