The Gremlin's Wings

A quick note: the skin on my blog was corrupted in the update to WordPress 3.0. I had to switch to another. I hope I can switch back, because I quite liked that old skin… Oh well. Change sometimes is for the better.

Speaking of, I should mention my situation lately. Hence the last post being done in April, when it is now late June. Two and a half months late on my newest entry, which was going to be about the Hollywood trend of shock-gore horror films instead of suspenseful horror films but I am not so sure about it right now.

Well, in my personal life, things have been going rather well lately. If you have not heard yet, I now have two jobs and a new apartment to boot. Yep, Adam had to move. Continuing in the tradition of moving to places that are accessible on foot to all work venues, my new place is about a twenty minute walk away from both places. I was insistent on this place instead of others for this very purpose. Yes, I am still working for Zellers… and now I am working for one of my old employers as well, answering telephones and generally being the helpful person that I am (though I bet that several people in my life would like to dispute this).

Has it been a change? Yeah. Life lately has been about constant change. I mean, just three months ago, I had no job, no money and a bleak outlook on life in general. My Employment Insurance (Americans: think unemployment benefits) ran out in May, right when I was at my most vulnerable point. If you think moving is hard, try planning a move then finding out that you are going to be over a thousand dollars short in your moving and rent budget. I owe my parents big time for helping me through that rough patch, both financially and emotionally.

June definitely was a changing month for me. I now live in a great new apartment (where the landlord will not try to screw me out of a damage deposit, like the last one did), I have two jobs, two wonderful kids, a smile on my face and a positive outlook for the first time since January 2009. I am so happy, I have taken to saying when people ask me how I am I respond: “If I was any better, I would be twins.”

So now you know how I am. How are you? Leave a comment below and tell me.

So now to catch up on world events… what should I next spread an opinion about? BP’s major screw-up in the Gulf? Nah… done to death already.

I have been quiet lately. Considering I had nothing more intelligible to write other than, “OH DEAR GOD DO MY FEET HURT!” a hundred times, I think I did you all a favor in restraining myself. Nor did I do an April Fools joke, mostly because there’s been more humorous ones out on the Internet – I was actually pretty sad at how Google’s joke went this year. Really, just renaming your company to Topeka? In response to this silliness?

So what have I been up to?

Recently I got myself a part-time job. It is nothing major, except for the fact that it is different work than I am physically used to and I am slowly getting my body readjusted to a regular work schedule. It is at a department store called Zellers, which is less than a block away from me. For the unedumacated American population that may be reading this little blurb, Zellers is a subsidiary of the Hudson’s Bay Company, basically the oldest corporation in Canada and one that predates America by… what is it, a century? Anyway, I am a night shift stock boy.

It is an adjustment for me. My previous employment experience involved me sitting on a phone and yelling at people; moving things for five hours a night is quite a different sort of tired at the end of the day. My mind is active, but my body feels so sore by the end. I think I discovered muscles I never knew I had doing this work, and I may have lost a few pounds in a week just from the change of activity.

Now to get used to the blisters caused by the uncomfortable steel-toed boots! YAY!

I started last Thursday (March 25th). So far, I have learned a lot about stock, setting up displays and the unnecessary amount of packaging luggage comes in before it gets put out on display.

But the really funny thing: even away from a help desk atmosphere, people are just… people.

It does not matter where you are. You still see some policies you do not agree with, some you agree with, people who enforce them to the letter, people who do not even know what the word “policy” means, people who are universally liked, people who are universally hated, the crazys, the lazys, the overachievers… I am always amazed, every time I switch jobs, at how even in different fields there are still things that show we are not too different from each other.

I only wish that world politics could take that perspective. We would all be a lot better off.

The title of this post, “Black History Month Is Racist”, may be something that is a fire-starter. I am not trying to marginalize the struggles of the past, nor put down any of the people who currently identify themselves as African-American, black or whatever you may call yourself. You have pride in yourself and what you perceive as your own racial group. This is more of addressing racism than anything else.

Racism. What a really ugly word. You know, I never really got the whole race thing. So someone has a different color skin than me. Big whoop. That just means their ancestors lived in a different part of the world than others. Does that really make a difference to me? No.

