Serrated Prose

Religion, any religion, is absolutely indefensible. After many hours spent listening and reading arguments from True Believers, I've come to realize that this utterly irrational stance cannot be justified or defended. The funny thing is, the True Believers know it. They know it the same way we fully expect our feet to hit the ground as we rise out of bed in the morning; it's something so basely fundamental, that we know it without being cognizant of it. It's the subconscious way we speak and understand our native language, while every other language sounds like silly gibberish. Deep inside most people is a creature lurking in the deep night of the unconscious and that creature keeps the secret motivation of Pascal's Wager away from the conscious mind. For clarity, Pascal's Wager refers to Blaise Pascal, stating that (paraphrased) it's better to believe in a god and be wrong than not believe and be wrong. He was speaking specifically of the god Yaweh and Yahw...

Picture it: Germany, 1932. Hitler gives a rousing speech about nationalism, rebuilding the crushed economy, putting people back to work, and, oh, it's the Jews' fault that things are in such a state. While running for office, Hitler privately told nervous parliament members that his rants about Jews were just to get the crowd riled up. He reassured them that he wasn't the mass-murdering bigot that he turned out to be. He lost the election, but was appointed as chancellor in 1933. Now, I know what you're thinking... well, pretty sure, anyway. You're thinking this is going to be another half-assed comparison to Donald Trump, right? And if you voted for the guy, you'll think I'm brainwashed (and possibly stop reading here). And if you didn't vote for the guy, you'll start getting that uncomfortable feeling of dread by holding the images of these two men in your mind at the same time. Well, rest assured, Trumpite, I'm not saying your man is the equ...

I started this blog a while ago to get more accustomed to jotting down my thoughts. It's mostly a secret blog, which I understand is incredibly bizarre -- something essentially anonymous on the most public forum ever known. I also walk a fine line: I don't reveal too many personal details and certainly don't get overly introspective to the point of self-pity. But truth be told, self-pity was likely the catalyst for starting these blogs. For many years, I've wondered what the term "failed writer" meant. How could someone fail at something done for such personal enjoyment? Typically, there isn't a ton of money to be made in writing of any kind; it's one of those skills absolutely anyone with a sixth-grade education could do. Most popular novels are written at a sixth-grade level for a reason. So, this blog was my exploration into the status of "failed writer." I wanted to know if I had joined that illustrious group of downtrodden, world-w...

I used to wonder how Nazism took hold. Learning about it in school forty years after the end of World War II, I couldn't fathom how people could do such things to each other. I now know it comes down to fear. We can get smothered in fear and then wear it like bravado to make us into proud monsters, striking at imagined enemies and each other. Fear is the easy path, compared to the thorny way of reason. It’s easy to surrender to fear and make bold cowards of us all, cringing behind whomever has the loudest, angriest voice. We let the anger seep into us and fill our thoughts, because it becomes too difficult to puzzle out the answers on our own. It turns vigilance into paranoia. It makes good people commit murders, wars and genocides… and wonder for generations how we could do such horrible things to each other. This all comes to mind because of Facebook, of all places. Several people I know are rather hardcore conservatives who have been enamored with Donald Trump and ...

Is there a word for prideful, ostentatious ignorance? I can't think of one. If there is such a word, it could be applied to so many things in the human experience. Most of these things relate to personal beliefs, but something in particular has been troubling me for years: Ironically, the advent of the Internet has proliferated this Victorian-level distrust of science. Over a medium that is purely a monument to science, ignorance is proudly exclaimed and tries its best to refute anything discovered by the scientific method. I don't dismiss such stubborn ignorance because I understand where it comes from. To those who always believed that science was the "last word" in everything, suddenly being thrust into the knowledge and rumor overload of the Internet can cause the less well-read people to retreat into a shell of "trusting their gut feelings" for everything from aerospace to religion. Mostly, this is harmless belief in nonsense that devolves into dead-e...

