As I head into today, I do so with a bit of concern. I have a ton of work I have to get done at home, but I have to work today first. It all comes down to keeping promises. I said I would make knee pads for the AWANA games and I have 2 sets complete. Only 8 more to go. Unfortunately, that means another 16 individual knee pads which are about a third of the way complete (I have the squares of material cut out). I still need to pick up the stuffing, make the straps, and sew them all together. Nothing big, just the basics. Oh, and I have to go grocery shopping before I start this. Hopefully I can get out of here early today, but I am not counting on it. What it all comes down to is, I didn't plan well and put it off. Procrastination attacks again. I am working on getting better about it, but I slip a little to often.
I have heard it said, "never do today what can be put off until tomorrow." I don't know who said it, but whoever did was obviously trying to get someone else to do their work. I say this from personally experience (which is why I am trying to get better at doing things right away). A procrastinator puts things off, not because he doesn't care about them, but because he doesn't want to do them. He puts it off in hopes that either someone else will do it or that the problem solves itself (it rarely does, by the way).
I finally realized this a few years ago when I became a home owner. At first, I thought the house was OK (I never really loved it, but it was ours). Then I started noticing things wrong with it. At first they were small and I kept putting them off. I would point them out to my wife and say things like, "I'll get to it," or "but that's for later." There was always something more important or some other reason. It wasn't until I stared at the same problem for a month that I realized no one else was going to do it and it most definitely was not going away. At that point I realized that I had to start doing something on the growing Honey do list.
After we completed a few of the projects I noticed a strange anomaly. Every time I took something off of the list, two more items would replace it. This would probably be a good time to point out that this wasn't a theoretical list, but a no kidding written list on the side of the fridge. What started as a quarter page of things (some small one minute items, others massive undertakings), was now a full page with the top eighth scratched off. The list "mysteriously" disappeared shortly after that.
The lesson learned from all this is, don't make a list. It only depresses you and makes you want to do it less. Tackle each job as you come across it. If you can wait to do it for a few days because of prior plans, then it must not be that important and didn't need to go on the list in the first place, so why bother. And that is where you realize that procrastination has been replaced by apathy.
Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
People are not like cheese: We don't necessarily get better with age.
After yesterday's rant, I feel the need to slow it down a bit. I believe that the only thing that comes to mind to do today is to insert another of my answers for my sons. Today, I think I will include the answer to the following question:
Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
What is the worst part about getting older?
Simply put, the way the body starts to betray you. First there is the pain. It I’m not talking about pain from more frequent injuries. No, I am talking about pain from the stuff you do every day. You find that your body has decided that you no longer need full use of various parts and thus it should remind you of that by making them hurt at random. It is true that as you age you tend to be able to do less and less. Things that you could do easily yesterday (standing up quickly for instance) are harder to do today. Your knees start to ache just from walking to the bathroom in the morning. Your back hurts as you sit up to turn off that alarm. Sometimes, just stretching can make you hurt. And that’s not including hurting yourself by trying to do something you were able to do just a few years ago. Take playing football for example. I used to be able to throw the ball without pain (not very well, but at least it didn’t hurt), now, after two tosses, my shoulder hurts and I think hand offs are a better option. Add to that that running for any distance is out of the question. Knees, ankles, hips, and back all get in on that action. Exercise for any extended period of time and your entire body reminds you that it is an unusual practice for days afterward. I suppose if you exercise regularly and eat right the pain is less, but where is the fun in that.
The secondly the body gives up on staying trim. When I was younger I could eat anything I wanted all day and not gain a pound. Then I hit 24 and my body decided I needed to start storing food for the winter. Now I have to watch what I eat if I don’t want a waist size equivalent to my age. Now I have a gut, a requirement to be under a certain weight, and a hankering for chocolate and fried foods (yes, a deep fried chocolate bar sounds great right about now). The weirdest part of all this is that, when I was younger, I used to eat fairly healthy and moderately. Now that I am older and have to watch what I eat, I mainly want to eat junk food and candy, and I want to do it all the time. In other words, the body says, “if you eat this I’ll make you fat,” and then turns around and yells, “EAT IT, EAT IT ALL!!!”