So why does it to so many others?

February is Black History Month, a celebration of what I believe the politically correct term is people of African-American descent celebrating their great people and accomplishments. Singling out the accomplishments of an individual is great, and I have no problem with this. There have been some great achievements done by many, and people celebrating accomplishments should be a great reward indeed. However, what I do have a problem with is dedicating an entire month to remember that which divides people into distinct groups within a society where we are all supposed to be just… people. By drawing awareness to the differences in between us, there runs the risk of people going ahead and drawing a line in which people can start to take pride in, and in pride, people can breed racism.

Is this a healthy thing, or more detrimental?

True, everyone is a little bit racist sometimes. It does not mean we go around committing hate crimes. (If you have not got the joke yet yet, click the image.)

Is it healthy to all of a sudden have a Asian History Month as well? Hispanic History Month? Do we have a White History Month? Strangely enough, yes, America has the first two, and a Jewish American History Month to boot. I only found out about that particular tidbit after I looked at the Wikipedia article for Black History Month that the other two months exist.

I know this seems like a very weird statement to make, but I believe events like Black History Month only underscore the racial divide in North America that people believe exists. I know there is some very racist people in places of North America, and I know Black History Month is designed to educate those who may be exposed to racist teachings, but I ask: What good does Black History Month do? Why is it important to draw that out in one month, instead of taking that concept of education and putting it to work all year long? I can not see a clear advantage to an education system that teaches one racial profile for a month, then the rest of the history later on.

And here is the biggest question: does it work, or does it draw a line that makes people’s differences all the more apparent?

That is not the only thing I find to be racist, mind you. Most organizations that draw the lines of difference in between people can contribute to racism. We all know the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and a lot of organizations do have the best intentions in mind, but is it a good thing to show people with different colored skin than each other as separate, or is it the proverbial road we are traveling down? For example, the NAACP. I know it tries to do good things with their organization, and I will not try to call them evil or anything… but I start to question its relevance in the world of today, and I also question if it does nothing more than to help draw a dividing line of race in our culture.

If you have been reading this blog for a while, you may notice that I do not think highly of Western culture as a whole. I believe we have gone into a period of stagnation, where we are looking for gratification over development as beings, on the precipice of regressing back to an earlier state of being. Hell, look at the last decade of cultural achievements. The highest grossing movies of the decade are mostly series movies (with the exception of Avatar). Television shows are getting remade, spun off from, and then marketed to death. Connections to the past as ideas and reimagining them is, quite frankly, lazy, and only in a few cases actually done right to the point where it can be called a success.

I wish we could be living in a world past racism towards our fellow man. As I say to others, though, I hate everybody equally, and I usually do not mean that as a joke. It does exist, though, and, if what I read in the news is correct, it is even institutionalized in some parts of North American society.

I can not see a difference in between these people. Can you?

I believe that a society should really be judged on how it treats its worst off citizens. But then again, that is just me talking.

Who is going to listen to me? I am just a lowly Canadian.

(This is an old post that I had kicking around on a different system, and I wanted to keep this one around. If you have already read it, sorry, but if not, it is a small window into what Canadians have to deal with as a country. This was posted back in March 2009, originally… but I liked it, so I decided to put it up again.)

So, apparently I am not losing my job, so I’m not going to be having to look for another one. I have good news in that, because I am sticking around IBM… and I keep a steady paycheque, so I now move on to other concerns.

It has been a while since I have done a full-fledged rant on any particular subject, but this has been stewing in my mind for months, ever since I had heard about this first from a random blog post I had stumbled upon. I am talking about CRTC Public Hearings 2008-11 and 2008-11-1, the move for the Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission to start regulating content on the Internet and promoting Canadian content, specifically with broadband video coming into play.

