Morally Opposed to Pet Ownership

Preface
--------------
Before beginning, I feel it important to explain what I mean when speaking of morality. I mostly ascribe to the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant. His views on morals are frustrating to most, but I’ll do my best to explain his most basic premise as succinctly as possible.

Kant believed that morals were individual, specific to each person. Only after intense consideration should a person commit to a moral. Once a person sets their moral code, any deviation from it is to be considered an immoral act. Others should not set morals for others.

Taking my leaning toward Kantian ethics into account, this blog post explains why I don’t have pets outside of a couple fish. Fish, ironically, are pets that I don’t mind keeping because the kind I get are generally short-lived when found in their natural habitat. Now, on to the post…

--------------------------
I'm morally opposed to pet ownership.

My moral opposition to pet ownership is a personal thing that I've told almost no one about because it makes me appear like a jerk.

While I do morally oppose pet ownership in general, it's not a morality that I would ever expect others to adopt. I do not criticize those who do not agree with my point of view.

The positive connection that pets of all sorts, even snakes and spiders, grant their owners is undeniable. It's been shown over and over again that humans benefit immensely from the symbiotic relationships they form with many of our fellow Earthly cohabitants.

Pet Ownership Weakens Species
--------------
From an evolutionary standpoint, I'm morally opposed to pet ownership because I feel it's greatly weakened other species.

Most of the genetic health defects that domesticated felines and canines suffer are a direct result of human-propagated breeding practices. We've selected those traits we prefer and bred for them. This is why we have such a wide breadth of physical appearances, or "breeds," of cats and dogs.

Ever notice how most mutts look alike? That's what dogs would look like if we left them to their own devices. In Mexico, there is a class of citizenry that serve as deep evidence of this. Canines that roam through most cities, towns, and villages who will befriend but rarely allow themselves to be turned into pets.

So many of the health issues that pets suffer are human-induced, resultant from everything from breeding practices to what we choose to feed them. Our most prevalent pets, cats and dogs, are not allowed to live as nature intended. They have become dependent upon human beings for their very survival.

Some pet owners go to great lengths to provide a diet that most closely mimics what they would get in nature. Most notable in these efforts is the raw food diet. But just as tanning lamps are okay in the short term for sun-deprived peoples, it's not an authentic long-term solution.

“Buried” Alive
--------------
This section is a little more gruesome and fantastical, but it wouldn’t be the first time a pet was to die because its owner died first.

• What would happen to all the pets of the world if humans were to all drop dead one day?
• Would they have been better off for having been cared for by owners?
• How would they escape the confines of their prisons so that they could hunt?
• Would they have the skills necessary to hunt for food?
• Would they die and wither alongside our unwatered houseplants?

Pet Ownership Is Slavery
--------------
Some believe that pet ownership is an assertion of domination over nature, that it's a form of slavery. From my perspective, I find the claim hard to dispute.

From cats to cows to chickens, we have domesticated creatures to serve us and ousted those too difficult to tame. That's a huge part of the reason that North American bison were almost completely eradicated. They weren't as easy to push around as cows.

Domestication is the very act of destroying a creature's natural birthright. Pet ownership and all its practices deny creatures their natural birthright. In the natural world, we are all born free.

Friendships over Pet Ownership
--------------
Like St. Francis of Assisi, I believe it is possible to form strong bonds with the creatures of the Earth without asserting our dominance. Personally, I have a truly rewarding friendship with the family of scrub jays who live in my neighborhood and all I had to do was talk with them.

Dogs Trip Me Up
--------------
Dogs are a rare exception to my moral opposition to pet ownership. Historical evidence dating back as far as 33,000 years ago reveals a natural companionship formed between man and canine.

Dogs chose to join up with human beings. But they didn't choose to be controlled. That was humanity's doing.

For myself, I occasionally consider seeking canine companionship because I love dogs. They are so personable and fun to be around. They make me feel good, and they are far more considerate than cats.

Too Much Unnecessary Responsibility
--------------
Then I stop myself when I think about what a great responsibility it is to take on a furry companion. There's the obvious need to feed and care for them.

While it makes me feel wrong inside to dominate others without their consent, I cannot tolerate those who do not teach their dogs discipline. I would feel obligated to break my dog’s natural urges because to live in society, cohabitants must follow some base rules.

Like no shitting wherever you please and no destroying others material goods and no willfully inflicting pain on others. If you're going to cohabitate with another species... well, you know the saying "When in Rome..."

A Persistent Stray Would Test My Morality
--------------
That's not to say that compassion wouldn't strike should an animal naturally come to me in search of care or companionship. I would love the creature and probably invite it to join our family.

Going out to seek an animal to blend into our family? That I can't do.

Tolerant of Others Pet Ownership
--------------
I'm not going to hold it against others who choose to engage in pet ownership. The fact is that pets like cats and dogs have been so deeply integrated into our societies that it behooves us to care for our cohabitants.

I could never start a campaign to end pet ownership. The emotional connections that form between pet and owner are so positive and rewarding for both.

As for me, I will be content to be without interspecies companionship.

Jesus Is Not the Reason for the Season

With growing smugness year in and year out, Christians love to tout that “Jesus is the reason for the season.”

