My religion is -me-

I recently had a thought-provoking discussion with my roommates about faith, that motivated me to look a bit deeper inside my head to discover what I believe, and why I believe it. Let me say, from the get-go, that there are reasons why I don't call myself a Christian, but there are also reasons why I don't call myself an Agnostic. There are reasons why I'm not Buddhist or Taoist, and others still as to why I don't call myself an Atheist.

If you want the bittersweet summary of "why?", it's because I don't believe that I should have to categorize what I feel. I don't like being asked the question, "what are you?" Well, I'm human, firstly. I'm male, as well. I don't really have a racial identity, since my blood is mixed with a handful of nationalities. As far as what I am, in relation to religion? I can't answer that the way that you want me to. The best way for me to tell you, is that I have my own beliefs, and I don't really feel like sharing them with someone who categorizes faith into brand names.

Don't get me wrong, I am not some soulless individual who shies away from having a moral identity. I'm not a big fan of philosophy, but I respect it, and the lessons it can teach. I disagree with many teachings from religious individuals, but I don't shun them (unless they're Fred Phelps).

I once had a discussion with an old friend of mine about morals versus religion. I have always found it irritating that people associate good moral fortitude with religion, and at the time, I was passionate enough about the subject that it made me angry. Religion may define what is considered good and bad for the people who follow it, but I don't like the idea of someone believing that they have the power to tell me what is right and wrong.

This is the best definition for "moral", that I have been able to find:

"Founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations."

While that's a bit of a textbook definition, perhaps a better way to describe the word, would be: the way that a human decides whether or not something emotionally feels right. As you can surmise, someone who thinks morally, would be the polar opposite of someone who thinks logically. A logical thinker is able to see a situation without any filter or flavoring, and can make a decision without subconsciously checking a moral code for the appropriate response.

Let it be said, that if I have only one good thing to say about myself, it's that I have no illusions as to who I am, and what made me into the person that I am today. I am not a logical thinker, and I highly envy those of my friends that are. If confronted with the lives of a mother and her child, I would not be able to choose which one would live, without consulting my emotional conscience. It is a burden to me, but I freely admit that I am a moral thinker.

I did not get my set of morals from a book, however. I got them from my family, friends, and sometimes even some of my school teachers. Although I may act as though I were Christian, or Buddhist, or otherwise, I don't follow their teachings. Most of what I have learned has come from my mother, my father, and both of their mothers (my grandmothers). I will not argue that what they taught me had its own influences, but it managed to get its way to me without coming from a congregation.

Do not misunderstand me, however, I will admit that certain people within religions are able to teach good habits to their listeners, whether with the aid of a book, or not. I almost want to say that if the Bible were written by Jesus himself, I would be a lot more inclined to read it. But it wasn't, unfortunately, and because of that, its messages are often twisted or misconstrued.

That is one reason why I do not call myself a Christian, or otherwise. It's because I do not wish to go into a room that is full of convinced people, and listen to someone explain their opinion on another person's opinion on another person's teachings, then feel guilty that I have not shared this perspective previously to that day. I harbor no ill will to the people who attend these meetings, but it isn't something that I want in my life.

Keep in mind that what I am about to write, is not intended to be insulting or offensive. I am describing myself to you, and I in no way believe that the way I live is the "right" way to live, or that I'm justified in describing the way that people are.

That being considered, another reason that I do not follow a religion, is because they appear to be self-defeating, to me. Guilt is enough of a punishment for not being a perfect person, so I feel like I shouldn't need to perform specific religious practices of atonement, or live my life according to someone else in order to feel like I'm being a good person. I don't need a spiritual reward to encourage me to follow my morals. Instead, I should try my best to follow the wisdom that I have gained from the people around me, and learn from my mistakes and from my misjudgments, then use that experience to strengthen my knowledge and turn my moral thinking into logical thinking.

I'm more than certain that I'd see a lot of hands raised, if I asked this next question to an open forum. How many of you know someone who identifies themselves as a Christian, but admits to performing at least one 'sin' on a daily basis? I know hundreds of these people, and I respect a good amount of them, but their situation confuses me. Why would you continue to identify with something that you repeatedly contradict, simply out of your own nature? For example, why would you tell me that you're a Christian, yet you regularly have sex with an unmarried partner? Following that, why would you then confess to me that you feel guilty that you are not following your religion's beliefs, then go and pray for forgiveness?

Why do you feel as though you need to repent for disobeying someone's teachings, that you "disobeyed" simply out of human behavior? These people owe nothing to anyone but themselves, and it pains me to think that they may not realize it. It seems like they are forever trapped in trying to attain an identity that isn't their own, and don't realize that it's futile. People can only be themselves, no matter how much they try to be like someone else.

