About Me

******UPDATED****** I felt it was about time I updated this section since I hadn’t done so in almost a year and I wanted it to accurately reflect a more up-to-date “me.” My name is Danielle but most people know me as Dani DeBold. I was born in San Francisco, raised in San Jose, and am currently living in Texas. Right now I am a sophomore in my fall semester at the University of Texas at Austin. I am double majoring in journalism and government and minoring in religious studies. Next semester, I will be studying abroad with the Semester at Sea program. I am extremely excited to have such an amazing once in a lifetime opportunity like Semester at Sea. I will be going around the world, traveling from the Bahamas to Brazil to South Africa to Mauritius to India to China to Malaysia to Costa Rica… and the list goes on. I am excited to get to enjoy the fun tourist-aspects of these regions but more importantly I am looking forward to getting exposure to the culture in these areas and getting the opportunity to do missions trips and work with people of less means in the developing world. It has always been a dream of mine to travel to Africa and India and I consider myself extremely lucky that very soon that dream will become a reality.


Once I return to the states I will most likely continue my degree through the University of California system. While UT and Austin are both amazing places, through the knowledge gained that can only come from experience, I have come to realize that in my heart California will always be my home. Wherever I end up, after I graduate from college I am looking into a number of options, including: attending law school to focus on civil rights and constitutional law, pursuing a graduate degree in international relations emphasizing human rights and outreach, interning/working in DC, extended traveling, and/or volunteering with the Peace Corps or other types of service outreach programs of its caliber both domestically and abroad. Wherever I end up I know that ultimately I would like to have a positive impact on the lives of others, especially the least fortunate and under represented, and that I hope I leave the world a better place than it was when I came into it. Whether I do this on a large scale by becoming a senator, an ambassador, or an international advocate or even a smaller scale by taking on jobs and opportunities locally in my community, I want to be an influential contributor and valuable resource for the three major causes that are closest to my heart—the AIDS epidemic, injustice and human rights abuse, and global starvation.


"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile" - Einstein

"My life is my message" - Ghandi


To me, truly the most noble thing one can do is fight for justice on behalf of those who are incapable of doing so for themselves. I firmly believe that each individual has the ability to change the world and I intend to do as much as possible to be a beneficial factor in improving the global community. I have been told that I am idealistic to a fault, but that has never effected the complete confidence I have in my own capabilities and the capabilities of all people to make a positive difference in the lives of others. Although many people may blow off Ghandi's philosophy, I genuinely believe that we must be the change we wish to see in the world.



I like to learn new things. I love talking to people with different perspectives and backgrounds because I believe that we learn the most from those who do not agree with us. Although I hate political polarization and corruption, I find both topics very intriguing. I like to debate and discuss politics as well as read about them and write about them. I also enjoy dicussing religion and philosophy, even though I myself am not a very religious or spiritual individual. Personally, I believe that organized religion can be overly problematic and the social impact it has on the global community is more detrimental then it is beneficial. I have no problem with individual belief or spirituality, however, often when a group of people with similar beliefs come together to form organized forces, the belief and spirituality of the group can be overshadowed by corruption and intolerance--perverting the intention and the positive aspects and nature of religious philosophy. I think that all of the world's problems would be solved if people were accepting (or at least tolerant) of differences, whether they be culture differences, religious differences, racial differences, social differences, political differences etc. You can call me idealistic or just a bleeding heart liberal, but I find that most of my views on the world today can be summed up by John Lennon's song "Imagine."

"To truly love is the ultimate expression of the will to live. A heart that truly loves is forever young."

