Ignorance: Avoided by Reading More than one Book.

Yesterday, I opened my mailbox to find a pamphlet that says 'Jesus Christ: HE IS YOUR ANSWER' in my mailbox. I read it cover to cover. It sounded like propaganda, it had no real substance to its message, and it made Christians look incredibly ignorant—pretty much what you'd expect from the mentally inept people who usually spout this crap. It's not the fact that it promoted a religion that made it stupid; it's the fact that the people who wrote it were clearly retarded and had no clue as to the reality of the world around them. More on that piece of shit later.

I've been thinking about religion quite a bit lately. To put it simply, I think the aim of all religions is to fool, control and abuse the intellectually inept and those who can't properly critically think. Its goal is to regulate and manipulate, not to save like they so often claim. If you need to stick a label to my forehead, I am an agnostic (in terms of god in general), and an atheist (in terms of the Abrahamic God).

This said, however, I do not automatically hate or even dislike someone if and when I find out they have faith in a religion of some form—this alone does not make someone worth hating or disliking. The moment they say something of pure religious conviction that contradicts scientific knowledge or basic common sense, I usually lose respect for said person very, very quickly. Two of my closest friends are both Christians, and I don't know what I would have done without them. They've helped me countless times when I was in need, without banging on about their shit; they're both intelligent, caring people, regardless of their faith. So I don't develop disdain for a person simply because of their religious background—only on one's actions and intentions do I judge someone.

Even my first (and, at this stage, only :P) girlfriend is Christian. I knew of her faith before we started dating, but I couldn't care less at the time. Did it honestly matter? I couldn't have given less of a shit about her beliefs back then, even though I didn't share them; it blew me away that she'd put aside our differences just so we could be together. It never came between us, not for a long time. I knew it probably meant she would be unwilling to explore sexual avenues, but this was our first relationship, and it lasted little more than six months. I wasn't going to ask anyway, because religious or irreligious, we weren't ready for that kind of intimacy, and discussing it would just have made her uncomfortable. I was lucky to be with her at all; far be it from me to push things :P

Well, as much as I understood that, I was still going to play "Bash the Bible Basher".

Skip ahead about four months. By this time, I'd become wrapped up in more controversial stand-up comedians, starting with George Carlin, and moving on to Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, etc. Anyone familiar with even the gist of their work will cite its dark, cynical, anti-authoritarian nature; and that's what I became: darkly cynical and anti-authoritarian :P  I quickly grew to internally criticise religion, writing more and more on the subject in short monologues. At the same time, our year was doing some kind of life skills program (I would have thought you got those by... living... life... o.O). Among the workshops was one on homosexuality, and its tolerance in society—a few gay people came in to discuss their experiences, and would answer any questions the group had. My then-girlfriend was in the same group as me, so we did the workshop at the same time. After it ended, we left the building. Upon reaching the area where we hung out, I was about to reek of bigotry:

"Well, that was a bit pointless for you, wasn't it?"

"What do you mean?"

"Well, you're Christian, so you think gay people are all going to Hell anyway."

...see what I mean :P  I've more or less jumped to the conclusion she's homophobic based purely on her supposed religious beliefs. Now, I can't remember this conversation word for word, but it went something like this:

"Well, it's not like I hate gay people or anything——"

"Yeah, but you think they go to Hell just because they're gay."

"Well, I do think homosexuality is a sin, but that doesn't mean——"

"According to you, people go to Hell if they sin even once. Isn't that putting them on the same level as murderers?"

She now has tears in her eyes. She starts to cry, albeit holding back the tears to speak:

"I don't think gay people are on the same level as murderers; that's not what I think at all. It's not like I think gay people be punished in the same way murderers are; it's God who views all sins as equal, not me. I don't think gay people should be treated like murderers or anything like that. It's God's job to judge them, not mine."

At this point, it has come to my immediate attention that I am being a dick—an arrogant, bigoted, convoluted dick :P  I basically attacked her for what she might have believed, and for some pretty extreme potential beliefs at that. She wasn't a Bible basher at all, yet I treated her like one all the same. Realising what I'd done:

"...I'm sorry. I shouldn't have lashed out at you like that; it wasn't right——"

She then held her arms out, beckoning me towards her. I went to her, and she hugged me, tighter than she ever had before. I wrapped my arms around; I started to unwrap them about 10 seconds later, but she was still clinging on, so I stayed with her, still not aware of the full impact my actions were to have. It's a cruel irony that one of the closest moments we had came as a result of me being a dimwitted, overly-judgemental fucknugget. It frightens me to think that this event may have destroyed her feelings for me—it's not like I didn't deserve it, but it's still unnerving for me to think the only argument we had was this intense, and that from that point onwards, things weren't really the same. We never fought before this, about anything.

