Laziness would probably be a good reason half the stuff I want to say on here never get here. What was it I was going to post? Oh, yes, Broomball, being out of shape, and poor hand-eye coordination are not a good mix. I didn't think I was that out of shape still. Sad thing I've probably been the most physically active in my life my first semester this year. Heh, I better get to bed tonight, I'm so sore...I'll worry about the pulled muscles later....

The thing I thought of literally two minutes ago...ahh, yes. I was going over the aspect of intelligence. Another opinion formed as a bastard of my mother's influence. She would always harp on the aspect of good grades and how to pay attention in class, etc., while anyone who knows me could attest, the last thing I've ever considered important about a person was their performance in class.

However, contrasting that, I have always harped upon the idea of intelligence. I expect to deal with intelligent people. Okay, that's not entirely true. I know plenty of people who aren't the smartest that I love dearly; it's when they start to voice opinions (which will be poor, given their own shortsight) and thus infringe upon others freedom and pursuit of happiness that I get irritated. My, that sounds really awful, but one of the few times I'll argue it's true, nonetheless.

And, I cannot deny that the intelligence of someone weighs a heavier and heavier influence in how I view them. I respect the intelligent - I think we all ought to.

What, then, dictates intelligence? It's not what you learn in school, for the most part. That'll make you knowledgeable, but you can still be the biggest dumbass ever and be on Honor Roll. We all know those individuals. No, you won't impress me by your GPA.

However, to side put that argument, don't we increase our intelligence by what we learn in class, simply by virtue of differing opinions and new ways of thinking? True.... I probably was more life-altered by my government and World Masterpieces (take that class, damn it, if you get the chance!) classes than by many other things - though, I'll admit, it was as important a part by the teacher as it was by the material taught. By the way, on that note, if anyone is taking Economics this year and happens to see Mad Dog, tell him hi for me. And get me his opinion on who he wanted to win the election. No one's economic opinion do I trust more.

Anyway, back on topic. Do I still have your attention? Despite the point of this whole entry, I can imagine it must be boring as fuck to read.

So, I attended this Peer Health meeting today, which I had no clue what the meeting was, I'll admit. Our Queer Life Coordinator (I hate that title, principally because the word queer is in it - ever call me a queer and I will punch you; no joke), Justin, was leading the lesson. So I was expecting to see 1 or two people, at most. I walk into a fairly full room with Sex, Gender, and Sexual Orientation written on the board along with Transsexual, Gay, Bi, Pomo, Pan, Transgendered, etc. etc. written as sub-subjects underneath the big three categories.

I swear I thought I had died and went to heaven (yes, they will be giving lessons on sexuality and gender expression in Heaven, to incredibly large crowds).

In any case, I found the lesson interesting, though I knew, to a relative extent, most of what was talked about. I found it funny that I probably knew more about the Trans topics than I did about those Bi related (specifically the terms Omnisexual and Pomosexual, though (if you ask me) I think you're pushing it by going past Pan...but a topic for another day).

So, why this random diversion? No, it's not simply because I found a random unrelated reason to talk about sexuality (or because it's even related to sexuality); it just happened that this was one of the events that lead to the over-arching premise of this post.

I found the information for the meeting interesting, of course. But largely for the same reason that I enthusiastically scoured the internet when first learning about anything gay related - my own ignorance.

And some of the stuff talked about were theory, things I had picked up in my theatre class first semester. And, being a class, and being theory, it wasn't the most interesting.

And that's the principle difference between the ignorant and the intelligent (though there is one last component to intelligence I'll cover right after) - the intelligent are willing to learn. I don't give a crap if it's a struggle to learn or if you don't get it immediately. If you're willing to bother to try to understand and commit to memory the stuff you're going over, that makes you better than a Hell of a lot of other people.

What I used to boil intelligence down to was your reasoning ability. Were you able to, simply, reason and use logic. After all, back then (and still greatly now), my biggest concern was figuring out stuff and right and wrong (yes, you guessed it, largely due to my mother and the faulty advice she's tried to give me over the years). But the fact I forgot to acknowledge was that to continue progressing and learning more, we do have to learn different aspects of life. So, how willing or eager are you to do so? Or, simply, how willing because you know its use?

In the end, it still boils down to your ability to reason and use logic. I am of the firm belief that, armed with those two, you can do near to anything.

And I've seen in plenty of people those aspects. Maybe that's the central reason I point out and notice the potential of people.

In the end, it's all up to how much you want to put into it and how much you're willing to use those skills given to you - and applying the things you learn and using them as points of your reason in life. Really,  reason and logic aren't that difficult; in fact, we're pretty much born with it, as humans, and they strengthened the more we use them.

But you've got to be willing to use them.

The tacked on song is simply because I haven't been able to stop playing this, lately. It's an amazing song.

We all bear the scars...
Yes, we all feign a laugh
We all sigh in the dark
Get cut off before we start

And as the first act begins...
You realize, they're all waiting...
For a flaw...for a flaw...
For the end...