I am a very opinionated person. The concepts of justice and liberty are some of the only things I see worth fighting for. I believe in justice for all people, not just Americans or Westerners, but people from all backgrounds, cultures, and communities. When I study abroad in the spring, I will be given the opportunity to travel to Africa and India, something that I had only dreamed of and hoped for before. When I visit both places, I especially want to work with children living in poverty and dying in AIDS orphanages for, to me, the greatest injustice in the world is an innocent child raised in poverty. While I will be given some exposure to the conditions and sufferings of these people when I visit Africa and India next Spring, I know that my trip will only be able to provide me with exposure and awareness. . With the knowledge that I gain, however, I hope that someday I will be able to build on it further and do more to help alleviate the suffering and pain of impoverished children first-hand.



As I said before, I am avid about all issues that fall in the political and social realm. I enjoy being young and independent. I love music and dancing. I am an upbeat and optimistic person who tends to talk too much, laugh too loud, and smile too often. I appreciate the brilliance behind a good-hearted joke and I love sarcastic humor. I enjoy talking to people who are intriguing, intellectual, and witty. I love being in the company of others. I am extremely young and idealistic at heart but at the same time I am also mature, very knowledgeable, and socially aware. I have a very strong and vivid personality and I am not one to be subservient to others or to forgo voicing my opinion, however, I do know the limits to which this should be done and I believe that mutual respect is always key when doing so. I am always up for a good challenge and I always put my best effort into my work because I don't like to fail. I strive to always be the best at everything I do. I believe in myself and I tend to challenge any limit that has been established for me. The combination of my personality, perspectives and values often surprise those around me. I believe it is for this reason that I have been told by several people that I am hard to forget.


"Three passions have governed my life: The longings for love, the search for knowledge, and unbearable pity for the suffering of humankind. Love brings ecstasy and relieves loneliness. In the union of love I have seen in a mystic miniature the prefiguring vision of the heavens that saints and poets have imagined. With equal passion I have sought knowledge. I have wished to understand the hearts of people. I have wished to know why the stars shine.Love and knowledge led upwards to the heavens, but always pity brought me back to earth; Cries of pain reverberated in my heart of children in famine, of victims tortured and of old people left helpless. I long to alleviate the evil, but I cannot, and I too suffer."

Only the Living Fear Death...

So here is a blog about a topic I am not necessarily well educated in. I tend to be a big fan of social studies and historical analysis, but not so much a huge fan of the sciences and mathematics. It is not that these topics aren't valuable, I just am not as interested in them as I am in sociology. But, even though this is true, I would be lying if I said I was not intrigued by science at all. In science, there are two topics that I find extremely interesting--astronomy and quantum physics. This blog that I write about today is going to dab into some theories of quantum physics to bring up an interesting way of thinking...

Now, before I go into the main topic, which you can probably safely assume is death, there are two things I want to address: 1. don't read this blog if you are going to become defensive about anything pertaining to your beliefs about death, the afterlife, and or God... I do not mean to attack religion or anything in this blog, I am simply going to look at death from a different perspective and 2. it might do you well to read the article that inspired my thought process for this blog: http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/in-no-time/?searchterm=time (you don't necessarily have to read it for I will describe the basics of it, but it just gives an outside source to what I am about to say).

So my idea starts off with an article I read recently called "Time may not exist." Here are two excerpts from this article that should be addressed before I continue:

------

As Rovelli explains it, in quantum mechanics all particles of matter and energy can also be described as waves. And waves have an unusual property: An infinite number of them can exist in the same location. If time and space are one day shown to consist of quanta, the quanta could all exist piled together in a single dimensionless point. "Space and time in some sense melt in this picture," says Rovelli. "There is no space anymore. There are just quanta kind of living on top of one another without being immersed in a space."

Einstein, for one, found solace in his revolutionary sense of time. In March 1955, when his lifelong friend Michele Besso died, he wrote a letter consoling Besso's family: "Now he has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."

------

So, how did this prompt a discussion about death when the article I read didn't even explore what a lack of time would mean to death? Well, if you can take up the latest theory in physics about time and wrap your brain around the concept that the past, present, and future blur to one, (meaning, anything that is brought into existence will always exist because it has always existed) you, as a being in the universe, will forever be a part of the universe because you were once (and therefore will always be) a part of it. What is created cannot be destroyed.

