|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| Today I went to a local Chinese restaurant in Fremont and we ran into a Chinese Tour group. The tourists apparently bought/brought their own Chinese Liquor. It was so strong we could smell it a table away. The tourist group was composed of men probably 40's-50's and they multiple shots of this stuff. The funniest part was each time they drank, they would cheer "Good!" in chinese, stand up, and proceed to drink the shot and then sit back down. They came in three or four tables, and each table would "chain-cheer-drink". My family noted how it was pretty much an exact rendition of Chinese Martial Arts movies where people stand up, say cheers and then down a shot/bowl of liquor. Then rinse and repeat until they are piss drunk and happy.
I didn't stay for the piss drunk part, but if you've ever seen a Chinese Martial Arts movie, it was exactly like that except that they were wearing normal business attire.
| | |
| So while talking to friend I realized that there were some pitfalls to my idea of materialism.
Which is worse? to invest a lot of time reading reviews and looking at specs and comparing deals to get a pretty good deal on something, or to think about it a little and then buy it (less over thinking).
The first can imply materialism, even though you don't even own the item. You are still wanting something material. The latter might lead to unwise spending patterns with money -> materialism of actually having stuff.
I obviously side with the first situation. I am somewhat thrifty, and especially picky when it comes to electronics and books. I will spend as much time as needed evaluating my options, doing a cost benefit analysis, and comparing specs that sometimes can't even be compared scientifically. I admit I spend a lot of time contemplating and worry about different features of the device and sometimes if a better deal will come about. I suppose that's somewhat greedy of me.
On the other hand, if it were food, clothes (which I don't spend much on, esp if it's not equipment related), or home appliances, I would gladly spend a few extra dollars on for particular brand quality or style. In fact, I'd be willing to say that I spend more on food, then I do on electronics over periods of time. So is my unnecessary, thorough analysis of each deal too greedy? I think that might be the case. On the other hand I want to remain thrifty, as I want to be a good steward of what I do own.
What do you think? To analyze, and to what degree? Is being a good steward of monetary resources imply not only that one does not own the things but that one does not even "want" unnecessary things?
| | |
| While reading ourdailybread today, I wondered who this other disciple (the one Jesus loved) is?
If Jesus loved this person, why didn't list their name? Some commentaries say that it's probably John himself. That's pretty funny. It's like saying, my mother came in one day and saw my brother and the other son she loved (me). I guess it must be a cultural thing to write in the third person. I guess in someway its a more humbling way to write about one self. There's less of a concentration on "me" rather than "just someone that Jesus loved".
Side Note: Now I know that John can run faster than Simon Peter and he go to the tomb second (after Mary).
Tomb race:
1st - Mary (Woman got their first)
2nd - John (The other disciple who Jesus loved)
3rd - Simon Peter (Maybe that's why they call him the ROCK, not only because he's a foundation (maybe he was fat), but because he runs like a rock.)
Just kidding. Passage is below.
John 20
1Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. 2So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him!" 3So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. 4Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. 6Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 7as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. 8Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. | | |
| So at 3:15 am today Nov 19th, I heard the Cal fight song being played. Only the brass parts (probably trumpet) here at Stanford. That is pretty bizarre. Anyways I was sick, and it sorta woke me up. Strangely enough hearing the Cal fight song makes me feel better. Maybe i'm just delirious. Hopefully someone can find out if someone is actually running around campus playing it.
| | |
| This is probably a testy topic, but objectively even had Prop 8 in California passed, domestic partnerships would not have gotten the federal rights anyways as it's a state law. Had it passed they would earned exactly.... ZERO extra rights. (Reference CA 297.5)
Now Prop 8 opponents have targeted the Mormon church and are protesting in front of religious areas. Some of their signs are rather rude and are insulting. One picture is particularly interesting as one sign claims they won't "fight hate with hate" while the guy next to him holds a sign reading "you bigots!" Ellen Degeneres has also said she's not paying taxes. This is the sort of immaturity you see from a child who's lost. That's not how you protest! (I'd like to think she'll end up paying taxes anyways.) In addition, she already has those rights in California, just not federally. Had Prop 8 passed, I doubt the IRS would recognize same-sex marriage anyways. They are always hungry for your money regardless.
Had Prop 8 been rejected, would mormons and other Prop 8 supporters protest? Perhaps some might, but in general I'm fairly certain most would just take the legal route. The most ironic thing is that Prop 8 is about a definition. In California, CA 297.5 already gives domestic partners the same rights and obligations as the married. What the gay agenda has tried to do is to vocalize the issue to the rest of the United States and world. Winning or losing in California would have had no effect, since what they want cannot be granted by the state in the first place. Other states that do not recognize domestic partnerships will not recognize non-traditional marriages if they don't want to. Therefore, fervent prop 8 supporters are simply raising a ruckus and essentially lashing out at the community.
If gay activists want to relate themselves to civil rights activists from the 60's, just take the legal route. The lack of maturity only underscores how these gay activists that hate are not anything like the civil rights activists of the 60's, except that they are protesting about their beliefs. I mean, this is america. After the election, republicans and democrats all shake hands (perhaps after some grumbling) and we make up. Gay protesters are becoming borderline activists requiring police protection for Mormon churches. Media coverage is rather biased, as it was only mentioned briefly how a man supporting Prop 8 in San Jose was beaten up by an anti-8 supporter. I'm sure there was some minor violence coming from both sides. Gay's generally pride themselves as being tolerant of others because they believe they understand from their background. They dislike people that are "bigots" and portray themselves as victims.
While they are victims in many cases, this targeting of Mormon churches, is exactly what they experienced by other sub-cultures which used gays as scapegoats in our society. Do gay's really want to become the oppressor once they are no longer oppressed? It sure seems that way. However my friends that are gay (I hope) are not part of this activity. Otherwise, you become the person that you hate.
Aside from prop 8 and the issues that go along with it. I've realized that many times, we become who we hate. I dislike people that are selfish, yet recently I have come to realize that I too am often selfish. I laugh at people that I think spend their money foolishly, yet I also sometimes spend my money foolishly. I often forget, I am who I hate. The difference between me, and the anti-8 community is that I recognize I am who I hate, and I try to objectively judge myself and shy away from it. It's fairly obvious, when you're infront of someone's gate shouting at how they are haters, that you yourself are a hater. Point is, we are who we hate.
| | |
|
|
