Tag Archives: science

Middle Ground

Denying God is a choice for some folks. This choice has many different factors, most of which are not evil. The roots of disbelief are varied and don’t have as much to do with Satan as they do with our psychology.

I’ll stay as far from the atheist vs theist movement as much as possible. These two groups, in my eyes, are the charismatic extremes of the normal everyday believer or non believer. While one labors to live today within an Old Testament reality the other spends an inordinate amount of time talking about the crusades. Neither of these two will help anyone.

I have learned that the middle road scenery is a more realistic journey. I have to stay focused on the path because life seems to push us to extremes. I’m not afraid of God or biology, and for me, it’s what we’re all made of.

At it’s purest form God seems to be the “thing” we question or celebrate every time something good or bad happens to us. After a series of unfortunate events we may question “Why me!” Maybe we hit a string of luck and feel fortunate that somehow it was our turn. Either way, luck, good or bad, assumes an external control.

The strange thing is that whether you believe or don’t, there’s a nagging “something” within the human condition that questions our place in the world. A believer who questions their faith during times of trial, or the non believer who rationalizes events in their life, both rely on something invisible to the average human condition of understanding. Both experience events beyond their understanding and question “why”.

I’m not making a case for or against believing or non belief. I’m simply pointing to the fact that we share this space of unknown consequence. We experience things beyond or control or understanding and attempt to fill it with faith or facts. When both of these fail it seems it’s just us. Somehow we are the unfortunate or fortunate ones.

This space is where the disagreement comes and folks have preyed (no pun intended) on probably forever in human history. It’s almost like I wish we could define for folks what it was like “pre-religious”. Like we do for pre-industrialization. From the accounts we have, it was a violent existence. I’m not saying religion saved the world , it seems it capitalized on humans ability to organize for collective survival. However, we are certainly better off as humans for exploring our spiritual side, it’s when it became a vocation we strayed.

Origins are the key. It’s from these points we can move foreword with coherence. We won’t change institutional religion in government, they’re mutually exclusive at this point, we’d have to eliminate both and that’s not gonna happen. We can enlighten folks on the history of our humanity so that they may exercise their spirituality more responsibly.

So whoever or whatever we fill that void with, we have to leave room for respect and honesty. When I say honesty I don’t mean facts, I mean feelings. I am in the middle between facts and feelings, not to be objective, although that helps, but I think the middle is the space where balance rules.

Hitting folks over the head with a Bible or Quran just makes folks numb. Just like throwing our a barrage of scientific facts to counter someone’s spiritual sensibilities shuts down dialog. Someone had to stand in the gap of reason.

Religion is not spirituality and science is not intelligence. It makes no sense that God would subjugate his creation, just as it makes no sense science would reject possibility. Between the two most of us live, and within the two we survive our own intellectual and spiritual ignorance. And this is life.

Logical Intrusion

Usually folks put some kind of sympathetic disclaimer in the beginning of their conversation when they talk about “touchy issues”, well I’m not. If you wanna be a man, or woman, or both learn to suck it up and realize you ain’t perfect bitch , bastard, whatever!!!

The argument about homosexuality is taken out of context on many levels. Christians and conservatives make it about the “war on marriage”. Supposed “left wing liberals” take the issue out of the scientific realm using sympathetic social cliches like the Russians use plutonium. All this confusion takes away from the truth.

Thinking empirically, as a species of humans Gay couldn’t work for obvious reasons. So “Gay” for the sake of brevity, is not a species.

Gay cannot be a gender for the same reason it can’t be a species; gay cannot procreate and therefor would not reproduce biologically. Wether they have a vagina or a penis they physically fall into the category of one or the other. If they have both they’re an anomaly, not a gender.

Gay does not fit into the race chart because the characteristics are not specific. Caucasoid, negroid, etc all share DNA that makes them similar in origin. Gay can be found within each of the race families.

Gay is not a nationality for obvious reasons. It’s not a sustainable way of life to reproduce and lacks the power to exert its will over other forms of society, I think!

As a culture Gay has grown to become one of the stronger fringes of society. Piggybacking and eventually usurping the woman’s right and colored civil rights movement have put Gay at the forefront of civil rights.

Gay is not a medical condition. Their are no medical differences between Homosexual or heterosexual folks. There are no conditions or disorders or illnesses specifically related to being Gay, other than the obvious relating from the act of risky sexual behaviors.

Here we are again though; to say Gay is a medical condition is viewed as an attack. Mainly due to the logic that. Medical conditions have a cure. That doesn’t go well!!!

As of late there are medical advances to perpetuate Gay as a normal experience, however; there are no vaccines or surgeries to complete the Gay experience as a transition to reproduce. The fact that folks are pursuing these options is a statement against the argument that if used, brings scorn.

This brings us to a really sensitive point. Gay as a psychological anomaly. It’s the only explanation scientifically that makes sense. It is not viewed as empathetic to say we should except folks as they are, as we do with other psychological anomalies. Gay folks won’t stand for that. They believe that a man or woman who wants to be Gay should be accepted without consideration to wether or not it’s normal, meaning statistically within the curve as normal human behavior. Accepting Gay as a psychological anomaly within the human spectrum is not a popular statement, no matter how empathetic you are.

