Xordelia (dot) COM

As an atheist raised in a Judeo-Christian household, I find this topic to be particularly interesting. As someone who watched all of the Dr. Dino videos in church as a kid, I am very familiar with a lot of the far-right “intelligent” design arguments (see http://www.drdino.com/). Without getting too political, I was horrified that so many schools in the bible belt (Southern US) were trying to get “intelligent” design put into schools, presenting religious dogma as science, especially during the presidency of George W. Bush. Creationism is NOT science and has no place in a science classroom; if presented in public schools, it should only be presented in a comparative religions class giving other religions equal emphasis. Creationism and Intelligent Design are not scientific theories because they do not follow the scientific method. They do not analyze data proving or disproving a hypothesis and they are not open to peer review. They must either be accepted or rejected. Intelligent Design is figuratively black or white whereas science has a lot of grey area and is constantly changing and correcting itself. To be objective, Intelligent Design in its most recent manifestation is finally at least making an effort to be loosely scientific. Creationists are now trying to disprove science, citing religious dogma as evidence, instead of using a completely faith-based approach. For instance at http://www.intelligentdesign.org/ they actually say that Intelligent Design has nothing to do with the bible and is common sense regardless of what one’s religious beliefs are. When asked if creationist theory is the same as intelligent design, they reply “No. Intelligent design theory is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the “apparent design” in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism is focused on defending a literal reading of the Genesis account, usually including the creation of the earth by the Biblical God a few thousand years ago. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text. (http://www.intelligentdesign.org/faq.php)” One would have to question the truthfulness of this statement however, noting that “god”, “bible” and various pronouns for “god” are capitalized, implying that his site has a Judeo-Christian affiliation. Regardless, it is downright untrue for this website to call Intelligent Design a scientific theory.

A very interesting article validating my opinions is http://is.gd/2pBMP (link has been shortened), which was written by Glenn Branch, the deputy director of the National Center for Science Education. His ultimate conclusion is “Creationism is not just a legal failure. It is a scientific failure as well. Scan the scientific research literature: There are no signs that anyone is using creationism, whether as creation science or its newfangled form of intelligent design, to explain the natural world. In contrast, not a year passes without the appearance of thousands of scientific publications that apply, refine, and extend evolution (http://is.gd/2pBMP). “ Ultimately, thank your deity of choice that we have a supreme court that enforces the separation of church and state clause in our constitution. Otherwise the American education system would be even more flawed. Hopefully during his presidency, President Obama will make a difference in the science education throughout the US, especially in the Southern states, enforcing our laws requiring educators to acknowledge only evolution in the classroom.

It is a shame, in this day and time, especially in a place as liberal as California that Proposition 8 was upheld in court. I would think that everyone, even super conservative christian bigots would want others to be happy. Equality should be for everyone, unconditionally, not just for people who support the conservative agenda.

The far-right in America continues to amaze me in their slamming of President Obama. I admit that I’m still a little doubtful about his economic stimulus, but I am keeping an open mind. But otherwise I have 100% approval of him. He is doing a very good job with foreign policy and rebuilding the bridges that George Bush burnt down.

It pains me when I receive bullshit e-mails like this. But this time I sent a heated reply.

E-mail

Obama Audacity, Obama Arrogance & Obama Ignorance

Arrogant Americans, Mr. President? Arrogant Americans, Mr. President?

Peter Heck – Guest Columnist – 4/14/2009

As I was sitting in church waiting for the start of the service, my grandpa came walking towards me pointing his finger. No matter how old I get, and no matter how long he’s been out of the U.S. Navy, that’s still an intimidating sight.

As he approached me, his voice quivered as he said, “We saved that continent twice…how dare my president apologize for this country’s arrogance.” My grandpa is right.

Americans need not apologize to the world for their arrogance; rather, Americans should apologize to their forefathers for the arrogance of their president. Barack Obama’s first foreign trip as President of the United States has confirmed the naiveté so many of us feared during the election cycle.
But worse than that, it has also demonstrated that our president suffers from either a complete misunderstanding of our heritage and history, or an utter contempt for it. Neither is excusable.

Garnering cheers from the French of all people, President Obama declared, “In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” Consider that Obama spoke these words just 500 miles from the beaches of Normandy, where the sand is still stained with 65-year-old blood of “arrogant Americans.”