What a clever slogan. I mean it. From a marketing perspective, the slogan is gangbusters. This makes sense to the average Christmas observer. After all, it’s baby Jesus’ birthday.

The intent of this post is not so much to try to convince you that Christmas is a sham. On the contrary, the purpose is to pique your interest and entice you to explore the customs that most of you practice at this time of the year.

That said, this post will sting to those who cherish Christmas and who cling tight their belief about the holiday.

I’d like to start this post with the smart-ass, half-true observation that the season of winter (or summer in the Southern hemisphere) happened well before the time of Jesus. Now, for the many reasons that Jesus is actually not the reason for the season.

It’s Not Jesus’ Birthday
This is the number one reason that most do not know or refuse to recognize: Jesus was not born on December 25. Although the bible doesn’t specify an exact date for Jesus’ birth, most objective scholars agree that all the clues point to a spring birth. That’s why there was no room at the inns, because it was time for the census and that required everyone to return to their place of birth in order to be counted.

It’s Saturn’s Birthday
When the Catholic church was just forming as the dominant (and for a long stretch of history, the only) form of Christianity, they chose to celebrate Jesus’ birthday on December 25 because they knew that the pagans they were attempting to convert would never give up their cherished tradition of Saturnalia.

Many Mid-Winter Holidays Aren't Christian
Celebration of the Winter Solstice is the oldest known celebration in the history of homo sapiens. Today in the United States of America, people celebrate all sorts of holidays that relate to either their religion, ancestry, or rejection of past traditions within the last two weeks of the year. Such major holidays include Chanukah, Kwanzaa, Winter Solstice, Yule, and the increasingly popular Festivus (Thanks, Frank Costanza!)

Most Christmas Traditions Come from Other Religions
The decoration of Christmas trees dates back to Wassailing, a pagan tradition of decorating one apple tree in mid-winter as a fertility rite for the entire orchard. Holly and mistletoe date back to Celtic mythology and Druidic rituals. Lights are an integral part of Chanukah. Santa Claus’ origins reach as far back as the Greek’s Basil of Caesarea. And gift giving goes back as far as Saturnalia.

Gifts: WWJD?
One last word that is meant more as a criticism of the hypocrisy that runs rampant throughout Christianity: Jesus would reject the unabashed consumerism that has come to mark Christmas. If more Christians rejected the consumerist version of Christmas and gave even half as much to the poor and downtrodden regardless of their religious beliefs as they do to friends and family, the world would be a much, much better place.

A Final Word
With or without Jesus, the winter holiday season would still exist and thrive because it is a down and opportune time. Nature can’t be cultivated at this time in most regions of the northern hemisphere. The crops have all been harvested. Cold weather has taken hold along with the long, dark days. What else is there to do but relax and revel with friends and family? Jesus is most definitely not the reason for the season. To insist he is, rejects the pluralism that makes this world so very beautiful.

Contradictions: Sports Lovers Who Espouse One World

A Prius rolls up to the local food co-op. A bumper sticker in the bottom left corner of the back window brightly blazes the words "ONE WORLD." On the right side of the window, a die-cut football helmet with a particularly aggressive team logo proudly declares who the vehicle's owner supports. The driver steps out of his hybrid. His hair is cut short, bleached and angrily spiked with so much gel it's flaking in the breeze. He wears a football jersey that matches the team sticker on the back of his window.

He runs into his neighbor in the meat section. His fence mate attempts to spark a conversation about how great it is that the co-op provides nothing but locally raised, free-range chicken. The jersey-clad man stops his neighbor mid-sentence to rib him about the neighbor's football team's surmounting losses on the field. The neighbor rolls his eyes, dismisses the sporty man's derision and resumes his original topic of conversation. The sporty guy waves off his neighbor and exclaims for all to hear that he wouldn't want to talk about football either if he rooted for losers.

Flash forward to a day of the week in which none of the man's favorite sports are telecast. The man is now at the local gym. He's now sporting his favorite basketball team's jersey. He resists the urge to dribble the basketball he carries as he scans the workout room for someone he knows. Then he spots him. His workplace's sole "black" man. This man is in the middle of an intense set of bench presses as the sporty guy approaches him.

No, the guy doing the workout is not interested in playing basketball. He's in the middle of his workout routine. The sporty guy doesn't buy it. The workout guy is just afraid he won't live up to the hype that his skin tone conveys. That's what the sporty fellow spews as he dodges and weaves around the guy working out. The guy with the barbell rolls his eyes at the accusation. The tank-top jersey guy chalks up the other man's refusal to play as a victory. His coworker knows a winner when he sees one. Then he proceeds to hit the court to play a game of one-on-three against some middle schoolers. When he beats them, he declares another victory. This time it's a point for the "old" guy.

Everywhere he goes, this sports lover creates divisions. If you root for the same team as him, play the same games as him, talk about the same divisive sports as him, you are part of his "us" clan. If you don't like sports, if you don't accept his challenges, you are one of "them." The lines are clear with him. There is no gray, only black or white, only with him or against him.

