A Metaphorical dilemma

"He smokes a cigarette like a paedophile going down on a 12-year old"

Have you ever had a metaphor just scream itself at you? No matter how hard you tried to resist it? This happened to me the other day. It came at me from out of nowhere and implanted itself in my brain.

I'm plagued by the imagery my metaphor has brought to life. Yet, I'm somehow pleased that I was able to express myself in such a literary manner. I'm shocked by the imagery, and disgusted at the thought.

The man I'm talking about isn't a paedophile. He's a normal human being. He's a good and decent person.

Man, I must be warped

So much for the Good Samaritan

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/061807/met_178250725.shtml

It's 2AM, you're fading fast. Probably well on your way to sawing a few logs, when suddenly, you hear someone scream "I've been shot!". Suddenly you're wide awake. Your adrenaline is pumping. You realize someone is in trouble. What do you do? Ignore it and hope it goes away (so you can get back to sleep)? Bang on the wall/ceiling/floor and tell them to pipe down (so you can get back to sleep)? Call 911 and let them deal with it (so you can get back to sleep)? Or, maybe... gasp... get involved and see if you can help?

This poor guy chose the last option. In a selfless gesture, forgetting about his own safety, he grabbed his shotgun and went to see what happened. What he found was a woman who's leg was bleeding badly. He administered first aid. He waited for the authorities and medical help to arrive. Then, thoroughly exhausted, adrenaline supply depleted, he went back home and crashed. This was, by far, his worst mistake. For his trouble, he was fired!

The fact that this fellow worked for the company that managed and/or owned the apartments where he lived was, apparently, the most important issue here. Never mind that he risked life and limb to rush to someones aid, saving the woman's leg, if not her very life. He should have consulted his employee handbook first. Had he done so, this whole messy business could have been avoided (as far as his job was concerned anyway).

The company's policies were clearly laid out in the employee hand book. The issues were also discussed at a recent employee meeting and... covered in a recent e-mail. With all these warnings about proper workplace procedure, how could this guy have gotten it soooo wroooong? Wait a minute... he wasn't at work, was he? He was at home, nearly asleep. But, he lives 'on-site', so I guess he 'works' there 24/7. Policy prohibits any type of weapon being used in the workplace. The report says his weapon was never fired, so I guess, simply carrying it over there was interpreted as using it. It also states that you should contact (for lack of a better word) headquarters immediately. Well, he fell asleep, didn't he, thinking he'd contact them (later) in the morning.

Then, to top it all off, the company's dismissal complaint stated that he was guilty of "gross misconduct". What kind of fucked up world are we living in? What was the corporate thought process here? Note: This is me imagining what 'might' have been going on in someone's head and not an actual quote by any of the company's managment.

Corporate managment: We must fire this guy before he saves again and garners us more free, good publicity. What if, during his next heroic act, he actually shoots the bad guy? Even worse, what if he doesn't kill the bad guy and the bad guy lives to (gasp!) sue us?. Ohhh, the liability of it all!

Yeah, that sounds about right.

This guy is more than welcome to move into my neighborhood. We need more good citizens like this. Bravo, my good man. Keep up the good work. I only wish I had a job to give you. It'd be yours.

Evil Religion?

I ran across this quote today and it seems to dovetail nicely with my last post:

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg

My first thought was "Yeah! Take that, religion. See what kind of trouble you cause, damn it!" I'm a cynical guy and this had immediate appeal for me in that respect. It's the kind of statement that lays it out in black and white and really drives a point home.

Then I thought about it for a moment... or two... Is religion the only impetus for making good people do evil things? Most certainly not. Is he talking about religion as a concept, meaning peoples' belief in a higher power that motivates them to behave in a particular manner? Or is it the institution of organized religion, that promotes (and uses) peoples' belief in a higher power to motivate them to behave in a particular manner? A less cynical person might say these questions are one and the same.

These seem like very good questions to me. And I don't know which angle he was shooting for. I'm not even sure that I care. The point is not that religion is making good people do evil things. For the most part, religion is a positive influence and provides basic positive guidelines by which people can (and, for the most part, should) live their lives. It's the religious zealot and their belief that this higher power empowers them. That's where things start to go wrong. Religious zeal provides the zealot with a sense of power and, as the saying goes, power corrupts.

When this is taken to the next level, the problem is magnified. Religious leaders hold sway over large groups of people. Imagine how empowering this might be. With a army of zealots hanging on your every word, who among us would not be... corrupted absolutely?

Ok. Let's get started

Things piss me off. I don't get pissed off every day but, occasionally, things being what they are in today's society, the pressure builds. This is where I'm gonna unload.

I only write (seems it's the only way I CAN write) when I'm mad about something. It's an 'in the moment' kind of thing. I don't have a current rant (an inspiration, if you will) to call upon for my first post, but instead, I'll post something I wrote a few weeks ago.

Jerry Falwell died today May 15, 2007. He was a man of God. A man of his convictions. In some ways, I admire those qualities. I never admired Jerry Falwell.

Why didn't I admire Mr. Falwell, seeing as how I admire those qualities? Well, it seems (in some small ways), we're somewhat alike. Like him, I don't have much tolerance. I have a low threshold of tolerance for idiots (No, I'm not saying he was stupid).

His convictions led him to promote an unprecedented level of intolerance, for a Christian man of God. He was a Christian leader who could have had a great and POSITIVE influence on a large number of people. Instead, he concentrated his energies on those things that were divisive, instead of unifying.

He attacked gays on the grounds that homosexuality is a moral affront to God. He said that it's wrong simply because 'God said it's wrong'. He also implied (and sometimes outright said) that their actions were the direct cause of some very evil things (such as 9/11, for instance). No matter how righteous the man was. That's wrong.

My views are a little different. Centering more on scientific rather than moral grounds. My general argument centers around the fact that, by it's very nature, a homosexual union cannot conceive children and, therefore, cannot pass on that particular genetic trait (otherwise, there's a big hole in Darwin's theory, right?). That being said, homosexuals are human beings, and as such, deserve the same respect as any other.

As far as the the Reverend goes, I'm not up on all things Falwell, so I can't speak to any specifics. I'm sure that the man had some good qualities. At the very least, simply because he had millions of followers/supporters, he must have been, at the core, a decent man. He was certainly a charismatic man who believed strongly in faith and family. I can respect that.

I think maybe he went overboard in the belief that, because he knew he had that kind of influence, maybe if he overstated things here and there, he'd be able to push people (just a little bit) in the direction he thought they should be going. Sort of like a 'the end justifies the means' kind of thing.

I could have gone and read a lot more about Jerry before writing this, but I wanted this to come mostly from inside (from the heart, if you will) and not from something that someone else had written, so that's what I've done.

I'm doing my best not to speak (too) ill of the dead. So now I'll just say this to Jerry... You made the world a better place (by leaving it). RIP.

If you read this and it pissed you off. So what. It's just my opinion. Get your own!