We think of existence in the terms of dimensions that we can understand. That is, we think of existences as a finite state, that begins with our birth and ends with our death. But if you can try to wrap your mind around the concepts of time that mesh past, present, and future into one dimension, then to have existed is to always exist. And for us, our view of existence is highly skewed by time. If matter cannot be created nor destroyed, then you, as matter, can neither be created nor destroyed. Why is this at all relevant to the idea of time? Well, simply its the factor of time that we create that makes us believe in a beginning and an end... If we are to always be in a state of existence, then what is our "birth" but a marked point where we become aware of our existence and form a self-created concept of time. What is our life to us but a ticking clock? What is death but a fear of having no more time left? In a sense, it seems ridiculous for us to cling so preciously to time when in itself it is an illusion that we create. While our death may be the end of "time" it is not the end of existence. Existence is not dependent on time. Matter does not disappear because of time. It is forever constant.


So the big question comes down to what will existence be like after death? Well, personally, I think it will probably be exactly like what existence was like before birth. To think in such a way may be uncomfortable to some, but to me, it is not. For, while I have no recollection of existence before my birth, so will I not have recollection of existence after my death. And, because I can already predict the argument that will spring up against this theory, I will address it before it becomes an issue. As I have said above, matter cannot be created nor destroyed (it can only be converted into energy). It is for this reason that I do not believe that existence begins with birth. And, for those of us who believe that human beings have souls, by this theory souls were NOT created at the moment of conception. Instead, this theory incorporates the concept that our souls have always existed and when we are born we become aware of them, but that does not mean we were without them before. So, like everything else in the universe, if our soul has been it will always be and its existence was not created with birth and nor will it end with death. That is why I believe that existence after death will be the same as existence before death, because, in a sense, we have already experienced such a state. While this idea might scare some people, I do not believe it is necessarily a good or bad thing--it is what it is. And, ultimately, I have come to the conclusions that only the living fear death. And while obviously this makes sense and seems like a no brainer, if you truly think about what it means then you can view death on a different level. When a person dies, his time has ended, but his existence will forever remain. Those who are left to mourn and fear death are the living. If you can accept the ground-breaking discoveries of quantum physics as true, you can most definitely accept the idea that death is an ending of time but it is not an end of being...

I want to write more about this topic, but I haven't fully thought through everything so if this doesn't make a hundred percent sense yet, it is primarily because I havent 100 percent thought it through and I still don't think I am articulating it properly... I will edit this and add more to it as I think about it more and as I become better at describing the idea. For now though, its just an interesting topic that I thought I'd share... I also am going to read Steven Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" before I write more about this...

Reason, Logic, and Emotion

One of the most prominent arrogant attitudes that I encounter amongst highly educated people is that often they harbor an air of faultlessness that coincides with a belief that they are always correct simply because they are erudite and cultivated. This is a preposterous misconception. Having the ability to logically argue and defensively twist and manipulate logic DOES NOT mean that you are always right. Furthermore, the gender or race of one does not predetermine his or her depth of accuracy in debatable or scholarly woes. The greatest scholar of all is that one that can accept that a counterpart of lesser, equal, or higher intelligence can share reason and understanding of a situation or topic beyond his or her own. Accepting that you may have overlooked or not considered something in an argument is not a blow to your intelligence or ego, but rather the surest method by which to enrich it. In other words, being open-minded and capable of error are the key factors to embracing logic and reason. Shooting down another's belief system or grounds for debate on the premises that you have already predetermined your "accurate" attitude toward a given topic does not expand your intelligence but rather increases the depth of your ignorance.