The final thing the body does to you is mess with your sleeping habits. By this I mean it refuses to allow you to sleep properly. You may be able to get up regularly at the same time every morning before your alarm clock goes off. Then, the night the power goes out and your alarm clock fail to go off, your body decides you need to sleep for an extra four hours. Never mind that on the weekend when you can sleep in your body wakes you up 5 minutes before your alarm normally goes off. Then when you go to bed, you start reading and can’t seem to finish a sentence. You turn of the light and stare at the ceiling for an hour until your body finally decides that you’re serious. The body lies about how tired you are all the time too. You could be falling asleep on the couch and unable to keep your eyes open, but the moment you lay down in bed, you are wide awake. Then when you finally do fall asleep, you wake up 3 hours later for no reason, and then every hour on the hour you wake up again. The next night, as soon as your head hits the pillow, you pass out and are barely able to wake up for your alarm clock.
Yup, the worst part about growing older is how your body begins to betray you.Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Gay marriage: Wrong by definition.
I am back on days and so I will be posting more often. Today I think I will address an issue that is coming up on the ballot here in the state of Washington. It is a referendum on gay marriage. I understand that this is a hot issue and that it will be hotly debated, so let me start with some facts. First of all, here in Washington state, there is the civil union law. This law gives any couple who apply for it (much like a marriage license) may enter a civil union. Those in that union receive all the same privileges and benefits of a married couple. In other words, no rights or privileges granted a married couple may be with held from a couple with a civil union. It also adds that this union may be between couples of the same sex.
Why did I mention that? Simple, it means that any move for gay marriage ceases to be about civil rights as no rights are being denied. It is about redefining marriage. The argument that we are trying to deny people basic rights is ludicrous at best. By law, if a same sex couple is denied something a married couple gets, then they have every right to bring charges and sue the person discriminating against them. The law that enacts same sex marriage is about definitions, not rights. I have yet to see any right or privilege that a married couple gets that a couple in a civil union is denied by law.
The one thing that has always bugged me as well is the idea that marriage is a right. The fact is, we can't call it a right. If we do, then we have been denying this right for years and the gay marriage law will not change that. I am referring to 2 consenting adults of legal age. I agree that the idea that enacting gay marriage will lead to people marrying animals or that it will legalize pedophilia is asinine at best. What I am talking about is relational marriage. If it is a rights issue, no two consenting adults of legal age can be denied this right, yet we continually deny marriage between close relations (1st cousins, siblings, father daughter, mother son, etc.). Don't get me wrong, I understand the implications of these marriages and don't agree with them either, but the fact remains that we discriminate against these marriages as well.
Call me what you will and be as angry as you want. The fact remains that this ceased to be a civil rights issue when the only thing being argued is a definition. Why am I concerned? Because it means that, in order for a religious entity to maintain its beliefs and convictions, it must, by definition, discriminate and go against the law. By enacting a law that redefines marriage, you force churches into a situation where they are forced to either run afoul of the law and discriminate, or go against their convictions and beliefs. There shall be no laws establishing religion or infringing the free practice thereof. How can a church fee free to practice its religion is against the law to hold on to their beliefs.
Now, to answer and argument that jumps up every time religion is brought in on this. Slavery is not directed by the bible. As I read the new testament, it is clear that it did not agree with slavery. In fact, every instance of slavery in the new testament that I have read has mentioned paying proper wages and treating them fairly. I am not a theologian, but it appears to me, the biblical definition of slavery can be paralleled with someone under contract today. Yes, it was twisted and used wrong in early America and elsewhere and I could never condone that, but I am not talking about early America. The fact is the bible is very clear on this issue. Homosexuality is wrong according to the bible (new testament included) and since this is what my beliefs, and most Christian beliefs, are based on I cannot condone it nor agree with it.
That's about it for today. Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Why did I mention that? Simple, it means that any move for gay marriage ceases to be about civil rights as no rights are being denied. It is about redefining marriage. The argument that we are trying to deny people basic rights is ludicrous at best. By law, if a same sex couple is denied something a married couple gets, then they have every right to bring charges and sue the person discriminating against them. The law that enacts same sex marriage is about definitions, not rights. I have yet to see any right or privilege that a married couple gets that a couple in a civil union is denied by law.