There are many things at stake for Canada as a country in this, which other nationalities might not understand without this paragraph. Unlike a lot of other countries in the world, Canada is right on the border of the United States, and with ten times the population and a hell of a lot more money and broadcasting power than anything in Canada, American media had almost quashed any Canadian-produced content out of existence. That’s when the CRTC stepped in and set it up so that Canadian content would occupy a certain percentage of air time for both radio and television broadcasts. This artificially created a market for Canadian-produced content, which extends to this day. Oh, and they even do something as evil as take broadcasts from Fox or NBC and, if a Canadian channel is airing that same show, switch the signal to the Canadian broadcaster so that we get local ads instead of the American ones. This, of course, peeves off a lot of Canadians, because half the fun of the Super Bowl is watching the commercials… and we don’t get that.

In ’99, the CRTC concluded a study that basically said they weren’t going to try to regulate content on the Internet. From their FAQ page:

In 1999, the CRTC studied the Internet and decided not to regulate it. Access to Internet services was competitive, and both creativity and innovation grew in an environment without regulation. While there was some broadcasting content being offered, most Internet services at the time were text based. The CRTC concluded that the Internet was meeting the objectives of the Broadcasting Act and Telecommunications Act. The CRTC periodically reviews its policies to ensure that the objectives continue to be met.

Fast forward to 2009.

The people at the CRTC have reopened this, as broadcasting on the Internet has taken an upswing and some people have gotten pissy about it, because it’s cutting off their funds. And yes, I said pissy, because that’s what they’re being.

Canadian broadcasters are arguing that the Internet has severely hurt them, in both terms of money and Canadian culture, but it seems that people are using the culture part of it to fight. Take, for example, this sample from actor/comedian Colin Mochrie:

Unlike television, when you are broadcasting through new media, the space for content is practically endless. However, being endless, content can easily get lost. So how do we make sure Canadians can find our own content? How do we make sure Canadian content is featured and given “shelf space”?

The full text of his article can be found here.

Let it be known right now that I have great respect for this man. He truly is a funny comedian, and a great actor. However, I’d also like to point out that I know of him from the American version of “Whose Line Is It Anyaway?” and “The Drew Carey Show”. Serious, that’s where I first saw him – it was before I started to regularly watch “This Hour Has 22 Minutes”, which I caught on reruns afterwards.

I’d also like to point out that I lost respect for him after I saw this quote:

Third, if the CRTC is going to create space for Canadian stories in new media, there must be stories to fill that space.

To that end, a levy should be imposed on Internet and wireless service providers to fund new media production, modelled on the levy on cable companies.

Yeah, f*** you too, Colin.

America, you’ve got it right. Most Internet video content is ad-supported, and can usually sustain itself. YouTube, for example, inserts text ads in to support its massive bandwidth fees, and is impressive for its user-driven content. If this goes through, Internet connection fees for EVERYONE in the country will skyrocket, with no real reason other than to “support Canadian content” which it is MY choice to view or not view.

This will kill Canadian web development, and send us back to 1991 for web development technologies. I will cut off my 10 Mbps cable Internet connection, down to the lowest I can find because using the Internet would be pointless if I cannot view the content that I would like to see… either that, or I’m just going to proxy around every single block that ever comes up.

You want supported content for Canadians? Create a Hulu-like service in Canada, that charges a monthly fee to watch high-quality video feeds of Canadian and foreign broadcasts.

You want Canadian content? MAKE GOOD CONTENT! I’m going to use one example, Rick Mercer, who could EASILY compete with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert if people would give him the chance. Corner Gas was pretty good, though a little too topical for people’s tastes – focusing on a small town in Saskatchewan -

Problem is, the company he’s working for, the CBC, is cutting back because of an advertisement shortfall. Since this is a mostly publicly supported company, the funds that came from the federal government were insufficient to help with this. Canadian content will further continue to suffer, as Mr. Mochrie’s arguments had said, but not because of the Internet but by the reluctance to act by the sitting federal government, and yes the economic recession which has caused advertisers to cut back. Yes, way to go Harper, throw more people on the unemployment line in the middle of an economic recession. (And yeah, I expect to be flamed for that. Come on, Conservative supporters, do your worst!)

The point is not to artificially inflate Canadian content by making ISPs charge users more to provide the same service that they have enjoyed for years, but Canadian content providers have got to start putting out competitive products that can and will do well in domestic markets, while still being marketable in foreign markets as well. The Americans did it by taking risks on shows that might have good content… and Canada must follow suit and do similar things, and promote them effectively.