Indeed, columnist Mark Whittington observes, “One should remind Mr. Obama and the Europeans how America has ‘shown arrogance’ by saving Europe from itself innumerable times in the 20th Century. World War I, World War II, the Cold War, and the wars in the Balkans were largely resolved by American blood, treasure, and leadership.” But all that appears lost on the president’s seemingly insatiable quest to mend fences he imagines have been tarnished by the bullish George W. Bush. If Obama wishes to continue trampling the presidential tradition of showing class to former office holders and publicly trash Bush for his own personal gain, so be it. But all Americans should make clear that no man – even if he is the president – will tarnish the legacy of those Americans who have gone before us. Ours is not a history of arrogance. It is a history of courage, self-sacrifice, and honor.

When abusive monarchs repressed the masses, Americans resisted and overthrew them. When misguided policies led to the unjust oppression of fellow citizens, Americans rebelled and overturned them.

When millions of impoverished and destitute wretches sought a new beginning, Americans threw open the door and welcomed them. When imperial dictators were on the march, Americans surrendered their lives to stop them.

When communist thugs threatened world peace, Americans bled to defeat them. When an entire continent was overwhelmed with famine and hunger, Americans gave of themselves to sustain it. When terrorist madmen killed the innocent and subjugated millions, Americans led the fight to topple them.

This is the legacy that generations of Americans have left. If President Obama seeks stronger relations with the world community, perhaps he should begin by reminding them of these very truths, rather than condemning his own countrymen on foreign shores.

This “obsessive need to put down his own country,” has caused blogger James Lewis to call President Obama a “stunningly ignorant man” who has evidently never spoken to a concentration camp survivor, a Cuban refugee, a boat person from Vietnam, a Soviet dissident, or a survivor of Mao’s purges.

Unfortunately, I can no longer bring myself to give Mr. Obama that benefit of the doubt. Not after looking at the pain in my grandpa’s eyes…a man who still carries shrapnel in his body from his service to this country.

As a student and teacher of history, I recognize that America has made mistakes…plenty of them, in fact. But one of the great things about our people has been their courage and humility in admitting and correcting those mistakes.

God willing, they will prove that willingness again in four years and correct the mistake that is the presidency of Barack Obama.

My Reply

They forget to mention that America did not join WWII to help Europe, America waited until they saw Hitler as a threat to their own interests and only joined to protect American interests.

They had full knowledge of what was happening to the Jews and did NOTHING to help them because they thought they might have to emigrate them here. Obviously we learned nothing because look at Darfur and Rwanda.

America is hardly the noble country that this is making it out to be. I think Obama is doing a good job, I’m very impressed with him.

Further, America was minimally involved in WWI and the whole idea of the cold war was America vs. USSR. If anything the non-Communist parts of Europe helped US. Not the other way around. The Far-Right needs to stop being so emotional and read up on their history. I hated history and I know more than the person who wrote this forward.

I should clarify that none of my words are aimed at the American soldiers who fought and died for our corrupt government, they are aimed at the government and it’s poor decisions.

Cectic – Science Proves Noah.

HAHA. If there was any doubt evolution was far-left lies, here you go!

Another interesting economic blog I found looking around. Our economy really is looking dire these days. This one is short and sweet, but what do you think about it?

I agree with the Social Darwinism/Self Regulating economy idea. Let the American auto industry fail. Toyota is better anyway. Perhaps Toyota will buy up the old GM/Chrysler assets and continue doing a better job. Toyota is already better for the American economy than the big 4 have been since the 1950s.

Our government needs to stop bailing everyone out. This is not Sweden – the US is too big to be a “nanny” State. I voted for Obama and I’m generally pleased with what he did, but I agree with the vast majority of economists (including the Nobel Laureates) – more spending is not going to help our budget deficit.

Cafferty File: Tell Jack how you really feel Blog Archive – What if GM or Chrysler go bankrupt? « – Blogs from CNN.com.

This made me laugh – I got it in one of those chain e-mails – it goes along with my favorite American saying – “If you want it, buy it; if you can’t afford it, charge it”.

Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Detroit. In order to increase sales, she
decides to allow her loyal customers – most of whom are unemployed
alcoholics – to drink now but pay later. She keeps track of the drinks
consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans).

Word gets around about Heidi’s drink now pay later marketing strategy
and as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood into Heidi’s bar
and soon she has the largest sale volume for any bar in Detroit.

By providing her customers’ freedom from immediate payment demands,
Heidi gets no resistance when she substantially increases her prices for
wine and beer, the most consumed beverages. Her sales volume increases
massively.