The one thing that has always bugged me as well is the idea that marriage is a right. The fact is, we can't call it a right. If we do, then we have been denying this right for years and the gay marriage law will not change that. I am referring to 2 consenting adults of legal age. I agree that the idea that enacting gay marriage will lead to people marrying animals or that it will legalize pedophilia is asinine at best. What I am talking about is relational marriage. If it is a rights issue, no two consenting adults of legal age can be denied this right, yet we continually deny marriage between close relations (1st cousins, siblings, father daughter, mother son, etc.). Don't get me wrong, I understand the implications of these marriages and don't agree with them either, but the fact remains that we discriminate against these marriages as well.
Call me what you will and be as angry as you want. The fact remains that this ceased to be a civil rights issue when the only thing being argued is a definition. Why am I concerned? Because it means that, in order for a religious entity to maintain its beliefs and convictions, it must, by definition, discriminate and go against the law. By enacting a law that redefines marriage, you force churches into a situation where they are forced to either run afoul of the law and discriminate, or go against their convictions and beliefs. There shall be no laws establishing religion or infringing the free practice thereof. How can a church fee free to practice its religion is against the law to hold on to their beliefs.
Now, to answer and argument that jumps up every time religion is brought in on this. Slavery is not directed by the bible. As I read the new testament, it is clear that it did not agree with slavery. In fact, every instance of slavery in the new testament that I have read has mentioned paying proper wages and treating them fairly. I am not a theologian, but it appears to me, the biblical definition of slavery can be paralleled with someone under contract today. Yes, it was twisted and used wrong in early America and elsewhere and I could never condone that, but I am not talking about early America. The fact is the bible is very clear on this issue. Homosexuality is wrong according to the bible (new testament included) and since this is what my beliefs, and most Christian beliefs, are based on I cannot condone it nor agree with it.
That's about it for today. Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Labels:
Belief,
Christianity,
constitution,
faith,
gay marriage,
Law,
Opinion,
Slavery,
truth,
wisdom
Friday, March 2, 2012
Short and full of complaints.
It has been a heck of a week. Since my last post, I have barely had time to check my email let alone write a coherent post. Overall it has been an interesting week. My oldest son had his first science fair. I think he did all right. I was unable to attend due to work, but I heard he did OK. I am looking forward to talking to him about it, but I haven't been able to see him since it happened due to other events.
That being said, I find that things are happening that are driving me nuts right now. I have to work overtime this weekend which means that I will be unable to attend church yet again this weekend. i should be able to go to the afternoon practice for the AWANA games, but I am unsure. I work the graveyard shift so hopefully I can wake up enough to go to the practice. I will have Monday off (mainly because I will be sleeping during the day) because of it, but that really isn't saying much. I have to set up a doctors appointment for my shoulder. I think I re injured it doing push ups. Hopefully this time the doctor will be able to figure out what is wrong.
I guess I have complained enough. I really don't know where else to go with tonight's post so I think I will just end it. Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
That being said, I find that things are happening that are driving me nuts right now. I have to work overtime this weekend which means that I will be unable to attend church yet again this weekend. i should be able to go to the afternoon practice for the AWANA games, but I am unsure. I work the graveyard shift so hopefully I can wake up enough to go to the practice. I will have Monday off (mainly because I will be sleeping during the day) because of it, but that really isn't saying much. I have to set up a doctors appointment for my shoulder. I think I re injured it doing push ups. Hopefully this time the doctor will be able to figure out what is wrong.
I guess I have complained enough. I really don't know where else to go with tonight's post so I think I will just end it. Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Candidate report: Obama.
I find myself in a peculiar position. The following report on Obama is not as in depth as I wish but I feel compelled to share it anyway. I ask that you read it all before you dismiss it and comment freely if you feel so lead. I delineate between facts, conjecture, and opinion at the end. I did not list the specific sites for my research as I didn't write them down as they were found via google searches and those searches are easy to duplicate (e.g. name/net worth or name/voting record). I used government websites for the most part for my data as I don't trust most news outlets to be impartial. So without further ado, please read on.
As I did what little searching I could, I discovered somethings that were not telling nor useful. For instance, Obama voted along hte party line nearly 100% of the time. The few times he didn't did not stand out as a stance in any direction. In other words, he has voted as one who seeks the party's nod for office. He has played politics almost his entire career. his monet comes mainly from books he has written. Books which, on the surface, appear to be politcal retoric and self promotion. This isn't to say he is poor, at a net worth of over 2 Million, he is better off than most Americans. The funny thing is, through all of this, I found a picture of a man that is a politician. He has a law degree, but really hasn't practiced law. He taught law in Chicago for a while, but that is something that most politicians do as they start their careers. In other words, Obama is a career politician. I haven't really seen anything that tells me he is anything other than the Democrat Party mouth piece. Nothing I have seen or read has convinced me he has anything he personnaly stands for. The things he claims as successes were either started by other people or given to him by his party.