He spews this your team/my team attitude, mostly under the guise of good clean fun, but always while in close proximity to some piece of media that exclaims "one love" or "one world." Never does he recognize the contradiction. It's difficult to call him a hypocrite, because he's unaware of what he's doing. He wants to believe that a world can be at one with each other, but he loves sports too much to look deeply at how fully it contradicts the very message of unity that his bumper stickers and occasional t-shirts espouse.

His favorite sport makes this contradiction all the more stark. He's always ready for some football. The months between the Pro Bowl and preseason play make life seem less vibrant, less worthy of his exhilaration. There's no strife, no division to spur on any excitement. Sure, there's baseball, but that sport's so dull and so devoid of any hard-hitting action that the very notion of its existence seems ludicrous to him. He needs it brutal. NASCAR fills that void on occasion, when the driving results in some nasty pile ups. Still, it's not the same. He needs something reminiscent of battle, and football fulfills his need without fail.

For him, nothing quite beats jumping up and down screaming at the altar of his television. His tie-dye Bob Marley tapestry sprawled wide as a backdrop with the words "One Love" beaming down upon the clash of helmets and grunts.

Blog Action Day - A Story of Charity

Although I no longer celebrate, the greatest Christmas I remember was also the bleakest. Growing up, my family was poor, dirt poor at times. On top of that, my mom was a multiple divorcee, which often left her to act as sole provider.

Many a time, my family subsisted on beans, hamburger meat and salmon. I grew up in Alaska, so even though we didn't always catch them ourselves, people were always gifting us with fish. Well, the year of the Christmas in question, we even lacked those basics. My mom was stubborn, refusing to admit we were poor, refusing to accept handouts or to apply for food stamps.

Christmas was fast approaching and my mom couldn't even put food on our table. Her stress was palpable. Our home was on edge, and the youngest siblings consistently asking when we were going to see Santa only added to the tension. As the oldest, I felt for my mom. She worked for 12-14 hours a day, and still she didn't make enough to keep the bills up to date or to fill the fridge. In my mind, there would be no Christmas that year. Then a miracle happened.

I woke to watch my brothers and sisters while my mom went to work. She was running late and was yelling about making sure the dishes and laundry got done before she returned from work. She dashed out the door barking some other last minute orders, when she stumbled over something. About to yell at us for leaving our stuff in front of the door, she stopped and gasped, clutching her hands to her mouth. Tears swelled in her eyes as she turned to look at me.

She signaled me to come to her, to help her with what caused her to stumble. I joined her to find four bags stuffed with groceries, enough to fill our fridge and more. There was even a turkey. Suddenly, thanks to the kindness of an anonymous soul, Christmas didn't seem so bleak.

What Would You Ask Palin?

Looks like the McCain campaign isn't entirely convinced of their pick for John's running mate, first-term Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

According to an AP story posted on Yahoo! News, Palin has merely repeated the "greatest hits" from her acceptance speech given last week in Minnesota. She has said little else, and the media has not been granted any real Q&A time with her.

In contrast, Democratic Vice Presidential hopeful Joe Biden has addressed the media countless times, usually answering all questions thrown his way.

Why is Sarah Palin not allowed to stand up and speak for herself? What skeletons or otherwise embarassing mannerisms or philosophies are the McCain campaign afraid of leaking to the press? Do they not trust her to give quality or acceptable responses to the media's questions?

What ever their reasons, Palin's handlers need to let her loose, to let her step up to the plate and show she is capable of handling tough questions. It is part of the job she's vying for after all.

If you had the chance to ask Governor Palin one question, what would it be?

Changing the Tack of My Rants

My posts here can sound pretty negative at times. I admit that nothing gets me writing quite as quickly as something that has set me off. Yet, I'm not what you would typically label a negative person.

Ironically, though, it is the things I post that are rife with negativity that tend to attract the most attention. Well... that and a crafty headline.

As to be expected with such posts, those who feel passionately in the opposite way usually have something really negative to say in return. I posted something that someone discovered via Google. They found my rant petty, but didn't catch the greater question I was posing. Well, I went back and read and re-read my post to see if I really was coming off as petty and mean-spirited as the person suggested. I wasn't.

Yet, somehow, I lost her to the rant. My writing, although clear and concise, evoked too strong of a negative emotion that distracted the reader from my main message (even though I ended with very clear questions). I was pretty irritated that they didn't actually get out of the post what I hoped they would get out of it. But the writer in me told me to take a breath.

This person's comment stood as a signal that even in my most cooled of rants, I can still lose someone to my emotions. Maybe I did drop the ball on that one and lost my readers in a jealous rampage. One things for sure, to this one reader at least, I failed in getting across my true message and call for dialog.

So, I have decided to put a much greater demand on myself. I am removing myself from my writing (for the most part, at least). Meaning, I plan to write in a distant and objective voice. My plan for all rants in the future is to write them as satire, to write them as if they are slated for publication on "The Onion."

You ready to laugh? After that last round of comments, I sure am! Welcome to the bitingly satirical Rogue Writing.

Some Upcoming Stories:

• Berkeley Passes "One-World" Legislation
• Nordic Man Sues Vatican for Reparations
• Wayne & Stark Tried for Embezzlement
• Marketers Lead Lemmings to Bridge to Nowhere
• Ad Revenue Soars in Recession

2 Firsts, No Matter Who Wins the General Election

I am not voting for McCain. I refuse. But his pick in Vice Presidential candidates is exhilarating. McCain announced Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate.