There's a path stained with tears
Could you talk to quiet my fears?
Could you pull me aside?
Just to acknowledge that I tried

And as your last breath begins
Contently take it in
'Cause we all...get it in...the end

[string solo]

And as your last breath begins
You find your demon's your best friend
And we all...get it in...the end

[marching band starts]

And as your last breath begins
You find your demon's your best friend
And we all...get it in...the end!

Everybody!

[repeat]
-Scott Matthew

I was debating writing this, because in my own circles it needn't be said. I hate the culture war with slight exceptions, I do. However, I've been sticking my head in the news for far too long a period today and it got under my skin.

As anyone who knows me would admit, socially, I'm quite liberal. You can persuade me more so economically but you'll find little luck on the social spectrum.

So, recently, I heard someone complaining about how we view the world today. "People's morals today are just trashed". Yeah, and they totally weren't many years ago...I'm sure the Dark Ages was tons more advanced than us today morally. Open up Shakespeare, please - utter genius but the greatest source of tons of sex. And guess what - your Freshman children are reading up on sexual innuendos and sex at 18 (or so) right now (Romeo and Juliet). Now go panic and proclaim the end of the world, please.

As one person (I'm certain it was on Revelife - continual source of intelligence coming from there) put it, "Who would have thought that today's people would decide right and wrong on what they feel?" (emphasis mine, with the possible exception of the italicism; I can't properly remember). And then I read a blog today noting how the God-awful "liberal" media makes everything seem fine if we just plaster "love" and "feelings" over it. Yes, they were tying the connection of a female teacher molesting a 13 year old male student of theirs to homosexuality (can I hear some respectable groans from the wonderful gay and bi people in the crowd??).

You know, funny thing about that - socially liberal people (note I specifically mention socially liberal; a previous post of mine, for those who have read my xanga for a while now, helps to understand why that distinction is important) actually really like facts.

This would happen to be why most liberals (on average) happen to be atheist in comparison to social conservatives (which, of course, makes my own piety a tad bit laughable). This would also happen to be why the higher the education you have, the more liberal you're likely to be.

So, when we happen to say that homosexuals aren't boogie men we've created to try to tear down society...that's because the American Psychological Association actually has stated that homosexuality is rather natural and not chosen (some of your best friends are gay, you know).

"...but rather protesting the open nature and societal acceptance of homosexuality, an orientation which many scientists view to be an a-posteriori choice." Oh, are you kidding me??
"No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. For most people, sexual orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed." (http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31).

We haven't decided this simply because we felt it. It came upon our radar because we felt it. Then we assessed it. And we found it to not destroy entire societies (believe me, at the rate they're going, by now I have the ability to set several forests on fire, start earthquakes, and bring about the end of the world. And to think I was worried with something like clinical depression). The whole reason we're pushing words like justice, equality, and hate is because we've already passed the right/wrong portion of the class. Please, could you keep up?

You'll have to forgive us, but we just find these following tenets common sense:
-How someone dresses shouldn't make that big of a deal - the content of their character ought to.
-While we have no issues with, really, any religion, we do have an issue when you want to make that one religion the law of the land. Sorry to break it to you, but you do live in a nation with many others. They deserve their rights as well.
-Hey, we like autonomy. If they aren't harming anyone - leave 'em alone.
-Guess what - we aren't perfect yet so to assume things should remain stagnant isn't the best thought process. If you want to take a literal description of moral conservatism, to conserve means to keep as was. That means a social conservative today would have been a major liberal in the eyes of the past. Wait...

Now, don't get me wrong - I have rather conservative tendencies (I like to think they subside my homosexual ones...okay, even I'll admit that was a bad one). I believe in logic and reason. Following this, either extreme (liberal or conservative) could not be correct. However, social liberalism happens to be more so.

One, I'm a Christian (which, when all is taken into account, is a really funny paradox). I'm a strong advocate of abstinence (as my concurrent rants and long streaming opinions continue to point to a somewhat extreme opinion on sex in general). I obviously believe in more conservative dress (my own clothing style is so mundane it's pitiful). I am pro-life (that's the simple answer; the actual one is a bit more complex). I'm definitely anti-gun control. I disagree with "porn booths" and the selling of porn at gas stations, though I would support continuing those running since I believe in that right (though I am willing to hear the argument that porn booths degrade the community, not to mention encourage more public sex. However, you have no real argument about the gas porn, honestly).

The thing that separates me and makes me liberal is that with all of those (with the exception of abortion and gun control) is that I don't shove my personal opinions down someone else's throat because it's not going to hurt me. I don't care how much porn the next person buys (though I do pity them for going through that process if they have an internet connection at home - honestly, that's just stupid). I don't care how much like a jack rabbit the next person humps; I knew someone was having premarital sex in my own dorm - the girl seemed to be having a blast, from the sounds of it. But I'm not dead from the fact, yet.

