27. OTHER RAMBLINGS I DON'T LIKE ABORTION, HOWEVER, I DO RECOGNIZE THAT WOMEN SHOULD HAVE CONTROL OVER THEIR BODIES. SAYING THIS I ALSO BELIEVE THEY AND THEIR SEXUAL PARTNER SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS CAUSING REPRODUCTION. I DO NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH ABORTIONS IN THE CASE OF RAPE OR INCEST, OR WHEN THE MOTHERS LIFE IS IN DANGER, AND MAYBE EVEN IN VERY YOUNG COUPLES, MARRIED OR NOT, WHO MAKE A MISTAKE AND DO NOT WANT TO START A FAMILY NOW, AT LEAST THE FIRST TIME. ABORTION SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A USUAL, REGULAR, OR NORMAL METHOD OF BIRTH CONTROL. THERE ARE MANY OTHER EASIER AND HEALTHIER METHODS IN EVERYDAY USE. (B) ALONG THIS SAME SUBJECT LINE MAYBE I CAN INJECT SOME OTHER CLARITY. MY FATHER SUGGESTED THIS TO ME. IF THE ABSENCE OF CORTICAL BRAIN ACTIVITY IS THE MEDICAL DEFINITION OF CLINICAL DEATH, THEN IT SEEMED TO HIM THAT THE PRESENCE OF CORTICAL BRAIN ACTIVITY IS THE MEDICAL DEFINITION OF LIFE. SURELY, SOME SCIENTIST WHO SPECIALIZES IN PRENATAL STUDIES CAN TELL US WHEN CORTICAL BRAIN ACTIVITY STARTS IN FETUSES. THIS WOULD NOT END THE ARGUMENT FOR THE RELIGIOUS PEOPLE BUT SHOULD CLARIFY THE LENGTH OF TIME INTO THE PREGNANCY LEGAL ABORTIONS SHOULD STOP. I AM NOT CERTAIN I LIKE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, EITHER. HOWEVER, I THINK IT MAY BE A NECESSARY, IF NOT AN AWKWARD SOLUTION, TO A BIGGER PROBLEM. THEREFORE, I WOULD LIKE TO INJECT THIS IDEA INTO THE ARGUMENT ABOUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND SAY TO THOSE WHO SAY CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS NOT A DETERRENT TO CRIME. FIRST, I DEFY ANYONE TO SHOW ME ONE PERSON WHO HAS SUFFERED CAPITAL PUNISHMENT WHO HAS EVEN GOTTEN A PARKING TICKET AFTERWARDS. I WON'T EVEN DISCUSS VOTING. IN THOSE CASES CAPITAL PUNISHMENT SEEMS TO BE A DETERRENT TO CRIME, SECONDLY, IT ALSO SEEMS TO LOWER RECIDIVISM. NO ONE WHO HAS COMPLETED THEIR SENTENCE HAS EVER RETURNED TO PRISON AGAIN. NOW, ON TO GUN CONTROL. GUN CONTROL TO ME IS BEING ABLE TO HIT WHAT I AIM AT. WHAT MOST PEOPLE TRULY WANT IS CONTROL OVER GUN OWNERSHIP. I THINK MENTALLY UNSTABLE OR MENTALLY DEFICIENT INDIVIDUALS, CRIMINALS WHO ARE VIOLENT OR WHO HAVE FELONY RECORDS, AND PERSONS WHO ARE AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE GUNS. PEOPLE WHO ARE AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT OBVIOUSLY DO NOT TRUST OUR WHOLE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, WITH A TRIAL BY A JURY OF THEIR PEERS AND APPEALS OUT THE YING YANG LASTING FOR YEARS AND YEARS. THEY DO NOT THINK THAT THIS SYSTEM CAN BE TRUSTED TO MAKE A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL DECISION ABOUT THE PUNISHMENT OF INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE COMMITTED HEINOUS CRIMES. THEN, HOW CAN WE TRUST THEM TO BE A BETTER JUDGE AND JURY IN THEIR OWN LIFE AND DEATH SITUATIONS, AND ALLOW THEM TO USE A GUN TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND OTHERS THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO DEFEND? PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME! WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW THEM TO HAVE GUNS? VIOLENCE - FROM THE TIME THE VERY FIRST SINGLE CELLED CREATURE MOVED OVER AND ATE THE SECOND SINGLE CELLED CREATURE, SURVIVAL HAS BEEN OF PRIMARY IMPORTANCE, MAKING VIOLENCE A NECESSARY EVIL. I CAN UNDERSTAND SOME FORMS OF VIOLENCE WHEN IT COMES TO SURVIVAL. HOWEVER, THE VIOLENCE I SEE IN EVERYDAY HUMAN AFFAIRS IS NOT NECESSARY AND IS VERY EVIL. WE, AS HUMAN BEINGS, MUST GET TO THE POINT WHERE ALL VIOLENCE, BY US, TO US, AND AROUND US IS NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE, ALLOWABLE, OR TOLERABLE. THEN WE WILL BE FULLY AND COMPLETELY MATURE HUMAN BEINGS. I ALREADY BELIEVE ALMOST ALL FORMS OF VIOLENCE ARE AN UNNECESSARY EVIL, AND MUST BE STOPPED. HOWEVER, I AM NOT WILLING AT THIS POINT TO GIVE UP MEAT OR PLANTS AS FOOD SOURCES. WHEN WE CAN REPLICATE FOOD FROM RAW MATERIALS LIKE ON THE TV SHOW STAR TREK, THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO GIVE UP MEAT AND PLANTS AS FOOD. CURRENTLY, WE USE VIOLENCE AS A REACTION TO THE US-VERSUS-THEM SYNDROME. FOR SOME REASON WE FEEL THREATENED BY "THEM." THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE, SINCE THERE ARE NO "THEM" HERE ON THIS PLANET EARTH, ONLY US. WHEN WE, AS HUMAN BEINGS, CAN COME TOGETHER AND GREET EACH OTHER AS BROTHERS AND SISTERS, NOT AS "OTHER'S" OR "THEM'S," THEN WE WILL BE READY TO STOP THE INSANITY OF OUR VIOLENCE. I WISH WE COULD HAVE A WAR ON DRUGS. IF WE COULD ELIMINATE THEM FROM THE WORLD, THEN WE MIGHT BE A HAPPIER PEOPLE, BUT WHAT I SEE IS A WAR ON OUR OWN PEOPLE. THESE PEOPLE (DRUG USERS) ARE VERY SICK AND CAN'T EVEN HELP THEMSELVES. SO A WAR ON THEM MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME, NOT! THAT MAKES ABOUT AS MUCH SENSE AS TAKING THE WAR ON POVERTY TO THE POOR AND KILLING OR JAILING THEM BECAUSE THEY SUFFER FROM POVERTY. WE SHOULD HELP BOTH THE POOR AND THE DRUG ADDICTS TO REGAIN, OR POSSIBLY GAIN FOR THE FIRST TIME SOME SELF RESPECT AND HOPE. SINCE A LOT OF POOR PEOPLE USE DRUGS, WE COULD "KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE" SO TO SPEAK. THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO THE ISSUE OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND. IT SEEMS CLEAR WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING REALLY NEGATIVE TO THE SUPPLY SIDE, SO MAYBE WE CAN DO SOMETHING REAL NEGATIVE TO THE DEMAND SIDE, LIKE GET DRUG USERS OFF DRUGS BY BUILDING DETOXIFICATION CENTERS, REHABILITATION CENTERS, AND SENTENCING USERS TO EXTENDED STAYS IN THEM. EDUCATION COULD HELP AND ALSO REDUCE THE DEMAND FOR DRUGS. EVEN NANCY'S SILLY "JUST SAY NO" WAS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. DIDN'T PROHIBITION IN THE THIRTIES TEACH US ANY THING ABOUT TRYING TO STOP THE SUPPLY? PARAQUAT, RADAR PLANES, SEARCH-AND-DESTROY MISSIONS IN FRIENDLY NATIONS AND ALL THE REST OF THAT