“please don’t donate your eyes…”

I was having a conversation with a friend and the topic of being an organ donor came up. She explained to me that being an organ donor was her way of giving back, that life was a journey and that she wasn’t going to be able to take anything with her into the next life anyway.  I thought about this for a moment, and realized her statements had strong merit.

I never thought about being an organ donor seriously, mostly because I plan on sliding head first into my grave, all used up, broken, worn out, scarred, and pretty much done with this body of mine. To me life isn’t just a journey, it’s an adventure, a challenge,  a puzzle, and a test as well as a journey and the human body is a pretty amazing creation that can withstand pretty much all that it will encounter in life. It is a vehicle through which we can experience life to its fullest.

As I sat looking at my friend and listening to how important and valuable being an organ donor was to her, I caught myself, as I have many times before, admiring her kaleidoscope eyes. She is the second person in my life that I have met who has the coolest looking eyes with shades or red, green, brown, blue, amber and black in them, true and natural kaleidoscope eyes.

I asked her, “If there were any part of your body that you would not donate, what would it be”?  She said she would not exclude any part of her body as long as she could be helping someone in need. So I said, “please don’t donate your eyes, because there is no way I could look at someone else and not wonder…” I was happy to make her laugh, but then a thought occurred to me, what if someone only needed one eye? How perfectly unique and unusual that would be if say they originally had solid blue eyes, lost one, then got her donation. Not only would it be stunning and eye-catching…but what a perfect opportunity to not only have seen the world through your own eyes, but then to see the world through someone else’s eye…permanently.

This would seem to create a supercharged intelligence factor of at least X10. Seeing the world through your own eye and someone else’s eye at the same time, 24/7, would be an overwhelming advantage over everyone else. At this point I was once again accused of “zoning out” and being completely disinterested in her accompanied by the “pouty face” look, and I came back to the present and pondered whether I should hurl on her shoes to counter her overly feminine expression.

We ate our lunches instead.

Why? just tell me Why!

This just in… “J. K. Rowling at Carnegie Hall Reveals Dumbledore is Gay; Neville Marries Hannah Abbott, and Much More”

I liked Jo Rowling. I liked her books. I liked her writing style. Wouldn’t you know it, as soon as you are blanketed in fame, fortune, popularity and spend far more of your life in the limelight than you realized you would, you suddenly succumb to media pressure and do something stupid.

Case in point, The Harry Potter series was doing just fine. It was fantastic as far as I was concerned. It’s been so good that it vaulted Jo Rowling into almost instant fame. The movies based on the books have been held to impeccable detail following the book and not deviating from the book, per Jo Rowling’s wishes. Then while she is lambasted with eager young kids with questions galore at the Carnegie Hall, she ruins the entire series with what I am sure she thought would be catering to what the public wants, or catering to a new market to sell more books and movies. In any case, Jo Rowling was asked a perfectly innocent question from a youngster “Did Dumbledore, who believed in the prevailing power of love, ever fall in love himself?”

Now, understand, Jo Rowling is an adult, writing books that typically are aimed at a young readership, but also makes them appealing to adults as well. Her answer to this young fan was:

…recently I was in a script read through for the sixth film, and they had Dumbledore saying a line to Harry early in the script saying ‘I knew a girl once, whose hair…’ I had to write a little note in the margin and slide it along to the scriptwriter, ‘Dumbledore’s gay!’

Now, PLEASE! I am begging, someone tell me, why would Jo Rowling come to a fan gathering, book signing, and seeing all those young faces of happy children eager to meet their new idol, and announce (after a perfectly innocent question) that “oh ya, one of my characters is gay”? I mean really folks, the right answer should have been “no, the story doesn’t go into a love life with this character (which is the indisputable truth). The story focuses on the lives of the children characters in it” and left it at that. But no, Jo Rowling saw an opportunity, she seized the moment (in front of the young audience) and dollar signs flashed in front of Rowling’s eyes as she announces “yes, yes as a matter of fact, that’s right, yes indeed, that’s a great idea, Dumbledore IS gay, I’m glad I thought of it” and sits back with a smirck of financial windfall and popular controversy on her face. Maybe she just got this grand notion that she had to be “politically correct” and add gay community to her story since she already included a nice smattering of ethnicities in the books. The problem is, the smattering of ethnicities is nicely evident in the books, social issues of peer pressure and other childhood problems are a focus in her characters, as well as puppy love and cliques or clubs, gay issues are not.

Jo Rowling did a great job of covering a lot of issues in the lives of children growing up and facing the challenges of their surroundings and life issues in general, in her books. I never read one hint of homosexuality in her books. So why try and incorporate it after the fact to a fan base of generally children?

