100

(Not a sequel to Frank Miller's book)
And so a landmark post, which was meant to represent a new writing beginning. This blog originated as a way to write (based on Neil Gaiman's recommendation that the first thing any budding writer should do is actuall write) anything, so that I could see what I liked and disliked about my own writing. If I read the earlier posts , I find them much funnier than the latter ones (or atleast attempt to be funny). I see that most of time is spent writing about
a. Books especially Comics
b. Religion
c. Sports
d. Politics.
So a summary of what has been so far
Books! The only place where we get to see dialogue like
Monk : Seek not revenge, Seek the Buddha instead
Fox : the monk told me to seek the Buddha instead of vengeance
Dream King: That is good advice. Vengeance is a never ending path. And..?
Fox : I shall seek the Buddha....But first, I shall seek revenge!
And she does ofcourse.
Though in someways there are fewer good books and a lot more mediocre ones than what I remember. Perhaps I have read all the great ones already.
And there is no thrill of the hunt. When we had no money and had to raid the various raddi shops, a single book gave a lot of happiness (and rereads). But now when I can afford most books, the thrill of the search is gone , as are the rereads. There was a time I knew the number and cover of every comic I had, and now I cant remember which friend has my books.
But there is hope, I've introduced Lucifer to a new comics reader, which thrilled me.

Religion
I think the headline of my blog sums this up
while things that are uncomfortable, palpitating, and even gruesome, may make a good tale, and take a deal of telling anyway. J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit
Ive often been asked (by the same person) why I dwell so much on religion if I dislike it so. And the answer has always been because it affects me!. And among the major problems faced by society , religion is probably in the top 10.
Perhaps the thing that irritates me the most about religion is the hypocrisy. (e.g. oh our religion teaches us to be humble, but you'll are all wrong only my religion is correct, or oh you need religion to tell you what is moral, you disbelievers are immoral, and the followers of my religion who are immoral, well they aren't real followers,or oh look at that religion , its so funny , how could people believe in something so stupid, oh my religion? all of the funny unbelievable things are miracles. or oh look at all the violent stuff in that religion? the violent stuff in my religion? thats only descriptive/thats a metaphor/ dont take everything literally or...) That was meant to be one example.
Its also that some conclusions are inescapable. If your religious God is Good(any commonly accepted definition of good), and is capable of making a difference or a change and chooses not to (and we know from all the religious tomes that he is capable of making differences) , then he can't be Good. Whenever Im told of how some God actually healed the sick, Im reminded of a comment, So you have this omnipotent God, who can cure, actually cure people with a touch but chooses to do so only to a select few people, how good could he be?
Any road (thanks Robbo) to conclude with an anecdote
When Captain Sullenberger was asked whether he prayed during the Hudson river landing,he said something to the effect of "I was busy taking care of the plane. I was pretty sure that the passengers were taking care of the praying."

Sports
Being in a country obsessed more with the show then with the sport and with one of the absolute worst sports in the history of mankind, has dampened the enthusiasm for sports. Oh for the days of watching cricket and a little english premier league football, some golf, some NBA, and look there's even a kabbadi match, some tennis, some hockey .. sigh.. Im down to why the heck does cricinfo not refresh faster! how about some AJAX,you useless developer!!!

Politics
The only thing that leaves a worse taste in your mouth than religion (hey we aren't discussing my cooking so it doesnt count). It's sad to see that American politicians are as bad and in some cases worse than their Indian counterparts. If I ever approve of the death penalty, it will be because some politician is on trial.

