The Grudge

Yes, I went and saw the Grudge yesterday afternoon. It was thrillingly scary. What does that mean you ask? Have you seen The Ring? I give the Ring a ten in scariness. The Grudge was a close nine. Yes, that scary. It would have scored higher but the movie takes place in Japan and only in a certain house. The Ring is in the US and could happen anywhere. It's much more personal. I definitely recommend this movie if you would like to be scared OR if you want your female friends to be grabbing at your arms in fear. My friend Joe suggests going to the gym before hand.

For those of you who have already seen the movie: There's a little boy standing behind you.

Mwahahaha!

Catholocism and Orthodoxy

The Catholic Pope is returning two relics of saints to the Orthodox church in Istanbul after 800 years of ownership. It's seen as a sign of goodwill between the two churches. It also seems that they may begin theological talks once again. I like to see the various Christian churches working together to make the world better. We may all have theological differences but that shouldn't get in the way of Chrisitian service.

That said, I don't see why the Catholic and Orthodox churches would begin theological negotiation. Let's look at it logically. The Catholic church believes it is the true church descended from the church began by Christ and the apostles. They claim that their authority has been unbroken over the 2,000 years. The Orthodox church broke off for many reasons, but foremost being the strength of the Pope. I don't know if the doctrinal changes between the churches occurred then or later, but they exist now. Basically if any side concedes to change, that shows that it is incorrect. I don't think either side is really ready to change their doctrine. And then logistically, let's say the Orthodox church merges with the Catholic. Would all Orthodox members agree? Would all Orthodox members automatically be Catholic? And you know for sure there would more schisms because of the changes. Lastly, the Orthodox church is poor. I can't see the wealthy Catholic church taking on such a liability.

My opinions are mostly one-sided. I lived in Romania for two years. They are predominantly Romanian Orthodox. And I only know one Catholic.

Posting up!

Get yer dukes up! My nine-year-old nephew could beat him. LOL

If that doesn't get you laughing, try the following:

Strong Bad strikes again.
And for more fun and humor check out William Shatner's new CD.

*Uppercut!*

That is, uppercut to the RIAA or Recording Industry Association of America. I just read on Instapundit's blog about this:

The Supreme Court handed Internet services providers and privacy advocates a crucial victory yesterday when it decided to pass on an important Internet piracy case. . . .
"The recording industry may not agree, but the U.S. Supreme Court thinks personal privacy is far more important that music piracy," Red Herring reported. "On Tuesday, the high court refused to entertain an appeal of a unanimous 2003 decision by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals that held that copyright holders cannot force Internet providers to identify file sharers using a mere subpoena. Industry watchers see this as yet another blow that the recording industry has taken in its fight against online file sharing -- a fight it is slowly losing. The lawsuits in question were between New York's Verizon Internet Services and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), headquartered in Washington, D.C."

Yes that's right. Personal privacy is more important than music piracy. Blow after blow the music industry will be forced out their 'evil lawyer' cave.

A smart idea.

I just read an article about the European Union threatening to put sanctions on Israel until they resolve their conflict. Much like the Europe did to South Africa until apartheid was eliminated. I was just thinking, why doesn't the United States place sanctions on Israel. Effectively, we could place a 'famine' on Israel until they comply. With the EU and US putting up a blockade, it could seriously harm Israel. I told my roommate this and thought that Israel would be even more stubborn than Cuba in the face of sanctions. I think I'd have to agree with him. But I still think it would be a serious push for peace in Israel.

Star Trek vs. Kerry and Bush

And the winner is... Star Trek! Yes, the Star Trek: Enterprise season premier is tonight. And it is on during the second Presidential debate. Yes, Enterprise isn't the best Trek series and it can be disappointing at times... But the debate will only be more so. Perhaps I'll catch the third one. I'll read the articles on it afterwards. If anyone does watch it and would like to give their comments, please feel free.

"Beam me up!"

An Abortion Surprise!