This little-known politician rounds off McCain's ticket in a way that is going to make it more difficult for Obama to win over swing voters. In choosing a woman running mate, I am certain that McCain is hoping to win over some angry Hillary Clinton supporters with his veep pick.

I have little positive to say about McCain, but I thank him for his pick. In choosing Palin as his vice-presidential candidate, he has created a win-win situation for all American voters who want to see a change in the "pedigree" of the White House administration.

My top concerns with McCain's pick? Nearly complete inexperience on this Alaskan Governor's part and the opening of ANWR. Alaska is a state most heavily tied into oil production, after all.

Obama Had Me At Langston Hughes

Barack Obama gave his candidacy acceptance speech a couple hours ago. As I shared my opinions of his speech with my wife, I wondered what the media would take from his speech. What would the headlines read?

Yahoo! posted an article from the Associated Press. The writers note that:

On a night 45 years after Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his "I have a Dream Speech," Obama made no overt mention of his own race.

Pardon me? What is his race? Remember that he is half white, too. I feel that this statement reeks of the "one drop rule." I wonder if he struggled with checking boxes on forms, or if he just always checked African American without giving it a second thought.

It's interesting, too, to note that the Wikipedia page that the details the one drop rule opens references Langston Hughes response to the odd rule:

You see, unfortunately, I am not black. There are lots of different kinds of blood in our family. But here in the United States, the word "Negro" is used to mean anyone who has any Negro blood at all in his veins. In Africa, the word is more pure. It means all Negro, therefore black. I am brown.

Why is this interesting in the context of the Obama speech? Well in it, he refers to "dreams deferred." This is classic Langston Hughes and it speaks miles to the overall sentiment of our country — regardless of race.

Dream Deferred

What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load
Or does it explode?

This poem spoke to me from the first time I read it. My life so often would feel like it was just one long string of dreams deferred until "it just sags / like a heavy load." I've moved past most of that now, but I immediately saw the connection he was drawing to the current state of our country.

I actually learned about "Dream Deferred" through a play by Lorraine Hansberry called "Raisin in the Sun." The (possibly unintended) reference to this play packed an extra wallop, as it continues to be a steady favorite in theater productions and represents some firsts. The play was the first Broadway play written by a black woman and with the first black director of a show on Broadway.
'
The nuance of this (un)intentional refererence invokes the spirits of two African Americans who left a legacy, as well as the beloved Langston Hughes. And that's where Obama had me... with Langston Hughes.

Now, I know that I've pussyfooted around the whole un/intentional thing. Well, I'll take a stance and say Obama intended to invoke "Raisin in the Sun." Why...?

While pursuing my English degree, my lit class read the play. As with any lit class, we had a theme around which we would discuss the book. In the case of this one, we discussed The American Dream!

That's right. Did you happen to hear any overt references to The American Dream throughout the rest of Obama's speech? I think I remember a few. The synchronicity of it all is slowly giving me chills. Here is a person who I relate to more than any other I can ever remember, because he was raised by his hard-working mother, his father was absent, he rose out of poverty, and he's been married about as long as me.

Yet despite all our similarities, Obama had me at Langston Hughes.

Should We Respect Our Elders?

Do the elderly really deserve our respect and admiration?
I was taught this my whole life, and believe it or not, I continue to hear this sentiment. Yet, "respecting your elders" seems to contradict another saying: "Respect is something you earn."

Have the elderly earned the youth's respect?
Before I continue, I must point out that I'm not talking about a general respect that you should show all living creatures. I'm talking about looking to the elder generation for their wisdom that has come from a life full of rich experiences.

With all our current crises ranging from healthcare to global warming, though, I wonder if the elder generation deserves our unquestioning respect. I say "no," our elders let us down in almost every way, especially in terms of our environment. They are squarely responsible for the mess we're in.

Plastic shopping bags
They are slowly being banned, starting with California's recent legislation. I remember when plastic bags first hit the shopping scene. They were all the rage, and still are.

As a Blockbuster customer, I am often asked if I would like a bag for my movie(s). Every time I'm asked this question, I chuckle. I mean, who would actually request a bag for their DVD? With no one in line behind me, I decided to interview the employee:

Me: "Do many people actually ask for a bag?"
Her: "Not many. Usually only if they have a ton of movies and some candy or soda."
Me: "Hmmm, do you ever have people who want a bag for one or two movies?"
Her: "Yeah, but not many."
Me: "Is there any specific demographic associated with those who do want a bag?"
Her: "What do you mean?"
Me: "You know... like an age, gender, or race."
Her: "Why do you want to know?"
Me: "Just wondering if my suspicions are correct."
Her: "Who do you think asks the most?"
Me: (Laughing) "Ah, I asked first..."
Her: (Looking around then pointing at an elderly man in the Drama section) "Mostly people like that."
Me: "Don't worry. Your secret's safe with me."

Just as I suspected. The very same people I'm still told to this day to respect are stuck in ecologically destructive patterns. Yet, these are the people I'm supposed to respect?