I suppose that what I want my friends to understand from this (aside from getting a good look at my own narrow-minded psyche), is that I don't want to follow a religion because I don't want it to take away from who I am. I don't want to follow it, because I don't think it, as a brand name, could help be to be a better person. If you have advice you feel could help me, then tell me. Wisdom is as precious to me as life itself, and if there is something that I can learn from someone, be it a family member, friend, teacher, or otherwise, I'd rather have it fed to me raw, and unaltered. Without reservation. No hidden agendas. Void of subliminal opinion. You get the idea.

Anyway, that's enough of me rattling on for tonight. Thoughts, comments, feel free. My brain is yours to make fun of.

[Currently listening to: Oh, Sleeper - Son of the Morning]

Occupy Wall Street

A couple videos have been released, that have displayed the NYPD using physical force toward the protestors aligned with the Occupy Wall Street movement. After watching a few of these videos, I'm on the fence on if the police are using this as intimidation, or if they're being cornered and provoked into self-defense.

Most of my hesitation is due to poor camera handling, but I suppose that it's difficult to maintain a stationary position in the middle of a protest. In a lot of instances, I've been shown clips of police grabbing random people in crowds, throwing them to the ground, and bracing their knees against the protestors' necks while two to four other officers assist in arresting them for no visible reason. That's the poor camera handling that I'm talking about.

Now, I'm not one to speak ill of police officers, but history, even recent history in my own neighborhood, has taught us that excessive force is a real thing. In some circumstances, this maybe be exaggerated, but the thing I'm worried about is the possibility of another Rodney King fallout.

If you're unaware of the Los Angeles riots of 1992, I'm summarize it for you. After a video was publicly released by a local media network, that depicted an African-American man being beaten by police, a trial was held to determine the validity of excessive force and police brutality. All of the five officers involved were acquitted of assault, and three of the five were acquitted of excessive force. This sparked an enormous outrage from the people of Los Angeles, who took to the streets in a violent "protest" that ended in a six-day riot involving widespread arson, violence, and even murder. All in all, the fallout included:

"...53 deaths, 2,383 injuries, more than 7,000 fires, damages to 3,100 businesses, and nearly $1 billion in financial losses."

The Occupy Wall Street movement has been labeled as a "peaceful" protest, and given that no one has died or received fatal injury, I'm willing to agree with the description. However, the videos recorded by the protestors have disturbed the surface of this metaphorical pond, so to speak, and it's the ripples that I'm worried about. The video I linked at the top of this post displays many attempts by officers to "subdue" random protestors that aren't visibly causing disruption, but the question of provocation still lingers.

Though I'm not particularly worried about this escalating to the level of Tienanmen Square, I am worried about the possibility of media coverage being skewed in favor of the protestors, and the consequence leading to a non-peaceful movement. Right now, the people involved in Occupy Wall Street are doing the right thing by gathering together and attempting to incur peaceful change. I won't argue that they're very unorganized, and that their "demands" (more seemingly "suggestions") of taxation on the rich and universal healthcare are a bit generalized and are without any sort of "how", but plenty of "why". The fact that they're gathering plenty of support, however, might indicate that this movement is really a movement, and not some short-lived media event.

All in all, I'm hoping that Occupy Wall Street continues as peacefully as possible, yet that it also continues to expand beyond New York. As long as the protestors refrain from provoking police officers, they'll have my support if any sort of police brutality occurs.

In light of this all, I encourage you to follow these links to some easy reading and listening. It's totally relevant, and is in no way me exploiting the topic to get you to listen to my music. Not at all. Now go listen.

Say "no" to retail

In an effort to dissuade people from getting sucked into the life that I did, I'm dedicating my writing today toward informing you all of the disadvantages of the retail industry, and why you should never apply to a retail chain.

"But why?", you ask. "Why would you dissuade me from getting a job? Jobs are so scarce as it is, shouldn't I be thankful for any kind of work?"

That kind of talk may have flown one or two years ago, but there is absolutely no excuse to find better work right now. Unemployment is high in our country, yes, but it's not due to low job availability. There are plenty of jobs out there and very few of them, believe it or not, are related to the retail field. Go look on Craigslist or any job-finder website, and make sure not to limit yourself to retail.

Before you do that, however, let me give you some motivation to go outside of your bubble, as it were. I don't want you to just think that I'm some anti-establishment rebel who has it out for retail companies, so hear me out. There are many reasons to seek work elsewhere, and I'm going to expound upon three of them. So, take off your name badge and get out of those uncomfortable khakis. Just relax, and read on.