A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank recognizes these
customer debts as valuable future assets and increases Heidi’s borrowing
limit.

He sees no reason for undue concern since he has the debts of the
alcoholics as collateral. At the bank’s corporate headquarters, expert
traders transform these customer loans into DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS
and PUKEBONDS.

These securities are then traded on security markets
worldwide. Naive investors don’t really understand the securities being sold
to them as AAA secured bonds are really the debts of unemployed alcoholics.

Nevertheless, their prices continuously climb, and the securities become
the top-selling items for some of the nation’s leading brokerage houses.

One day, although the bond prices are still climbing, a risk manager at the
bank (subsequently fired due his negativity), decides that the time has come
to demand payment on the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi’s bar.

Heidi demands payment from her alcoholic patrons, but being unemployed
they cannot pay back their drinking debts. Therefore, Heidi cannot
fulfill her loan obligations and claims bankruptcy.

DRINKBOND and ALKIBOND drop in price by 90 %. PUKEBOND performs
better, stabilizing in price after dropping by 80 %. The decreased bond
asset value destroys the banks liquidity and prevents it from issuing new loans.

The suppliers of Heidi’s bar, having granted her generous payment extensions
and having invested in the securities are faced with writing off her debt
and losing over 80% on her bonds. Her wine supplier claims bankruptcy, her beer
supplier is taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local
plant and lays off 50 workers.

The bank and brokerage houses are saved by the Government following
dramatic round-the-clock negotiations by leaders from both political
parties.

The funds required for this bailout are obtained by a tax levied on employed
middle-class non-drinkers.

Ok so maybe romance is an overstatement. Short lived casual dating is more like it.

Anyway, since I’m not all that fond of flaming types when considering guys to date – and despise our mainstream American gay culture – I have had a hard time meeting people who are worth my time and effort to date. In the end I’ve decided that my choices are either meeting someone at church (unlikely with sites such as http://godhatesfags.com out there) or meeting someone on an online dating site. For my own safety, I chose the latter.

I should preface this with saying that I’ve always considered online dating sites for lame fat people who are unable to get laid – or people looking ONLY to get laid – so I’ve never taken the time to get involved with one. However, I finally took the time to join OKCupid which is a fairly effective (and free) dating site. It asks you a series of questions about yourself and how your ideal match would answer the questions and gauges a relationship compatibility based on your answers.

I met a few people people on there right off the bat, two guys who seemed to be different than the stereotypes, perhaps deep, and worth my while. The first guy I met is called Ryan and the second is called Jose.

Ryan and I hit it off almost immediately – but then I met Jose who asked me out before Ryan and I got a chance to talk too much. I of course said yes even though I felt a bit uneasy about meeting online people. We met at Hillcrest Cinemas and saw the movie Revolutionary Road, went to a hookah lounge to watch belly dancing and finally ate breakfast at 1:30 in the morning.

I thought the date went very well. It was a bit long for a first date but it was fun. And, as I would have it no other way, it ended with a kiss on the cheek. Our society is so cliche for ending up in bed on a first date and I just find that ridiculous and low class.

Throughout the date and throughout the pre-date and post-date text/phone flirting, Jose was the perfect guy. He knew the right things to say, remembered little details such as me having a test or interview and seemed to really care. I really liked that. In short, he did the mushy well. But regardless of any other aspect of him, I just didn’t feel the chemistry – I was not attracted to him. And that isn’t to say that he is unattractive. He’s decent looking. Just…I don’t know, couldn’t get into him.

As cliche as this sounds, I thought to myself that I was the problem, I’m shallow or something and maybe if I gave him more time I could come to find him attractive. It never happened.

When I went to San Francisco the weekend of the 14th, he and his friend Christopher also happened to be up there that weekend. My friend Carrie and I met them at the corner of Haight/Ashbury and went driving around. We had random adventures around the city, went shopping, went to Starbucks, etc. But the entire time, Jose and Christopher were making comments about everything we passed. Some of them were funny like “oh my GODDDDDD. That maternity store is so fucking cute!” and “oh my GODDDDDD woman, are you waiting for a better paint job” when a lady hesitated at a light. They were truly hilarious, in true flamboyant fashion – but flamboyance is a huge turn off to me.

In the end, I just decided that Jose’s conformity to gay mainstream culture was a turn off to me. His need to go to gay bars and clubs to pick up guys, even while casually dating me, was a turn off. His need to comment on everything in a super obnoxious way, be it positive or negative, was a huge turn off. Ultimately, he was a huge turn off.