I mention this story because I know a lot of atheists and agnostics like to take the moral highroad and say 'we never try to force our beliefs on other people, unlike you religious bastards!' As my story demonstrates, this isn't true—it's all on the individual. I was the one being a bigoted cunt here, unlike the religious person, who had never tried to lay her beliefs on me a day in her life. Her parents had invited me to her Youth Group thing when we started dating, but that's as far as the word spread, so to speak.

Not too long after that, school finished, and she went on a trip to the United States to see relatives for about a month. She came over to my house once before she left, and we exchanged Christmas presents. She got me a Super Mario Chess Set—she evidently knows what I like, because that was awesome. I got her a necklace—I wanted to get her a copy of an anime film I'd heard about that was based off a series she liked, but couldn't find the damn thing anywhere :P  This, when I look back on it, makes it apparent to me that the relationship hadn't been too damaged by what I'd said. We kept in touch while she was over there over MSN, and nothing seemed awry. When she got back, however, she wasn't open to me at all. I knew it was over by the weekend, and the following Monday, I had to get someone else to give me the bad news because she wouldn't tell me. The best six months of my life ends here.

Months later, I was still trying to get over it. I'd left my friend group, going to the library at recess and lunch rather than outside to see them. Meanwhile, she started going out with a friend of mine; this I only found out about the day before our Year 12 Formal, so you can imagine how shitty I felt about that :P  Thing is, they split only two months after they'd started going out. I remember the day I saw 'Relationship Status: Single' printed on his Wall: I was fucking ecstatic. It was that simplistic, competitive animal inside of me looking at the numbers and gloating in his defeat. "I went out with her for longer than you, I did more stuff with her than you, I was closer to her than you; I win, you lose >:D". A dickish thing to think, most certainly; but when you're down, you'll look for anything to pick you up. From what I understood, she simply didn't like him as much anymore, and they'd been talked into it somewhat by friends, so it was nothing out of the ordinary.

Now skip ahead another six months to a random meetup with friends (little more than two weeks before the publishing of this entry). I'm well and truly past this shit now, and he and I are still friends—I'm pretty sure he doesn't even know I thought that way about him :P  The subject of their relationship was brought up (while he wasn't around, if I recall correctly) and it was mentioned that my ex's parents pressured her into leaving him because he wasn't Christian.

That fucked with my head, big time. My mindset instantly changed. Granted, I was no longer thinking "Haha, I'm better than you"—that mindset was limited to the night I'd seen the Facebook announcement—but my mind was now at the complete opposite end of the spectrum. Now, I felt enraged at the situation: he got royally fucked over. Shit, she got royally fucked over! He got judged prematurely by her fundamentalist, intolerant parents (who seemed to be fine with me, from my experience with them), and she got fucked out of making her own goddamned decisions. She was 18 by the time they'd started dating. She's an adult. She can think for herself. She decides who she does and doesn't go out with. This friend of mine isn't a drug dealer, nor a violent criminal, nor a rapist, nor a scumbag; he wouldn't do anything to hurt her; he's not a bad person. He did nothing to deserve the judgement he received.

And no, this isn't the chauvinist in me trying to step in and valiantly defend my fair lady; I'm not trying to win her back in any sense by appealing to some code of morality. The fact of the matter is that her fucking parents have no place deciding who their adult daughter does and doesn't go out with. There are only two prerequisites for a relationship here: Person A wants to go out with Person B, and Person B wants to go out with Person A. That's the end of the process. If she decides on her own that she doesn't want to go out with a man who isn't Christian, so be it. The point still stands: she goes out with whoever the fuck she wants to go out with. Shit, if I'm not right for her, can she at least be free to choose my fucking replacement?

It disgusts me that her parents have that much influence, that anyone has that much influence in deciding the outcome of a relationship other than the people involved. It's clear abuse of the "Honour thy Mother and Father" commandment; just because it's there doesn't mean parents have the right to be uptight, ignorant, judgemental cunts.