1. Employment relationship

Most retail companies these days are "At-Will" employers that don't have unions, which means that both the employee and employer hold the legal right to end the employment at any given time. In other words:

" ...any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

Don't misunderstand me, they can't fire you for anything involving discrimination that is defined by the EEOC, but they can terminate you for broadly-encompassing reasons such as "performance", which is defined in the company's handbook or whatever compliance material they provide their employees with.

There are a lot of ways this employment relationship could be abused, but that's not to say that this is the case for the majority of retail terminations. However, say that you're a supervisor at a small retail store, and due to a combination of increased customer traffic and changes in your store's administration (managers, assistant managers), you've had a difficult time finishing some of your weekly tasks. This happens often enough and, depending on your company's termination procedures, they could fire you for "bad performance".

Keep in mind, this doesn't always involve a phone call before your shift. You could very well show up to work, be there for an hour, and then get called into a meeting. Alternatively, you could work the whole day, and then be approached at the end of your shift. This varies between companies, but all At-Will employers can do this, so keep it in mind. You could be the hardest worker at your store, but if it isn't properly staffed, your "performance" can very easily slip out of your own control.

2. Wage

The federal hourly minimum wage is currently at $7.25. Unless you've already had retail experience, or you're great at argument, this is what you will be getting paid. Let's put this into a larger perspective for you. Though it's very unlikely, say that you work 40 hours a week. If you get paid weekly, and don't count income tax, you'll be making $290 a week. Four weeks is a month, and that's $1,160. Twelve months is a year, and that's $13,920.

The 2011 Poverty Line, as defined by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), lists this year's threshold at $13,600 for Alaska, $12,540 for Hawaii, and $10,890 for the rest of us. This means that although you're just above the poverty line, if you're living on your own and working at $7.25 an hour, you're going to be doing without a lot of conveniences other job fields will be able to afford.

There is somewhat of a luster to the lining, if you want to be positive. Most retail companies will offer an employee review with a wage increase, though this differs vastly between companies. The review could occur every 6 months, or it could be once a year. The wage increase could be a possibility, and not a requirement. It all depends on the company's policies.

"But Keith, you could say that about any field. All companies are going to have different policies."

Oh, certainly, I don't deny that a lot of companies in unrelated fields have this same outlook on promotion and wage increase for hourly positions. In fact, I'd agree that most of them have the same approach. However, there are other fields that involve things like gratuity, and commission. Being a waitress or waiter at a restaurant could turn out to be highly lucrative, depending on the hours the employee works, and how good they are at their job. A salesperson at a car dealership could be outstanding at reading their customers, and make a great amount of money based off of their commission pay.

What I'm trying to say, is that with retail, your wage is your wage. It is a constant. Though in some circumstances this could be a good thing, a good bartender could work a busy Saturday night and make more in that night than your wage offers you in a 40-hour week.

3. Benefits

This is the worst part of the retail business. For the sake of argument, let's say that you haven't yet received any management training, and you're either entry level, or you've even been with the company over 90 days (the usual probational period). Most companies only offer benefits to employees who have met the 90-day probation period, were hired on as a full-time employee, and are currently working 40 hours a week.

Meaning, that if you're a part-time employee who's working 40 hours or more a week, you won't get benefits. Combined with the rampant discouraging of overtime by your administration (and yes, they will highly discourage it, but I'll get into that in a second), there is literally no incentive to working part-time in retail. You will get no overtime, you are getting paid a flat rate, and you will get no benefits. At least in fields that offer gratuity or commission, you can still make more money doing part-time work.

As I said earlier, your administration will discourage any overtime that you accrue. They are required by the US Department of Labor to pay you 150% of your regular wage for anything exceeding 40 hours of work per week, and if they can do anything to prevent that from happening, it will improve their budget and make the company look better on paper. I would like to note here that companies are not required to change your status from part-time to full-time if you are working 40-hour weeks. That is a very common misconception, and most companies have a very defined process for making an employee eligible for full-time benefits such as health insurance.

In conclusion, when you're going on the job hunt, you now have 3 reasons to search elsewhere of the retail field. If you want to look at it logically, think about it like this: if, for now, you are going to be a part of the bottom 90%, you might as well be the slice in the pie chart that's getting the most out of their job. Look for something that offers commission, or gratuity. Even if it's less hours, you have a better chance at making more money in less time, and who doesn't want that? Just get good at your job, smile more often, and talk to your customers. As much as people like to complain, none of those things are difficult if you put forth the effort. So get out of retail, and start enjoying your job!

