This is America! There is no requirement that you have to speak English.

GOP Candidates Say Immigrants Don’t Learn English, But Report Proves Them Wrong

I get so sick and tired of hearing about the right wingers who say that they love the Constitution of the United States, and want to protect it from the evil left wingers, but then seem to not know what the hell the damn thing says!  There is nowhere in there, and no law made otherwise, that makes English the official language of the United States.  If these right wingers were to get there way the United States would become the 2nd Berlin with walls against the Mexican and Canadian borders, and English would be the official language.  We might as well take down the Statue of Liberty that is in New York Harbor since her quote would no longer apply.  

I have no problem with people who do not speak English.  But yes, I do agree that if you live in a place that speaks a different language than you do, it would help in communication if you were to learn the local language.  It would be like me moving to Brazil.  They speak Portuguese and I don’t know one lick of that.  So if I didn’t have anybody to translate for me, or learn some of the language beforehand it is going to be very hard to do shopping, find an apartment, or get a job.

I’ve seen people get upset at foreigners (and remember that EVERYONE in the U.S. could be considered a foreigner) for speaking their own language while eating at a restaurant, or standing in line waiting to be served.   I’ve heard people yell “speak English, this is America”.  Yet it is fucking funny as hell when they get up to the counter and they can speak English pretty damn good.  She’s right!  This IS America, where you can speak any damn language you want to.  Make one up if you want to even!

When the United States was first started, it seems to me that the Government WANTED to be all inclusive.  They didn’t want for everyone to have to become molded into the society.  Didn’t they used to call the United States the “Melting Pot”?

What is so wrong with someone speaking another language anyhow?  How do you know that these people that you are yelling at for not speaking English even live here?  What if they are tourists?  How would you feel if you went to France and were waiting in line at McDonald’s (there is no way I’d eat at a restaurant there that I could eat here.  You’re in France for God’s sake!) and some French woman started to yell at you and your boyfriend in French for speaking English?  You’d be a little upset.  So now put yourself in the shoes of those here that do not speak English.

If you grew up somewhere else, like Spain, where Spanish is your first language and English is your second language sometimes it just might be easier for someone to speak their first language with those around that can understand it.  Ever think of that?  They still might be able to speak pretty perfect English, but if it is just easier to speak your first language there is nothing wrong with that.

The place that I work at has a LOT of people where English is there 2nd language.  So sometimes it is hard to figure out what they want, but most of the time if they don’t speak English well they usually have someone there to interpret for them. And again there is nothing wrong with that.

All in all these fucking right wingers really need to go back and study up on what America was built on.  I may be young, but I’m not stupid.  These people want to change America, but they are changing it for the worse.  It is unfathomable to think of how many people agree with them.  We should ship all of these people to Siberia where they can all be alone together, Speaking English, they can build their walls, and keep all of the progressive people out.

Like I keep saying, we need to be more supportive.  Fling the doors wide open!  Let’s help the immigrants enjoy the American life rather than shunning them away.

Love to you all!

~Ryan

Art Vs. Pornography

One of the great mysteries in life is when does art become pornography, and when is pornography art?

I think before we can even discuss this we have to look at what the Dictionary.com definition is for both art and pornography.

Here is the one for Art: the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance; the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings. 

Here is the one for Pornography: obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, especially those having little or no artistic merit.

People have a bad habit of calling works of art pornography just because the drawing, painting, photograph, or sculpture happens to show penis, vagina, breasts, or buttocks.  They are not looking at the full scope of what the artwork is meant to represent.  In layman’s terms, pornography is meant to be sexually arousing, something to get off too, while art is meant to take in not only the subject of the work, but the surroundings as well.  Art is meant to tell a story, while pornography is meant to get you off.

Go into any art museum and I guarantee you will see more that one painting or sculpture that depicts a nude man, woman, or child, and nobody is calling that pornography.  Go to Europe and there are plenty of statues out in the public that depict nudity in artistic fashion.  One of my favorites is the Boy with a Frog (Link to Pictures of it on Google) that use to be in Venice, Italy.  It was removed May 9, 2013 and replaced with a street lamp.  HERE is the story about it’s removal that makes it seem like it had nothing to do with the fact that it was a naked preteen boy.  But as the story says, the statue did have it’s detractors.  It doesn’t make mention of the reason, but since the kid is naked, that is probably at the top of the list.

