Idle Randomness

Two thoughts today, neither one sufficiently complex--at least right now--for their own dedicated posts.

First: the whole Facebook "friend/unfriend" phenomenon.
Second: do I have the right to moderate and "censor" comments on my personal blog?

Discussed below.

First: why should I be made to feel guilty because I "unfriend" you on Facebook? I mean, honestly?

Background: I do not know about you, but my Facebook wall is locked down pretty tightly, restricted only to my friends. I have a friend who has recently decided that our once-mutual faith and belief system is no longer "doing it" for him. He has lost his testimony, is now falling away from the Gospel of Christ and, in so doing, is becoming quite caustic and belligerent about religion in his Facebook posts. I know he thinks it is humor, as do his little circle of like-minded friends that swarm around his anti-Church posts.

For example: "When you are sad, it is most likely because you are actually feeling guilt for something you once did that you forgot but God never did forget and never will. You're going to Hell."

His friends immediatly gather around, some of whom are actually text-laughing like Beavis and Butthead, but all of whom are chuckling like hyenas and making similar comments about spirituality, guilt, the evils of believing in organized religion and Christ, not to mention how ridiculous it is that people should be made to feel guilty about doing what feels good.

I want to believe that it is a phase, that it is something else that is making him feel this way. He has always been a bit liberal in his beliefs (spiritual and political), at least since I have known him. We have always been able to find some common ground upon which we can agree, however tenuous. However, just recently he has started mocking Christ and Christian values. I refuse to even cite an example, however.

Ummm.... I am not sure it matters WHO you are, but you really do not want to mock one of the Godhead, do you? I mean, is that smart?

In short, all of what he posts lately is pretty offensive to the other 143 friends I have. I have received comments about it.

So: should I feel any guilt about either (1) hiding his posts or (2) unfriending him altogether? In the past he has blasted his family members who have defriended him (although how one learns one has been defriended, I do not know) and has let it affect his familial relationships. That is why I hestiate. He is still a friend for whom I will continue to pray and a colleague with whom I need to interact on a weekly basis. But do I really need to be subjected to his anti-religious sarcasm and vitriol on a daily basis?

Perhaps I will simply hide him for now.

[Sigh] Why on earth does social media turn so many adults into whiny little children?

Second: Do I have the right to moderate and "censor" what goes on here, on my own personal blog?

I am of differing opinions here. I can see both sides; I do not AGREE with both sides, but I can see the arguments.

[Aside: I should note that I have good readers and, at least to this point in time, have been extremely fortunate on this issue. I have fellow bloggers, however, who are constantly being attacked ON THEIR OWN BLOGS, and then criticized when they do something about the attacks.]

I realize that by putting my opinions out here on the internet and inviting comments on what I write, I lose a little bit of credibility with the argument. However, it is my space, my little bit of the 'web.

I believe that I can say that I have never once deleted or moderated a comment that made a negative or contrary argument to one of my posts. I delete spam on a regular basis, but only spam. I do not believe in deleting comments, but then I have not yet received one that is openly offensive. I cannot say what I will do in the event that happens.

But is it "censorship"? I think that is stretching it. To me, a "censor" is one who has some authority or control over others. While you could argue that I have control over your posts, and deleting said posts is an act of censorship, that might be true if it was, technically, a public forum.

Think of it in this way: I have invited a group of you into my house. Many of you are complimentary of my house, my LW, the Horde, and comment favorably about my religious artwork and books throughout the house. However, several of you take it upon yourself to belittle my beliefs, throw food at the walls, and put down my LW and the Horde, not to mention the expletives that you fling around. Would any of you actually fault me for throwing that small minority out of my house and try and spray Lysol around to get rid of the odor? Would any of you really tolerate me doing the same in your house?

Would any of you, in that instance, consider me a censor?

Why then consider me a censor for doing the same to those who come into my little house on the 'web and do the same thing?