Thank goodness the majority of Americans are happy that DOMA was  defeated  by the Supreme Court (now called SCOTUS by the too-cool-for-school crowd), but here I'd like to address the detractors and their arguments against allowing homosexuals to marry. I'll cover the most common ones I've heard, the first is drawn from a woman I just heard call into a talk radio station: "What is marriage, now? This will open the door to all kinds of unions. Can you marry a child, now? Can you marry a sister? Can you marry a dog? Can you marry many wives or husbands? Where does it end?" This argument boils down to "I'm so confused! The world doesn't make sense anymore!" I'm sure this was the general sentiment among conservatives when the Supreme Court allowed interracial marriage in 1967 -- but for the sake of clarity, let me break it down for those who make this argument: Marriage is still monogamy between humans who are no closer in relation than first...

Children are a marvelous thing to behold. Not only because of the obvious willingness to believe anything and thoughtlessly depend on adults for just about everything -- but because we were all like that at one time. A time so long ago, for some, that the memories seem like a fairy tale told to us about some stranger in an imaginary land. We believed everything we were told. We could believe in dragons, ghosts, superheroes, and even altruism. But then we get older and reality is the mother of all wet blankets. People really aren't so nice and strangers are rarely looking out for anyone but themselves and are, at worst, nefarious people who want to somehow take advantage of us. The world really isn't a magical place; there are no dragons or superheroes and altruism always seems to have an ulterior motive. I didn't forget about ghosts. Some people jealously cling to the belief that spirits linger and watch us -- mostly because, by nature, ghosts are invisible, unlike dragon...

At the risk of putting up a corny Thanksgiving ramble, I'm going to try to accentuate the positive things we have. So often we hear about horrors or the doom lurking just around the corner. Doom and fear sell. Humans crave it. We LOVE bad news. We all have experienced a touch of  schadenfreude , from time to time. To memorialize our recent fear, currently the conservatives are lamenting the "loss of America" to Obama's recent winning a second term as president. Somehow, America is now going to dissolve into the sea. Also, in January, is the "Fiscal Cliff," when all sorts of automatic spending cuts and increased taxes will be triggered -- a measure created because in 2011, the hard-core conservatives balked on raising the debt ceiling as has been done dozens of times in the past decade. So, they made a stand and found out that stomping your feet and just saying "No," actually has consequences: America's AAA rating was lowered to AA (by only on...

The OWS movement is joyously celebrating it's one-year anniversary  with what amounts to a public party trying very hard to look like a protest. In short, one year later, nothing new. They still have no message except "Those guys have more money than we do," all under the dubious moniker of "We are the 99%," which does little more than prove most of the protesters skipped the Statistics chapter in math class. The sad part of all this is that they would have a point, if they had the mental fortitude to get organized beyond using social media to gather. OWS is really little more than an extended "flash mob" who shows up and then decides why they're there. In their confusion, they've decided to define themselves by what they hate: people with money. Like I said earlier, they'd have a point if they could actually formulate it in an intelligent way: The people at the top of the economic pyramid are becoming fewer while those at the bottom are ...

Wow, totally stunned. Not much to say here.... As one Canadian put it, "Congratulations, US. Welcome to the developed world!" I completely agree. It's time the US moved away from the social Darwinism model of "Survival of the Richest" and move to a more civil and just model. The law still needs tweaking and will be debated for years to come, but for all those out there who have been bankrupted by healthcare, this is a step in the right direction. For the detractors, here are some of the obvious arguments. And at the risk of pulling a "Limbaugh," I'll argue with myself: "How will we afford it?" We'll find a way. There are provisions in the bill for allaying the cost, but as we all know, costs are always at least double whatever has been projected where politicians are concerned. This is important, though. This isn't a mandate forcing everyone to have a widget in their shoe; it's truly a matter of life and death to some an...