The rampant materialism, the propagation of a disposable society, these things epitomize the Depression Era and Baby Boomer generations. The Baby Boomers are slowly coming around to changing their ways, but those from the Depression Era ironically shun anything labeled as good for the Earth.

As with any demographic, there are certainly exceptions. In fact, without the radicals of past generations, we might not have progressed as far as we have. But in general, the elderly have squandered their respect quotient long ago. What wisdom do we have to gain from a culture based on rampant materialism and voracious homogeneity?

Respect the elderly? I don't think so, at least not until they start showing the youth some in return.

Some Elders We Should Respect

• Allen Ginsberg - for changing and opening up the world of poetry for all
• Noam Chomsky - for expanding our understanding of linguistics
• Ralph Nader - for championing a change in our environmental policies
• Rosa Parks - for challenging the racial status quo
• Jane Fonda - for persisting to push for global causes
• Ilona Staller - for pushing our conceptions of moral backgrounds
  

Searchme.com Assessment — Addendum Stacks

In my assessment of searchme.com's use as a search engine, I completely overlooked one of the most innovative aspects of their site... Stacks!

Instead of trying to explain what stacks are and how to use them, I refer you to their information page about stacks. Make sure to scroll to the bottom of the page to watch the video. To check out the stack info page, click here.

Here's the "Rogue Writers" stack I created while testing out the stack feature.

Searchme

Maximize stack view

Also, a bit thanks to the folks at Searchme.com for taking note of my assessment.

Talking about Osam... Oops, I mean, Obama

News groups continue to slash their staff writers and editors by the bushel. I can't help but wonder how often (if elected president) Barack Obama will be accidentally referenced as "Osama." Can you see the headlines already?

"President Osama Obama Approves Ax Tax Cuts for Poor"

Should the US President Have Served in the Military?

Despite calls from his supporters, McCain continues to point out that he has served in the military and Obama has not.

Does it really matter if the future president has military experience?
Look at Bush. Sure, he served in the guard, but he doesn't have any measurable experience. While our boys were getting blown to bits in Vietnam, he was having a grand time in the Gulf of Mexico flying fighter jets and going AWOL. Yet, here he is - Commander in Chief.

Then there's McCain, a five-year prisoner of war. He was a victim of terrible atrocities, and I commend him for choosing to remain a POW so that his fellow soldiers could be released instead. Yet, he is a victim. It's always a bad idea to put the victim in charge, because their decisions won't be balanced or objective. It's like the female rape victim who will forever view every male as a potential rapist.

Despite these points, there's something bigger at stake when a nation of voters demand that their president have military experience.

To vote for a presidential candidate because he or she has military experience is to say that we are a warring (vs. peaceful) nation.

Why should a peaceful nation need a soldier as their president? Look at all other nations who choose to vote in a military commander or POW as their top-elected officials. How does that typically turn out? Can you say Peron, Castro, Stalin, Mugabe, Hitler...?

The point is this:
An understanding of how you can most effectively deploy the military is more important than having served in it.

Afghanistan or Iraq - Which really poses the bigger threat? Which is home to the Taliban and al-Qaida?

Obama knows where the real danger lives? McCain is too blinded by all the oil in Iraq to see the truth - even if he won't admit it.

Why McCain Will Lose

This post may sound a bit overly optimistic, but bear with me...

Why do so many people flock to Obama? Well, it's quite simple really; Obama is running on a campaign of change and hope.

The majority of US citizens no longer want our troops fighting in the Middle East. Those who do believe we should continue fighting tend to bow to the idea that our enemies are not in Iraq, but in the hopelessly under-soldiered country of Afghanistan. (Note: Ignorant exceptions do exist.)

Stepping beyond his initial cry to pull all troops out of the Middle East, Obama has listened to military commanders and consultants and conceded that a shift in our troops to Afghanistan is needed.

In the meantime, McCain is running on a double campaign of "steady on" and mudslinging.

Yet it won't be his views on the Middle East that destroys McCain's campaign. So far, he has parroted the policies of the current Administration.
It's clear most US citizens want a clear divergence from Bush Co.

In short, McCain offers zero change. Just look at how he's running his campaign. He offers no solutions, only blame. What's worse, he spends too much time trying to smear and mock Obama's campaign efforts and not enough time solidifying his own ticket.

Voters have had enough of politics as usual. They want the candidates to tell them what they plan to change, not how their opponent's policies will result in the complete devastation of our society.

McCain needs to start focusing on his own message, to start telling us how he's going to create measurable change in our nation. So far, he's fallen far short of anything even closely resembling such a campaign.

This post was inspired by an AP article titled "McCain rejects 'audacity of hopelessness' for Iraq" and was composed using ScribeFire.

Organic Does NOT Equal Bigger

My duplicitous neighbor proved his "sheeple" status the other day. No, he's not a Republican screaming to open offshore drilling. He would like to think of himself as quite liberal. After all, everything in his garden is organic.

Here's his statement that made me want to "baaaa" in his general direction:

"My strawberries are all so small. I don't understand where I'm going wrong. I used all organic soils and plants. It looks nice and rich, but they're sooo small."

It took all my strength not to point out how misguided he is in regards to "organic" practices. The main principle behind organic agriculture is quite simple: No pesticides, herbicides or GMO is used in the cultivation of plants. That's it!