The reason this topic is being brought up in a blog is because I was recently challenged by a male friend on a topic of debate in which he completely disvalued my opinion on the basis that 1. i am a female and simply "cannot understand the extent of his perspective" 2. he highly overvalues his own opinion as being without error, and thus, had predetermined that his argument was right and was unwilling to listen to a contradicting opinion (or rather, my opinion) which he had already deemed of lesser value. While all of this irked me, the reason for writing this blog is not so much to complain about how distorted his attitude is nor to fathom the level of his ignorance (I simply don't think it can be done) but, instead, I wanted to simply elaborate on the topic we were discussing because I found it intriguing.



The topic of which I am about to explore was brought up by my good guy friend (for purposes of this blog we will call him Jake). If there is one word that Jake would use to illustrate himself most accurately, he would probably pick "apathetic." For, as he pointed out, he does not simply act apathetic, but rather embraces this philosophy as the basis of his attitude towards everything in life. To him, emotion is an unneccessary ill that poisons ones capability to use reason and logic. His argument, or rather his assertion, is that only weak people allow their "reason to be clouded by emotions." However, in the mist of his faultless perspective, I insisted that he looked at multiple situations from multiple perspectives before he concluded that emotion "poisoned" logic. I am not saying he is wrong, nor am I saying that my argument is correct, (for I do firmly believe that he and I have a lot to learn from each other) but rather, I am simply saying that there isn't always a black and white conclusion to each discussion. Sometimes an argument can have multiple sides and no answers. If he is right, than I am as right as he, and, if he is wrong, then I am as a wrong as he. Yet, in his ignorance, he could not see this, and instead he disvalued my rebuttal to his stance that an "intelligent person" does not allow emotion to cloud reason. This is why I beg to differ...


Let's start off with the basics... What is reason but one's individual capacity for logical, rational, and analytic thought? Reason is commonly attributed as the basis of the greatest level of intelligence--it is a characteristic of the human condition beyond instinct that is accredited as being the chief utility of higher-level cognitive processing. Recognizing this verity often leads to the conclusion that reason alone is the key to validation in any given life situation. Likewise, it allocates the argument that motivation should only be a product of rationale justification. It is understandable, therefore, to argue that a person who fully employs their "cognitive aptitude" will never allow themselves to be facilitated by anything but fundamental rationalization.

What often goes unrecognized is the fact that reason in itself does not function separate from emotion. The "logical" conclusions that we make, the analytical processes we undergo, and that rational that we allow to determine a situation are so inherently inbred with our emotions that we often are blind to the underlying function of our emotional state in our cognitive processing. For most decisions and attitudes we develop in life, we do not even begin to delve into the very basic emotional input that went into our rationale. But, just because we do not identify our emotional influence as a premises of our logical thinking, that does not mean it is not there. In any situation, choosing to avoid or ignore a factor does not make that factor non-existent. Instead, we tend to just overlook the emotional impact on our logic unless it becomes utmost necessary to face it. It is in such situations that our reason can be skewed by the emotional factor, and it is theses instances that Jake's negative attitude towards emotion pulls the most weight. Even then, while our logic and ability to higher cognitive thinking is what may define us as a human race, it is our emotion that motivates us beyond our logic. To reasonably be able to deal with ones emotions is to exercise self-control but to completely avoid emotions in the decision-making process is to lack a level of common sense so basic to human cognition. Before one can indulge on reason, they must first acknowledge the most basic emotional needs, ignoring or avoiding such needs does not make your logic and rationale stronger, if anything, it weakens your perception and overall weakens your ability to process information accurately. The wisest of the wise do not avoid their emotions but rather accept them and control them accordingly. There is no doubt that emotion plays a greater role in human motivation than logic. It's a fact that is true to life. How often have you been motivated by something because it was logical? Motivation is the key to action; emotion is the key to motivation. Therefore, emotion overrides reason in the process of determining human action. It is for this reason that I find it difficult to believe that Jake even truly believes in his own argument. While he may say that his "apathetic" state allows him to function on a higher level of reason and intelligence than others, I cannot even begin to properly dissuade him from a perspective that he preaches but does not actually truly embrace himself. Like all other humans, Jake has shown in the past that the main factor of motivation in his life is not based on pure logic, but is most basically and definitely based on the reasoning of his emotions. The main thing that makes me believe Jake's argument is flawed is because he believes that the idea of "emotional reasoning" is an oxymoron that cannot be on the same level as logical reasoning. To me, reason is reason, and to many emotional reasoning is a far greater motivational factor than any sort of logical reasoning. While my logical reasoning may be the reason I assess this situation in the first place, it is my emotional reasoning towards this topic that motivates me to write about it. So, as is true of this situation, and almost all situations in life if you take a moment to consider it, reasoning consists both of logical exploration as well as emotional identification. Reason rarely functions without the input of emotion and logic together, for emotion and logic come hand in hand and, ultimately, to fail to accept both as factors of our rationale is to fail to be reasonable.