Okay, so that title is not very appealing. But I just read an article that clinched the already sure vote of mine for Bush. Apparently five of nine Supreme Court judges support current abortion rights. But if Bush is re-elected he will be able to appoint a new judge. This could upset the balance and allow the Roe vs. Wade ruling of 1973 to be overturned. Exciting! The article goes on to say that twenty-one states are at high risk for banning abortion, nine in middle risk, and twenty at lower risk. This surprised me. All 50 states are at risk for banning abortion. I had no idea that most of the nation's legislation actually want abortion banned.

This news definitely clinches my vote for Bush.

Shoplifting

Apparently the pick for the CIA's third highest position has withdrawn from the nomination because he was caught shoplifting twenty-three years ago. With the full background check, Michael Kostiw was cleared to be a CIA employee and see high class information. The article I read made it seem as if it was the Washington Post that did its homework and brought that up. I could have misread it. If that is the case I don't think that Mr. Kostiw should remove himself from the running. The fact that he passed the CIA's own requirements is enough for me.

That brings me to my question. Should government officials resign for any infraction in their past? I've been taught that the personal lives of government leaders should not be separated from their careers. I agree with that. But where should we draw the line? Should all officials be above reproach and never have made a mistake? Men and women are able to change themselves and leave behind past mistakes. I only wonder where the line should be drawn.

True to Its Name

Iconoclast:
1. One who attacks and seeks to overthrow traditional or popular ideas or institutions.
2. One who destroys sacred religious images.

The Lonestar Iconoclast claims itself as President Bush's homestar paper. And true to it's name, it is seeking to overthrow tradtional or popular ideas by now endorsing Kerry. Now I will admit, everything I know about Texas I learned from Fox's "King of the Hill". But apparently life in some parts of Texas is close to that of Arlen in "King". Check it out.

Apparently the Iconoclast only has 425 readers. And that is in a serious decline now. Once endorsing Kerry, the paper lost many of its advertisers. I'm left wondering if the paper was in a decline before declaring Kerry their candidate. Seems this could be a good way to get under people's skin. Any publicity is good publicity.

I won't be looking to the Iconoclast for political knowledge. But it is a portal into small town Texas. I wonder if I might see Hank Hill featured in an article.

Fun in two easy steps.

Would you like to have some fun? Here is my two step process:

1. Read any one of my blog entries below. I might suggest "Serious Wisdom..." or "The Debate" For extra credit actually write a reply to one of them. (I love when people do that.)
2. Follow the link I am about to share. Remember, until you do the first step, don't do the second. This is important. Link.

Come back after you're done. Comment.

Gay marriage in Spain

Shocking fact: 1 in 10 Spaniards is gay. Literally. Spain has now passed a bill that will allow homosexuals to marry. It is the third in the European Union. Of course the Roman Catholic Church (which has a lot of power in Spain) opposes the move. "'It would impose on society a virus, something false, which will have negative consequences for social life,' Juan Antonio Martinez Camino, spokesman for Spain's Episcopal Conference, insisted in midweek."

At the heart of this conflict is the new ability of gay couples to adopt. Some 60% of Spaniards favor gay marriage, but only around 40% favor adoption by gay couples. A 20% difference is a big thing. I would guess that most people (including myself) oppose it, not because the child wouldn't have good parents -gay parents can be as good as heterosexual parents- but because the child would think that homosexuality is normal and natural. It's fine to have adults make those choices but children shouldn't have that choice forced upon them. One Spanish gay activist said, "Most Spanish people think what is important in adoption is the well-being of the child quite apart from the sexual orientation of the parents." That is true only when you believe that sexual orientation doesn't matter.

But in closing, a whole TEN percent of Spain is gay!! I will be more wary if/when I should meet any Spanish.

The Debate

Yep, I watched the Presidential debate tonight. No I didn't watch it all the way through. I watched forty-five minutes of it. (Did it go an hour or two?) I'm sad to say that I didn't learn an awful lot from it. No I'll rephrase that. I didn't learn as much as I had hoped I would. But here is the basic rundown of the debate:
Kerry believes that the war in Iraq is not a just cause and should not have been started. He does however believe in getting our troops home as soon as possible and in giving them the supplies they need. (Ironic.)
Bush believes that invading Iraq was a good choice. He believes America needs to have a strong, unwavering stance against terrorism and to root it out wherever it may be.