My neighbor's statement had me wondering if he's ever shopped for organic produce. Walk through any store that offers organic produce and you note a marked difference in size and appearance. Apples, strawberries, cucumbers, asparagus — they are all smaller than their non-organic relations.

In addition, most organic produce isn't winning any beauty contests. They are usually malformed and contain the occasional signs of pest consumption. That's the trade-off for choosing to eat nutritious fruits and vegetables devoid of nasty chemical treatment.

How is it that so many sheeple have latched onto this notion that organic means that all aspects of the product are better?

Note: Yes, liberals can most definitely be "sheeple." A sheeple is one who blindly follows the flock, believing that the wisdom of their flock is infallibly the right one.

Are Microsoft Jokes Old Hat?

“Microsoft sucks!”

Time and time again, you hear the same old stabs at all things produced by Bill Gates’ mega-corporation.

There are countless jokes about how poorly Microsoft performs, with claims of systems freezing up abounding. Mac users love to complain about how slow MS operating systems run. Linux/Unix users like to say that MS operating systems are too bogged down with extraneous and redundant systems checks.

There’s one joke in particular that continues to make its rounds. It goes as follows:

At a [not-so] recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the
computer industry with the auto industry and stated, "If GM had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating, "If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
   
2. Every time they painted new lines on the road, you would have to buy a new car.
   
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue.
   
4. For some reason you would simply accept this.
   
5. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
   
6. Only one person at a time could use the car unless you bought "CarNT," but then you would have to buy more seats.
   
7. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive -- but it would only run on five percent of the roads.
   
8. The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "general protect ion fault" warning light.
   
9. The airbag system would ask, "Are you sure?" before deploying.
   
10. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the antenna.
    
11. GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand McNally Road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither need nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50 percent or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.
    
12. Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
    
13. You'd have to press the "start" button to turn the engine off.
    

---

Heard this one before? Thought so. This joke was obviously written when Macs were superior and Windows ’95 still floundered. Let me address each of these point-by-point, based on my own experience:

1. “For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.”

COUNTERPOINT: After moving from Windows ’95 to XP, I have rarely if ever experienced a crash. If I did have a crash, it was a hardware error or a virus. Now, Macs, hmmm, I’ve had the extreme misfortune of having to use Macs at most publishing companies, and they were constantly crashing.

2. “Every time they painted new lines on the road, you would have to buy a new car.”

COUNTERPOINT: Although this used to be true, all updates for legitimate copies of a Windows system are 100% free! Are all the updates timely and do they all improve your system? Not always.

3. “Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue.“

COUNTERPOINT: This is really an expansion of point 1. It’s been forever since I’ve had to restart my Windows XP. Macs on the other hand? Are you familiar with the spinning wheel of death? Most Mac users are, and they typically deal with them at least every other day. The only course of action to resolve the wheel? Unplug the Mac, which is horribly detrimental to the system.

4. “For some reason you would simply accept this.”

COUNTERPOINT: What choice do you have, regardless of the system you’re using?

5. “Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.”

COUNTERPOINT: Once again, another outdated comment and repeat of point 1 and 3. The writer of this joke is a bit of a broken record, eh?

6. “Only one person at a time could use the car unless you bought "CarNT," but then you would have to buy more seats.”

COUNTERPOINT: Eh? Definitely an outdated observation. All Windows systems since NT offer the ability to set up multiple user accounts.

7. “Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive -- but it would only run on five percent of the roads.”

COUNTERPOINT: “Sorry, Mac lovers. Why do Apple products run quicker? It’s because they don’t have all the systems checks in place. If you’re not checking to make sure that your system is running correctly and virus-free upon opening, of course it will run faster. All it’s going to take is for one Mac-hating proficient hacker to destroy every Mac OS out there. I’ll take the extra 10-30 second delay for the sake of security, thanks. As for powered by the sun? Is there any reason in hell you should have to send your iPod back to the shop to replace the battery or that your iPhone has bubbling screens and run off a monopolistic relationship with AT&T? And they call Bill Gates an evil proprietary ass.

8. “The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "general protection fault" warning light.”

COUNTERPOINT: Yep, another outdated comment. As a Windows user, when was the last time you received this warning? If ever?

9. “The airbag system would ask, "Are you sure?" before deploying.”

COUNTERPOINT: I see their point here. If you need emergency defenses to deploy, you don’t want to have the system ask you for permission to do so. However, I’ve not seen a Windows system ever have to take this step. I personally like the “Are you sure?” step, especially during the trash/recycle step. Unlike a Mac, that doesn’t ask and permanently deletes the program or folder with no recourse for recovery.

10. “Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the antenna.”

COUNTERPOINT: CTRL + ALT + DEL? Wish Mac offered this function. Is this really so complicated that it’s worthy of a stab? At least you can use this feature without having to turn off the whole system like on Macs.

11. “GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand McNally Road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither need nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50 percent or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.”

COUNTERPOINT: Hmmm, not sure what in the world this refers to. Definitely outdated though.

12. “Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.”

