Among the things I thought about is something going on over at DiscConnected's blog. Long story short, there's a documentary out there (which my son has been after me to watch) about the capture and treatment of Killer Whales at SeaWorld. Apparently the widely known expert on animal-human relations and lead singer of Heart, Ann Wilson, cancelled a show at SW after viewing the documentary, comparing the treatment of the whales to slavery. Late in the game, an anonymous commenter decided to allude to those of us who think "slavery" is an inappropriate word to use for animals (at least these animals) as being dumb. So, let's think about it. A KW at SeaWorld, yes, has been taken from their home. Yes, they are trained to do tricks. For this, they get a safe place to live (if a little more cramped than they're used to) and all the fish they can eat. And Ann Wilson and "anonymous" think that constitutes slavery. What is it that I consider slavery?
First, you have the one thing both groups have in common- being captured against their will. But Killer Whales aren't capturing other KWs and selling them to SeaWorld. Then, consider the trip- where SW takes as much care as possible to deliver the animal to the park, a Stanford study showed that close to 12% of prospective slaves died either directly before, during, and directly after the trip. The trip which consisted of being chained up lying down in the hold of a ship with no restrooms, little food, and packed like sardines up to 200-300 per ship. Then there is the 'training"- I'm sure the man pictured above would have loved being taught how to do right with fish instead of 40 lashes with a bullwhip. And I find it hard to believe that a crowd of tourists would react to a KW snuggling up to a dolphin by throwing a rope over the nearest tree branch.
I considered giving a possible example of animal slavery by posting a picture of a losing dog in a dogfight... but they are just too sickening. I suggest Anonymous might want to look at them, at his own peril. It is a far cry from anything thrown at the Killer Whales at SeaWorld. I'm not saying that if I watched the video I wouldn't swear off SW myself... just think that SOME people ought to think before they devaluate the pain real slaves went through.
Another thing I thought about was last night when Laurie got into it on FB with another one of those "How dare you teach your beliefs" types. She thought Laurie was monstrous for even suggesting a parent teach their belief systems to their OWN children. "Children should be free to decide on their own. Who are you to force them into what to believe?" Now, I am not going to waste my time anymore with such an utter moron, and advised Laurie not to. They won't hear anything but what they want to hear, anyway. But there are a few things I would have told them, had they the capability to listen to anything but their own poison.
First, part of the Task of Parenting is to "Raise up a child in the path they should go." You cannot expect a child to have any kind of healthy value system by "letting them figure it out for themselves." They would be forced to rely on instinct, watching other children who may or may not be "infected" by THEIR parents' value systems, and grow up to be the kind of rudderless, soulless moral degenerates that populate our jails after stealing without remorse, raping and molesting without conscience, killing without a care.
Second, children properly raised end up making their own choices AS ADULTS. How many stories about "pastors' kids" do you need to see that even a godly upbringing can be rejected. How many of you follow exactly the same faith as your parents, morally, politically, or spiritually? If I had clung to every dictum I was taught, I'd be a Catholic Democrat, voting mindlessly for the late fat man in Boston who thought to tell me I should eat healthy, and that killing babies is just fine. Probably root for Georgetown's basketball team, too. But as I matured, I asked questions. I learned about the difference between church tradition versus what the Bible says, about making an informed choice rather than voting a certain way because "we always vote that way", about the difference between "giving a man a fish and teaching him how to fish."
Third, The truth of the matter is that people like that have a simple, deluded goal- the same one too many people have. Rush Limbaugh this afternoon did a monologue about "If I could just give away other people's money all day like the POTUS, how popular I would be." In the midst of it, he said one thing that cut to the core of the philosophy of these people. Speaking as someone trying to use Obama's methods to be as popular as Obama, he said:
"I am the one who says if they want to smoke marijuana, I'm gonna stand in their way. I'm gonna support it. If two guys want to marry each other, I'm right in there. Whatever anybody wants to do is fine with me, and here's money for it to boot."
Whatever anybody wants to do is fine. You might say, yes, this is the liberal philosophy, the PC philosophy. But there is another whose philosophy matches this as well....
|Please allow me to introduce myself...|
So many people think that "Satan" is the guy who possesses weak people, who buys your soul and drags you kicking and screaming into hell. But he gets his purpose fulfilled just as well by people "doing whatever they want to do." Sure, look at the internet porn and pretend you're too good to rape a child. Lie your ass off to get that promotion and call yourself "successful". Do whatever to whomever, and pretend to yourself there'll never be a comeuppance. Because there'll always be a way that seemeth right to a man.
Finally, one last thing- and I'm gonna get clobbered for this one. Laurie is not your typical person. Which is a good thing, because trying to figure out the rules of a relationship with someone like her keeps you from getting lazy about the relationship. For example, Valentine's Day. I learned very quickly that you have to strike first with her. Because whatever you do, she'll top. Not because she "needs" to be in first, or because she sees it as a competition. But because she's got a big heart, and her instinct is to give more than she receives. As such, it is infinitely better to get her something and be happy when she tops it, than to "get mad for being topped", or to go back out and get the next thing. So, yesterday, I got her a nice heart-shaped box of Russell Stover chocolates and a card. When I got up this morning, there was a similar box by my computer... and a bag of Lindor truffles. And I did the only two things I could do.
1- Looked at Scrappy and said with a smile, "Your boofy mommy..."
2- Ate half the truffles reading your blogs and e-mails.
If I don't mention it later, Happy Valentines Day!