White Statue of Boy With Frog

Photo by: Todd Heisler/New York Times

But to me here is where it becomes art.  Take a look a the location: He is on a point, surrounded by water.  And what kid doesn’t like hunting for frogs?  I did when I was about that age or so.  I just wasn’t eight feet tall.  And what about his nudity?  The body is not something to be ashamed of.  Young, old, man, woman, slim, or obese.  Remember that according to the Bible (OK) that Adam and Eve were walking around for quite a while buck naked and perfectly fine with it.  It was only after the eating from the tree did they realize that they were naked.  [And by the way, if God is supposed to be this All Knowing entity how come he had to ASK Adam if he had eaten from tree? [Genesis 3:11] And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?”]

Now here is another work of art that is nude: David by MICHELANGELO.  Nobody is calling this porn!

Statue of David by MICHELANGELO

It seems to me that the only time that things get classified as pornography is when they are photographs.  And yes, when you troll online there are plenty, and I mean PLENTY of websites and do nothing but feature pornography.  I’ll let you just Google the word porn on the images side and you’ll know what I mean.  But so now that I’ve given a few examples of how nudity with statues isn’t considered porn, now let’s take a look at a couple of photographs:

Boy Outdoors With Dog

This photo, like the statue of the boy and David is not meant to be sexually erotic.  It is supposed to showcase the naked naked body in natural surroundings.  It is a photograph that makes you think:  What is he looking at?  What is he pondering?  It is almost like the statue of The Thinker by Auguste Rodin, which is a nude as well by the way.  Yes, the photographer took the shot as a full frontal nude.  But now think if this was a statue sitting on a pedestal and made 300 years ago, would we call it art or pornography?

Out in Nature

Here is the second picture that I wanted to show.  Here is boy standing in pose in a natural setting.  What if this was turned into a sculpture and placed on the point where the Boy With Frog stood?  Would we call it art, or would we call it pornography?  And what if the men in the photographs had been the age of the Boy With Frog?  People would be screaming child pornography, the Boy With Frog stood there for four years.  It is people that do not have the appreciation for the naked body who will see every naked body as porn.  Hell if you would ever catch them at a nude beach!  Heaven’s there are naked men, women, and children all over at those places.

Yes, there is a very very fine line between art and pornography.  And each person is subject to his or her own opinion.  If the work is tasteful, and is done in a way to showcase not only the body but the surroundings, then I would consider it a work of art.  If the work is meant for the viewer to get aroused, and focuses entirely on just the body, then I would consider it pornography.  But there are also photographs that showcase just the body, with no surroundings that I would still consider art.

But from what I can see from what I read, see online, or at museums, is that the world is getting more and more uptight about the naked body.  There is nothing to be ashamed of.  Yes, there are people out there that will see a great artwork and get off on it.  Nothing we can do about those people.  But I think there are more people who know, or want to know, how to admire the body like it was intended to.

And before I go on this one, just two more photographs of statues and how weird some people can be, and believe:

Boy With Golden Penis – Prague Castle

This is an artwork at the Prague Castle in the Czech Republic.  It is supposed to give you good luck if you rub him where it counts.  Hence the fact that the statue is dark, but his penis and scrotum are shiny bronze.

Naked Angel Crying – Island of Tears, Minsk, Belarus

On the island of Tears in Minsk, Belarus is this statue of a crying angel.  It is said that brides come to the island on the wedding day to rub the angels penis to be bless the marriage with fertility and a male son.

So artwork verses pornography?  It really comes down to how you view the subject.  If a photograph was a statue would you consider it art?  If a statue was a live person would you consider it pornography?  It’s a fine line for sure.  But as an appreciator of the human body I hope that there is a lot of great artwork yet to come.

Love to you all!

~Ryan

EDIT: I found this picture about a half hour after the original post and really gets to jist of what I was trying to say.