Evolution

Its quite funny reading the Intelligent Design folk's. Evolution cant explain some thing which clearly show a designer (to them). They do however stop short of saying who the Designer is. And then they wonder why people laugh at them. Here are my reasons.
a. Who is the designer. God(and which one?)? Aliens? Our descendants from the future? Fairies? Our duplicates from a parallel world? To be taken seriously the Intelligent design theory would have to make some guesses (including how to verify the guess) about the designer and his motivations. The utter hypocrisy where they stop short of saying the designer is the god of the religion I happen to believe in causes them to be the subject of much ridicule.
b. Who designed the designer? if he always existed or himself evolved then why is it so difficult to believe life evolved.
c. Why did so many species become extinct (even without man's interfering). Was some of the design flawed?
d. Why call it 'Intelligent ' design. Except for our brains, a lot of the other bits of human is not very intelligent. Why wouldn't you have designed man (who is made in god's own image after all) as someone who could tolerate extreme temperatures, be the fastest, strongest species? Why have human's vulnerable to most sickness? Why have two kidneys (when humans can get by with one) but only one heart and one brain? Why have the universe and then have humanity needing to breathe so that we cannot (without a lot of help) explore it? We seem to be as well designed as early version's of MS DOS!. Call it somewhat workable barely intelligent design if you will (we are talkign about an omnipotent designer so I assume the designer could have made us more efficient if the designer wanted that).

Presidential elections

The BBC covers the current US presidential candidates (current) opinions. And i want to see how i matched up. So here we go

a. The war : No one wins in a war, and it looks like only Obama realises this. Note John Edwards and Hillary Clinton say something to the effect that if I knew then what i know now I wouldve opposed the war. And so even though the entire world except Tony Blair knew this war was being fought on false pretenses these two claim ignorance! That should probably disqualify them from the election. More important is that they supported the war with incomplete and now incorrect evidence. The republicans candidates come of as fundamentalists with their we wouldn't have handled the war this way, yah right. I would never support or indeed vote for people who openly support war as a means of resolving a problem. People who dont give a damn for lives (both their countrymen in the army and those from the opposing side) shouldnt be allowed anywhere near a government. For those who see a broader context in the war i remember star trek's the original "the greatest good of the greatest number" to which the next generation responds with "how many lives does it take before it becomes wrong"
b. The economy : While i can claim almost total ignorance here, Mr Obama and Ms Clinton seems to recognise that education is important. The rest are all about tax cuts or spending cuts. its hard to think of any problem that cant be solved with an educated(as opposed to literate) population
c. National Security : Ms clinton military response suggestion is laughable. Attacks are not always by something that you can have a military response for. Almost everyone here supported the Patriot act, though Mr obama has criticised and reauthorised it thereby earning more negative points. Im surprised that no candidate has stated stop interfering in other countries affairs, we are not a global pandu. Stop patronising extremist states which sooner or later turn on you. That would reduce the need for extreme national security.
d. Illegal immigration : Im not sure why americans even debate this topic. "illegal" immigrants have to be sent back , at most you could say that we wont hold this against you if you apply legally. The broader issue is stupid and complicated immigrant laws. Note that my views that there should be no rules as to who can work where, as this earth is not (to put it in my native slang) "your father in law's or what" , would ensure that my votes tally would remain 0.
e. Health care : for the amount of taxes we pay , health care should be free for everyone. Its not practical till you consider how much money the US of A spends on arms and arms research and how many times over the armaments they currently have could destroy the earth.
f. Social issues : Abortion is one issue im totally conflicted with , the right of a woman to choose conflicting with the embryo/child not being given a choice. I'd rather they werent any (Except where the mother's life is in danger which is pretty clear cut) and that people were educated enough so there arent any , but i also think id not want a child to be born whose mother wanted to abort it but didnt do so because the government made it illegal. I dont think there is a right answer here so id have to settle for the parents can choose.
Was also one of the people who believed civil union is fine for same sex and marriage is between a man and woman till i read a republican (rudy) say the same and realised uncomfortably that i have also been told(indirectly) that marriage between two non catholics is a contract whereas between two catholics its a union of the souls, a union blessed by god, a sacrament (i quote out of memory). And i realised i am no different than the above person , i only draw the lines at different places and have subsequently changed my views to a marriage is whatever the people who are getting married want it to be.
I think my views are somewhat better off than the current presidential candidates, too bad US laws wont let me run. And when i read through the opinions of the current lot i think GW Bush wasnt so much worse after all. And that india is not the only place where you settle for the least worst of the lot.