Because that's what this shit does to some people: it fucks their minds right up. It destroys their ability to think properly and actually deal with situations rationally; it permanently tarnishes their perspective on everything. Her parents may have disagreed with her choice to date an irreligious guy, and even expressed their opinions to her—that's their right as people—but I'll be damned if I'm going to think it appropriate for them to fucking interfere with her dating life. And I mean, this doesn't even affect me, yet I took it so personally when I heard about it because I probably fell victim to the same bullshit. I bet you anything that while she was in the U.S., her extended family advised her to leave me. I'd put my life on it. Whilst I had most certainly changed as a person, and become a lot less like the person she liked, the reasoning of 'I just don't find him fun to be around anymore' could have simply been a cover-up for the true reasoning. For now, however, I believe what I've been told—my ex has never been one to lie.

I'm evidently angry about this, which itself irritates me a little: this is all so minor in the grand scheme of things, yet I feel so strongly about it. I don't think ill of my ex for any of this at all; as I've said, she was just as much a victim of her parent's ignorance as my friend was, and as I may have been. It's all in the past, and it's just one small part of my life; but it's still someone's feelings they were toying with, and, at least in my friend's case, what was done was revolting. Being dumped is hard enough as it is, but if it was her decision, I'd have no reason to feel angry. Being dumped with reasoning this poor, on the other hand, is just fucking cruel.

This is when I begin to hate religious people: when the exercise control over their subjects for the sake of their own hate. It's ignorant meddling, and those who meddle ignorantly should be treated like the unenlightened knobs that they are. I learned from my mistake when I called my ex a homophobe, and I apologised for my intolerance because I knew what I did was very wrong and hurtful. She deserved absolutely none of the hate that came out of my mouth, not a fucking word of it. The more fundamentalist religious folk, however, preach till they die, and never realise how ignorant they or their words are, even when they're presented with the evidence.

This brings me to the pamphlet. I scanned it with a magic scanning machine to show it to you:

This is the front cover. Not much to say about it—standard fundie-Christian fare. Now, what is Jesus Christ my answer to? Did I ask these people a fucking question? If I'd asked "What's the name of the man who Christians believe died for their sins 2,000 years ago?", then yeah, Jesus Christ would be my answer. But I didn't ask that question. I didn't ask these people any goddamned questions. Is this Jeopardy by mail-order? Do they send me the answer so I can send them the question?

You see, I was under the impression that Christians thought accepting Jesus into your life was the solution to the problem of sin, not the answer to a fucking question. Devalues the guy a tad, don'tcha think? They evidently respect Him about as much as they do the language.

Also, gotta love the choice of red as the highlighting colour—you know, the same colour as the Devil, hellfire, blood, anger, lust, rage, and evil. Well, at least it's honest!

The first page—where the madness really begins. Now, firstly, why bother quoting the Bible to try and convince me that God is real and that Jesus died for my supposed sins? I believe the Bible was thought up by men thousands of years ago with the intent of tricking people into following their bigoted command from beyond the grave—the point's fucking moot because the book has no credibility to me.

Next up, the classic "Here's how it is, folks!"—making statements and assertions without a shred of fucking evidence to back your point up. God made us, did he? Prove it. You can't? Then stop talking.

Also sick of this "We are sinners by default" nonsense. Really? So, even foetuses are sinners? The fuck did a foetus do to you? To anyone? Yeah, it might have given its mother morning sickness and a bit of swelling, but was that its fault? Why are we sinners right off the bat? And, if we're below God's standards by His design, why the hell are we expected to meet His standards in the first place? Is He incapable of lowering His standards, or producing us to a better standard? To quote Lenny Bruce:

"If God created the body, and the body is dirty, the fault lies with the manufacturer."

Just replace 'dirty' with 'sinful', and there goes your point.

Then we get to the diagram. God likes His metaphors, and He likes them blunt. And stupid.

First off, since when did God live in a forest next to a cliff? Is that Heaven? That's a shithouse Heaven, man. God can do better than that. Where are the fluffy clouds? And the golden harps? And the pearly gates? There aren't any fucking gates, not even a fence or a roof! Shit, you could fly a plane over the top, jump out, and land in this Heaven! What kind of Heaven can be broken into via parachute!? Total fail.