Hey, mock me all you want on your blog. That is your space. You and your little friends can do that all you want, remembering of course the libel laws. But when you come into my space and mock me, my beliefs, or -- Heaven help you -- my family? You are in my house and can expect to be shown the door.

And before you pull out the "free speech" or a Constitutional argument--technically speaking, only the Government can violate a person's Constitutional rights. And for better or worse, I ain't the Government. In my house, your right to swing your arms around wildly ends at the tip of my nose.

If any of you have additional thoughts for me, I would welcome them.

Road Signs: Detour

Over at The Spirit of the Law, there is a new post by yours truly. As you may remember, I am one of the moderators of the site, albeit a long-dormant moderator. I promised the guys over there I would not be too free with cross-posting. However, I feel strongly about this one, so I must beg their indulgence. I would also ask that you take a trip over there if you are so inclined to read the comments that I am sure this post will ignite.

The post itself is called Freedom is Refreshing. And it goes a little something like this:

Freedom.

It is like 7-Up for the soul.

Yeah... its lemon-lime (cannot say lymon, because that is Sprite, after all) effervesence that makes your nose tickle when you take that first drink? That is the feeling of freedom.

I am talking about all kinds of freedom.

The freedom to stand up on a soapbox in a park and proudly proclaim your beliefs without worrying about being arrested (so long as you are not inciting violence).

The freedom to carry your Beretta where- and whenever (nearly) you want to do so.
(Aside: For the record, that is "Beretta" not "Baretta": it is difficult to carry a private investigator wherever you go, let alone his cockatoo 'Fred.').

The freedom to vote for whomever you wish without fear of reprisal or intimidation.

The freedom to read, or write, the books you want without oppression or censorship.

The freedom to be able to worship how, where, and when you desire.

Except in the so-called Bloggernacle, apparently.

Unfortunately, it is an all-too-common practice among supposedly observant Latter-day Saint blog-hosts/-moderators to moderate, censor, and yes, even stifle debate. That is to say, debate against the ideas they believe and support. They willingly moderate and hold posts, preparing and scripting their responses. And then, when they feel they are losing or have lost the argument, shut down the comments altogether. Who knows why they do it: fear? hatred? shame? I do not claim to know. All I know is that, when faced with a little opposition, they inevitably suddenly up and walk away home, taking their baseball with them, bragging to everybody how they won the game.... Of course, it was their ball, and when they leave, how can you argue with them that they won the game?

That is one reason I am proud to be a member of this blog. The Spirit of The Law, regardless of how vitriolic some of us moderators become, it is in defense of our beliefs, beliefs that are under common and vile attacks elsewhere in the supposedly observant and routinely hypocritical LDS Bloggernacle. A place where the Brethren of the Church have urged members to bear our testimonies of the Living Christ and of the truthfulness of His Gospel, and the Restoration of the Gospel in the Latter-days. A place where, all too often, those testimonies are belittled and challenged by those who think that those Brethren--Brethren they supposedly sustain, by the way--are out-dated in their thinking, that they "just don't understand," or even worse, bigots and/or deranged.

Yes, this is the state of a large portion of the "Bloggernacle." It is a hostile place out there. Heck, sometimes it is a hostile place here, too. None of us is perfect, after all.

But for those of you who disagree with the moderators of this site, remember this: at least here, you -- a dissenter -- you get a hearing. I am not sure that I can remember an instance of any of the moderators shutting down argument or locking up a thread. Here, we understand Agency; we may not agree with your choice, or your perspective, or your comments, but you are free to make your argument.

For this, I say 'thank you' to my fellow moderators. I can feel my nose tickling.

And that is Freedom.

Quote of the Day -- August 20, 2009

“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.”
Sen. Hilary Rodham Clinton (D. NY)

I am sorry, but for 7+ years I decried the Republican's attempts to smackdown any and all who criticized President Bush, the war, etc. I may not have agreed with all of what was said, but I recognized and defended their right to say it.

The same holds true with the current criticism of the current administration.

At least it should.

But we all know it does not hold true. And if you say differently, while I recognize your right to say it, you are either lying, deluded, or misinformed.