That is, IF they truly care about Canadian content on the Internet, and on TV and via the radio. The way to do it is not by cutting back, it’s by increasing in tough times, and experimenting with new technologies. An on-demand CBC radio schedule would be one way of doing so, turning from the old AM broadcasts into iTunes podcasts, for example.

Start innovating. Go cutting edge. Stop living in the past, embrace the future, etc. Obviously what you’re doing isn’t working, so start coming up with a different business model, or expect to see all Canadian content go up in smoke.

- Me, Myself and I

National borders aren’t even speed bumps on the information superhighway. ~Tim May

I owe my computer.

See, just over a month ago, I made a bet with my computer that my hard drive would be the first thing to go on my computer. Technically, it was the oldest component on it – out of the entire thing, I bought that drive in 2006, a Samsung 120 GB hard drive – and looked a little rickety to me when I looked at it. There has been a noise coming from my computer for the last little bit that I could not quite identify. I assumed it was the hard drive, but apparently it was not. On Boxing Day, I sought out and purchased a new 1 TB SATA hard drive for a very good deal – more than half the purchase price off. It’s given me good service since then.

Apparently I was wrong.

Today, my monitor started behaving irregularly. It is an LCD monitor that I bought in 2008. And now, almost precisely two years later from the manufacture date listed on the sticker, it is a monitor-shaped paperweight, due to the backlight failing.

Prognisis? Replacement needed.

Damn you, you electronic POS. You won.

Originally, I had a post about half-done, about my views on world government and the world currency situation. However, while I was researching everything I could about this, something came up that caused me to not put up that one post, and it is a religious reason – apparently, uniting the world in one government will cause the Apocalypse or Armageddon (not the movie) according to prophecy. Once I thought about it for a bit, that actually made sense as to why the United Nations is set up to be this incompetent power in the world, and why the League of Nations failed in the first place.

My understanding of why humanity is so messed up got better just from that revelation.

Anyway… moving on.

Lately, I have been a complete insomniac. My life right now consists of:

• Get up from bed
• Apply for work
• Eat
• Apply for more work
• Play a game to try to entertain myself
• Hope someone calls
• Sleep
• Repeat

I do not know if you know this or not, but I have been unemployed since June of 2009. When I was let go from a very familiar multinational company, I was devastated. In fact, I think I might still be. Lately, especially over the past few days, I have had extreme bouts of insomnia and today I have a numbness that I can not entirely explain. Panic attacks, maybe, or the fear of panic attacks.

My unemployment runs out soon. Am I panicking? Yes.

Am I depressed? Meh, probably.

I do not think I am going to whine about it incessantly here, though. Instead, I am going to dance with myself. If I had a chance, I’d ask the world to dance, ’til then I’ll be dancing with myself. I mean, what good is that? I am not a little whiny emo punk or anything. I think, though, instead of writing about my angst and despair, because all that will do is get you to feel sorry for me and I really do not want it…

...because this is not me.

I think I will just share some other things with you instead.

The decade ended over two weeks ago. Ten years ago, I was in my junior year of high school (11th grade), and I was starting my life down the path that would lead me to where I am today. Yeah, I did one little choice that changed me from who I was to who I am today, and it has affected every facet of my life from then on: I started to date a woman that lasted a six year stretch and ended up with two children and the place I am today. I do not regret any choice, nor do I wish it to all go away, and I would do it all over again, if given the option.

The weird thing is that everything did come full circle – I started the 21st century without a job, without too much direction in life, and addicted to the computer. Details are the only thing that has changed from then until now. I would argue that I look very similar in between then and now, except I can actually grow facial hair and lost a lot of the boyish stuff in my facial features. Oh, and I gained about forty pounds. Can not forget that one.

Am I in the place that I wanted to be? No. Life turns in odd and unexpected ways for everyone, and I am no exception to this whatsoever.