Also love the bridges we've apparently been trying to build. Let's get one thing straight across the board: this diagram assumes we do all these things to reach the Abrahamic God. This assumes He is there to be reached; this alone could be false. In reality, these things may be practised without the intent of reaching God (with the exception of non-Abrahamic religions). In reality, these things are usually practised to either advanced society or because it's seen as the right thing to do. Must have been hard for them to type this with their heads stuck so far up their arses.

Morality: wait, what? Morality isn't a good way to reach God? Doing things you believe to be right and acting in a morally righteous manner to people doesn't mean anything to Him? Well, I suppose you could look at the way some fundamentalist Christians act and talk sometimes, and agree with that one :P  But... isn't there a Christian morality? What about that morality? That one sucks too? Damn, I guess all moralities must be awful. Well, at least I'll have no need to think of other people when I act now that I'm saved!

Religion: Wow. Just wow. I can't even begin to process the amount of irony they managed to cram into the presence of that one word. Let's get this straight, shall we? Oxford Dictionary defines religion as: 

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods

Does Christianity involve belief in and the worship of a personal God? Why, yes, it does! Therefore, Christianity is a religion; and, according to this diagram, religion doesn't let us get to God. We're not even two thirds down the first page, and they've already gone and completely fucked their argument. But, for the sake of humour, let us continue.

I'm sick of these faggots who try to separate their own religion from all the others by not classifying it as religion. The dictionary and the nature of context makes you incorrect. Even if your religion is correct, it is still a religion. Please get over yourselves. I'm pretty sure arrogance of that calibre is frowned upon by your God.

Good Deeds: see Morality (note to author: they're practically synonyms, for fuck's sake >.< ).

Philosophy: hahahahaha—oh, you're serious. Let me, a Philosophy student, school you. A key area of Philosophy is the concept of logic (the study of correct reasoning). Part of logic is mathematical logic (logic involving mathematical symbols). Without this, they wouldn't have the computer they typed this on, nor the printer they printed it with, nor the resilient architecture of the churches they worship in. Then there's the linguistic element of philosophy, without which they wouldn't have the ability to communicate with their computer nor their fellow Christians. That's not to mention the impossibility of such texts as the Bible, which I gathered was their lovechild from all the quoting they've been doing. This is, of course, ignoring the fact that there have been, and are, devout Christian philosophers—Immanuel Kant is a fantastic example. Way to insult one's own kind.

And all this has been done without success? Well, what does one do when they try something, wishing to succeed, but fails in the process? They try again. People will continue to attempt advancing society via these means forever, Bible or no Bible, God or no God. One day, we might find the key answer people have been searching for, whatever it is, if there is one—it may or may not lie in the hands of God.

Oh, but look! Apparently, we can build a bridge—with a novelty-sized cross. The symbolism hits deep, doesn't it. Also love that it's not Sinful People, it's just Sinful Man. Chicks must get a free pass—can't say Christianity beats down on women's rights now, can you, ladies?

OK, first off, the bridge itself is impassable. I can get about 40% of the way over the bridge, then I run into the tip of the cross. Meanwhile, those amoral, Jesus-reject plane-flying motherfuckers can still get in without a problem. Is there a ladder? A lift? Suction cups or something? Same goes for getting down the other side—do we abseil down? Is there a water slide? A slippery dip? I ain't never seen no cross with a goddamned slippery dip. That's because there is no slippery dip. That's because you don't build bridges out of crosses. And anyway, how wide was the cross that Christ was crucified on? Stretch your arms out as wide as you can—there's your answer. That's hardly a large gap. People can't jump that? Or find a plank of wood that long somewhere? Just take a plank off the actual cross! Damn, the security in this place is worse than at APEC '07. 

I also see more Bible quotes; these I shall explore for you. Gotta love the claim that sinners are all wicked, greedy, depraved, envious, murdering, disobedient, lying, malicious, gossiping, slandering, God hating, insolent, arrogant, boastful inventors of evil operandi. Wow! That's not not a wicked, depraved, malicious, slanderous, arrogant, boastful thing to say at all! Then, the next quote says "no one can boast about [having faith]." Yeah, ragging on those you want to save, not boastful in any way. Implicit braggin' is still braggin'. Any author of scripture, God or otherwise, knows that if you're gonna contradict yourself, you have to do it on different pages.

God demonstrates his love for us by having Christ die for us? No—God demonstrated his love for us by having Christ die for us. Get your tense straight, yeesh (waits for someone to find a temporal error in this entry :P).

