UNITED 93 part B

so here i am to talk a little more about "united 93". as i stated earlier i wanted to see the movie because i needed to remember 9/11. i wanted another reminder that the world is not what it use to be, my children are no longer safe anymore...not that i am paranoid but, there are a group of people that want to kill me, my wife, my children and you, and your family. that is simply reality.

if you think i am extreme or crazy then all i would say to you is go watch the movie. if you think i am extreme or crazy then all i will say to you is there wasn't just one plane that was intentionally crashed that day. if you think i'm extreme or crazy then all i will say to you is remember madrid, london, the u.s.s. cole, mogadishu, and remember the myriad of other instances when terrorist chose to attack and kill women and children in israel.

yes they chose to do those things, don't blame the united states, don't blame spain, don't blame great britain and don't even try to tell me that they just wanted "their land" back...anyone with an ounce of historical honesty, a modicum of sanity and a scrap of intelligence knows the history of that region and knows that "palestine" was a term used by the romans and others to refer to the region, not to a specific country. in centuries past there was no country of "palestine". again, "palestine" referred to the nation of israel and surrounding regions/countries that did exist. so if you want to be honest, an israeli is just as much a "palestinian" as is a jordanian. etc. etc. i belabor this point because i am tired of indivduals that want to blame everyone else except those who target civilians as they blow themselves up. i am also tired of the idiotic argument that we have no right to be in iraq, that we are just as bad as the terrorists...do not equate me or your average u.s. citizen with them and DO NOT equate our brave men and women in uniform with them either. your average joe citizen in this country doesn't go to church, or to a synagogue, or to his temple and then proceed to go out and wire himself so he blows himself and others to bits. your average u.s solidier is not targetting civilian men, women and children (nor sawing off their heads either).

this my friend is one of the things that "united 93" is about. it is a look at those who want to kill you if you do not agree with their ideaology, religion, whatever you want to call it, and a look at your average joe citizen and his response to those who want to blow you up. it is a look at the necessary heroism that was needed to keep others from harm and death.

i find it interesting that in the end the only thing that saved lives and thwarted the insane goals of the hijackers was; a) others sacrificing their lives, and b) a group of individuals rising up and by deadly force attempting to circumvent (and succeeding to a certain degree) what those insane men had planned(gee kind of like our men and women in our armed forces). it seems that what happened on "united 93" is what is happening ( on a much larger scale)in afghanistan, iraq and will be needed around the world to prevent people like the men that murdered the passengers and crew of "united 93" from achieving their goals.

no i am not finished yet but i must get some sleep.

I'M BACK
it's been a while which i don't like, but life has been extremely busy. i will not relate everything though because that is not the purpose of this blog. i will continue my posts on "united 93", "the big three", "shamnesty" and a little bit on "cynthia who?" later. i am tired now and need sleep.

SHAMNESTY?part A?

this is one of those blogs which i mentioned in which i disagree with our president. i was reading his speech about "immigration reform" (yes i have a copy, a friend e-mailed it to me) and realized something-our president states that it is not amnesty but i must disagree lets have a look;

"I believe that illegal immigrants...who meet these conditions should be able to apply for citizenship..."

hmmm, what are those conditions?
1. "pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law"
2. "pay their taxes"
3. "learn English"
4. "work in a job for a number of years"

well lets see I am a citizen of the U.S.A. (third generation) and
1. any time i get a parking ticket or a speeding ticket i have to "pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law".
2. i have been working since i was 15 and have been paying taxes.
3. english is my first language and i still studied and learned about it growing up. in fact i have english speaking children (who are legal citizens)in my classroom (i am a teacher) who are studying the rules of english and learning it.
4. i have been in this job for eight years, my second job for five and have been working in various jobs since i was 15.

so there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference between me, my students and an illegal alien when it comes to citizenship criteria...mr. president with all due respect-you and those who agree with you have cheapened citizenship in this country this cheapening of citizenship on your part is something that i, those who have become naturalized citizens in this country (through legal means, not amnesty)and, especially those legal citizens that are presently fighting and dieing to preserve the right of legal citizens of this country will not take lightly.