There was no credits on the original post that I found.

These two are almost identical.  Are they both art?  Are they both Pornography?  Or is one art and one pornography?  To me they are both art.

Morals – Who Says Mine Are Wrong?

So this is a “suggested” Rant by one of my followers on Tumblr.  He suggested that I do one on morals.  Since today there is a lot of activity surrounding this.  There is the war going on in Syria, the Presidential election season here in the U.S., for a couple of examples.  One way or another we all try to push our own morals onto everyone around us.

What are “morals”?  According to Dictionary.com “morals” are: of, relating to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conductor the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.  2.expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work.  3. founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations. 4. capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.  5.

conforming to the rules of right conduct (opposed to immoral ): a moral man. 6. virtuous in sexual matters; chaste. 7. of, relating to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character: moral support.

The subject came up because of the County Clerk in Kentucky, U.S. who just recently was found in contempt of court and was ordered to jail.  Her crime?  She withheld same sex marriage licenses after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality.  The reason?  To her, it is morally wrong for two people of the same sex to get married.  It is her religious belief that made her not go against her morals, and went to jail instead.  Now she has two choices to get out of jail.  #1 is that she can start to issue the licenses in accordance with the Supreme Court, or #2 she can resign.  I’m hoping that she takes option #1, but if she is willing to go to jail for her morals I’m thinking it will be #2 in the end.

What are some of my morals that I have?  I think it is morally wrong to have the death penalty.  Sure, I get that who ever is on Death Row is there because they committed murder on someone else.  But the reason I am morally against it is, now this is going to sound really stupid coming from me for those that know me, is the Bible says “Thou Shalt Not Kill”.  I’m not a big firm believer in the Bible, but this is one thing that I think it got right.  And “Thou Shalt Not Kill” includes anybody.  For any reason.  Including the punishment of murder.  Another moral that I have is that I am against slavery.  And no I’m not talking about the U.S. Civil War type of slavery.  I am talking about any type of slavery where there are people that are being held to do things that are against their own wishes and they have no control over it.  That would include pimps and their prostitutes, warlords taking people and forcing them to fight or be human bombs.  It would be the coyotes of Mexico, or asian countries, who will take people across the border, but them make them work for them to pay off the debt.  That is the type of slavery that I am morally against.

I think that morals are things that get deeply ingrained into our culture from hundreds, and sometimes thousands of years ago too.  Take the whole “one man, one woman” marriage thing for example again.  We here in the U.S. see it as morally wrong to have more than one wife, or husband. Yes, I’m talking about polygamy.  But when you look at it, is there anything that is humanly wrong with it?  I don’t think so.  Is it possible for one man, or one woman, to be married to several people of the opposite sex and have everything work out fine?  I’m sure there is.  Just look at the compounds that you see out in Utah with that radical wing of the Latter Day Saints church.  One man being married to several women seems to be working out there.  Of course what got that guy in trouble, and other like him, is that he started to marry the underage girls, and having sex with them.  Whow, stop your horses right there!

Morals may be a great thing to follow, but unfortunately, laws still trump morals.  Going back to our Country Clerk, the Supreme Court ruled that marriage equality is now the law of the land.  If your morals are going to interfere with the performance of your job, then you’re going to need to find a new job.  With the guys out in Utah who’s morals say for them it is OK to marry someone who is underage, laws trump again.  You may be able to love them as your wife, but you’re going to have to hold off on the sexual relations and the marriage until they turn 18.

And when you look at the world view of morals, I think you’ll be like me and realize that it is morals that have been behind pretty much every war there has ever been.  Think about this:  A country is doing something that we here in the West thing is morally wrong.  So what do we do about it?  We would probably hit them with some sort of sanction to get them to follow what we think is right.  But they may have been doing there there for thousands of years.  How about the story, and sorry I don’t have the link for this one, recently about the woman who was stoned to death for having an adulterous affair?  If I remember right it was a Middle Eastern country that this happened in where their morals about adultery are way more extreme than they are here in the U.S.  Here if you have an adulterous affair and get caught, the worst that happens is you get slapped with divorce papers, and you end up paying alimony and child support.  The militaries morals about adultery are a bit more severe where you can still go to jail if caught there because of the impact it can have on the job.  But in the Middle East where they still take adultery very seriously, you can be put to death.