Now here is what I learned. Kerry focuses on the past. He kept on reiterating that we should have entered Iraq. He didn't focus on the now. And that is that we are in Iraq... saying again and again that we shouldn't be there won't change that we are. He also stated that by voting against giving our troops the needed money for supplies he was in actuality voting against invading Iraq. That seems a little convoluted.

Bush is committed to this war on terrorism. He believes that removing Saddam Hussein has made the world a better place. He doesn't like sending troops into harms way, but there are causes that justify the loss. It seems that Bush does not want to rely on foreign intervention or help to achieve the goals he has set out. He will go to them the first time, but after that he will take matters into his own hands.

I could go on and on about their motives and details I saw in the debate, but I'll say a little bit about how they spoke in the debate. Kerry is a polished speaker. Bush was a little slower and not as smooth. But Kerry is a senator and I think that oration and speech giving comes with the territory. But it seemed that Kerry's words were made to tug on heart strings and persuade the audience to his side. Bush seemed to be more sincere. Time will tell if he is right or wrong. But you can tell by the way he speaks that believes he is right.

What are you thoughts on the debate?

I just *love* easily offended Mormons.

"I can't... I'm Mormon." These are the words which have raised the ire of BYU students and faculty. In the Daily Universe there was an ad for the t-shirts with that slogan on it. I read the article today after seeing a short ad on television about it. Here's some quotes from the article that show both sides:

"Many Latter-day Saints living outside Utah, he [Ramos and t-shirt creator] noted, utter the phrase every day when asked to partake of activities - such as drink coffee or watch racy movies - that violate church standards."

And...

"I don't like it when people perpetuate these Mormon stereotypes," [Steve Brady] said. "I'm not a big fan of Mormon movies like 'Singles Ward' and 'Home Teachers' for the same reason."

I'm going to stand by Ramos. So many LDS here in Happy Valley (most of them grew up here) don't understand or think that LDS humor is appropriate. Unfortunately they have very shrill voices and like to make those shrill voices heard. I think the slogan is humorous and not offensive. So I'm okay... But people who find mild humor offensive need to ignore it. I'm going to trot out a term again... Utah Mormons. You can find them the quickest just by uttering that phrase. They'll be the ones who are standing up and getting red in the face. I've lived here in Utah myself about fifteen years and I have succumbed to some Utah Mormon ways. But I can see it in myself. Anyway, to the point: Utah Mormons will find shirts and slogans like this offensive, but ignore a lot of the more important things.

So I will happily proclaim: I can't... I'm Mormon!

What would you do?

I was just reading an article on US bombing insurgents in Iraq and having success. By success, I mean that they were eliminating insurgents against the US and Iraqi governments. This in turn has caused in-fighting amongst the rebels. Iraqi hospitals have reported civilian and child casualties with these attacks. The US gov't says that that is only propaganda. It is possible there were casualties outside of the rebels, but that the hospitals are exaggerating the numbers.

"'We've seen reports from the hospital about dead and wounded within 45 minutes of airstrikes,' Lessel said, which, he said, was too soon for victims to have been transported from the site of the attack. He also said wounded people shown on television could not have survived the airstrikes."

The article also quotes a Abu Thar as saying: ""They [the US,] are saying they want to kill al-Zarqawi, but instead they are bombing innocent families," Abu Thar said. "Iraqis' hatred is growing, which means the resistance is growing."

That I can understand. Whether you're a rebel or not, hearing your fellow citizens being killed would not make you happy.

So what do you do? If we leave the country all together and let them govern themselves, there may be a civil war. We would be responsible for that. If we stay, we are probably increasing the hatred some Iraqis have for the US and we will lose more soldiers to terrorist bombings and activities. It seems like a lose-lose situation both ways. I don't know what the solution is. I want the Iraqis to govern and police themselves. I don't want to lose more of our soldiers to cowardly terror attacks. Perhaps there is some way to have both. I hope so.