So, what it comes down to is Jake's belief that emotions skew reason and logic, and my belief that reason is not separate from emotion and logic, but rather, it is composed of both. Even if my argument is wrong and Jake's perspective is more persuasive to some, I do not mind being incorrect about this topic. For, to me, to not experience emotion is to be less than human. And personally I would rather embrace a method of cognition that combined my logic with my emotions than one that completely ignored my emotional instincts and well-being

Harry Potter

For those of you who do not follow Harry Potter, you probably will not understand the premises of this note or be able to identify with anything I say. If that is the case, you probably won't find this at all interesting. However, if you have an appreciation for Harry Potter then I encourage you to read on.

I started reading Harry Potter when I was in sixth grade when I was just 11 years old. I had never read a book for "enjoyment" at that time. Harry Potter was the first book I ever read that I really enjoyed. From that point on I eagerly awaited the release of each proceeding book. For the past 8 years each individual book release has been leading up to this day. It is crazy to think that today is the climax of something that has been a part of my life for so long. It may sound cheesy or overly dramatic but I know several other people my age who feel this way. Harry Potter isn't just a book series. There is something about Harry Potter so bewitching (sorry I had to do it) that captures you up in his story and makes you feel like you are a part of his life and the world that he lives in. If there is anything I admire most about the books, it is JK Rowling's writing style and her distinct ability to make her reader identify so extremely well with the characters that she brings to life. The characters in the book aren't just characters you read about, they are characters you feel like you know. You develop love or disdain for each character accordingly. Each blow in the book is an emotional blow to you. I balled when Sirius Black died. I was overjoyed when Gryffindor won the house cup. I cried at Dumbledore's funeral. I have emotionally felt and identified with Harry Potter in and out of each adventure in his life, the good and the bad.

I realized a few days ago that Harry Potter, while being a great fun read, has also been a part of my life. I started liking Harry Potter before I hit puberty--Before I had any cares in the world. And, even when life got fucked up in my teenage years, one thing I could always count on was the fact that Harry Potter would always make it and in the end the good would triumph over the evil. I always knew that, at the end of each book, no matter what happened, Harry would end up alive and well and things would make sense. Another thing I also realized how much time I have spent being engaged in the world of Potter. I have spent hours of my life discussing Harry Potter, talking about theories of what would happen next and what had happened before. It seems ludicrous and unreal to me to say that by this time tomorrow Harry Potter will be over forever. I don't want to believe it. I don't want to have to accept that something that was such an important part of my childhood and teenage years is about to come to a conclusion. I feel like after this I will have to leave behind my childhood and move on and I am not ready for that just yet. A part of me wishes that the 7th book had never been written so that I could always leave open the possibilities of what could happen and would happen to my imagination. Reading the 7th book shuts all of that down, it sets everything in stone. It brings the fantasy world that I know and love to an end. It is a part of my life that I will (literally) have to close the book on and I am still uncertain how I am going to feel about all of this this time tomorrow. I guess I will just have to wait a few more hours to see...

This is What a President Should Look Like...

Before I start off writing anything I want to point out that I do no hate George Bush...

with that said...