As I read what I just typed, I find myself amaazed that what I typed is almost exactly what you would expect to find on a republican website. I understand a lot of it is conjecture and opinion, but then most of it must be as there is a lot of contradicting reports out there. The few facts I found (net worth and voting record) came off of government websites. As for my thoughts on the books, they were based on the wikipedia article for them (and we all know how highly regarded that is as a source) and thus I call my stance on that conjecture. As I put everything I had researched and everything I have seen and heard in the past 3 years from both sides (I do have democrat friends), I came to a personal belief (read also as opinion) that Obama is not a man of principles so much as a Democrat that has done well in his party.
One final thing I feel I should point out here. My research is not as in depth as I would like it to be. Through out his carreer he voted on literally thousands of bills (96% of the time he voted with his party), I only reviewed the ones listed as important and based my opinion on those. I welcome anything you may want to add, I just ask that you note what is fact, conjecture, and opinion and include sources with your facts. I am not above changing my mind or my opinions if the situation warrants it, but in this case, I don't think Obama is the one I would vote for.
Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
As I did what little searching I could, I discovered somethings that were not telling nor useful. For instance, Obama voted along hte party line nearly 100% of the time. The few times he didn't did not stand out as a stance in any direction. In other words, he has voted as one who seeks the party's nod for office. He has played politics almost his entire career. his monet comes mainly from books he has written. Books which, on the surface, appear to be politcal retoric and self promotion. This isn't to say he is poor, at a net worth of over 2 Million, he is better off than most Americans. The funny thing is, through all of this, I found a picture of a man that is a politician. He has a law degree, but really hasn't practiced law. He taught law in Chicago for a while, but that is something that most politicians do as they start their careers. In other words, Obama is a career politician. I haven't really seen anything that tells me he is anything other than the Democrat Party mouth piece. Nothing I have seen or read has convinced me he has anything he personnaly stands for. The things he claims as successes were either started by other people or given to him by his party.
As I read what I just typed, I find myself amaazed that what I typed is almost exactly what you would expect to find on a republican website. I understand a lot of it is conjecture and opinion, but then most of it must be as there is a lot of contradicting reports out there. The few facts I found (net worth and voting record) came off of government websites. As for my thoughts on the books, they were based on the wikipedia article for them (and we all know how highly regarded that is as a source) and thus I call my stance on that conjecture. As I put everything I had researched and everything I have seen and heard in the past 3 years from both sides (I do have democrat friends), I came to a personal belief (read also as opinion) that Obama is not a man of principles so much as a Democrat that has done well in his party.
One final thing I feel I should point out here. My research is not as in depth as I would like it to be. Through out his carreer he voted on literally thousands of bills (96% of the time he voted with his party), I only reviewed the ones listed as important and based my opinion on those. I welcome anything you may want to add, I just ask that you note what is fact, conjecture, and opinion and include sources with your facts. I am not above changing my mind or my opinions if the situation warrants it, but in this case, I don't think Obama is the one I would vote for.
Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Busy weekend
With the weekend coming up, I realize I have so much to do that I can't get it all done. I have to go shopping to get the stuff my son needs for his science fair project, I then have to do the third run of the project with him, then I have to help him design and put together his backboard, basically, I have to help my son complete his science fair project in one day because I am on swings and can't help him through the week and his mother refuses to help. On top of all that, I still need to spend time with the rest of the family. Oh, and I have duty Sunday so Saturday is the only day we can do this. This is why I don't like swing shift. I get no time with my family and when I do get some time with them it is filled with stuff that should have been done through the week but couldn't be done because I wasn't there. At least I go back to days in another week.
I really don't have much else to say so I think I will keep this one short. Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
I really don't have much else to say so I think I will keep this one short. Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Affirmative Action: Legalized discrimination.
Sorry it's been a while since my last post. For some reason the computer wouldn't let me compose these past couple of days. Anyway, here is something that caught my attention and I feel needs to be said.