"Greed is good," said Gordon Gecko in the movie Wall Street. It's one of the most famous movie quotes in decades -- not only because it's got that alliteration thing going for it, but because Gecko laid out a very believable, solid argument for naked avarice. Greed and wealth know no party boundaries, but advocates of greed or something akin to economical Darwinism is espoused by the Republicans -- shamelessly espoused. They claim it to be the cornerstone of Capitalism, as a matter of fact. Not only do they champion "winner-take-all" mentality, but they tend to say that everyone is subject to this. Everyone wants more. Everyone will step over each other to make that extra dollar. OK, maybe I'm generalizing a bit, but the Republicans tend to be a more lockstep-message party than the Democrats (by a small, but measurable degree). But the championing of greed wouldn't be so amusing if not for championing the 2,000-year-old philosophy of Christianity a...

What is freedom? Each political party tries its best to control us with emotional, empty words such as "freedom" and "patriotism." I'm sick of hearing about it. Critics of the Democrats say they're trying to "take away our freedom" by imposing national healthcare or increasing taxes. National healthcare takes away our choice to be irresponsible by forcing people to have healthcare and if money is freedom, then taxes indeed reduce freedom. That's the argument put forth by the Republicans and it appeals to my desire to have more money (but remember, everyone wants money -- even the wealthy). But more money doesn't always equal freedom. In fact, Americans have it pretty good. It could always get better, so, like I said, I'm not against having more money... but, as Americans, what do we need the money for? More stuff is always nice, but not necessary. What are the necessities money can buy? Food, shelter, and in America, healthcare. Healt...

Before I get going, look at this: http://goo.gl/Fo0WK We've all seen the mockery of the Tea Baggers with their goofy tea bags dangling from tricorn hats. We've seen the price rampant patriotism can have on one's ability to think clearly or somehow mix up Jesus with the American flag. There's been vague accusations of racism -- and somewhere deep in the ranks, there is -- but certainly not the majority. Not consciously, anyway. Enter the OWS crowd. Clearly, a left-wing movement. If not in direct opposition to the Tea Party, it probably wouldn't have gotten as much traction without the right-wingers thumping their Bibles and loading their guns at the last election cycle. Imagine an alternate universe, where the Tea Party abandoned 1776 as the time when rainbows and butterflies burst from the orifices and fountain pens of our Founding Fathers, but instead harkened back to an earlier time -- 1605, when Guy Fawkes decided to start amassing gun powder to blow up Par...

Have I mentioned that I'm pretty much useless? I haven't written a lot, here -- but I've written enough to repeat myself, from time to time. I'm pretty sure I haven't mentioned my masterful ineffectualness before. I don't do much, in general. Maybe I do about as much as the average guy; I've discovered over the years that I'm just average enough to melt into the pablum of society, so I'm typically safe in assuming that I'm suffering from the same pox of mediocrity that most people bear. This comes to mind because my readership on this blog has recently exploded by 100% -- or 50%, if you count me. I've given you enough math to figure that one out. In a recent discussion with my new readership, I was asked the question,. regarding this blog "Does anyone else read it?" I said, "No," although I actually have no idea. But I'd say, the chances are likely that my quick assertion is correct -- which is what gave me pause. Wh...

So the "Occupy Wall Street" thing has been going on for a week or two, now. What does it all mean? Damned if I know. What I see are hippies, new and old. We have the old, who protested Vietnam and somehow really believe that they changed the world -- when, in fact, it was more likely the war was just becoming an expensive, losing battle. But what the hell, the Baby Boomers love to believe they changed everything with some sit-ins and Mary Janes, so let them have their little glory delusion. Accompanying the old hippies are the new hippies: The ones with Liberal Arts degrees and boundless love for the Earth and boundless hatred for anything connected to corporations. Let me clarify: I love the Earth. I live here, full-time. I don't expect to move, although I think it would be nice to see some scenery on other planets. I'm stuck, so I make the best of it. I recycle. I don't kill non-infesting bugs (like spiders or centipedes) in my house; I just release them outsi...