One thing that I am proud to say is that I am still seeking understanding of the world around me. It might not be as detailed or as involved as people getting into world politics, but I like to generalize. I might dabble one day in world politics, but the next day is more about the behavior of males and females, or the influence of certain factors against individuals, or my own mind. Metaphysics the next day.

What Soylent Green is made of the next day.

Life is what I make of it. I just wish there was not this incessant need to get a job that I have to fuel in order to even live life. I must admit, though, it was incredibly rewarding to work for a living, because it felt like I was contributing something to the world… but only contributing a poorly-written blog post every couple of days I guess will have to do for now.

I think this post has wandered in weird ways. I apologize for that, but this is how my mind thinks lately. It jumps from one subject to another very easily, and I guess that does not really make sense. It is like throwing a playlist on your music player on random with a list that covers multiple genres of music or something… which is something I do anyway. I like listening to The Who, Bif Naked and U2 within a span of ten minutes (and yes, all three of those are on my playlist). My mind threads things together in its own way, and I point out similarities in each of those music styles in my head, and I hum along or tap my feet at all the songs.

Ah well.

I think I am done here.

Welcome to the world of tomorrow!

(I could not resist the Futurama reference, sorry. Here is something a little classier for you.)

May you not screw up 2010, especially if you are a world leader. It is a new decade, a new time for discovery, change, and, as some like me want, a return to some of our space race ambitions: the exploration of space, to seek out strange new worlds, and to push the boundaries of human understanding of the universe, our world, and ourselves forward.

May you have a journey of self-discovery along the way.

Thank whatever deity is out there that the Christmas season is done…

So, what have I been doing? One thing that I did do today was start following a few links on Twitter and I ended up perusing Carrie Fisher’s Twitter page. Completely randomly, of course; I was clicking on people that were following William Shatner. It was while I was viewing her recent tweets when I saw this update, which contained a link to her blog, where I read this. (Sorry for doing that… but I noted a few people on Twitter were noticing that some tweets got deleted. I want to back my links up, just in case.)

Now, just in case some of you are wondering what the big deal is with this particular person, let me jog your memory for you:

…yeah. Princess Leia. Star Wars.

Anyway, there was this big blowup online where she was blasted because of how she looks now. Apparently people have taken the whole “let’s be jerks on the Internet” liberty and blasted Carrie Fisher about her looks, calling her “fat” and stuff like that. The Internet is useful for many things, and unfortunately this particular part is also what it is primarily used for: uncensored reactions that are saved forever.

For reference, this is a picture of Carrie Fisher that I found online from September 2009:

People blasted her for her appearance. And in her blog, which I linked above, she had this to say:

Amazing as this might sound, I BARELY eat a fucking thing, AND I exercise regularly, get  acupuncture—-AND I take hundreds of these enormous, annoying vitamins……but it would appear that between being 5 foot ONE & 53 years old (in 3 weeks), I’m not going to be shedding a bunch of pounds anytime soon…..I suppose I could completely STARVE myself, but then I wouldn’t have the energy to do my show, be myself AND (most importantly, of course) defend myself on the Internet to those I’ve been upsetting with my increased presence……..

I hate going on these talk show excursions, cause everytime I do, the Internet fills up with what a fat act I’ve become……

First off, sorry for the language. That is the only time I have sworn on this thing so far… and it was not me. Carrie Fisher made me do it.

Another thing I wanted to mention here is that… granted, that is sort of what I thought the first time when I saw this, too, I will not lie. It was the first thought that crossed my mind when I went looking at YouTube videos and saw a recent interview she did on a talk show. Then the second thing that crossed my mind was a sharp dose of perspective, and I believe this is something that culture as a whole has forgotten, and has largely glossed over:

• People change, especially over three decades; and
• The fact she did not dive into plastic surgery was awesome.

The fact that most people associate the Star Wars original trilogy with a good wave of nostalgia – and considering it is one of the most well-known movie series in the western hemisphere – it is not too surprising that people view her as still this young woman in their minds, especially those who are turned on by the first picture. But what people forget is that three decades have passed since A New Hope premiered. Harrison Ford has changed. Mark Hamill has changed – bad break for that guy, too. James Earl Jones and Alec Guiness are dead. Carrie Fisher has changed too.