I wanted to post a video of Bill Clinton that shows why he was a highly qualified president and an absolutely brilliant man...

You might not like his politics or agree with some of his "extramarital affairs" but, regardless, the man is a fricken genius and excellent debater... watch him in this youtube clip where he pwned fox news...




And just for humor purposes... jamie foxx on bill clinton ahhaha

The Bible

I was talking to a friend who had read a blog I had posted once entitled "homosexuality and religion" In that blog I did my best not to attack any person of religious faith. I sought to make my arguments stray away from attacking individuals while, more properly, aiming them at institutionalized flaws of practicing organized religions. I addressed conservative religious attitudes towards the homosexual community that I believed to be flawed and used the bible as a source to help me prove why such attitudes were faulty and, in my view, a misconstrued application of biblical text as well. My friends response to my argument was far more crucial and far less "politically correct" than the blog I had posted. He simply stated that, while he agreed with my argument, he felt I gave religion and the Bible too much credit. He told me that despite my stance, he firmly believes that the Bible really only causes problems and that it was more harmful than helpful.

While he is indeed an atheist, which is probably an easy assumption to make from what I wrote above, I believe that the view he holds of the Bible is much harsher than most atheists and agnostics hold to be true. To me, the Bible itself is not a bad book. It does not cause harm. The Bible is just a book. Whether you believe it is the word of God or not, the Bible itself does not create religious intolerance, it does not enact crusades, it does not judge and condemn. People do these things. While the words of the bible may prompt people to be religiously intolerant, enact holy wars, or judge and condemn, the Bible in itself is just a text. Where my friend has it wrong, I believe, is that he takes a pessimistic approach to the value of the Bible. It seems that my friend has been turned off by religion in general, which in turn has caused him to have a negative outlook on the Bible. Because of the abundance of hypocritical Christians and those people who misinterpret and tend to malpractice Biblical teachings, people like my friend have a dismal attitude towards the Bible's inherent worth. It is the people in society who use biblical text and scripture to justify their intolerance and condemnation of others that give the Bible the bad name that my friend attributes to it. While my friend may label the bible as a "bad book", people who do evil things in the name of the Bible are themselves labeling the bible as a "bad book" just as much as my friend.

To be quite frank, I do not agree with my friends pessimistic attitude towards Scripture. I can genuinely say that I like the Bible--not the Bible that has been interpreted and molded by the Catholic Church, or the bible that is made into a "bad book" by some Christians who embrace it improperly and are ignorant to its true value and purpose--but the Bible in itself. This is probably perplexing to many, for I am not a firm believer in God. I would be arrogant and foolish to not believe that there is something out their greater then my own understanding. For this reason, I have not completely shut out the idea or possibility of religious validity. Nonetheless, my lack of belief in God does not mean that I do not like the Bible. While the passages about praising God and being God's children aren't my strong point, I do strongly believe in and support many of the ideas expressed in the Bible. To me, Jesus was a great man. A great philosopher. A great teacher. Was he God? I don't necessarily know that, but I do know that I like him as a person. I like his teachings and his values. The parables he told were full of a wisdom that I find inspiring. So yes, many Bible passages do inspire me. No, they do not inspire me because they are the word of God. They inspire me because they make sense. "Let he without sin cast the first stone" makes sense to me. "Do not judge, so that you may not be judged" makes sense to me. "In everything do to others as you would have them do to you" makes sense to me. It is such values and wisdoms as these that I hold to be true and worthwhile. It is the underlying message of the Bible, and the message of Jesus in specific, that touches me. No matter where my faith stands, or what I believe in, one thing I will always hold to be true is that Jesus of Nazareth was a great man and if people listened to the teachings he offered about living life in solidarity and with compassion then the world would undoubtedly be a better place. Unlike my friend who condemns the Bible, I believe that Bible has something of value to offer, more than just faith or hope. The Gospels offers a simple moral code of not only tolerance but acceptance of others as well as an appreciation for life and love. The stories may not be accurate accounts of non-fiction, but they have their value in the deeper meaning beyond them. This meaning, as I have said, celebrates the good aspects of life--not the bad. To embrace the Bible and to neglect or condemn others is to be not only hypocritical but it to associate scripture with an evil sentiment that was never intended. To give the Bible a bad name is just as bad as, and maybe even worse than, ignoring its value in the first place.