STUFF, HAVE STILL NOT STOPPED THE FLOW OF ILLEGAL DRUGS TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ( NOT EVEN BY 1 PERCENT BY OUR OWN DEA'S ADMISSION). SUPPLY-SIDE THINKING ONLY MAKES THE WRONG PEOPLE RICH, IN THIS CASE THE DRUG DEALERS. (WHICH REMINDS ME OF RONNIE RAYGUNS ECONOMIC POLICY, ONLY THE RICH GOT RICHER ON THAT TOO. YOU REMEMBER RONNIE, THE GUY WHO FIGURED OUT OUR WHOLE FUTURE NATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY ON A COCKTAIL NAPKIN IN ONE AFTERNOON MEETING). HUM, I WONDER WHO ARE THE BIG WIG DRUG DEALERS AND HOW THEY CAN CONTROL AMERICAN POLITICS SO MUCH THAT THEY CAN ELECT THE PERSONS WHO WILL MAKE THEM THE RICHEST? MAKES YOU WONDER ABOUT IT, DOESN'T IT? I WONDER WHAT WAS IN THAT NAPKIN! DRUGS, MAYBE? HEY, DOESN'T IT MAKE YOU WONDER ABOUT THE MEDICAL DOCTOR WHO WAITED TILL SIX YEARS AFTER RONNIE REAGAN WAS OUT OF OFFICE AND RONNIE'S MEMORY PROBLEM HAD BECOME SO BAD HE COULDN'T TELL YOU HIS NAME, TO FINALLY REALIZE HE HAS ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE. I COULD HAVE TOLD YOU THAT FIFTEEN YEARS AGO. ONE OF THE FIRST SYMPTOMS IS THAT WOBBLY HEAD AND HE HAD THAT THE FIRST TIME HE WAS ELECTED. BY THE END OF HIS PRESIDENCY, HE COULD NOT REMEMBER ANYTHING, WHICH KEPT HIM FROM BEING BLAMED FOR ANY WRONG DOING, BECAUSE HE REALLY COULDN'T REMEMBER ANYTHING. HE STILL DOESN'T REMEMBER ANYTHING. WELL, I AM SURPRISED, NOT! CENSORSHIP IS THE NEXT PROBLEM I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS. I DO NOT BELIEVE IN ANY KIND OF CENSORSHIP IN THEORY. HOWEVER, IT SOMETIMES SEEMS WE COULD CENSOR: THE NAZI'S, OR THE KKK, OR ANY HATE GROUP, OR PORNOGRAPHY, EITHER AUDIO, VISUAL, OR IN PRINT. BUT THAT WOULD START A TREND AND WE CAN'T ALLOW THAT TREND TO START EVEN A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE WHERE WOULD IT END AND WHO WOULD DECIDE WHAT TO CENSOR? HOWEVER, WE, AS ADULTS, CAN LIMIT WHAT OUR KIDS ARE EXPOSED TO. THIS IS NOT CENSORSHIP. THIS IS ACTING APPROPRIATELY FOR OUR CHILDREN'S PROTECTION. OBSCENE, HATEFUL, OR VIOLENT MATERIAL CAN BE HARMFUL TO OUR CHILDREN AND SHOULD BE LIMITED TO AND BY ADULTS WHO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD AND HOPEFULLY CAN MAKE BETTER DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO READ, HEAR, OR SEE. NOW, ONTO THE CUSTOMS WHERE WE ARE SUPPOSED TO APOLOGIZE FOR OUR OWN NATURAL HUMAN FUNCTIONS. IF I DON'T HAVE TO APOLOGIZE FOR BLINKING MY EYES OR BREATHING, WHY SHOULD I APOLOGIZE FOR MY OTHER BODILY FUNCTIONS, SUCH AS SNEEZING, COUGHING, BURPING, OR FARTING, UNLESS I DO IT DIRECTLY IN YOUR FACE? I REFUSE TO APOLOGIZE FOR MY NORMAL BODILY FUNCTIONS. MAYBE YOU HAVE BEEN TAUGHT TO BE ASHAMED OF YOUR BODY. WELL, NOW, I AM NOT ASHAMED OF MINE. WHEN I SNEEZE, COUGH, FART, OR BURP AND YOU LEAN OVER AND POLITELY CORRECT ME AND SAY, "WHAT DO YOU SAY NOW, MARK?" I WILL SAY, "HAVE A NICE DAY!" IF YOU SAY "EXCUSE ME," I WILL SAY, "YOU ARE EXCUSED, BUT FOR WHAT?" I DON'T DO THIS TO BE RUDE, I DO THIS BECAUSE I REFUSE TO