I remember seeing Miss Fisher – I can not bring myself to call her by her first name, dammit, no matter how hard I try – in the first role I recognized her in outside of Star Wars: Austin Powers. I recognized her there, without having to re-watch the movie. Time is cruel to all of us, and Miss Fisher has had to battle a bi-polar disorder, drug addictions, and Internet trolls since then. Personally, I think she looks good; hey, I do not like the plastic surgery look popular in Hollywood, what can I say?

Who finds this sexy, anyway?

Notwithstanding, this is something that, I think, is a symptom of Western society as a whole. Apparently, if one does not find sex appeal in a person, especially in females, they are no longer relevant and subject to trashing. Males, on the other hand, unless they go bald, they can get sexier even as they age. Our youth-driven society that values looks over function is rearing its ugly head. But hey, that is what MTV is for, right? Glorifying beauty and youth over everything else? I mean, it was not founded for something silly, like music or anything like that.

If you have not guessed it, I am not really enamored with Western society’s “if I do not want to have sex with with it or view it as competition, it is not worth my time” kick it has been on, but I will admit, I have to fight those urges too; to judge something so readily on looks is a base human instinct. That which is ugly used to be that which could kill you easily. If you thought your baby was ugly back in the caveman days, you would probably eat it and kill off the human race. Desirability in mates is what we all have, but the problem is that we have that thrown into our faces by the media, and we are expected to discard those that have any imperfection, those that do not look like a perfectly-molded plastic doll. Especially in women.

Funny thing, I have heard that we are living in a “post-feminism” world. We are living in an era where women are expected to make their own way and be strong and independent, but still make the men pay for a dinner date. Where manly men are told that they are dinosaurs. Where strength is encouraged in females and feelings are encouraged in males (at least, these examples have been my experience). We silently accept this, because we see it as an inevitable struggle to fight the change in society that we cannot control.

I think people forget that a single snowflake can make the difference in between beautiful snowy scenery and an avalanche of destruction. Of course, one should be careful.

It takes someone to rally and challenge the norms, to strike out in the night and say, “Something is wrong with the status quo.” It takes one person to change the landscape of the world… Alexander the Great, Leonardo da Vinci, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Joan of Arc and others all did it. They saw something was wrong and did something about it. Granted, most of those fought in bloody wars, but the principle is the same, and should be remembered. I am trying to affect some change by pointing it out. If it is ultimately successful or not is up to chance, really. I know I do not have a particularly large audience with this, but I am trying, and that is the important bit.

I am trying to be that single snowflake.

I am unique, just like everybody else!

So, now, how does this all relate to Carrie Fisher? Well, in a way, the reaction to her was a symptom of a larger problem that Western society as a whole refuses to treat. To have a blow to your image like that is, I would think, pretty hard to even the strongest individual, and I think we should be giving her some positive comments. Personally, I think she looks great, a lot better than the molded plastic figures we have in show business today.

Since reality seems to be coming to the forefront in the entertainment industry, maybe we should be bringing our expectations back to reality as well.

No, I am not talking about a computer antivirus program. If you were expecting this topic, sorry. I am talking about virus vaccines.

I read a small article where someone actually did a sociology study on the distribution of a theoretical HIV vaccine. It was fascinating to see, mostly because it was an article that was more unique than other articles I have ever seen. Instead of listing results for one country – which has been done – the main researcher collected data from three different countries in the world for this study’s content.

While every study I always have to take with a grain of salt to make sure that I know that it does not represent all people, I can relax a bit on this one. (I still am, by the way; people can influence numbers to say what they want.)

I am just going to go out and say it: HIV scares the crap out of me. It is a deadly virus, in most cases can lead to AIDS, and you can get it from something as simple as having sex with someone (or contaminated blood). There is no known cure, but there are drugs that can help prolong lives and stuff.

In the early 90′s, there was a big awareness campaign about it. You could not see any awards show, for example, without the red ribbon that I show above here on any celebrity throughout the show. It fell out of favor after a couple of years, of course, just like most Hollywood trends.

I wish Hollywood would get tired of this trend, though. Paris, you are ugly, and you are not news. GTFO.