I’ve written this for myself as a human, a Christian, and a citizen. One day my folks will have a Gay person in our family. I want them to know I accept their decision to be whatever they want to be. I don’t want to them to think ill pacify them with ignorance to obvious facts associated with human behavior, but ill love them just like the other humans I know struggling to live and define themselves in the world we live.

Christians are the hypocrites in the issue. Christ went where he was needed and we all know the traps of judgement. Politicians are next in line. They use the whole issue to get votes. One side captures the Gay population and its sympathizers while the other grabs up the hypocrites who oppose the lifestyle. Both sides could be put in one basket really!!!

I don’t hate anything, but ignorance and deceit. I don’t like being told half truths and being expected to believe them just because of some agenda laced with emotion. Show me something about the scientific reality of the biological basis of Gay and I’ll certainly embrace the truth. Until then ill just continue to embrace everyone for who they are and how they choose to live. That’s the human thing to do!!!

The Police Are Coming: the Paul Revere Version!!!

Man!!!! These shootings really got me going for a minute, and I’m still pissed. This last story about the Soldier in Texas has fueled the fire. That Sergeant held himself accountable and turned himself into an El Paso jail for a two day stay and came out in a casket. I’m pissed.

This rubric that law enforcement and other agency use to excuse their incompetence is transparent and pathetic, but we as citizens do nothing. We cower to the “authority” that we give them. We have to address the issues professionally, leaving out myths and emotions.

Every once in a while over my adult life there have been “shake ups” in government entities. Usually politically motivated, but a light was shined on antiquated procedures and policies that in modern times seemed ignorant and counter productive to the particular agencies goals, possibly where the term. “Oxymoron” originated. It’s that time for law enforcement.

I am not attacking officers, their only as good as their policies and procedure, and the folks who develop and supervise them. Yeah their are good and bad officers, good and bad precincts, and probably good and bad regions. I’m certain most officers patrolling or guarding are good folks.

Take a look at the region of the United States where the shootings occur and maybe that will reveal something. I’m not sure because law enforcement seems to have a problem with reporting their actions for research purposes. Which could be problem number one, reporting!

There are an abundance of “corporate universities” on line and on site that have capitalized on advanced degrees for middle income American professions. Nursing, education, and Law enforcement leading the economic drive. Problem seems, education and nursing also have a representative presence in research universities as well, law enforcement doesn’t. This may explain the lack of accountability and rigor with respect to data. If they kept accurate date like the other career fields many myths and accusations about “bad policing” could be rejected; like the latest drama played out in Baltimore.

Second, and equally important is politics and policing. Stop electing law enforcement leaders. Take the School Board in some jurisdictions for instance. The Superintendent is nominated by elected officials. Then the short list is developed. Then a vote of the committee determines which candidate out of the few left best fits based on their “qualifications”. Right now a popular person with no qualifications is serving as Sheriff in some county out there!!! Take politics out of policing!!!!

3rd , supervisory positions should be earned by merit. In the military they make a good effort to do this. An honest assessment of ones ability is done monthly or quarterly depending on the service and positions. At the higher levels a board determines your eligibility based “on your record”, not your personality, they don’t meet you. It’s not 100%, but nobodies son “gets the position” this way!!!

Standardization is important. Had we been taking policing seriously for years we would appreciate the value of documenting and debriefing. This leads to more effective approaches in all endeavors and highlights ineffective actions that deter from the mission. Too many gaudy mission statements hang on dusty plaques In police offices and jails around our nation.

Officers need to be out of their cars and guards need to use strategies that allow them to interact with their populations. The antiquated authoritarian approaches to the criminal element will not work, it creates confrontation. This approach hinges on respect and that went out the window around the time ADHD became an excuse or condition, I’m not sure which one ! This ain’t the seventies!!!

Physical standards!!! I don’t even have to mention this, it’s obvious, but I have to make this a paragraph. You cannot be morbidly obese and be an effective officer of the law. You will not be taken seriously, it reflects bad on the profession, and you put yourself and the perpetrator in harm due to your reduced capacity. Establish realistic physical standards and say goodbye to those that can’t meet and maintain those standards.

We’ve shook up the FBI, CIA, Secret Service and a host of other agencies due to the old saying, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. We need to overhaul and provide oversight for law enforcement in the United States. From the top down clean house.

Then we may be able to start fresh with sound approaches that are accountable based on data. Its would be much better for the officers and the citizens. Right now the incompetence of the leadership has the officers going out into an environment where the citizens believe they target certain populations. That’s inexcusable.

If we had data for 15 years on who had been killed, wounded, and beaten; which ethnicity they were and what region they were from, we could probably clear up these headlines. For all we know cops are beating Chinese folks in Alaska at an alarming rate!!!

We, citizens, are the only group that can protect our citizens and officers that serve and protect them. We need to professionalize the procedures and policies of the leadership in law enforcement. Accountability is a basic duty of any leader. Transparency dissolves doubt. Militarization creates enemies and goon squads bum rushing cells are just thugs with equipment. This is the 21st century, surely we can do better than this!