So, while people may read what I wrote and think badly of my friend who views the Bible as a book causing harm and hatred in our society, the only reason that my friend is able to have that assumption in the first place is because of the way the Bible is "practiced" in modern society today. That is not to say that there are not good people out there who understand the purpose of the Bible and enact it in the most noble of ways, but that is to say that there are just as many who put these good people to shame. While I may not believe in God, I understand the message of Jesus most fully and accurately, and, frankly, that gives me one up on many practicing Christians today.

To close off this blog, I just wanted to share my favorite Bible passage, a passage that I find of great value despite the fact I am not religious. It comes from the Gospel according to Matthew:
"You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. So, in the same way, let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven."
I don't know exactly why I like that passage so much more than others, but to me it is inspiring. Maybe I am not big on the "glorify your Father who is in heaven" part but I recognize the value of the message as a whole. It is Bible passages like this that I see as having value beyond religious purposes. The passage speaks to me because it is both empowering and promoting human outreach and responsibility. It is this passage, and passages like it within the Bible that, in the face of those who have given up on the Bible, gives me hope and reassurance that the Bible still is a source of good and value today.

Nighttime Thoughts...

Have you ever cried completely out of empathy?
Because you could, even if it was only for one second, identify with the pain of another person?
Because you realized that we are all the same and that even the toughest of us, the most stoic of us, the bravest of us, the smartest of us share the same feelings and emotions with the weakest of us, the most emotional of us, the most cowardly of us, the least intelligent of us?
Have you ever simply cried because you could identify with the suffering of a friend (or, God forbid, even an "enemy")?

We are not all that different...
Whites, Blacks, Muslims, Christians, Democrats, Republicans, Women, Men, Homosexuals, Heterosexuals, Communists, Capitalists.....
None of that matters
Why can't people see that?
When it comes down to the bare bones of it all, we are all the same
Everyone of us has hopes, attachments, feelings, desires, dreams, needs
We are all human.
If you cut us, we bleed.
If you harm us, we hurt.
If you deprive us, we die.
The world would be such a better place is people could only realize this... if people stopped dehumanizing other people... if everyone acknowledged that a harm done to you is a harm done to me... if the world wasn't divided into friend or foe, black or white, wrong or right. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that by trying to instill classifications and simplify our concept of the world around us, we divide ourselves and forget that basic principle that first and foremost we are all a part of the human race? Yes, we may have our noticeable superficial differences that separate us from each other but in our hearts we truly are not that different. I realized this long ago, now what does it take to make others realize the same?