COUNTERPOINT: Isn’t this true with any system? In fact, it’s true with most all new or revised products. That’s just the way it works. Users hated XP when it first came out, but now, they scream about how they want their XP’s back and to do away with the glitch-riddled Vista (which has taken large steps to mimic the supposedly superior function and feel of the Mac OSX.)

13. “You'd have to press the "start" button to turn the engine off.”

COUNTERPOINT: As a wordsmith, I appreciate this irony of this point. How would you name this though? Would you create a separate “Turn Off” button outside of the Start Menu? Suggestions for improvement will always reign supreme.

---

Conclusion:
If you’re going to cycle the same joke around, make sure it’s humor is timeless.

An All-Too Similar Post:
A Programmer Cliché

Listen up, PETA. Eating Veggies Is Murder!

I've recently learned some pretty lousy things about PETA.

• PETA kills most of the animals they "rescue."
• PETA calls for the euthanasia of all Pitbulls and Rotweillers because they deem them dangerously aggressive.
• PETA is actually more concerned with pushing a vegan agenda than in saving the lives of animals.

I'm not going to say that PETA hasn't done some terrific things, but the last point is very hypocritical. PETA likes to run on the platform that it is important for us to honor all life, yet they promote veganism.

Studies in the seventies revealed that although plants are not able to speak to us, their "energy fields" tell us a different story. One story (not available on the web, sorry) details an experiment in which researchers strapped some monitors like the ones hospital patients get to the leaves of banana tree plant. The place they set up the experiment was in a shared office space. The two co-workers had to take on an emotional role: one loving and gentle, the other angry and threatening. The monitor responded to each of their presences in distinctly different ways.

When the kind worker entered, the plants monitor surged in a smooth and pleasant way. In fact, the plant even seemed to anticipate the kind worker's eventual arrival. When the angry worker would enter, though, the plant's readings indicated panic.

The angry worker was instructed to carry a grudge against the plant which he would frequently vocalize. One day, the angry worker got so angry at the plant, he grabbed a pair of scissors and threatened to chop down the plant altogether. The plant's readings went out the roof, climbing with each increase in the worker's anger. The kind worker stopped him, then spoke soothing words to the plant and it's panicked readings dropped back to a place of peace.

Now, these readings could be due to all sorts of variables, but it would seem as though plants do indeed possess some sort of "conscious being." With that said, how can PETA claim to want to honor all life yet live out their lives eating plants.

Now, I know, we all have to eat something. But, I guess that's my point. Life is dependent on the death of other life. That's the way of the Universe, at least on our plane of existence. It's called the circle of life. One thing must die so that another may live. It's the harsh reality of our world. Just because something doesn't have eyes or move on its own doesn't mean it isn't a living being.

Is Wordpress Going Out Like GeoCities?

A recent guest post on ProBloggger compares the Wordpress Multiuser (MU) software to the very hot Ning social network software. Here's the list:

	Wordpress MU	NING
Installation & Set up	Need your own server space, php, mySQL	Complete hosted solution with no cost for the basics
User Tools	Nothing beyond the base Wordpress admin, unless you install or program them yourself	Comes with base tool set, RSS feeds, forums, ability to create groups, user profile page with comment wall, etc.
Customization	Full access to open source code but must know how to program	Drag and drop customization for basics but can request access to code for more advanced control
Message boards	Not integrated but can install BBpress and share user database for integration.	Included but can not customize unless you request access to code
Chat	Not integrated	Not integrated without 3rd party widget
User Pages	Users have control over blog and can add posts as well as pages	Users have no ability to add their own pages
Friends Feature	Not integrated	Included in basic solution
Community Messaging	Not Integrated	Included in basic solution

To read the remainder of the list, click here.

As you can see, Ning just makes life uber-easy for those hoping to create a social network. This reminds me of when Blogger hit the scene with a force. Many folks had no idea how easy blogging made life for those who regularly update content. If you didn't need a huge series of pages, blogging made for a quick way to provide slick looking content. Wordpress was a decent solution for those with more advanced web skills to create multiple pages, but I can't help but feel that WP is actually a website application with a built in blog vs. a blog with extra features.

Of course, Blogger was free just like the then prevalent free Yahoo! website builder known as GeoCities. Yet, GeoCities required extensive log-in time. On my computer, it would take me close to five minutes just to reach a point where I could begin working with my site. Then there's the way you go about uploading images, files, and publishing your content. And let's not forget about the accursed Applet that glitches up every chance it gets.

For the expert GeoCities user, they didn't see any need to change. They knew the ins-and-outs, so there was no need to learn anything new. Wordpress users seem to have this same attitude. They've learned how to manipulate the software. They know all the tricks, so no need to switch over to something simpler, something free, something that allows you to customize with ease.

Now, I don't predict any mass movement away from Wordpress anytime soon, at least not from their blogging software. Yet, don't be surprised if Wordpress's MU software ends up on the scrap heap within the next couple years thanks to the awesome folks at Ning!

* This post created using ScribeFire.

Classic Rock Is Not For Rednecks

I've recently started to listen to the classic rock station again. I used to be a rabid rock listener until the mid-1990s. I stopped listening partly because of the fact I'd heard every song on the station's playlist at least a couple hundred times. Mostly I ceased because I couldn't stand the commercials any longer.