As far as I am concerned, this was a HUGE blunder by Rowling, and I am sure she had no idea what the implications of announcing that the “Head Master, The Definitive Authority at a school of children, the Respected Leader and symbol of what is good and right in the world”, would be by making this character gay all of a sudden, or at all.

I just don’t get it.

Free Porn – Totally 100% Free

It’s all over the “world wide” web in a quantity so vast that I am sure if digital porn was converted into an alternative fuel source, this planet would never again need a drop of gasoline, oil, propane, lump of coal or even electricity for the next million years.

I am almost certain Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler saw HUGE drops in profits and subscribers and never imagined the internet possibly interfering or even being the culprit for their losses. The question arises, “how do you get people to subscribe when it’s free in such vast quantity”?

Thankfully I could care less how they do it because this post is only slightly more about the pros and cons of prostitution, this country’s oldest profession and quite possibly the world’s oldest.

So I am pondering sex, prostitution, pay for and free, marriages and single folks, and how these are all related. I realized like most folks have, that

1. if you are married and you go to your spouse for sex, it’s perfectly fine and legal.
2. if you are single and you find a willing partner for sex, it’s free and legal.
3. married or single aside, if you go looking for a willing sex partner and you pull out your wallet/purse (not to get the condom), that as soon as you hand someone any amount of money before or after the sex act, it becomes instantly illegal.

Now I have to wonder, if a person is attracted to someone and he/she engages in sex with that someone, and there is no exchange of money, it’s perfectly fine and legal, but suppose some person approaches another and the person being approached doesn’t find this first person very attractive or maybe even put off by their looks, but would consider sex with that person if there were some sort of compensation. The act is still pleasurable (to at least one of the two involved), and they are both consenting adults, and lets just throw into the mix that both people are single, as soon as there is a gift be it monetary or otherwise, it’s suddenly illegal.

Heck, I know some guys that buy their girlfriend an expensive gift after every single sexual occurrence between them. I know some wives that spend a little extra on their husbands hobbies for a wonderful night of sex. The list goes on in the number of different ways that sex is rewarded for the intensity of the experience or just the experience alone. Are they all prostitutes because there is “compensation”? Heck no. So why is it still illegal here in the United States?

Then I think about all the little kids or young men and women who are sexually abused or raped because the perpetrator either couldn’t find a prostitute or found it was too easy to get caught with a prostitute and hence easier to accost a helpless child or teen. I wonder how far the sexual crime rate would drop if prostitution were legalized.

A 2005 research study of legalizing prostitution (updated in 2005)* shows that The United States has 3.2 rapes per 10,000 citizens compared to the UK which has only 1.4 per 10,000 persons. Amazingly enough the U.S. has 64 prisoners per 10,000 persons where the UK only has 11 per 10,000. Canada is embarrassingly at 7.5 rapes per 10,000 and only 11 prisoners per 10,000. Rapists sure know how to get away with it in Canada. These are very significant numbers to be sure.

Now for the real reason for this meaningless post. I average about 150 viewers a day here at The Dragon Tail (since it’s inception in April of 2007), and it is my hope that I am presenting a variety of topics to entertain a wide variety of people. I thought I would run an experiment and see what my viewership would increase to if I dragged a bunch of perverts away from their normal searches for porn with my title.

For an accurate comparison I am taking my average daily views for the month of October (154) and will compare them in an update on the end of the month. I think a two week range should be sufficient.

Until next time….

*Liberator, M. (2004) Legalized Prostitution: Regulating the Oldest Profession. The Liberator. http://www.liberator.net/articles/prostitution.html.

Enough is Enough

A representative for the Al Sharpton brigade showed up in Ft Pierce, Fla. to again show what true idiots they are rallying the public to take action against a police officer arresting a 15 year old black girl. The girl was resisting arrest with violent actions including biting the officer while trying to evade and resist him. She continuously shouts and struggles ignoring his instructions and commands.

The Sharpton “gang” contends that the Officer used excessive force in his attempts to arrest the girl. As usual the Sharpton Gang typically ignores the fact that any force the officer displayed was equal to the amount of struggling and resisting arrest by the girl. They also ignore the fact that the officer wouldn’t be using any force at all if the perpetrator complied with the officers instructions to begin with.

The Sharpton Gang also fails to recognize that the police don’t arbitrarily arrest innocent by-standers and if the officer had used the proper amount of force required to subdue a perpetrator who is resisting arrest, he would have taken her down [to the ground] forcibly and applying a subduing restraint hold on the head or neck or into the spine.

There is no doubt that the Sharpton Gang is trying to produce another Rodney King incident, and to what end? The Sharpton Gang would be of more value to the public if they spent more of their energy on helping youths become good citizens and providing programs and activities that promote their healthy social growth rather than grand standing as a result of their criminal and mischievous activities that get youths into an arrest situation.

