Writing History

There has been a lot of talk in the news these days about statues. Items that are not now nor have they ever actually done anything in life because they have not lived. Pieces are of art are being accused of horrendous acts.

Throughout history and present, statues have been used to remind people passing by the artwork of a person or event of a time past. Nobody ever said that person or event had to be good. A man by the name of George Santayana is credited with the statement, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Statues of Confederate States of America generals and other Southern leaders of that time are being torn down across the United States. Statues of people who did something with which the vocal minority of our current generation disagree are being toppled. They are trying to erase a part of history from the minds of everyone in country simply because their ancestors may or may not have suffered during that history.

An article was shared on social media by one of my friends concerning a…man, if one may call a monster that, who felt as though women with a darker pigmented skin tone did not experience pain because that darker skin tone meant they were closer to animal than human (stupidity at its best since we also know animals feel pain as well, so his reasoning was grossly in error from all points of view). That monster would keep the women conscious while he conducted unspeakable horrors on them and their bodies in the name of science. He now holds the title of “father of modern gynecology.” I felt sick to my stomach reading that article, but the picture stood out and is now imprinted on my mind: four women standing in hospital gowns with fake blood (it was pink, not convincing as blood but it made the point) as the only color in the black & white photo, standing in front of a statue of that monster. The statue was not the focal point of that photo; the women were as they represented the women who were mistreated and tortured. Without that statue – despite the feelings of disgust and abhorrence it invokes – how will we have that powerful of a reminder that experimentation on humans in the name of science, completely disregarding the feelings of those humans, was done in the past and ignored? A reminder that we cannot allow that to happen again?

That is why the statues are being torn down reminding people of the Confederacy – not because the general were slave owners because many of them either never owned slaves or set their slaves free as soon as they came into their possession. No. Those statues remind people that at one point in our history, the federal government got too big and was infringing on the rights of the individual states leading a group of states to fight back for their rights. (Slavery was NOT a cause of the War Between the States….I’ll write about that later.) If a group of Americans want to use those statues as a reminder of mistreatment of their ancestors or those like their ancestors, then that is their right as Americans. However, toppling those statues will not change what happened.

(The conspiracy theorist in me is thinking that somehow the federal government – Republicans and Democrats – have had a hand in the toppling of the statues because the election of Donald Trump woke them up to the fact that We the People are angry at how they have destroyed our country, and they want to get rid of reminders that we are allowed and encouraged by our past to fight back against an overbearing federal government.)

I am actually waiting for statues of Patrick Henry, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine, and other outspoken Founding Fathers to be toppled – in the name of they owned slaves of course, nothing to do with their cries of Give me Liberty or Give me Death! 

Winston Churchill once said, “History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.” If you do not like the events of the past, do not allow them to happen again. Walk past that statue and remember and do not allow them to happen again. We cannot rewrite the past, but we can direct the course of events our posterity will read as history.


Dear Congress. . .

Dear Congress,

Over the last couple weeks, many have directed their opinions of the election toward the President-elect, the failed presidential candidate, and the media. I’ve chosen to address you.

Were you paying attention? Did you see that the citizens of America are tired of the race war the current head of the executive branch and his associates started? Did you see that We the People are tired of the lies that come out of Washington D.C.? We are tired of you trying to force us into a pattern of living that profits you to the extent that you no longer feel guilt over how much you are hurting us.

The United States of America is to be the nation of united individuals not cookie cutter citizens. 

Stop trying to pit people of different cultures against each other! Americans are not racists or xenophobes just because we don’t want to blindly allow or trust the various departments of justice when they report them clear to enter our country. Those departments have repeatedly proven that they are not without flaws in their screening process.

Your job is to create policies and laws that benefit us, the American people. Some of those policies should be geared toward lower the national debt without raising taxes. Here’s our idea: quit raising your salary. Quit exempting yourself from taxes and penalties and national policies you force on us.

Have you heard of Davy Crockett? He was in your place once. He went to Congress to truly help the people he represented. When his term was done, he returned home to help his neighbors in person. Then he served his country – at that point, not even his country, just his fellow man – by taking a final stand at the Alamo. Davy Crockett served the way Congress was designed – temporary! The term limits are supposed to send you back home to get in touch with the everyday, blue-collar Americans you SERVE.

Do  not forget: you are voted into position to serve US. We are not your puppets or pawns in a power play. Instead of wondering if a policy will better those in a party other than yours, wonder if it 1) follows the Constitution, 2) will benefit the American people, and 3) is something the American people want. Do your jobs. We get fired when we don’t do ours.


We the People of the United States of America

Three Types of People

This morning, as I used my all-natural laundry detergent and fumed about yet another chain store wanting to enter my little town, I decided there are three clear types of people in this world.

The first: my oh so favorite (please sense the sarcasm) treehuggers. These treehuggers essentially believe that the world is better without humans to preserve the world. It doesn’t matter if a tree is dead and about to fall on the home that has been in a family for generations and poses a risk to the little ones playing in the yard. They still think the tree should not be cut down and be allowed to fall as if it were still in an uninhabited area.

The second: I don’t actually have a good name for these people, as of now. This group is filled with people who live in the concrete jungle and think that the entire world should be paved over with asphalt, cement, concrete, etc. These are the people that seem to think that every village, township, town, city should have a McDonalds and Dollar General. They are the anti-treehuggers. It is important to note that while all in this group are city-boys, not all city-boys are in this group.

The third: the naturalists. This is the group of which I consider myself a part – the happy medium between the first and second. Naturalists are happy with how things are now – distinction between the country and the city. Naturalists typically live in the country because they don’t like the crowded, nature-deprived city, but they recognize the necessity of the cities to house a continuously growing population. Naturalists don’t go protesting every time a tree is going to be cut down, but they do believe and love national, state, and local parks. Naturalists don’t like the government interfering with how we keep our houses warm (the EPA should be disbanded), but they also prefer natural, biodegradable products around their house to do what they can to help preserver the environment. Naturalists are pro-hunting, but dislike hunting purely for sport (Dances with Wolves has a scene of thousands of slaughtered buffalo, killed for sport rather than meat and warmth, that has haunted me for over a decade.).

Naturalists can live in the city. You’ll find them in parks or taking weekend outings to local lakes or hiking grounds. They’ll be pushing for recycling in their building or homeowner’s association.

Naturalists are the most likable of the three groups. Treehuggers cannot go a day without telling you you’re wrong about everything when it comes to the environment. They tell you how you’re contributing to global warming that day. That second group cannot go a day without telling you that yeah, the fields of wheat waiting for harvesting set against a background of gold, flaming, and auburn trees with a dusty blue fall sky above all are beautiful, but think of how much nicer it would look as a parking lot for the new plaza of stores they want to build there. Yeah, our grandparents used to climb trees and run play by the creek, but it’s much safer for them on a small playground.

Because of the feuds between the treehuggers and the concreters (not the best title, but it’s still pretty accurate), everybody thinks the choice is one extreme or the other other. Everyone forgets that there is the third option. When you live half an hour from a city with every grocery, clothing, craft, auto, home-project store you could need, you don’t need a dollar general in your town just to have a dollar general in your town. You don’t need to feel guilty about cutting down a dead tree. Just plant another tree or grind that one into mulch for your flower beds or chop for a bonfire or woodburner.

Heart of the Wild

I am actually quite impressed that I have managed to stay quiet for so long on the whole gorilla-killing and other events in the animal kingdom these last couple of months. However, yesterday, a sad story about a suicidal killer whale caught my attention, and that was the final straw.

I firmly believe humans are above animals because God, the Creator of the universe, gave us dominion over all other creatures after He proclaimed creation good. Unfortunately, the fall of man in the garden, nature was cursed, and the punishment of mankind as part of that curse and the consequences of the fall led to humans and animals having a difficult relationship. The fact still remains though, that we are on top; we are different.

Now. That being said, many humans have abused that power of dominion and turned it into cruelty. We’re told in the new testament of the Bible that God does care about even the tiniest sparrows, but humans still feel the need to hunt for sport rather than food or need (Dances with Wolves is a movie my parents watched when I was very, very little. I sneaked out to see what they were watching and have since been unable to rid my mind of the hundreds of slaughtered bison who were killed for money rather than necessity.).

First, allow to look at an event that took place at Yellowstone several weeks ago. Tourists were afraid that a bison calf would freeze in the snow. Bison, which are one of the few animals actually native to this land for hundreds of years, are not typically known for freezing during a snowfall – especially when the baby has a mama somewhere nearby, which I am frankly quiet surprised did not attack the tourists in defense of her baby, which would do anything to keep her offspring alive. As a result of the sheer stupidity of those tourists, the calf was essentially kicked out of the herd and became a hazard to the safety of itself and humans driving through the park as it would run toward the cars. The rangers attempted to reintroduce it to the herd and other herds but eventually had to put it down. My personal feeling was that they could have sent the calf to a bison sanctuary, which do exist, rather than euthanizing it. They also could have have shot it and saved the meat.

Next, there was the whole gorilla in the Cincinnati zoo drama. I think the mother is at fault for not knowing where her child was for such a long period of time. I also think the responders to the situation did the right thing by shooting the gorilla rather than trying to tranquilize him. This is part of the having dominion aspect of humanity: when an animal attacks a human, the human comes first, especially when it is a young, tiny human who did not fully comprehend the severity of his decision. The decision to shoot was made by a team of experts familiar with not just gorillas in general, but also this specific gorilla. I trust their instincts and protocol so much more than the other so-called “experts” who have decided, from a distant, grainy video that the wrong decision was made because the video showed that gorilla might have been trying to protect the boy, or he was just going to play with him (think of how rough kids are on their toys; now think of a 400 pound kid playing with a toy). The actual experts on scene not only followed their protocol, which is a big deal, but went with what they knew was right based on experience and actually being there.

The very next week, another idiot happened through Yellowstone National Park. The lack of respect in this day and age led to that idiot trying to attempting to get a “selfie” with a mama elk. If you have never seen an elk or looked them up in a book or online for whatever reason, they are huge and very protective of their young. Understandably, the mama found the woman creeping up on her and her baby with a strange device (camera, maybe with one of those sticks, I’m not sure) a bit threatening. She attacked. The rangers did not interfere. I think that was the right decision. Perhaps they’re taught the same as fire and EMS and law enforcement: your safety first to prevent creating more victims and more dangerous scenario for the next round of responders. Maybe they were thinking of the Cincinnati ordeal the week before where people did their job and were now under investigation. Maybe they remembered, which the woman clearly did not, that it is a national park for the preservation of nature and animals, with signs clearly posted with the dos and don’ts of interacting with wildlife for those lacking in common sense.

Finally, I mentioned the suicidal killer whale in the first paragraph. Apparently, this poor whale had been injured in the wild and taken to a Sea World with the purpose of rehab. Now, rehab, for people anyhow and with most true animal preservation organizations, means that you keep that creature in as natural a habitat as possible while it heals. For Sea World, rehab means that creature never returns home; it is instead taught tricks. This injured whale, since healing and being taught tricks, has tried to, and this might sound a bit rude, bash its head in against a metal gate and beach itself after a show. This isn’t like the many other unfortunate animals at Sea World who were born into captivity and only have instinct telling them it’s wrong. This whale was born and raised in the wild and remembers that freedom!

I think zoos can be good and bad. I’ve been to several zoos where the bears were not in anything that even slightly resembled their natural home. I’ve also been to zoos where you cannot even see the animals, like the cheetahs, because of how large and well put together the habitats were. Those zoos are the ones that actually the preservation of animals as their core mission. In that case, I think it’s a great thing because it allows us people to see animals that have been hunted to near extinctions, animals we would never have the opportunity to see in their natural habitats. However, the zoos where the animals are kept in little better than cages with no room to run or climb or whatever their natural actions are need to be closed with their animals moved to actual sanctuaries.

Sea World has repeatedly proven they do not have best interest of animals at heart, so as much as I love to see ocean life up close without risking being eaten by a shark or stung by jellyfish, I don’t think I can go back there. I have refused to go to a circus since watching Dumbo and seeing the treatment of the animals there (good job, Disney! addressing the cruelty of circuses while still being cutesy.).

Overall, I wish people would go back to simply having dominion, hunting for food not just trophies, watching your children so animals who are already not in their natural environment are not killed because of the circumstances, and recognizing that dominion and cruelty are not synonymous. Dominion, in the Biblical sense, is closer to care-taking. We are to take care of the world.

Note: this is coming from somebody who cannot stand the treehuggers and green politics. They take it to the other extreme.

The Dawning of a New Movement

I have been trying to write a new post for a couple weeks, but, I guess you could call it writer’s block, would not let me. Last night, I had, what I think is, a brilliant line of thought:

The feminist movement is deceitful.

You might be thinking, well, duh, and starting to wonder if I had changed my views since my previous posts on the subject.

I have not. Think about it.

The definition of feminine is: having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with women; of or denoting a gender of nouns and adjectives, conventionally regarded as female (Oxford dictionary). The meaning of the suffix -ist, also according to the Oxford dictionary, is “a follower of a distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology or an artistic movement.”

Based on those definitions, and common sense, a feminist should be the title given to women who embrace their feminine qualities – not to women who want to be a man. Those women should have a different title (see post about Target…)

A true feminist should love the fact that, for example, naturally, we’re better caring for others which encompasses so many jobs and daily tasks – healthcare, teaching little ones, running a household, etc.

Back to the title of this post: I propose that we should start a NEW feminist movement. This movement would recognize our strengths are different than the strengths of men. This movement would not degrade both men and women by claiming we are “equal.” Instead, this movement would encourage freedom for women to be who can and want to be! No more being satisfied with striving to get the same pay as men; now, women will focus on getting paid what they’re worth by practicing and obtaining better negotiating skills to get paid what we’re worth based on our experience and skills. This movement will enhance the natural abilities of women and strengthen our weaknesses.

In conclusion, I think I am now feminist, and from now on, the “women’s rights” movement shall be known as the anti-feminist movement.


Hitting the Bullseye

It amazes and amuses me that such a liberal store has a logo commonly associated with guns and hunting – the bullseye.

Let’s look at their history but not the history they have on a timeline on their website.

Since I was little, Target has

* refused to allow the Salvation Army to post buckets and volunteers outside the store collecting funds for those in need.

* been anti-military by penalizing reservists called back to active duty.

* again refused to allow Salvation Army to stand outside their stores after a few years of it being permitted.

* refused to allow a long-retired Marine to be posted at the store collecting Toys for Tots.

* refused to acknowledgment the differences that make each child special by getting rid of anything that could be “controversial” in the toy section as far as is it for boys or girls?

* finally said there are no such things as genders, use whichever bathroom you feel like regardless of how it makes others feel.

One of my friends posted that the probability of a transgender person attacking a person in one of those mixed bathrooms is far less than that transgender person being attacked. So, maybe Target is actually anti-transgender if they are promoting and increasing the chances of a transgender person being attacked? There’s a thought, but I think they are trying to strengthen their liberal stance.

Here’s what they, and all the people bashing Christians and non-Christians who oppose mixed bathrooms are missing: we are not saying or insinuating that the transgender person is going to rape us or our kids. We are saying that this provides an opportunity for a straight pervert to attack us. All that criminal has to do is say, “I was born male but identify more as a female,” and they will be allowed in a bathroom with vulnerable girls of all ages. THAT is why the majority of people are so against Target and others allowing transgenders to use bathrooms for the gender not belonging to their body.

For as often as Target has missed the mark on their corporate policies, they need to either change their name and logo or enlarge that logo so they have a better shot of hitting the bullseye.


Postscript: You can read back through my older posts to see what my views are on the gays and such, but since I haven’t specifically covered transgender, here is my very concise thought on it:  To say that you were born in one gender but were meant to be the opposite is saying that God made a mistake. God does not make mistakes.

History Repeats Itself

Disclaimer: In the following writing, I am NOT claiming America as the Promised Land of the Bible. I am NOT saying America is God’s chosen nation.

Now for the post.

I was listening to a sermon today, preached almost two years ago on the chapter of 1 Samuel when the people of Israel demand a king. Their reason why they wanted a king? They wanted to be like other nations. Other nations had a king. Regardless of the warning from God given by Samuel to the people about the negative results of having a king – loss of personal property, children moved at whim, etc. – the children of Israel clamored for a worldly king.

Fast forward to the mid-late 1700s. The English Colonies here on North America were not happy under the rule of a king. They wanted the chance to make decisions for themselves, for their children. Obviously, they knew a nation without a leader was one that would fall quickly, so the system of checks and balances was established with three different branches of government at state and federal levels. The Patriots were willing to die for the chance to escape a monarchy, the standard government of the time of the nations of the world.

Summary so far: Israel wanted to be like other nations of the world and have a king. American Patriots/Founding Fathers wanted to be different from other nations of the world and NOT have a king.

Fast forward to present day. Socialism, whether “democratic socialism” or “communistic socialism,” is the common government of the world. When my grandpa was near my age, the country was at war with countries who were taking away the rights of the people of those countries. Even now, you hear people grumbling about Russia and how their people are treated by socialistic government, but the smooth talking politicians and wanna-be politicians who call themselves “civil rights leaders or advocates” point away from Russia to the countries of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, etc. who also have socialist governments. Those smooth-talkers are working hard to convince the descendants of Patriots, Minutemen, Sons and Daughters of Liberty, to point to those other countries and say, “We want to be like them.” They want the current generations of people of the United States of America to turn their back on the principle beliefs that began this nation in favor of being like everyone else who have no say in how their government is ran, which is a right being taken slowly away from us even now.

Look at the current presidential candidates. I do not believe I can call myself a Trump supporter, but he does my respect as the only presidential hopeful who is not pointing to other countries as examples of how we should be. He is the only candidate who is reflecting on our past and present situations saying we need to get back to the basic beliefs and Constitutional government of the Unites States of America.