Yeah. It's a harsh thing to say.

But look around. Show me where all those people were screaming about how patriotic were their anti-war commentaries, how "truly" American were their anti-American screeds. Where are they? Most of them are now decrying any who disagree with the President as anti-American, stupid, liars, "corporate shills," or worse.

If you stood up for 7 years screaming vitriol about Bush being a Nazi -- or Hitler himself -- and claimed a First Amendment right to do so, I am not telling you to shut your mouth. I am simply saying that you had darn well better acknowledge the same right for others now.

Otherwise, you're simply a hypocrite.

And you look really stupid, too.

Quote of the Day -- August 19, 2009

They hate us with every fiber of their existence. We love freedom. We love independence -- to feel, to question, to resist oppression. To them, it's an alien way of existing they will never accept."
Adama, commander of the Battlestar "Galactica"

A deep and salient thought from the one and true Commander Adama regarding the reasons why the Cylons wish the subjugation and/or destruction of the human race. (Aside: From the original series, of course. Lorne Greene could whup Edward Olmos' behind with one arm tied behind his back any day of the week and twice on Saturdays.)

Bonus Quotes of the Day:
"Ma'am, trying to have a conversation with you would be like trying to argue with a dining room table. I have no interest in doing it." -- Rep. Barney Frank (D. Mass.), 2009.

"Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.” -- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D. Cal.), 2009.

"The Republicans, they have no interest in this Bill. They’re using the 1994 playbook. Let’s kill the bill and kill the president ... or, kill the president’s term. Although there are sort of angry people out there I get very nervous about this stuff. I don’t like it at all." -- Howard Dean (Nobody), 2009.

And this, I think, proves a fitting conclusion to today's post: A quote from our own Imperious Leader President:

"I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess." -- Pres. Barack Hussein Obama, 2009.

By your command... over my dead body.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

As far as I can tell, this Amendment is not party-specific.

So get your red-eyed, jack-booted robots SEIU/ACORN thugs out of my way and out of my countrymen's way and let us exercise our freedom.

Nope. Not Mighty Mouse!

I am sorry.

But even if it gets me put on a list somewhere, this is dang funny stuff.

Unfortunately, thanks to the state of the Country and the Future, it is probably close to being morbidly humorous (also known as "black humor" but I have to be careful about that term, don't I?).

Add to that the fact that, for many, he IS a Superhero.

Talk about a fantasy.

But I still have a First Amendment right, dagnabbit! So sit back and enjoy:

Try JibJab Sendables® eCards today!

Rest in Peace, America

We lost two entertainment icons last week. Farrah and Michael. May they rest in peace.

America may be history as well. But more on that in a moment.

The loss of any human life is, at its most basic, a tragedy. There is some tragedy in how these two lived their lives, but I am not going to belabor that or lessen the impact their deaths have had on their families. Whatever you think of them, they were human beings, plain and simple.

What I will do, however, is excoriate the mainstream media for forcing it down our throats, non-stop. EVERYTHING on cable programming yesterday afternoon was about the death of Michael Jackson. Everything. I think I even saw him on a Beverly Hillbillies re-run, although I may be mistaken on that point.

I had to literally search for something -- anything -- that discussed the outcome of the vote on the biggest tax attack perpetrated upon the American People. I mean, of course, the so-called cap and trade "HR.2454: Title: To create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy.

Politically-correct Global Warming crap.

Even the local news spent more time trying to link Michael Jackson's life, somehow, however tenuously, to our little town than they did reporting on how our representatives voted on the cap and tax scheme.

You see, the mainstream media and the Washington insiders did not want the American people to focus on this bill. They knew that there was grave danger to the bill if the people really stood up and took notice.

So what did they do?

What do you do when you take a young toddler to get his or her picture taken? What do you do in church when the same child starts to fuss because you've taken something away from him or her?

You distract them.

You use the squeaky duck toy. You jingle your bright, shiny keys in front of them. Anything to get them to forget the camera or the fragile book you want to get away from their grasp.