Recently, a case went befoer the supreme court on affirmative action. The case involved a student trying to get into a university in Texas. If you haven't heard of it you can look it up as I don't feel the need to rehash it. This post is on my thoughts on affirmative action. I feel that affirmative action, by its very nature, is discriminatory. If you give someone preference based on the race or gender and it is considered discrimination, yet this is exactly what affirmative action does. Based on the fact that you are a part of a minority, you are given "special consideration." I don't understand the logic of using discriminatory actions to "ensure equality" by forcing quotas. We have a system that is very sensitive to discriminatory issues. In fact, if you are a minority and want to get a bunch of money, bring a lawsuit against any company for discrimination and see how fast it gets settled. It doesn't matter how legitimate it is, even the hint of discrimination will open their checkbooks. Yet, we still feel it is necessary to pass laws and make rules that give special considerations to minorities.
So how do you make the process fair? You may ask. Simple, you remove any hint of a persons race, gender, etc. from the application process. You take a look at their qualifications and choose the best based on that. When it comes time for the interview, trust your interviewer to be fair and choose the best candidate. If you suspect discrimination after that, then sue and be prepared to pay. As I said, I can't think of any major company out there that doesn't fear a discrimination lawsuit. Just the hint of impropriety is enough to get people fired.
As is so often pointed out to me, this is the 21st century, the practices of 50 years ago are past. It is time to move on and start allowing people to earn jobs based on merit, not whether or not they belong to a minority. I am sure there are people out there that will decry me as being insensitive to the minority plight. That couldn't be further from the truth. I believe that race and gender have nothing to do with ability and skill. They are completely seperate. I don't think I could take a job that I knew I got because of my race or gender. Yet, it happens all the time. And not because the hired person is white, but because they are a minority and that is apparantly an OK form of discrimination.
So ask yourself this, if discrimination is wrong, how is affirmative action legal? In summary, it isn't. Affirmative Action is discrimination. Affirmative Action promotes racism by saying that a minority couldn't compete without preferential treatment. I say it is time to do away with affirmative action and embrace a new concept of equal treatment for all, regardless of race or gender. Then again, isn't that what the Civil rights movement of the 60s was after in the first place?
Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Recently, a case went befoer the supreme court on affirmative action. The case involved a student trying to get into a university in Texas. If you haven't heard of it you can look it up as I don't feel the need to rehash it. This post is on my thoughts on affirmative action. I feel that affirmative action, by its very nature, is discriminatory. If you give someone preference based on the race or gender and it is considered discrimination, yet this is exactly what affirmative action does. Based on the fact that you are a part of a minority, you are given "special consideration." I don't understand the logic of using discriminatory actions to "ensure equality" by forcing quotas. We have a system that is very sensitive to discriminatory issues. In fact, if you are a minority and want to get a bunch of money, bring a lawsuit against any company for discrimination and see how fast it gets settled. It doesn't matter how legitimate it is, even the hint of discrimination will open their checkbooks. Yet, we still feel it is necessary to pass laws and make rules that give special considerations to minorities.
So how do you make the process fair? You may ask. Simple, you remove any hint of a persons race, gender, etc. from the application process. You take a look at their qualifications and choose the best based on that. When it comes time for the interview, trust your interviewer to be fair and choose the best candidate. If you suspect discrimination after that, then sue and be prepared to pay. As I said, I can't think of any major company out there that doesn't fear a discrimination lawsuit. Just the hint of impropriety is enough to get people fired.
As is so often pointed out to me, this is the 21st century, the practices of 50 years ago are past. It is time to move on and start allowing people to earn jobs based on merit, not whether or not they belong to a minority. I am sure there are people out there that will decry me as being insensitive to the minority plight. That couldn't be further from the truth. I believe that race and gender have nothing to do with ability and skill. They are completely seperate. I don't think I could take a job that I knew I got because of my race or gender. Yet, it happens all the time. And not because the hired person is white, but because they are a minority and that is apparantly an OK form of discrimination.
So ask yourself this, if discrimination is wrong, how is affirmative action legal? In summary, it isn't. Affirmative Action is discrimination. Affirmative Action promotes racism by saying that a minority couldn't compete without preferential treatment. I say it is time to do away with affirmative action and embrace a new concept of equal treatment for all, regardless of race or gender. Then again, isn't that what the Civil rights movement of the 60s was after in the first place?
Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)