All A@@holed Out

At least once a week now, I ask myself the same question, usually prompted by some ignorant, separatist redneck post or some anti-abortion self-righteous meme…posted by my “friends.”  Some of these are people I haven’t actually “seen” since high school, and even then, they were more like acquaintances.  Many are people to whom I used to be closer, and time and/or distance has come between us, but with whom I would like to keep in some sort of contact.  And then I’m realizing I just never knew some of these people to begin with.  And I actually like some of these people…I mean, except for the unfortunate fact of their intolerance…

Um...yeah, okay.

Um…yeah, okay.

Shall I attempt to point out the many ways this meme is ridiculous?  Firstly, the only people who have a problem with secularism are people who feel everyone should be their religion.  Secondly, pretty sure many of the “lazy, unproductive” people were that way before Obama got into office.  I can only assume this is a jab at people who are on some type of public assistance.  (These are also likely the same people who post memes like “before we help the poor in other countries, we need to help our own” and then go around bitching when any laws that actually attempt to do so get proposed.)

Thirdly–  Ow! I stubbed my fuckin’ toe!  Thanks, Obama!

But anyway, the question I have been asking myself is this:

At which point do I draw the line between respecting my friends’ views and differences of opinions to You’re just an asshole and I don’t think I wanna be your friend?”

Generally I would say, the difference would be whether or not their “views” encourage hate or discrimination of any kind.  But seriously…have you seen  some of the memes going around now?  The line between expressing opinion and attempting to insult/control the opposition seems to be becoming increasingly blurred.

And especially in lieu of the George Zimmerman verdict and all the “moral outrage” and barely concealed racism going around, I am SO sick of seeing hateful, ignorant posts about “reverse racism” and white victims of black killers.  How about we direct some of that moral outrage and righteous indignation towards the things that really matter, and maybe realize that all these posts are just widening the racial divide?

But, back to my original question, how do you personally decide when to accept differences, and who to cut loose because they are just too different (aka, an asshole)?  Frankly, I’m all “assholed” out.

“Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won’t come in.”
― Isaac Asimov

Advertisements

Before the verdict…

Okay, so before the verdict, and the ensuing deluge of blog posts about the trial and race relations, here’s my piece (piece of opinion, that is) on the Zimmerman/Martin thing.  And first, let me stress that I am not one of those people who has been reading every article and transcripts of the trial on the internet, and my opinion comes from just what I have read and heard, which is by no means everything.

I think both Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin contributed to the events that happened that night.  If what Martin’s friend, Rachel Jeantel claimed is true, and Martin referred to Zimmerman as some “creepy white dude” following him, does that not make him guilty of contributing to the “racial” cast of the situation? That said, IF Zimmerman thought the guy was dangerous, when he followed him (with a gun and against orders from police dispatch) he put himself in a situation where he may have had to “defend” himself. Zimmerman, IMO was looking to be deputy dog or something.  And as to race and racial profiling, it DOES go both ways, and contrary to many may think, white people don’t automatically “get justice” if the crime is white on white. There is so much more to it (like money, for instance!)

The fact that this trial may result in a riot seems a bit ridiculous.  People (ANY people of ANY color,creed, or race) can’t just riot every time a jury trial doesn’t go their way.