Most people know, however, the threat is still around. AIDS was not exterminated; some say the figures may be as high as 1 in 3 people in Africa are infected with HIV. Tens of thousands of people are infected with the virus in each North American country, if not hundreds of thousands. There is no denying that it is an epidemic, and for a lot of people, it is a death sentence.

I know there is some around that will say the HIV virus is God’s way of smiting the wicked or something like that. I disagree with this statement, since I do not believe a god could be that cruel. What I do believe, though, is that people whom have made the lifestyle choice to put themselves at risk for this virus should not be punished for making that choice, no matter how much I disagree with it personally. Furthermore, for those that do not believe there should be a HIV vaccine because it is “God’s will for the wicked to be cleansed”, do you also believe that a “pure” woman whom was raped should also be subject to God’s judgment in such a manner?

I believe I developed a bit of a tangent from my main point, so allow me to return to it. In the article, I was particularly drawn to this:

We all have our way of thinking and frankly most of us associate vaccines with ‘Okay, now I’m fine.’ The other thing, though, is sometimes we associate vaccines with “Okay, that means that you are going to put a bit of flu inside me.” … Imagine when people think you are going to put a little bit of HIV inside me, [even though] it’s not the case.

This particular part struck me, as I have used the same argument about flu shots. I do not exactly like getting the flu shot, specifically because the vaccine uses a dead version of the virus to allow the body’s immune system learn how to attack the real virus, so then when exposed to the virus the body then can combat it effectively (at least, that is how I understand it). One thing that made more sense about an eventual HIV vaccine: the government would never allow someone to inject another with any form of the HIV virus (at least the Canadian government would not), unless it was proven it works without risk of the person… you know, dying and all that. The version used in testing right now is synthesized to not use the virus, unlike the flu shots.

It leads me to the very obvious question, though, the one I want to base this post on:

If an HIV vaccine was put out tomorrow, would people take it?

It is a legitimate question. I know I definitely would, due to the fact that I would rather be protected against something that could possibly kill me, but would others? Would people in religious communities be shunned for getting a vaccine because of the social stigma surrounding HIV infection? Would the price be too high? Are the side effects bad?

Will taking the vaccine make Vin Diesel ever wear a leather kilt again?

It is a good question. Maybe someone should ask the Pope about it. Yes, I am serious. It would answer a lot of questions right there and then, would it not? It would definitely answer the religion question, and since churches in general tend to dictate behavior in the bedroom and a good majority of the world is religious in some form or another (not to mention that Christian aid organizations are pretty big players in developing countries), it is a valid philosophical question… not the kilt question, but the rest of it.

How will we answer it? I sincerely hope that a lot of the answers come from a personal viewpoint and not a big viewpoint like the Pope or another religious leader, because we need to stamp this out now. HIV has taken too many people away that could not even live up to their own potential as people.

Rest in peace, Freddie. (What? I do not have to put jokes on ALL my picture captions!)

The same can be said for any vaccine. We just hope it does not turn out to be a worldwide placebo, and help the world get over one of the deadliest epidemics to affect the world since the Black Plague (in my opinion only; that may not be a statement of fact).

By the way, I am going to pimp something out here: the World Community Grid. Got a computer that you leave on and are not using all the time? Why not let it crunch a science project for FightAIDS@Home? I challenge you to beat my statistics; I have run over a year of processor time for FightAIDS@Home, and I am proud to donate my spare CPU cycles to a worthy cause such as this.

Now, the vaccine for HIV is many years off – I will be truly surprised if it comes any sooner than five years in the future – but finding out the social impact now of such a breakthrough would be a great thing. I know there are people dying in Africa right now of AIDS – ironically, the one that is rampant through Africa, the place with more HIV infections, is of a different subtype compared to the ones researched in North America, where there is less infected people – and this thing is one of the more adaptive viruses that has ever existed. We should be looking at curtailing this however possible; I would prefer to take all people into the future, if possible.

Let us all hope for a world where we have destroyed this virus, and there is no new outbreaks.