RANT

You know what really has been getting to me lately? Watching television. THe news is absolutely ridiculous. The type of things the news stations cover is beyond me. For the past week, day in and day out I have watched the news and no station has ever failed to "inform" me of Paris Hilton's dramatic episode of the day from behind bars. Don't get me wrong, I read People and US magazine. I do a fair amount of indulging in celebrity gossip. To me if someone wants to buy an entertainment magazine that delves into the lives of celebrities, I completely support and encourage them to do so. But, what pisses me off is that Paris Hilton's jail stint and other celebrity gossip has completely infiltrated our nightly news. It's a sad and pathetic day for America that we must now acknowledge that one of the top stories of the night on ABC news was Paris Hilton's "jail diet." All I can say to this is.... ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS?! Excuse my language, but what the HELL is wrong with America's media? Hearing about Paris Hilton on the local and national news stations upsets me, but its not necessarily because its PAris Hilton. What I am getting at is, the media is completely responsible for what news reaches the public. Everything we know about the actions occurring in the world outside of ourselves comes from a media source. In this sense, the media has the responsibility to inform us. The media decides not only what we know about the world around us but what the political agenda of our country will be as well. This fact alone is whats really getting to me. While the media focuses its nightly news resports on paris hilton's jail escapade, the American public continues to be completely ignorant to huge crisis and disasters going on around the world. HONESTLY. WHY THE HELL DOES THE NEWS STILL NEGLECT TO MENTION HUMANITARIAN CRISES THAT MATTER, PERSAY LIKE THE FRICKEN GENOCIDE OCCURING IN DARFUR?!!! I cant remember the last time that I turned on a television set and heard a story being broadcasted on a news station talking about the condition in Darfur. It upsets me to have to say that I have encountered many people who have never even heard of DARFUR let alone any current events that have occurred there. There are also those who I have encountered who have "heard" of Darfur and the Genocide but know nothing about the situation, who it involves, or what little is actually being done there. Then there are those who I have encountered that know about Darfur, are aware of the situation, and simply DONT CARE. To them, a news story about Paris Hilton's jail time is more interesting and worthwhile. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. I just don't get it. What is wrong with the media and the desensitized superficial people of this world today?! How can people turn their shoulder and simply not care when they hear that an ethnic-cleansing---A GENOCIDE---is occurring in Sudan right as I type this. What happened to never again? Didn't we already learn our lesson from the holocaust and WWII? Were we not shamed that Hitler was able to get away with killing millions of Jews right under our noses? This is why I am angry and pissed off at the media. THey are largely responsible for setting the damn political agenda and mobilizing the public to be aware of a cause. If media hounds were calling for action in DARFUR and not busy trying to get the latest Paris Hilton story then maybe our government would take a more active role in responding to this unbelievable humanitarian crisis. But that is not the reality of the situation. And currently, as a 19-year-old college student, there is so little I can do to change that. So, for now, this rant will just have to do to release my anger and keep me sane.



PS - If you are one of those people, like the people I mentioned above, who are not informed about the situation in Darfur, PLEASE do yourself a favor and read this: http://www.savedarfur.org/pages/background

Thank you.

I might just be optimistic

f u could see the world the way i see it
if u could feel what i feel
u could understand
u would know that everything is a purpose in itself
everything has a reason to be
everything will come together

if u could help others before u helped yourself
if u could find happiness in the smile of another
if u could hold onto the child inside of u
if u could make peace with the world around u
if u could take a chance to understand that the world is more than the simple level of life u live
if u could take a moment to appreciate, to understand...

that the world we live is more grand, more awe-inspiring, and more precious than our greatest dreams
that love, and life, and the future is what matters
that happiness is inside of u and that it is there you will find it most
that the natural things in life are the most beautiful
that serenity exists outside of ourselves
that purity will refresh us
that innocent is not lost
that the evils of the world are balanced out by the good
that each day should not be lived as a routine but should be explored as a new adventure
that limiting yourself to material possessions and desires will blind you
that acceptance sets us free from the chains of denial
that life will go on
that the world will still exist tomorrow even if u do not
that everything around us is a treasure
that life entails more than the little box we set ourselves in
that this limited world provides infinite opportunities
that the life you live is only yours to live
that there is still so much more to discover, to learn, to explore
that the only person's opinion who truly matters is your own
that in self-acceptance and awareness you will find purpose
that we may be flawed
and that nothing can be perfect
but, at the end of the day, it is all still worth it

Virginia Tech Shootings

Some of the cruelties of this world I will never understand. My idealistic heart cannot comprehend how a person could ever be capable of perpetuating such violence and hatred. The events that occurred at Virginia Tech are just a tragic reminder to me that amongst the evils and injustices of this world, blatant violence is still as cruel of a reality as the discouraging ignorance, racism, and prejudice that I have unfortunately grown accustomed to encountering on a daily basis.

My deepest sympathies go out to everyone affected by the Virginia Tech shootings.