And Jesus answered what, exactly? More fucking questions I didn't ask! Is there a question in the previous quote? That's not a question; that's a statement, an assertion, a proposition. This stuff really isn't hard to grasp—there are kindergarteners more linguistically enlightened than these pricks.

Back cover. I can choose to cross—I see what you did there! Credit where credit's due; that was a good one.

...wait... I can choose to cross? I cannot build the bridge? What must I do? Like, the author's referring to themselves in the first person? What? Well, if it's what they must do, why the hell are they sending it to me! They should send it to themselves!

"...repent then, and turn to God"... no, you turn to God first, then you repent! Who are you repenting to if not to God? The atmosphere? Don't you know it's polite to look at someone when you talk to them?

And why does this pamphlet feel the need to tell me what Heaven and Hell is? I live in a country where 66% of the population aligns themselves with some form of Christianity, and we get most of our media from a country where 80% does the same. I know this shit, man! I don't live under a rock—and if I did, I'd make damn sure I didn't have a mailbox so I didn't find crap like this in there when I got home.

I also need to mention, just in case anyone is unaware, that the whole CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL thing is actually sarcasm. These people must have thought it was serious. We learned types have a pretty dry sense of humour at times, don't we ;)

And what's this about helping me grow? What man doesn't know how to grow? Every man knows what turns him on; we can take care of this ourselves, thank you very much. Or did they mean grow taller? God's not gonna help kids grow taller. Kids grow taller until they hit their 20s, then they stagnate, then they start shrinking at 50. God's not gonna interfere with that process. Don't give kids false hope like that—every kid wants to be tall. Hey, at least they know what the kids want, right? They're all kinds of hip, and they're most certainly down with it, if I may say so myself.

I laughed when I saw it was from a Korean church. Living in Australia and seeing that was just funny for me; I don't really know why. If Australian Koreans wanna practise Christianity, that's cool, go right ahead; just do a better job of proselytising next time. Throw some evidence in the mix! It helps :)  Koreans practising a Middle Eastern religion in black man's country that was taken over by white Europeans—multiculturalism at work, 'eh?

Getting to the point: my main problem with this garbage is that it doesn't tell me a damn thing. I know Christians believe I'm a sinner and that I need to accept God and Jesus to be saved; what new information does this pamphlet present to me? None. No presented evidence, no compelling argument, nothing of any value; just drivel that I've heard a million times over. It's sad to think these people are under the impression that they're saved—if God is real, and He lets people this stupid in to Heaven... fuck it, leave me out. The Devil might be a cunt, but if he shares a flat with Christopher Hitchens, Charles Darwin, Mahatma Ghandi, Frank Zappa, and the aforementioned comedians, I think I'll crash with them, rather than these silly bastards who think they're headed to a magical forest upon death.

SOPA: New Legislation Takes the Slice out of Life!

Today, the Australian Parliament released details regarding new legislation that has everyone with an appetite talking.

Over the past few years, the Australian federal government has created and developed what was referred to at a press conference held this afternoon as the Stop Ordering Pizza Act, known as SOPA for short. This act, according to the documentation, has been created:

"...in response to the now overbearing issue of unhealthy dietary and lifestyle habits that have become far too prevalent in Australian society [today]."

The documentation claims that:

"...these habits are obviously due to the fact that Australians living almost anywhere can order pizza over the phone—and more recently, over the Internet—to have it delivered to their front door, without a scrape of effort on the consumer's part."

Federal investigators have pointed the finger squarely at the businesses who offer such pizza delivery services, claiming that they are the ones responsible for the outbreak in obesity and several other health issues over the last thirty years.

One investigator present today justified these findings by claiming that "...the ever-increasing availability of such services makes Australians more inclined to make use of them, rather than opting for a healthier alternative that may take more time or effort to prepare."

He spoke in favour of "…the ability of government to more strictly regulate participating businesses… [as this] is essential to ensuring a lower average weight, and a higher life expectancy and quality of life in general, for every Australian."

As for the regulations, at the top of the list sits the ability for police at federal, state, or even local level, to issue a legally enforceable 'cease and desist' order to any applicable business, effectively preventing the business from operating.