Well, I've ventured back into the world of commercial radio. Don't ask me why, but I'm there. It's really cool that I get to play the same game of "Quick, name this group!" with my sons that my uncle played with me. It's even more fun to share some music trivia with them... but one thing about the current classic rockers confuses me.

How did the classic rock audience become so closed minded? I'm serious here.

Maybe it's not the audience. Maybe it's the DJ's or the programmers or the big guys sitting in their New York offices. Whatever it is, I don't understand how it's all about macho rednecks. It's all about monster trucks, rodeos and being a "real" American. It's about being a redneck, as though Lynard Skynard is the only band that ever mattered. Just because the hugely popular "My Name Is Earl" chooses to color its show about white trash with classic rock tunes doesn't mean the spirit of classic rock is riddled with closed-minded idiots.

Think of all the top names from the rock scenes of the Sixties, Seventies and Eighties. Jimi Hendrix, Bob Dylan, Rush, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd... It was all about challenging the status quo, about trying new and exciting things, things that pushed both musician and listener to the edge and beyond. Somewhere along the line, though, the clueless frat boy and good ole boy made their way into the classic rock psyche and we get to hear ignorant-ass remarks from DJ's like the one I heard the other day:

"Apparently Robert Plant's got together with some of bluegrass people to make an album. Guess he must be hard up these days."

Are you kidding me? Has this guy ever listened to some of the mandolin-rich tunes that Zep produced. Probably not; he just plays what's on the list. That "bluegrass people" is a hugely successful person known as Alison Krauss. Ever hear of her? If you haven't, odds are you're living in a bubble.

Use Mind Maps and Graphs as Illustrations Only

Mind maps and graphs are overused these days. Most who create and use them to illustrate their point to others usually act as though they are the be-all-beat-all answer to hitting the nail on the head.

The problem is that those who insist on mind maps think that the entire world thinks visually like they do.

In the world of education, teachers and tutors are taught that there are two types of learners: textual and visual. Some people learn better via words, while others learn better via images.

Talk to a visual learner, and they will insist that mind maps are the best way to illustrate their point. Here's the problem with most graphs and maps: They require explanation!

Give most people concise and effective text, and they can move from one explanation to the next on their own. Give most people a graph, especially the busy ones that the visual teacher prefers, and their audience spends most of their time trying to figure out what it means.

Mind maps and graphs are excellent ways to illustrate your text, but seldom is the time that they are effective on their own.

Killing The Tiger! Gen X Destroys News "Experts"

The following is an exercise in visual rhetoric...
Ironically, it is the newsprint publications that are reporting on their own demise. Subscriptions and advertising revenue continue to drop for nearly every major and minor newspaper and magazine. Speculation abounds in regards to reasons for the plummet of these scions of current events.

Most notably, disinterested young readers and those who turn to the internet for their news are cited as the main cause for the decline. Although, not untrue, these "causes" don't dive deep enough to hit at the heart of the "problem": Gen Xer's!

Let's take a bold step forward here, shall we?
Generation X is known for turning their backs on authority. In turn, they teach this to their children, who are now hitting high school and college. These students, whether they exhibit the trait or not, have learned not to take anything at face value. They learned that you must evaluate the source of the story. I may give Gen Y too much credit here, but you have to admit that they tend to eschew much of what Baby Boomers declare as proper.

Suits are a prime example of something that both Gen X and Gen Y have (mostly) refused to accept as signs of expertise. Just like with glasses, you can throw a suit on nearly anyone to create the appearance of intelligence. After all, don't the experts wear suits? Not anymore!

Compare the photos on the official SXSW site to the photos from The Week's Opinion Awards. Notice how the current experts are younger, and despite their still predominately male role call, they wear casual (not Casual Friday) clothing like raggedy t-shirts and sport messy doo's. If they do wear anything resembling a suit, it's jazzed up or the wearer tosses the tie and blazer.

Now, compare those photos to the Opinion Awards. Once again, predominately male but all Anglo in descent. Also all wearing suits and all over age 55. These are the supposed "experts," the ones with all the answers. This is where Gen X steps... time and time again, these established experts have misreported or served as nothing more than mouthpieces for corporations or world governments. They have repeatedly discredited themselves in the eyes of the people, and the Middle East debacle only furthers to destroy their credibility.

At first, the masses had chosen to label anyone who called out these "experts" as whack-a-doo's. Then, ironically as more news came out about the prevalent deception in news reporting in the same papers that initially reported the deceptions, more people became aware of how untrustworthy the news can be.

Now, we all know that sheeple (people who are nothing more than sheep following the flock) are still in plenty across the world. Yet, I think that most of those sheeple may just be groups of scared individuals. They don't want to believe that they are fed lies on a daily basis. They believe in the establishment and long for the days of McCarthy, whether they admit it or not.

Magazines like The Week hold the best cards in the deck, in that they don't take responsibility. They gather differing opinions then present them in a back-and-forth debate style in their weekly magazine. It's up to the reader to decide which side to take, or hopefully, to develop a completely new take on the issues they present. Yet, The Week hasn't figured out, based on their Opinion Awards, that suits don't build authority.

Imagine the day when most people openly laugh at those who choose to don their Armani before spewing their supposed authority.