So morals are what we as individuals think is right and wrong.  And every person, every country, every region, is going to have different morals.  What I think is morally right, may totally offend you.  And what you think is morally right may totally offend me.  But the trick is to get along, and try to understand everyone’s morals before just going off on the deep end over them.  But if the law counters what your morals are, then you are just going to have to work to be sure your morals don’t cross the line, because unfortunately the laws are set by the majority.  And if enough people with your same morals comes into the majority, then we can change the laws in favor of your morals.  Do I hold anything against the County Clerk for believing in her morals and standing up for them?  Absolutely not.  This is a great country where you can stand up to the laws in a civil defiance like hers.  The only thing she did wrong was because she is an elected civil servant who is supposed to adhere to the laws of land, defied them.  For that, you are going to get punished.  Hopefully she doesn’t spend to much time in jail.  Honestly, I haven’t checked in the last few days, hopefully she is out even as I write this.

This was kind of a long winded Rant, but I hope I got my point across.  Thank you for the suggestion for the Rant.  If you have something you would like to here my opinion on, then just send me an Ask, or a Fan Mail.

Love to you all as always!

~Ryan

How Exactly Do the Elections in the United States Work?

So somebody asked me today if I had made up my mind yet if I am going to vote of Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders in the General Election next year.  First off, it’s not until July 7, 2016.  So what’s the rush for me to make a decision.  There is still a lot of things to think about, because each of them has their own good merits.  At this point, I’d vote for both of them.  But that got me thinking.  What exactly is the Primary Election for if it is the delegates at the Democratic National Convention who end up voting for the person who get’s the parties nomination?

I have been all over Google and to numerous websites and can’t quite still figure out what the purpose of the Primary Election is.  I think I should finish my GED and then go on to study elections.  Because from what I can find out is that it is the delegates at the Democratic and Republican National Conventions that actually vote for who will end up with the nomination.  Then in the General Election it is another group of delegate that actually vote for the President from what is called the Electoral College.  And no, it is not a place.  You can’t walk into it like you can UCLA.  It is a process, not a place.

But here is something really stupid that I found and can really twist your brain.  The delegates to a party are supposed to vote for the candidate of their party should they win the popular vote in the state.  So just as an example: if Hillary Clinton were to win the Democratic Party nomination, and then she won the popular vote here in California, then the party delegates would vote for Clinton from the Electoral College.  Here is the kicker – THEY DON’T HAVE TO!  They could, in fact, vote for the Republican candidate instead.  According to Archives.gov “there is no constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states.”  It also says that though it is rare that the delegates don’t follow the popular vote, “no Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.”  So essentially we are putting the entire Presidential election in the hands of 538 people who can vote however they want to.  So whats to say that we all like Clinton and the Electors like (heaven forbid it) Donald Trump?

I know that I have a long way to go to figure this whole thing out, and maybe by volunteering with the Democratic Party will lend me some education on the subject.  The thing is, I don’t want to volunteer and end up supporting anyone.  I want to volunteer to figure out how the whole thing works.

From what I have figured is that the state’s Primary Election determines how many delegates a candidate wins in that state.  Then those delegates go to the Party National Convention where THEY vote for the candidate.  Then in the General Election the winner of the popular vote wins the number of delegates for that state who are supposed to vote for their candidate, but don’t have to.

To put it another way, we are voting for people, who will vote to nominate the candidate at the conventions.  Then we vote again for other people to vote for the President in the General Election.  Wow, does that sound totally messed up when you hear it like that.  So now I’m on a quest to find out how one becomes a delegate, and what the hell do they actually do.

Nope, haven’t made up my mind who I am going to vote for in the Primary yet.  Let me get a few migraines trying to figure out how the Primary works first, then I’ll let you know.

