preussisch_blau: (Typewriter)
[Error: unknown template qotd]

Avant tout, j'ai décider dorénavant écrire mes notes de journal en français.

Que c'est interéssant! J'ai une angoisse de la page blanche différente que tout les autres quand je clique la liason de "Voir les réponses".

Je veux recommencer ma collection des icones. J'ai gardé la plupart à mon ordinateur ou mon Photobucket. Il y a quelques-uns je n'utilise pas, mais je ne fais pas les effacer. (Ah, valeur sentimentale.)

Bon Poisson d'Avril et Jeudi Saint.


J'excuse pour le français épouvantable. Ça fait longtemps que je n'ai pas écrire en français. Je vais écrire en anglais demain. Merci Dieu!
preussisch_blau: (*headdesk*)
[Error: unknown template qotd]

Neither, because I'm not stupid enough to think that fake news is actually a good source of information about current events and politics. IT'S COMEDY, FFS. If you don't trust the media, then watch a bunch of different news channels (I recommend putting Fox in your repetoire, so long as you avoid the wingnut known as Bill O'Reilly). Also, go online and read, and read the freaking newspaper. Listen to the radio too if you want.

Nothing is ever going to be as fair and balanced as you think it ought to be, because different people have different ideas as to what that entails. However, totally ignoring the fact that a comedy show is just that, COMEDY, isn't going to get you trustworthy news. It just makes you an idiot. (For the record, I don't watch either The Daily Show or The Colbert Report with any sense of regularity, but I'm pretty sure that it's been brought up that the shows are not meant to be taken seriously.)
preussisch_blau: (Thinking...)
[Error: unknown template qotd]

Heh, now here's something I've been thinking a lot about.

First, I don't think that such a fuss should be made about things like "In God We Trust" and the mention of God in the Pledge of Allegiance. The one, you don't ever really encounter except on currency and some official seals; the other, well, no one's forcing you to say it. There were a few atheists at my high school who, when we said the Pledge, simply said "...one nation, indivisible...". It's not that hard. If you're the sort of person who gets all ferhoodled when someone else believes in God... well, you need to get over yourself. Plain and simple. Stop stepping on my right to have faith in a higher power of my choosing. Most Americans believe in some form of God. It's not like we're saying "In Jesus We Trust" or "...one nation, under Jesus...". Yes, the general implication is of the Judeo-Christian God, but there's no reason why you can't choose to interpret the mentions of God differently in accordance with your personal beliefs, or just disregard them entirely.

Cut for a tangent. )

Okay, tangent done. Now, where was I? Oh, yes, as far as the whole Ten Commandments at the courthouse thing in Alabama... Well, I don't really have a problem with it, but I can understand why a non-Christian wouldn't want that to be there. So I'm not all outraged that they were told to take that statue down. I'd not be comfortable going into a courthouse where they display Islamic religious strictures, for example, because I want a fair trial based on actual law, not religious dictates, and it's a bit easier for that to happen when there aren't blatant reminders of one religion. (Actually, I wouldn't want to be judged on Judeo-Christian religious strictures either. I just thought it was more pertinent to understanding why someone wouldn't want the Ten Commandments displayed if I looked at it from the perspective of a person going to court and seeing a display of something related to a belief system other than their own.)

As far as marriage... Marriage is, in my opinion, a religious institution and should remain a religious institution. The government should nose out. This is why I'm not for gay marriage, unless the couple is of a religion that allows it. I'm not for straight marriage either when religion isn't involved. Marriage, in every sense of the word, is a religious institution, designed solely for perpetuation of both the human race and the ideology of the religion behind the marriage. That's it. It's not about love. There's a reason that, while love has always been oft spoken of as the true reason to marry, many successful marriages start off more like two people negotiating a business contract. In fact, it used to be that you found a suitable future spouse who would be an asset to your future household and courted them with the intent of making sure they would be a suitable spouse. Then you married, and if the match was good and both partners followed and believed what their religion said about marriage, love would develop, and even if it didn't, the marriage would still be a comfortable arrangement for both parties.

I'm all for civil unions, though. Anyone should be able to get one, gay or straight. There should be no difference in rights and privileges between gay and straight couples. Essentially, what I'd like to see is the government change the legal term "marriage" to "civil union", as it relates to non-religious partnership, and end the kerfuffle. Of course, there'd be no change to the fact that if you have a religious ceremony you should also register it legally. So, someone could potentially have a marriage and a civil union, or just a civil union. I'm not in agreement with the idea that a marriage shouldn't also be made a civil union because recognising the marriage in accordance with the laws confers benefits upon the spouse and possible children that otherwise wouldn't be available, and it is not in the spirit of marriage to not do something that can only benefit your family.

I know I haven't answered the question exactly. Honestly, it's a hard thing to answer. I think there should still be some level of acknowledgement that we, as a nation, have our roots in religion. However, we shouldn't force religion on anyone, force anyone to hide their own religious beliefs because of someone else's, or try and smush together religious institutions with secular ones.
preussisch_blau: (Thinking...)
[Error: unknown template qotd]

I was at school. 8th grade, I think. I'm not too sure, I've never been good with years. The only thing I really remember beyond it being a normal schoolday until we got the announcement of the plane hitting the first tower was watching the news until lunch and nearly punching a girl that afternoon in music class for making all these horrid, morbid jokes about the people who were dead and dying while one of my friends was slowly curling into a ball and sobbing because her mother, aunt, and some cousins worked in the towers and she had no way of knowing if they were even alive and that girl wouldn't shut up even after she asked her to stop because of that. She didn't find out until the end of the week that a cousin had died but everyone else was okay.

Past that, I'd be lying if I said they held any deep meaning for me. Yeah, it royally sucked that it happened, but, barring the plane that went down in Pennsylvania, it wasn't really my home and my territory. Maybe that makes me callous and cold, but those attacks are just never going to affect me the way they did someone who lost family, friends, or that childhood innocence that their home turf is safe from all harm. I didn't walk past the towers almost daily. I've only ever been to NYC twice. Once just three months before the attacks. That was the only time I ever saw the World Trade Center complex in person, the silhouette of the towers rising against the skyline in the sunrise.

I was honestly more upset about the plane crash in Pennsylvania because hey, if those passengers had waited just a few more minutes to make their move, then that plane could have ended up in MY back yard. Shanksville is just three hours due west from the town I used to live in, so it's VERY conceivable that United 93 might have crashed near my home. I had nightmares about that until Mum and Dad finally just stopped watching telly while I was awake until the programming returned to normal.

However, there's just a disconnect now. I understand the tragedy, but I can't sympathise with the people who actually suffered and lost people and that priceless intangible of security because the attack just didn't affect me personally.

If anyone who was so affected wishes to talk, I'll listen. I can't guarantee any more than just a ready ear, but I will give that much.

Edit: By the way, I'm sick of all the Pearl Harbour comparisons. Enough already, damnit. Pearl Harbour was an attack by a nation at war with our allies on a military installation that annihilated the Pacific Fleet, leaving military forces out in the Pacific stranded for slaughter with no reinforcement, which launched us into World War II because it prompted Germany to declare war on us. Pearl Harbour was not a terrorist attack, it was a tactical military strike on a military target.

Pearl Harbour =/= WTC and Pentagon

Profile

preussisch_blau: (Default)
Bird

March 2012

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
1819202122 2324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sunday, 24 September 2017 03:22
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios