I'm in the midst of creating a new blog over on journalspace. For the same price, free, I can have soooooooooo many other options. I'm actually quite excited about it.
When I am done, I'll post a link here and actually, move all my stuff over. So, pray me design happiness.
http://vivianlouise.journalspace.com/
This is where I am now. I'm not done shifting everything over there, but for now, all new posts will only be on journalspace. It really is much more betterer.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
IED's
It used to be, way back in the day, that the measure of a man or a woman was the level of self control they exerted over their baser nature. That self-control was taught, often brutally, by life, parents, nature and circumstance. Bad character wasn't some scary creature in a B movie, it was those parts of a person's soul that had been given over to the dark. Good character is that part of a person given over to the light. Dark meaning sin and light meaning godliness and righteousness. (Not self-righteousness, two different things.)
Yesterday I heard from Brian Williams on NBC that a new "disorder" had been "discovered", IED, or Intermittent Explosive Disorder, the condition that makes it impossible for one to control their temper.
WHAT??????????? These are the times I'd long to use an expletive, but in the interest of showing restraint I won't. But, WHAT???? Suddenly that fool who gets ticked on the beltway and rams the person in front gets morally let off because he has a condition that made it impossible to control his temper? Used to be that kind of "condition" got you locked up and a months worth of electro-shock therapy to boot.
Brian Nieman on WMAL rattled off some specious argument that if it's a disorder and the person gets locked up but gets help, either way the person is off the street and they didn't get off. Wrong, Mr. Nieman, wrong. It matters one heck of a lot HOW the person is charged and if they are held responsible for their actions morally. It matters how they are treated, what gets treated and what punishment they get. Fundamentally it is the sin of anger, which is a heart/soul ailment for which there is only one cure. That cure is repentance, there is no other way. That's about as much "disorder" I'm willing to concede. It is morally two very different things, if, say, a man murders his wife in a fit of rage, and we find him guilty of murder rather than innocent by reason of a disorder. Guilt connotates responsibility. Innocent, even by reason of insanity, connotates a lack of responsibility. If a man has this disorder then perhaps, since he isn't responsible for controlling his temper, he shouldn't be allowed to date, marry or have children. Further, he shouldn't be allowed to drive, vote, have conversations in public, visit family. He should be locked away forever in solitary since by virtue of this "disorder" he may someday go postal and murder, sorry, kill innocent people.
I love America, mostly. But this part I hate. Despise wouldn't be to strong a word. I despise our steadily increasing insistence that we are not responsible for our actions. I guarantee you that 99.999% of those people who will say they have IED would maintain their tempers when confronted by someone bigger and armed. That miniscule minority really do have a problem that requires them to be locked up. The rest need to learn some self control and others respect. We are not all victims. Even when we are we don't get to act with abandon.
Yesterday I heard from Brian Williams on NBC that a new "disorder" had been "discovered", IED, or Intermittent Explosive Disorder, the condition that makes it impossible for one to control their temper.
WHAT??????????? These are the times I'd long to use an expletive, but in the interest of showing restraint I won't. But, WHAT???? Suddenly that fool who gets ticked on the beltway and rams the person in front gets morally let off because he has a condition that made it impossible to control his temper? Used to be that kind of "condition" got you locked up and a months worth of electro-shock therapy to boot.
Brian Nieman on WMAL rattled off some specious argument that if it's a disorder and the person gets locked up but gets help, either way the person is off the street and they didn't get off. Wrong, Mr. Nieman, wrong. It matters one heck of a lot HOW the person is charged and if they are held responsible for their actions morally. It matters how they are treated, what gets treated and what punishment they get. Fundamentally it is the sin of anger, which is a heart/soul ailment for which there is only one cure. That cure is repentance, there is no other way. That's about as much "disorder" I'm willing to concede. It is morally two very different things, if, say, a man murders his wife in a fit of rage, and we find him guilty of murder rather than innocent by reason of a disorder. Guilt connotates responsibility. Innocent, even by reason of insanity, connotates a lack of responsibility. If a man has this disorder then perhaps, since he isn't responsible for controlling his temper, he shouldn't be allowed to date, marry or have children. Further, he shouldn't be allowed to drive, vote, have conversations in public, visit family. He should be locked away forever in solitary since by virtue of this "disorder" he may someday go postal and murder, sorry, kill innocent people.
I love America, mostly. But this part I hate. Despise wouldn't be to strong a word. I despise our steadily increasing insistence that we are not responsible for our actions. I guarantee you that 99.999% of those people who will say they have IED would maintain their tempers when confronted by someone bigger and armed. That miniscule minority really do have a problem that requires them to be locked up. The rest need to learn some self control and others respect. We are not all victims. Even when we are we don't get to act with abandon.
My New Favorite
This year my garden is producing few peas, I don't know why, and many many more radishes. Growing up I wasn't a fan of that little spicy red thing, but now, oh yum. But anyway, I'm still not so enamored of the straight up radish. I like it slightly marinated in Rice Vinegar, a little salt, a little pepper and I'm gone. By slightly I mean about five minutes. That seems to take the bitterness away and leaves the clear taste of the radish.
Even better than that just straight is a salad made of fresh greens and herbs straight out of my garden, seasoned with salt, kosher or sea salt, fresh ground black pepper, add a dash of really good olive oil. Then pour the bowl of marinating radishes over the lettuces and toss. Oh my lanta! That's a really good salad. You can add a touch of grated Romano, but you don't have to. It's nearly perfect exactly the way it is.
Even better than that just straight is a salad made of fresh greens and herbs straight out of my garden, seasoned with salt, kosher or sea salt, fresh ground black pepper, add a dash of really good olive oil. Then pour the bowl of marinating radishes over the lettuces and toss. Oh my lanta! That's a really good salad. You can add a touch of grated Romano, but you don't have to. It's nearly perfect exactly the way it is.
Monday, June 05, 2006
I want Mary Poppins
If I have to have a nanny I want one that possesses magical abilities, can teach me to fly and makes carousel horses run across fields. I want to dance with Dick Van Dyke and hop in and out of chalk drawings.
What I don't want is some government agency to tell me what I can and can not eat, drive or say. There was a report this morning on the radio that the FDA is considering regulating portion size in restaurants. That's outside the pale. The government has absolutely no business telling us how large our portions can be. They can, and do, make recommendations, but at no time do they have any business mandating portion sizes. It's already disgusting that they regulate smoking they way they do, and tax cigarettes prohibitively the same way they tax gasoline. I don't smoke anymore, and actually have no intention of taking it up again, but still, unless they ban the substance altogether, tobacco users should be free to smoke where they want to. I can chose to go to a restaurant that is voluntarily smoke free, or I can choose to put up with smoke. What I don't get to do is dictate to other people what they can and can not do with a legal substance.
I readily acknowledge drinking and driving is an obvious exception to that rule, so don't yell at me.
Anywho, I don't elect politicians to babysit me or my neighbor, to tell me what to eat, what cars to buy, what things to wear. I expect my politicians to read the constitution, get to know it real well, pass as few new laws as are absolutely necessary, strictly enforce the ones that are, repeal old bad laws as needed and to refrain from spending my hard earned tax dollars on stupid frivolous crap like regulating portion size at The Outback. If I needed a nanny I voted for, I vote for Mary Poppins. If I want a steak bigger than is good for me, I'll eat it and pay for it too.
Plus it would be fun to jump into that carpet bag of hers. OH, and to steal her umbrella and play pranks.
What I don't want is some government agency to tell me what I can and can not eat, drive or say. There was a report this morning on the radio that the FDA is considering regulating portion size in restaurants. That's outside the pale. The government has absolutely no business telling us how large our portions can be. They can, and do, make recommendations, but at no time do they have any business mandating portion sizes. It's already disgusting that they regulate smoking they way they do, and tax cigarettes prohibitively the same way they tax gasoline. I don't smoke anymore, and actually have no intention of taking it up again, but still, unless they ban the substance altogether, tobacco users should be free to smoke where they want to. I can chose to go to a restaurant that is voluntarily smoke free, or I can choose to put up with smoke. What I don't get to do is dictate to other people what they can and can not do with a legal substance.
I readily acknowledge drinking and driving is an obvious exception to that rule, so don't yell at me.
Anywho, I don't elect politicians to babysit me or my neighbor, to tell me what to eat, what cars to buy, what things to wear. I expect my politicians to read the constitution, get to know it real well, pass as few new laws as are absolutely necessary, strictly enforce the ones that are, repeal old bad laws as needed and to refrain from spending my hard earned tax dollars on stupid frivolous crap like regulating portion size at The Outback. If I needed a nanny I voted for, I vote for Mary Poppins. If I want a steak bigger than is good for me, I'll eat it and pay for it too.
Plus it would be fun to jump into that carpet bag of hers. OH, and to steal her umbrella and play pranks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)