This is a typical case of the Sharpton Gang crying wolf, and to make matters worse, “after” the fact as well.

I refuse to call Al Sharpton “Reverend” as he has never displayed anything about himself that is reverent.

Private Email Made Public

It’s amazing how deep stupidity runs. I visited a Bush bashing, ranting based on ignorance, website recently. There is a post [among a great many] that shows just how ignorant this bart guy is and he tries to pass as intelligent through humor or satire. There are several ways provided to voice an opinion, i.e. email, commenting on the blog, or commenting on the forum provided at the website.

I chose the private form of commenting as I had some choice words for this guy and it wasn’t necessary to “broadcast” my opinion of this idiot on his blog or forum since it would have served no purpose and it would have come across exactly as he does, purely bashing and nothing more.

The result was that I hit bone so severely that it caused him to take my private email to him, and post it on his website along with my name AND my alias, not that either of them are secret but its his ignorant actions that shows his true colors.

To make matters worse for himself, a recent post shows ignorance in its purest form on his blog as follows:

The “Democrat” Party

By tsakshaug

For the past several months, conservatives have been referring to the Democratic Party as the Democrat party. The term has “slipped” in to the president’s speeches, and may be on its way to becoming “natural” for some to use. There has been nary a peep from Democrats in regards to this. What should we do, before the name of our party has been taken away from us? Do we do as the leaders of our party have done and do nothing? This seems to be their answer to every slander, because it is not nice to call names. Do we become whiners, and say, “that’s not nice! It is Democratic Party”?

Whatever we do needs to be agreed upon and used. I am for using another name for the Republic Party. I have seen several mentioned over time, some may be considered in bad taste. I do not think we need to go over the line.

I propose we refer to the other party as the Repo Party.
Given the real estate foreclosure issues going on now, it is fitting.

The above is so typical of Democrats and a result of our failing education system. Anyone with an education would know that both Democrat Party and Democratic Party are correct.

As an adjective – democratic |ˌdeməˈkratik| adjective
1 of, relating to, or supporting democracy or its principles : democratic reforms | democratic government.

As a noun – democrat |ˈdeməˌkrat| noun
1 an advocate or supporter of democracy. ORIGIN late 18th cent.(originally denoting an opponent of the aristocrats in the French Revolution of 1790).

I’m sorry to inform the lessor educated Democrats that there is only one form of “Republican” and that is as an adejctive. (referring to the political party)

republican |riˈpəblikən| adjective
(of a form of government, constitution, etc.) belonging to, or characteristic of a republic.
• advocating or supporting republican government : the republican movement.

The mildly educated would know that the Democratic Republican Party was the name of the Democrats original party when it was founded in 1792 by Thomas Jefferson.

More not so shockingly, is that this Bart guy offers no solutions to anything he bitches about. Whereas his total worth is to find something wrong with the President, the Republicans, the educated, the way the military operates, the way the government operates, talk show hosts, etc. The list is endless to what this guy will bitch about, all in an attempt to make himself look better by berating and bashing. I think it’s obvious why he doesn’t qualify to run for President of the United States. He also finds solace in playing semantics as a defense rather than offering up anything of value or worth when he is confronted. In my email to him I purely guessed when I said he should stick to being president of his local bar, to my surprise, he retorted with the fact he owned two bars (I supposed at some time in the past). That just about sums him up as going into detail would be extremely lengthy and I have already dedicated far too much air time to his … cause? It’s just typical rhetoric from people trying to make a reputation for themselves based on their “bashing ability.” Now that I have lowered myself to his level, there will be no more posts of this type on this blog.

”The only requirement for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing”

My husband thought for a few minutes and then told my son to go stand in our front living room window. He said, “Son, stand there and tell me what you see?”

“Now I want you to stand there and look out the window and pretend you see Saddam come out of his house with his wife, he has her by the hair and is hitting her. You see her bleeding and crying. He hits her in the face, he throws her on the ground, then he starts to kick her to death.

I start to cry. My husband looks at our nine year old son standing in the window, looking pitiful and ashamed at his answers to my husband’s questions and he says…”Son.”

“Yes, Daddy.”

“Open the blinds, son, because that evil man…. now he’s at our front door…”WHAT WILL YOU DO NOW?”

My son looks at his father, anger and defiance in his eyes. He balls up his tiny fists and looks his father square in the eyes, without hesitation he says: “I’LL DEFEND MY FAMILY DAD! I’M NOT GONNA LET HIM HURT MOMMY OR MY SISTER, DAD! I’M GONNA FIGHT HIM, DAD, I’M GONNA FIGHT HIM!”…

The preceding are excerpts from a story you can read on the “My Papers” page here. You can go there from the navigation tabs at the top of this blog, or follow this link [here]