Love to you all

~Ryan

What a Waste of Court Time and Money

Ruling in Tom Brady Case to Come Tuesday or Wednesday

So do you remember the big stink in American football last season when Tom Brady, and the New England Patriots, we accused of deflating footballs during the American Football Conference (AFC) Championship game?  It was suspected that the deflated footballs somehow gave the Patriots an advantage over the Indianapolis Colts, and let them go on to win the game.  After the allegation Tom Brady was given a four game suspension to be handed out for the first four games of the season that is about to start.  Tom, not happy with the suspension of course, appealed the decision and it went to court.  In the article it says that the losing side is expected to appeal whatever the decision is.  Of course they would.  But that is a subject for the next Rant.  It would be appealed to the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.  WTF?!

This is the dumb side to sports.  You fuck up, you get caught, you get punished for it.  You would get punished if you were caught taking drugs because that is cheating.  How would deflating footballs be any different?  It is just another form of cheating.  Whether or not Tom and the Patriots actually did deflate the footballs, I don’t know.  Quite honestly, I haven’t paid too much attention to it because I thought the whole thing was stupid to begin with.  Tom should just man up, take his medication, and go on with the game.  Game!  Did you not here me?  Football is a freaking game!

According to Spotrac, Tom’s salary for the 2015 season is a total of $14 Million.  $8 Million for a base salary, and an extra $6 Million for a signing bonus.  Now divide that by 16 games on the schedule comes out to be $875,000 per game.  Now each game is allotted 60 minutes.  With all the standing around time that is “on the clock”, I’ll be generous and say that there is a total of 42 minutes of actual playing.  Of those 42 minutes, lets be generous again and say that the offense is on the field half the time, so 22 minutes.  $875,000 by 22 minutes comes out to be $39,772 per minute.  Does anyone else see that as an obscene amount of money for playing a game?  With how many games he has played in the past, I think he is more than capable of giving up four games worth of money.  Even if it is $3.5 Million.

But that is not really the reason that I wanted to get on this Rant.  This is supposed to be about how the f*** did a sports dispute end up in the tax payers court?  Fuck me, if you don’t like the punishment given, alleged or not, then maybe you shouldn’t be playing the game.  I thought sports greats like Tom were supposed to be role models?  I think a great role model would have taken the suspension in stride, and go on with the game afterwards.  To me all this is just saying that if you don’t like the punishment that you are given for cheating, there will always be someone to appeal to.  What if you get caught cheating on a test in school and the teacher gives you an “F” for that.  Now you can appeal that to the principal, and if you don’t like his decision, to the school board.  If you don’t like being held accountable at work by your boss, now you can take it up with the CEO, then the Board of Directors?

I agree with the article, and Jay Feely, a member of the NFL Players Association Executive Committee, that said they need to keep this kind of thing in-house with an arbitrator.  I certainly don’t think that my tax money should be wasted on a petty little dispute like this.  Yea, I realize that this is Tom’s “job”, and maybe the whole deflategate thing was an accidental thing. But really?  Man up!!  Take it, and move on.

The courts are already was overused in my opinion.  I’m sick of hearing that when ever a decision is made in court that the losing party is going to appeal.  So if the losing side is just going to appeal whatever the lower court decides, then what the fuck is the lower court there for even?  The only time that I think appeals should be made is if there was something procedurally done wrong that is discovered after the fact.  If something is wrong during a trial then it should either be thrown out, or restarted.  Appeal, yea, if you find after the fact evidence or procedural errors, but don’t just arbitrarily say you’re going to appeal just because you don’t like the outcome.  Of course one side of a court hearing isn’t going to like the outcome.  How many times have you seen both parties happy coming out of the courtroom on Judge Judy?

Think of how much time and money could be saved if issues like this never made it to the courtroom.  You just might have a lot more time to do actual, real, meaningful, court work.  I would be pissed off if I was the judge that got handed this case.  I would have told Side A and Side B that they are not leaving the room until they come up with a settlement because this type of thing should have never been in the courtroom to begin with.

So I’m going to end this one right here.  I hope that a lot of you will agree with me on this one.

Love to you all!

~Ryan