A Call to Legalize File-sharing with Taxes

The title and the article tell it all, so I am going to let you read it. Please feel free to comment. This is a novel idea, but it's still an idea. There may be others that are better.

BigRedHammer

Responsibility & Government

I was reading an article on the Israel's pull out from Gaza and their expectation of more attacks by Hamas as they do so. I am very critical of Israel and their tactics. Most Americans in my experience, sympathize with the Israelis. I sympathize with the Palestinians. They have no course of legal action, no representation in their government, nothing. So they do what they do. They attack the Israelis. I don't think that the way they do it gets them any closer to their goals. No strong government is going to give terrorists power or representation. So I do see current Palestinian tactics as futile. But I don't expect responsibility from small militant groups. I do however expect responsibility from a government. Throughout the rest of world, civilized nations find ways to deal with racism and hatred. Israel has too. They use missiles and their military to enforce it. I guess what I'm saying is, I expect more from Israel than their military-enchanced form of terrorism.

Hurricanes

Hurricane Ivan is now making landfall. My good friend 'Sobek' of SobekPundit has made it out with his family safely. I hope that everyone else in Ivan's path has evacuated safely and will suffer minimal losses. My prayers go out to everyone who is involved.

BigRedHammer

Serious Wisdom from a Play

The following are quotes from a theatrical production David Hare's "Stuff Happens," now playing in Britain.

From the character Colin Powell, "If anyone is stupid enough to think this is payback time for whatever grudge they happen to be nursing against the U.S.--be it Kyoto or the Criminal Court or, I don't know, how they hate McDonald's--then what they'll be doing in effect is condemning Iraqi women and children to the sort of bombardment which is going to make them wish they had never been born. ... That's what I'm trying to avoid,"

And from an Iraqi character, "Iraq has been crucified. By Saddam's sins, by 10 years of sanctions, and then this," the man says. "Basically it's a story of a nation that failed in only one thing. But it's a big sin. It failed to take charge of itself. And that meant the worst person in the country took charge. Until this nation takes charge of itself, it will continue to suffer."

Check it out.

=========>

Yes. That is an arrow. What is it pointing to, you may wonder. It is pointing to the newest entry to my blogroll. SonarBison, welcome to the hallowed halls of the BigRedHammer Blogroll. Your post on how to get a girlfriend at BYU deserves acclaim.

Any of you readers who have ever attended BYU, lived near BYU, know someone who lived by or attended BYU, or have been or had a girlfriend should check it out. You'll laugh.

Update: SonarBison has begun to get results. Follow the link above and find out the hilarious aftermath.

News to me: Many professors are liberal bigots

Okay, I just found more evidence of my 'bubbled' life. I just read an article on Yahoo news. In it I learned that in Colorado Universities conservative students are being discriminated against. I'll share a few of the examples given in the article:

"University of Colorado law student Mario Nicholas said a professor called him a Nazi after Nicholas complained when the professor told the class that "the `R' in Republican stands for racist." The professor was chastised by the dean but not suspended. "

"Metro State student William Pierce said he filed a grievance after a professor accused him of spying on the class for Republicans intent on enforcing the new policy. "

I go to Brigham Young University. It is a religiously funded university. As such only members of the LDS Church can be tenured professors. Which means that we have a very conservative faculty here. Well, comparatively. Many LDS people are ultra conservative and might disagree. So all I am used to is moderate professors who respect all ideas. But until today I didn't know this was not so of all colleges and universities. And I'm not referring to the conservative point. I'm talking about professors being moderate and respectful of all ideas.

The article talks about a professor that was forced out the classroom with death threats. He now sleeps with a rifle under his bed. I do not condone death threats or getting results through fear. And the 'conservative' students who did that not only hurt their cause, but hurt their lives.

But, such comments as calling a student a Nazi for any reason is not acceptable. The employers of such faculty need to evaluate their performance and if they cannot come to acceptable terms, let them go. That kind of environment is not conducive to learning for any type of student. Perhaps it is just my own experience, but professorship is not supposed to be a platform for expressing political views. Unless of course it is political science. And then it should be unbiased.

Students should not be judged on their political views.