An 'applicable business' is, according to the documentation: 'any business involved in the manufacturing or distribution of foods, drinks, or other substances deemed extremely detrimental to the human condition'. It has been confirmed that pizza delivery businesses definitely fall under this category.

These orders can be issued if categorised businesses are so much as accused of contributing to the excessive weight-gain of any Australian citizen. No court procedure is required; one complaint could lead to the almost-immediate closure of any pizza restaurant in the country

It was also stated by officials today that the business definition means these new laws will pertain to all pizza restaurants, whether they offer home delivery services or not. 

Several lines of legislation further on give courts the ability to lay down heavy sentences on the employees of any accused pizza restaurant. If taken into custody, any manager, chef, cook, or janitor could be charged with wounding, injury, and/or inflicting grievous bodily harm. Should the victim be deceased, these extend as far as manslaughter and negligent homicide, all the way to first degree murder.

Whilst pizza restaurant employees have claimed these laws to be "extreme and vicious in nature", one official said today that "…although these new laws may seem outlandish in nature, with this legislation's enforcement will come measures that ensure justice for Australians on both sides of the proverbial scale."
 

Could this mean the end of the humble pizza pie in Australia?

Pizza restaurants aren't the only ones making their concern vocal. Snack food manufacturers (including Arnotts, Cadbury, Nestle, and Allens), along with other businesses, are also openly criticising the act.

Their primary focus is the lack of a clear definition of what businesses are affected by these new laws should they be enacted. Said a representative from one snack food manufacturer:

"What classifies as a 'substance deemed detrimental to the human condition'? We have no idea, and neither do they, it seems. If they're gonna take this on some kind of 'I know it when I see it' basis, we could be in big trouble, and we don't even do pizza."

Not far down the list also sit powers to the freeze bank accounts of both the accused business and its employees. Whilst these have been claimed to '…stop the business and its employees from funding further criminal activity', scrutiny from one affected businesses cited this power to be an example of the "overly interfering and intrusive nature [of the legislation]."

The proposed legislation is not, however, without supporters. Associations including Obesity Prevention Australia, Diabetes Australia, and The Heart Foundation strongly claim that the legislation is "vital to help Australians realise their full potential in leading healthy, active lifestyles."

It has been claimed that fruit and vegetable suppliers, as well as health food manufacturers, have been buying the support of these groups to promote their own agenda and eliminate competition in the marketplace. Representatives from all three of the organisations listed above stated that these claims are "wild", "ludicrous", "anticompetitive" and "without evidence."

In response to claims of the "formation of a police state" from one journalist, one official defended the government plans by stating that "giving police these new powers is extremely necessary, as our research has concluded that Australians are too stupid and irresponsible to be held liable for their poor dietary and lifestyle habits any longer."

Leaks from whistleblowers around the country have assisted in the circulation of rumours claiming that similar legislation pertaining to other industries is also under development.

The most popular theories claim there to be legislation that will:

• make car manufacturers legally responsible for all automobile accidents. 
• make alcohol manufacturers responsible for all incidents of intoxication
• make firearms (no, not firearm manufacturers, the guns themselves) legally responsible for all incidents of ballistic trauma.

One anonymous tipster, a member of Hillsong Church, claims there to be evidence for the development legislation that would give authorities the ability to make God Himself responsible for any and all legal and ethical breaches across the country, seeing as He is responsible for the creation of absolutely everything (according to Christian scripture).

God, when asked about this matter, did not offer to comment.

by Liam McCann

Depression: It Isn't a Disease

As you readers may have acknowledged by deconstructing my previous entries, I am most certainly not the most content person to have his fingers touch a keyboard. It is natural for me to find fault with both myself and the rest of society, just as it is natural for me to wish to express my disdain. That in itself is a fault in my nature as a human being as far as I'm concerned. Shit, look at what's happening over in Japan: a fucking tsunami. 600+ already confirmed dead with 10,000+ missing, and I feel the need to bitch and moan, as if I'm going through hard times. The closest I've had to a natural disaster is a 40° day (Celsius, not Fahrenheit :P) and while it's by no means pleasant, it's also nothing compared to a wave towering 10 metres over your head, your house and your family. As destructive and devastating as such an event is, I always look to how natural disasters bring people together as we put differences aside and help one another. I find it strange that as negative a person as I may seem, I try to look on the positive side if at all possible. I am fully aware, however, of that fact that such a feat is easier said than done.