BE ASHAMED OF MY BODY. MAYBE IF YOU STOPPED APOLOGIZING FOR YOUR BODY AND ACCEPTED YOURSELF, YOU MIGHT FEEL BETTER ABOUT YOURSELF. OH, IN CASE YOU HAVE NOT NOTICED, I REFUSE TO PLAY THIS LITTLE GAME OF YOURS, MS. MANNERS. NOW, FOR MY NEXT RANT AND RAVE - OUR OVEREMPHASIS ON SPORTS AND OUR UNDEREMPHASIS ON EDUCATION. WE SPEND FIFTY DOLLARS A SEAT TO WATCH A PRO BALL GAME AND REFUSE TO PAY FIVE DOLLARS AT THE DOOR TO A SCHOOL FUNCTION, SUCH AS A SCIENCE CONTEST, OR A SPELLING BEE, OR A PLAY OR A CONCERT BY OUR OWN KIDS. THIS WOULD REALLY ENRICH THE SCHOOL'S ABILITY TO EDUCATE OUR KIDS. WE COULD EVEN INCREASE OUR PROPERTY TAXES TO DO THIS. INSTEAD, WE PROMOTE, ENCOURAGE, PAY FOR, (HELL, FIGHT FOR) THE RIGHT TO SEE A GROUP OF ADULT MEN TWELVE TIMES A YEAR RUN UP AND DOWN A FIELD CARRYING A PIGSKIN. WE PAY THESE MEN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR. HOWEVER, WE PAY SCHOOL TEACHERS MISERABLY LOUSY SALARIES AND THEY ARE THE ONES WHO MOLD OUR KIDS INTO THE LEADERS OF THE FUTURE AND DIRECTLY EFFECT THE FUTURE OF OUR WORLD. WHAT WILL THE AFFECT ON THE FUTURE BE IF ONE TEAM WINS ON SUNDAY COMPARED TO THE AFFECT OF EDUCATION OF OUR KIDS AND ON THE FUTURE OF OUR WORLD? LET US PLEASE GET OUR PRIORITIES SET CORRECTLY. PLEASE, THINK ABOUT THIS QUESTION, WHAT DOES THIS TELL OUR KIDS ABOUT THEIR OWN VALUE? NOW, ONTO ANOTHER HOT TOPIC - EQUAL RIGHTS FOR WOMEN. I BELIEVE THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE PAID EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK. HOWEVER, IF THE UPS MAN HAS TO LIFT 70 POUNDS AND THE UPS WOMAN HAS TO LIFT 50 POUNDS, THEN THERE SHOULD BE SOME PROPORTIONAL DIFFERENCE IN PAY. I BELIEVE THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE ALLOWED, NO, SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO SERVE IN EVERY COMPANY, SQUAD, FLIGHT, TEAM, OR POSITION IN THE US MILITARY. IF YOU DON'T WANT THAT, THEN YOU WANT SPECIAL RIGHTS, NOT EQUAL RIGHTS. THIS LEADS ME TO A CONNECTED IDEA. "RIGHTS" USUALLY MEAN "RESPONSIBILITIES." WHAT RESPONSIBILITIES AM I SPEAKING OF? WELL FIRST OF ALL, THE RESPONSIBILITY TO STOP BEING A VICTIM; SECONDLY, TO BECOME MATURE, RATIONAL, RESPONSIBLE ADULTS (WHICH IS HOW YOU DO THE FIRST ONE). IF MEN ARE PIGS, AND TYPICALLY WOMEN ARE THE ONES WHO (FOR BETTER OR WORSE) ARE THE TEACHERS OF THE VERY YOUNGEST CHILDREN (BIRTH TO SIX OR SEVEN YEARS OF AGE) AND CHILDREN DURING THOSE AGES LEARN THEIR SEXUAL STEREOTYPES AND ROLES FROM THEIR MOTHERS OR BABY SITTERS, WHOSE FAULT IS IT MEN ARE PIGS? NOW I NEED TO SAY THAT ADULT MEN CAN'T BLAME THEIR MOTHERS ACTIONS WHEN THEY WERE KIDS FOR THE ACTIONS OF ADULT MEN. IT IS OBVIOUS WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR BEHAVIOR. ALSO, I THINK WOMEN MUST ACCEPT SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS AND THINK ABOUT HOW TO CHANGE THEIR OLD PATTERNS. I AM TRYING TO BE LOVING, CARING, AND NURTURING IN ALL MY ACTIONS. I AM LEARNING TO DO THIS BY IMITATING THE WAY GOD TREATS ME, BY USING SPIRITUAL PRINCIPLES.