At first, I believed that South Carolina Governor Sanford's saga was the shiny thing. After all, why make such a big deal over a person -- even though a Governor -- disappearing to hike in the mountains? I think I would do the same thing if I were in public office: just disappear and be by myself. I did not blame him in the least. But remember how the media kept harping and harping on how horrible it was that he would just "disappear"?

The jingling had started.

Then it was revealed he'd actually been in Argentina, not the Appalachian Trail. Even then, I must say, I was still on his side.

The jingling got louder.

Then it was revealed that the married Governor had left his wife at home and traveled to meet up with his Argentinian girlfriend. Whoops. I jumped off his bandwagon at that point. But the media kept harping and harping, louder and louder.

I think at some point I may have seen a big squeaking bunny toy on the lecturn next to Governor Sanford. Honest.

He looked a bit like Harvey, actually.

I don't blame the criticism of the Governor on this issue. After all, your wife should be the most important part of your life. If you're willing to cheat on that, if your wife means as little to you as that, what are your constituents? "Governor" is just a job, after all is said and done. If I was a South Carolinian, I would feel abused and cheated upon. I would want him run out of the Capitol on a rail.

I still believe that he was the intended "shiny thing." It was all a bit too convenient, timing-wise.

But can you tell me any man in America more grateful at the passing of Michael Jackson? Really? OK, granted, it's a pretty tactless thing to say or think.... But Michael's death (and to a much lesser extent Farrah's death) knocked Sanford right off the front page.

Jingle. Jingle. Look at the shiny keys, Little Darlings.

Unfortunately it appears as the deaths of these two human beings has become the latest "shiny thing" held up and jingled in front of the public to distract them from the more important things in life.

Come to think of it, we lost an "infotainment" icon this morning as well. Mr. Billy Mays. You may not know his name (I did not) -- after all, he's just an infomercial frontman -- but you'll remember him as the pitchman for Oxi-Clean and OrangeGlo, the guy with the big beard and loud, annoying voice. Rest in peace, Billy.

But take notice: an awful lot of attention is being paid to his passing. He was the pitchman for cleaning products in infomercials, for crying out loud. No disrespect intended for the newly-departed, but does he really warrant the barrage of coverage his death is getting? What accounts for this press coverage?

In my opinion, it's simple: the American Sheeple need first to be distracted from the passage of the cap-and-trade fiasco. They do not want you to know about the 300-page amendment that was added to the bill at the last minute.

They do not want you to know that, under this bill, if you sell your house, an environmental group is required to come out and "rate" your house, and you will not be allowed to sell your house until you "modernize" your appliances and have a certified "green" home. Liberty? You rest in peace, will you?

Jingle. Jingle. Jingle.

I am willing to bet that the conspiracy-theorists out there are having a field day. Michael and Billy both die under strange and still-unexplained circumstances? Anyone see the Men in Black around their homes?

Jingle. Jingle. Jingle, JINGLE.

I will be willing to bet there is more -- much more -- coming down the pike that will require further distractions.

What will those distractiosn be? It is anybody's guess at this point.

Rest in peace, Farrah, Michael, and Billy. Rest in peace. At least they do not have to worry about all this any longer. Just rest in peace.

And apparently, I may as well say this while I have my First Amendment right to do so: Rest in peace, America.

At least, the Free America I once knew and loved.

Quote of the Day -- Mar.2, 2009

“Don't try to confuse the issue with half truths and gorilla dust.”
--Bill McNeal, News Radio

There's a lot of half truths and gorilla dust in the media lately. It's kinda causing a resurgence of blogpression, to be honest. Between that and the fact that we have filed more cases this month than any month (per number of days) in the past three years, I have not had time to post much. I regret that and apologize to all of my readers.

Well, that combined with the utter fear to say anything about the O-Messiah for fear of a visit from either the Secret Service or his proposed personal army of brown-shirt enforcers public security forces.

For now, I am still here and everything is all right.

I will be back soon, I promise.