[Currently listening to: City And Colour - In The Water I Am Beautiful]

Want to learn about Mexico?

Sylvia Longmire, a former Special Agent of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, has released a new book that explains the drug wars in Mexico, and how it is affecting the United States. Mrs. Longmire has been a consultant and analyst of Mexico's drug war for over 4 years, including 6 years of covering Latin America beforehand. Out of all the research I've done to understand the drug war in Mexico, I have to say that Mrs. Longmire is effectively the person that I've been paying attention to the most, for several reasons.

She understands and can explain how the drug wars started, and why they've gotten worse in time. Not only that, but she can explain what the political leaders of the world are doing wrong as they try to combat and contain drugs in general. For instance, did you know that no country in the world has fully legalized marijuana? Some have decriminalized it, yes, but dealers are still being put in jail, and fines are still being charged for possession and use.

The book, "Cartel: The Coming Invasion of Mexico's Drug Wars", has already received great reviews, and my copy should be in the mail by tomorrow. If you don't think that this situation will ever effect you, now is the time to wake up and educate yourself before it's in your city, town, or neighborhood.

The drug wars in Mexico threaten more than just the people living on the border, and if you think it's nothing to worry about, you might want to read this. One year ago, in October, a man was decapitated in Chandler, Arizona for owing a drug cartel and not paying his due. Regardless of his connection to a drug cartel, understand that he wasn't just murdered. He was decapitated. The kind of brutal killings you read or hear about in Mexico, aren't just happening there anymore. It's spilling over into the United States, and, quoting Sylvia Longmire, the drug cartels have a presence in over 1,000 cities above the border.

I'm not trying to scare anyone, but if you think that the Middle East is the closest threat we have to worry about, you need a serious reality check. If you don't feel like spending $12 on this book, I encourage you to at least listen to a recent interview with Mrs. Longmire below, and check out her blog if you get the chance. It's an eye-opener, and the information comes from a source with experience and understanding.

Interview

The last thing that I want to say, is that I encourage you to spread knowledge of this situation, because even though it's affecting us here in the United States, not enough people know or care about what is happening south of the border. I don't care if you can't donate or you simply aren't empathetic to the innocent people that are dying down there, but at least try to understand the situation and spread awareness of the real problem with the drug wars. I'll be posting a blog tomorrow about my take on the drug wars, and I encourage you to read it, because I believe that I can teach you something.

Thanks for reading! Now go listen to that interview, it's only 10 minutes long!

[Currently listening to: Sublime - What I Got]

NaNoWriMo

For those of you who don't know what NaNoWriMo is, take a look. In short, it's a yearly challenge to write a 50,000-word novel in 30 days. Sounds daunting, huh? Don't get me wrong, fifty-thousand words is a lot to write (about 1666.67 a day), but as the website states, the whole challenge is based on quantity, not quality. I am going to be a first-timer to the website this year, and though it's probably a bad idea, I want to look at this as something that will challenge me in two ways.

Firstly, is length of the novel. That, alone, will be difficult for someone like me who's only ever written a 7,500-word short story. Secondly, however, I also want to look at this as a challenge to write something decent, that's worth its figurative weight. We'll see how well this ends up panning out, but heck, I'll be happy if I'm even able to reach 25,000 words on my own.

Either way, this will be fun! If anyone else wants to try this, add keystrokegraffiti, and we'll be writing buddies! It'll give you the chance to laugh at my timid effort to reach 1,600 words a day, while still attempting to hold some sort of merit in my writing. (Haw!)

Good luck, come November!

[Currently listening to: Ha Ha Tonka - Usual Suspects]

Taking for granted

"Take for granted" is an idiom that people of the United States use to describe someone who expects something that was once an occasional blessing, to be a common occurrence. For example, say a co-worker noticed that you were having a bad day at work, and decided to be thoughtful and buy you a cup of coffee (in addition to buying their daily cup) when they had never done so before. Though perhaps you were initially grateful for their kindness, the next day you were upset that they hadn't bought you another, so you vocally expressed your displeasure when they walked passed you with their daily coffee.

I listened to an episode of This American Life today, which was about giving things up, whether it's intentional, or unintentional. Some of the stories tugged my heartstrings, and led me to question what I personally have had to give up, that I've taken for granted. Two things came to mind, one of which that was intentional, and one that was unintentional.