To put it bluntly, I am suffering depression, and I've realised that I've been feeling this way for a lot longer than I've perhaps fooled myself to believe. I'm not sure if there was a definite time or date when I began to think or feel this way, but in a very slow and progressive manner, cynicism and disgust have taken over my otherwise optimistic system. I could perhaps attribute this to my inherent admiration for George Carlin, for whom I have a great deal of respect as a person and from whom I've taken a great deal of inspiration as a comedian. I suppose it's the darker side of being exposed to a whole new way of thinking where you realise that you're just a speck in an ever expanding universe, and that everything around you has been set up to get you in and out as quickly as possible in a subvert attempt to minimise harm, that ironically does harm in a manner not many seem to be able to pick up on: it takes the spice out of life.

I find the best way to describe mood is to put it in terms of a fluorescent light. Good quality lights don't flicker much; they stay on most of the time, and illuminate rooms with relative ease. Some lights are a bit dodgy, and flicker a bit, but they're on for the fair majority of their run. Then there are lights that aren't so great; lights that never stop flickering. Sometimes they flicker really quickly in a manner more erratic than a hamster on methamphetamines, and other times they stay on for ages in a surprising instance of irradiated confidence. Sometimes, the power goes out, and even though it can stay out for a very, very long time, it comes back eventually. Sometimes, we decide to switch the light off, destroying its ability to shine, but leaving the possibility for further radiance contiguous. But sometimes, we go so far as to cut the wires; I'm in the process of soldering my previously tattered connection.

There are plenty of things that bring me joy to a level I can hardly contain: performing stand-up, improvising, multiplayer gaming, philosophical discussion, just to name a few, and these things have such value to me because they're rare occurrences. There are things that I've grown addicted to (namely watching improv and stand-up, as well as sleeping :P) that used to bring with them a far higher level of satisfaction that's been lost in their saturation; each instance of a repeated action has less of an effect on us as people, whatever that effect may be. In the most extreme cases, it takes the complete removal of an element from your life for you to realise its true worth; for me, that was my girlfriend.

We didn't split because I was taking her for granted; even though she dealt with the issue in an incredibly selfish manner, her reasoning of "I don't like you anymore," though harsh, is understandable and believable. Only when she was gone did I realise how happy she made me, and it was this that perhaps led me to cut my wires; I didn't think my bulb would get enough power, so I had to recover enough resources to allow the light to shine without having to worry about it suddenly going out. This metaphor is getting ahead of me :P

I find it to be a cruel irony how the things that make me happy are, for the most part, being with other people, whether it be performing with or for them, being leisurely with them, or even speaking with them, but feeling the way I do now leads me away from people rather than towards them. It's unusual how I deal with the same problem in different forms. For example, when I'm sick (as in, physically ill) I go to a doctor and get a prescription, actively seeking an artificial solution because I think I need it, leaving my natural immune system out of the question. Impatience and lack of faith takes hold, and I take the easy way out; we all do it. But, when I'm mentally deprived, I refuse such treatment, because I want as little dependency in this area as possible. I feel it's my responsibility to get myself out of such a predicament, but also acknowledge that this requires the efforts of others on my part.

I suppose my main fear is to become reliant on a counselor or therapist; yes, the profession exists for a reason and I can appreciate its worth to people with extremely poor mental health, but I'm just a bit blue, that's all! I don't need some fucker with a degree telling me how to think better; I need to find out myself so I can deal with problems as they arise without having to resort to "professional help." Dealing with these kinds of problems is something you learn through experience, and giving that experience to someone who's studied it for 3 to 4 years is a fucking waste. If you're on the verge of suicide or some other horrific or tragic fate, that's when you get help from the therapist. Otherwise, just get some buddies together and do something you love doing! No, it won't make all the pain go away, but it fucking helps!

Find something that makes you happy, and chase it. Listen to music, watch movies, go to the theatre, go out and party, have long winded discussions about cheese; the choice is yours, and in my case, the choice is to chase another girl. Have I found my next target? Yes, I have! Is this chase a permanent solution to my depression? Of course not! There is no such thing as a permanent solution; only temporary solutions, and you've just gotta find the one which lasts until the day you die, being careful not to abuse it and destroy its worth. That, ladies and gentlemen, is a good thing, because you need depression in your life; you just have to learn to harness and control it, and learn from it.

Remember: without bad times, there are no good times by comparison.