Before I begin, I need to declare that I mean no offense to any religion by what I do, say, or show in this following blog post, nor do I mean to hurt those that say free speech the most sacred of the freedoms that we hold dear. This is only my opinion on the matter.

And here we go…

Bob Martens posted up an article from the Associated Press on his Twitter, and it moved me to make this post. The article itself is one that touches on something that has become a matter of contention in between Islam and the West in general, about religion and free speech. For those who are not going to click on the link, allow me to summarize: a group of Islamic nations from the Organization of the Islamic Conference are lobbying at the United Nations for an international law that will prohibit defamation of all religious symbols. They are in the very early stages of this particular piece of legislation; there is no formal proposal made to the United Nations General Assembly at this time – at least, not one that I can find online. However, the Organization of the Islamic Conference has promised it will be coming.

Earlier this year, the UN passed a resolution which combated defamation of religions all over the world. The original text, I believe it is this one, clearly outlines what it thinks about defamation of religious icons. It seems that there has been at least two other resolutions on this subject, denouncing religious defamation.

I, for one, agree that we should not defame religion. What I do have a problem with, however, is the wording.

I do not meddle much in the matters of international law too much, specifically because I try to take a standpoint of trying to see both sides of the argument, then trying to compromise a solution that is agreeable to both sides. This is probably my main detractor from getting into politics, because I do not like to take sides, and I just prefer being the one who listens to all sides of an argument and helping the two come to a middle ground. Maybe I should be a mediator…

Well, anyway, back to what I was saying. The few things I actually do not like about the text are:

• The interpretation of the resolution is left very wide open. You could open an eight-lane freeway interchange in the space it leaves for what defamation actually is. Does it cover satire? Commentary? Interpretations of religious texts that do not conform with religious norms (which is illegal in some Islamic states)?

I hear UN Resolution Highway is a great drive in the spring time.

• The mention of Islam specifically in the text of the resolution. So… according to the UN, Islam is more important than all other religions in the world? That can not possibly be misinterpreted at all. And yes, I am against the specifically anti-Semitic resolutions in the UN as well.
• This text, which has noble intentions but basically points the finger at the West:

5. Notes with deep concern the intensification of the overall campaign of defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general, including the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;

6. Recognizes that, in the context of the fight against terrorism, defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general have become aggravating factors that contribute to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of members of target groups, as well as to their economic and social exclusion;

I really wish that people got along. I also wish that people would respond more with gentle words and not bombs or religious epitaphs. In diplomacy, we may have resolutions that make sense, but in this… I can not support any resolution that singles out a single religion or group before any others that constitutes infringing one freedom to protect another.

The title of this particular posting is “The Battle of the Freedoms”. Indeed, this is what at least the Associated Press has led me to believe what is happening: the West strictly opposes this resolution, while the non-West supports it almost unanimously. The United Nations is the battlegrounds for this, and the weapons words. The casualties may be a freedom that you hold dear, whether it is your freedom to say what you want, or the freedom you have to be protected against someone telling you that your religion is stupid. Veterans of wars past, I do not envy your position on this.

What will the outcome be?

I sit here, watching the Internet for the next salvo to be fired off.

Should I get myself one of these?

I am worried, not because I like to make fun of religions and that sort of thing – which I do not unless it is Scientology – but it is because of what this law can be mutilated in to.

If I question my own existence in a way that is offensive to the core tenet of a belief of one particular religion, will that make me a criminal in the law’s eyes?

If I am to state an opinion about a policy that a church adopts that is unfavorable, does this mean I will have people calling me a blasphemer?

If I say that I believe a prophet of one religion may be related to another, will I have people calling for my head?

I'm sure the Internet's flying tank will protect me!

I state these, because this is what does happen in some countries. I believe you can do some of the research on this particular point yourself, because there are many examples of where this does happen and will continue happening. The real question I have is… how far will certain countries go to enforce this law in other countries? In this aspect, this is both where the UN both fails and succeeds: it is the democratic way of the member nations, but fundamentally wrong to accept resolutions of this nature that are so open to interpretation.

Because I do not think either of these should be in charge of anything:

And with this… this particular piece of legislation, if it ever passes, will be what has been done.