The fact is, I originally wanted to do this without attacking and just pointing out the facts of it. But, honestly, mandating prayer in school is an attack to me and, more importantly, an attack on the child who could use that school time to be learning. Maybe it's really conservative of me, but I think the family should be the source of that child's religious enstillment, not the government and certainly not the school. I find it an attack when I'm told I can't have the basic legal rights to marry and keep a job. I find it an attack when, for a country founded on the idea of free speech and allowing other ideas (no matter what we may think of them), those ideas must be restricted by my government.

So, in short, I'm a social liberal not because I'm blazing with feeling I just cannot contain but because it doesn't insult my better intelligence.

Also, if anything confirms the idiocy in my mind, its the phrase I found on this page: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?sid=83448ae0e58f7f86d366251132fabc3c&gid=2230733281
"MAKE WAR NOT LOVE assholes"

Damn, I just feel so guilt ridden and dirty now....

Or my new favorite I just found: "They [social conservatives] do not subscribe to abstract notions such as 'reason' or 'progress'..."

Axis_of_Doom, could you comment on that one, just for me?

So, reverting back to the original child molesting post that drove me to this entry, the author writes, "Haven't we learned from the Beatles 'all we need is love, love is all we need'?" and then proceeds to tear down all the "liberal" ways that promoting love has diluted the topic (oh, the Beatles, those scandolous liberal bastards!). Yet somehow I have a feeling - sorry, I interpret that Lennon actually meant love when he coined the phrase. And that can lead to many things (compassion, patience, trying to understand, etc.). But I'm not going to try to explain or justify it further. If you have a brain, you ought to be able to figure it out.

Ehh, I hate the culture war. If you want to further discuss or explore things I've written here or simply clarify, comment or private message me. I would have no doubt I didn't explain something I wrote here properly.

This shall be half rant (as if you haven't heard enough negativity from me) and half statement, I suppose.

First - do to the sake of my own orientation, I try to not bring up the topic of homosexuality all too much. I joke about it at times, and it does need addressing (considering that only two states legally allow gay marriage (and at least three before the end of the year are voting to amend their constitutions to not allow it, Cali included), you can still be fired for your orientation, etc. and the huge stigma of it still). Even still, I try not to bring it up more than necessary, which (while I'm sure he didn't mean to offend) made Tommy's rainbow jokes all the more obnoxious. I'll be the first to admit it's irritating to hear something over and over again.

However, that can be semi-difficult when you acknowledge that its civil rights movement is still in process. It's somewhat hard to refrain from mentioning the fact when it may be legally impossible in 3 states for gay marriage due to the constitution being amended. So I apoligize beforehand if I've brought this up more than usual for other conversations.

As most of you on here know, I sent out invites for Ally Week. It's important because it stresses the fact that this isn't driven by some fad and a bunch of people just decided to see how much they could screw with legislation for a while (yes, I've heard people say being gay is just a fad and will go away in a few years). The part that kinda astounds me was that people actually said maybe or flat out no.

This isn't really a hard event - if you still go to SHS, the GSA probably has buttons and you wear it for a week. Otherwise, there's no participation necessary. And if you are elsewhere - you just acknowledge the week. No marches, no sit ins, no boycotts - nothing, unless you really want it to - changes about your week. So how in the world can you be on the fence about that? There're those who I know they're gay or bi and they say maybe? So those who aren't gay or bi - they're support means nothing? They don't have to get made fun of or even deal with the whole issue. They have no reason to support - yet they do. And that's how you thank them? "Um, maybe I'll do it." Clearly you don't give a damn about your rights. Wait 'til you get into the real world. Try even attempting to come out then.

Or the best was the Nos. My cousin isn't participating. I wonder why. I have to question what part of me saying, "I'm bisexual," she didn't understand. Remember, it takes no participation, really. Thanks for the support, cous.

So, to the straight allies, I want to offer an apology of those who seem to think that their rights are going to fight for themselves and have no clue how bad it used to be.

So, for everyday that I cannot be arrested for who I am - I thank you.
For everyday I can admit my orientation without the conversation going awkward - I thank you.
For everyday a GSA can actually meet - I thank you.
For the amazing court desicion for California - I thank you.
For everyday I'm not killed by someone who knows - I thank you.
For everyone who does know and thinks no differently of me - I thank you.
For everyone who doesn't treat me differently everytime it's said aloud - I thank you.

For giving a damn enough to support when you didn't have to, for defending me and millions of others when you could have stayed quiet, for recognizing us as humans, for changing this world and those around you - thank you.

They have no idea how much they owe you.

On a second portion of this first part, I'd like to review the word "faggot".

For those who don't know, it derrives from fagot, which is a bundle of sticks. This comes from the fact that they burned homosexuals using fagots.

So everytime you say faggot or fag, you are essencially making a death threat. Don't use it. Under no circumstance is calling a person a faggot acceptable.

Forgive my preaching.

My second part, I know that most know how highly I think of them generally because I'm always so paranoid what others think and I want them to know so I tend to tell them (subtly or not) on a pretty consistant basis. However, probably largely because I'm in a whole other state now, I feel the need for reminder once more.

My friends are absolutely amazing, and a constant reminder there's someone there. Everyone deserves to know people like you.