Intentionally, the one thing that I've forced myself to give up, recently, was World of Warcraft. For those of you who know what I'm talking about, go ahead, laugh it up. For those of you that are unaware, World of Warcraft is an online game set in a fantasy world, which, if you allow it, has created enough activities for a player to do, that it can literally swallow your entire day. As of March of this year, I decided that it was time for me to grow, as a person and as an adult, and I let my subscription become frozen. No more endless repetition, no more four-hour long sprees in front of the computer, and no more monthly $14.99 charges to my bank account. Honestly, I felt relieved. I felt free. Until this month, I had little interest in playing the game, and little more in spending more money. This month, however, my company hired a new co-worker, who became a quick friend. Unfortunately for me, he was an avid player of the game I had given up, and talked about it incessantly.

So, I caved. I renewed my subscription, and paid a transfer fee so that I could play on his server. I played the game for maybe an hour, and then became bored. I didn't play for the next couple days, and then today, I accessed my account, and cancelled the subscription. Though I lost money for the renewal and the transfer, listening to that podcast helped me to realize that I really do take my free time for granted, and in the end, I'd rather not waste most, if not all of it, playing a video game.

That was the easy thing that I had to give up. The harder thing, which will be hard for the rest of my life, was giving up my grandmother. The woman who had raised me since I was a baby, passed away this year at the age of 85. Initially, I didn't know how to feel. It was like my breath had been suddenly cut short. I didn't know how to react. Then I watched a video that my cousin had put together, which was a picture slideshow of my grandmother, set to two songs that had been her favorites. All of my family was gathered together to watch it.

It was difficult, but I consciously held back my tears as long as I could. That was, until I saw a picture of how she looked when I first starting remembering her as a child. The tears just came, then. I didn't force them or anything, they just came. I was honestly ashamed that I didn't sob more than I did. I was ashamed that I didn't break down, get drunk, or throw a fit. This was one of the most important, influential people in my life, why the heck wasn't I a pathetic display of depression?

They say that people deal with death differently, and for my part, I can tell you that it's true. I cried, yes, but I'm still recovering from it, and I'll tell you how I know that. Mostly, it's the coffee. My grandma had hooked me on coffee ever since I was 12 years old. It was a morning ritual, for my father and I, to go to Grandma Erma's house for a cup of coffee and some conversation, with the TV muted but still turned on. Sometimes we'd go outside and talk about whatever while our city woke up.

I took those days for granted, more than I took anything else for granted. Even now, just writing about it, I can feel the muscles around my eyes twitch, threatening to loose emotion. Not a day goes by that I brew myself a cup of coffee and I don't think back to those days. Sitting inside and sharing laughs with my grandmother, who chided me for making her laugh hard enough to render an immediate trip to the bathroom. Or sitting outside with her and my father, talking about how the world could be a much better place if there weren't so many bad people in it. "You don't know what you've got, until it's gone", is another idiom that is so relevant that it's humbling.

I think, as a society, we need to pay more attention to the things that we have all taken for granted. An inspiration of mine, the musician Serj Tankian, once gave a great example as to how we, as a society, have taken life itself for granted. He noted how appalling the idea of "fast food" was; that we have become so busy in our lives, that we don't even give ourselves the time to appreciate the gift of being able to eat something and savor it as a gift. We didn't have to go out and hunt for anything to get that food. We didn't have to grow crops, for the condiments. We didn't have to go to a market for the spices and flavors that were added to the food. All we did was exchange some paper, or plastic, and the food was ours, yet we consume it in minutes, sometimes in seconds. If you ever get the chance, watch an episode of The Deadliest Catch on the Discovery channel. If it doesn't humble you into eating shrimp with gusto, I don't know what will.

All in all, I've got to hand it to This American Life. They did a great job on stimulating my thought process this morning. Give it a listen, I think it might change the way you look at life. Or, at least, you might be thankful for that thoughtful co-worker who noticed your bad day.

Google+

For me, social networking websites are what I use to stay connected, and share interesting things with the people that I know. I don't like using them to waste time, and I don't like using them to keep myself busy (one of the reasons I haven't gotten a smartphone yet).

It seems like using a social networking website for entertainment is like having an addiction to vicariousness. Add to that, the little flash games that everyone plays to keep their attention in between friends' posts, and it just becomes a gigantic, thought-suppressing engine of complacence.

I'm not sure that Google+ will be much different, but I at least want to go out on a limb and give it a shot. With a great suggestion from a friend of a friend, whose advice I will link to, I'll try to make Google+ an open range full of creativity, art, and intellect. I'll definitely let you all know how it turns out, and I encourage you to give it a shot as well. What's the worst that could happen?

How to make Google+ worth the effort

Check it out for yourself.