All of it was a huge shame though because he really is a genuinely nice guy. He has long term potential. He’s very good at the mushy.

When I got home from San Francisco I lamely told him by text message that I don’t think we should continue dating each other – that I am not attracted to him and that he seems to be attracted to me – and that I don’t want to lead him on.

This was the extent of our interchange:

Jose: Morning! Don’t know if you’re working this morning but I hope you’re having a good one. PS: We still need to celebrate valentine’s. Just the two of us.

Me: Jose I really like you, but I’m just not feeling the chemistry with you. Maybe I’m still hung up on a past relationship. Maybe you’re just not my type. I don’t know but I know you are interested and I don’t want to lead you on. So I do not want to continue dating. Sorry. And I’m sorry to do this by text but I can’t talk at the moment.

Jose: My friends told me to end it after the first date but I thought you were different. I guess you don’t know what you want or aren’t mature enough for a relationship. I don’t think we were in a situation to really get to know each other on Saturday so that was probably not a good idea but had hoped to get another chance. I guess you don’t want that. You’re missing out.

Me: Maybe. I guess I’ll see.

Jose: I need to get something off my chest. 1. What happened to “you’re prefect”. And 2. That trench coat was so tacky! I guess that’s why I didn’t wanna be too close to you on Saturday you looked homeless.

Me: 1. You really are perfect. You do all the mushy stuff well. Are generally attractive, etc. But I’m just not attracted to you. I think its due to the obnoxious flamboyance. Or maybe the need to talk about every person you pass. I am not and never will be part of the gay mainstream culture. I have too much self respect. So like I said, everything you did was right. It’s just who you are that I can’t deal with. And I’m not naive enough to expect someone to change who they are for me. 2. Trench coat I think goes hand in hand with the whole shallow gay mainstream need to put people down. I don’t see it as relevant, but ok sure?

Jose: I’m pretty sure you made snarky remarks about the music playing in the car and made negative comments about burning man and coachella, both things you know nothing about. Also starting you were going to start drama with your family is not very mature and just as queeny and flamboyant. I can’t take your closeted views of gay culture seriously. It exposes your internalized homophobia. It’s not that you’ll never be part of the culture, you won’t allow yourself to be part of it until you let go of the negative stigmas and embrace who you are. Good luck with that. You’re holding yourself and others from coming together and fighting for equality.

Me: Sounds like I’m going you a favor then

Blogging about this makes me upset all over again. I started out, being sensitive to his feelings, being kind, not really saying what I mean, beating around the bush, etc and he comes up with all of this mean bullshit.

First of all, he told me that he told his friends about me and they were all happy for him, that he found someone who isn’t like everyone else, who is different. He and they as a group found that refreshing. So what is it? Why either lie to begin with or lie to try to insult someone. It was two dates! Hardly a dramatic break up.

My trench coat made me look like I’m homeless? HAHA. That is just an overly childish attempt at a below-the-belt insult. My trench coat is hot. Carrie said so. And I trust her judgement. I look like Neo from the Matrix. Jose is just jealous. He should be focusing on professional fashion rather than “gay” brands like Abecrombie & Fitch, American Eagle and Aeropostale that very much do not fit his frame. Does he not realize how obnoxious a form fitting polo shirt looks on someone who weighs 300 pounds?

Snarky comments about music playing in the car? I didn’t even know what the songs were! Never heard of them. How is that snarky asking who a band is? Coachella and Burning Man. All I commented was that I would die if I was in the desert for 3 days without a shower. Yup, that’s queeny, I’m guilty!

Finally, I do not see how not wanting to be a statistic makes me internally homophobic. A public image of gay males as being obnoxious, crude, overly sexual and flamboyant to the point of social isolation into places like Hillcrest, Castro, Province Town, etc. Yes, that kind of image is going to bring us equality. That’s what we need. More flamers marching in parades and making complete fools of themselves. I’m the one holding the LGBT population back from equality. From change. By being a socially acceptable and successful member of society. Who isn’t on fast track to AIDS from hooking up with guys from bars and clubs.

Anyway, rant done. Now I have taken the time to connect with Ryan, the other guy from OKCupid. I see real potential. He is not a flamer. Has a lot of the same interests as me. Definitely has an attraction factor in there. And even in the beginning, he accepts and desires me as I am. What more can one ask for?