Sociopaths, rejoice! Casey Anthony, according to even the most casual observer, appears to have murdered her daughter, kept the body in her car for nearly two weeks, and then dumped the stinking corpse in the woods. Her acquittal is a victory for guilty criminals everywhere, present and future. It gives them hope that even the flimsiest defense can still be victorious -- as long as more than one flimsy defense is presented at a time. It seems Anthony's lawyers have stumbled on a little glimmer of genius in their fumbling, incompetent way. They have revealed that the American attention span has become so brief and critical thinking skills have become so dull, that a new defense can be presented daily, with no substance to back it up. First, the father did it; that was pursued briefly, but then quietly dropped. Then, the brother did it. That wasn't pursued at all; once the brother took the stand, the defense made no mention of it to him. The mother was likely in the mix somewhe...

Here are some points that need to be addressed before I consider you a viable party to lead the country: 1) Evolution is real. It is not a "theory" in the colloquial sense; it's a "theory" the way gravity is a theory, meaning, it really exists, but the details aren't fully discovered. If you propose that an invisible man or woman (as if a god needed the differentiation) started the evolutionary ball rolling... well, you can believe that -- but nothing supports this idea. If you choose to use the Bible as a point of proof, the creatures pretty much sprung up from magic pixie dust in Genesis -- so, no evolution there. In short, understand you have no proof and no proof = imaginary, so treat it as such and shut up about it. 2) Morals exist without any divine intervention. Every society, regardless of which god they worship, has some kind of laws and morals because it keeps society together. Imagine a society without morals... how would it hold together if s...

Ever since I was child, I had a fascination with science. I loved dinosaurs as a toddler and youngster (more than most kids; I learned the names and eras they lived in) and as a tween I watched the entire Cosmos series. One would think my parents would expect me to become a scientist or at the very least, do something useful with my life. Unfortunately, my appallingly average intellect and above-average slothfulness prevented me from entering the sciences. In fact, it's a bit laughable that science interests me at all. What do you think of when someone says "science"? After I think of that Thomas Dolby song from the eighties, I think of math. Lots of math with indecipherable symbols and abstractions and plenty of square roots canceling out fractional imaginary numbers. Impenetrable math. Truth be told, I was terrible at math. Not just terrible in a average sense -- but terrible in the sense that I was put into a special remedial math program when I was in fourth grade, ...

So, here's a twist: The normally super-patriotic, love-to-kick-brown-people's-asses Republicans are now criticizing the no-fly zone over Libya. Unlike the mamby-pamby Democrats of the Bush era, these Republicans aren't saying we shouldn't be bombing the hell out of brown people (again), but that we're not doing it enough. The typical over-the-top right wing talking heads say we should go to Syria, while we're Libya kicking the ass of governments killing their own people for protesting. In a left-handed way, the wing-nuts are trying to play some kind of turnabout "Ah-ha!" bullshit, by implying that the whiny Democrats have a double-standard when it comes to making war in the Middle East. OK, so here's a little clarification: America was attacked by terrorists (mostly from Saudi-Arabia) on 9/11/01 -- a year we will never forget in the States. Then Bush attacked Afghanistan because that's where the al-Qeada training ground was and those Taliban ...

I'll start with the least important first: Charlie Sheen. Trainwreck? Oh, yeah. "Winner"? Um, no -- but I'm not looking down my nose at the latest Hollywood manic. Let's face it, guys -- he's living a man's dream. Two great looking women, lotsa money, and more leisure time than anyone should have. Frankly, if a man between the ages of 18 and 85 says anything bad about that arrangement, they're either lying or so uptight that they need lube to shit. It's the drugs that are the problem.The other stuff, I could live with. But he's gone off the deep end, maybe not because of genetics, but possibly because of extended meth use. And his ex-wife is not much better. Damn shame for the kids, really. Chances are, they'll be raised in the same bubble Charlie grew up in and become adults who think they're entitled to all the hedonistic pleasures the world has to offer. Who knows? Maybe they are. Maybe God just likes the rich folks better. With th...