UNITED 93 part A

so i went to see "united 93" tonight. i am pleased that this blogspot has a save as draft button as i know this blog will take up quite a bit of time as well as energy and blog space. i have to admit that when it comes to the movie i am left without words, truly speechless. normally after i see a movie my lovely wife asks me what i thought of it, how was it, etc. as i drove home i began to think of the movie and the questions that my wife would ask and realized that i could not answer them...at least not in the usual sense. i think this is because of my motivation for wanting to see this film. unlike a film like "lord of the rings" which i saw because i enjoy good literature or "pride and prejudice" (the most recent one) which i saw with my wife as a romantic time together as well as an "escape from reality", my motivation for seeing this film was to get a little dose/reminder of reality. i wanted a reminder of the reality of those people and the events that lead up to their heroic actions. i wanted to remember and reflect on what happened on september 11th. this is not due to any preoccupation with tragedies such as this or any saddistic/masochistic tendencies on my part, but simply because i don't want to forget 9/11. on the surface that statement may seem absurd, obviously an event of this type and magnitude is not something that any right minded person easily forgets or puts behind them.
however, i have to admit that it would be much easier to simply "move on" from 9/11. after all, i do not personally know anyone who died, nor even know anyone who was related to or who knew one of the victims (in any of the tragedies). so it would be quite easy to remove myself from what happened. i am being honest, to me this can very easily be only a "national" tragedy not also a personal one like those who were much closer to those who died. however, the reality of this horrendous act is such that it must be personal to me and every other adult in this country. unfortunately, what i believe i am seeing in our country as we move farther away from that day is that we are "forgetting" 9/11. we seem less and less concerned about what happened (i could be wrong and hope i am). a very good example is what is happening on the political front in our nation. so many of our elected officals seem more concerned about gaining back "power" or holding their proverbial fingers up to see which way the "popularity" wind is blowing in any case there is a great deal of politicking going on. i do not name specific individuals or parties because (unfortunately) it is coming from both sides of the aisle. i will say this however, we need to support our president and what he is doing (in iraq) to try to keep this country safe (yes i am a republican and i did vote for him). I wish i could only chalk it up to the democrates and their hatred for bush, but as stated earlier he is getting shot at from both sides. this is (obviously)not good for our governmant or the security of our country-perhaps i shouldn't say "obviously" as it doesn't seem obvious to those who continually attack our president. this is not to say that i think our president is perfect or that i agree with all that he has/is done/doing, but those are topics for other blogs. this blog is about "united 93".

CYNTHIA WHO??? (and the race platinum card)part 4

information, information...so much more information on "cynhtia who???". if i read all the information that i am coming across i would be here all night. if i worte on half of it i would be here until tommorrow night. so let me finish with what i was stating earlier...i was apologizing for comments about pelosi. the reason being that i do not know a great deal about her except from what i read from very reliable blogs. i gather she has not made the most coherent of statements, but i do not think that i should be insulting her simply because she is a democrat and i am a republican. so i will retract my statement about "inklings of wisdom". now to move on, it appears that "cynthia who???" is having to make some apologies...from what i have read she is doing so although she does not seem to be apologizing for her "racial profiling" and "sexual harrasment" statements. nor does she seem to be backing down from her "i am always treated like this" statements. it would be interesting to see as much video as possible of her comings and goings to see if this were true. my personal opinion is that she wishes to view everything as "race" oriented. that way she can misconstrue what she wishes and conveniently use her "race platinum card". there are times when those who are considered "minorities" make "race" more of an issue then it really is. oh well, i think joe. q. public is getting sick of all these "race platinum cards" being flashed all over the place. i know that we are getting much wiser and are beginning to question the use of the "race card" more often.

CYNTHIA WHO??? (and the race platinums card) part 3

okay, so i did some homework last night (which is what i should have done in the first place). i stopped by several extremely reliable sources to see if i could get some up to date and reliable information on "cynthia who??". so thanks to hugh hewitt for helping me get what i need. he had a really great link that provided me with scads of information. no surprise there mr. hewitt's always been a very fair and reliable news source (no i don't know him personally just through his radio program and blog). anyways on to this short blog, because of this homework i need to do some things;
first, apologize to nancy palosi as i was wrong, evidently the remark she made about not making a big deal about the assault was directed at republicans not "cynthia who". the family is awake, i will have to finish later.

CYNTHIA WHO??? (and the race platinum card) part 2

if i am correct a smokescreen is used for two main purposes;
a) a diversion
b) a safe retreat
so the latest i have heard is that the democratic politician is now saying that there is "much ado about a hair dew". i would like to know who her democratic mentor is because whoever it is has taught her well in all the democratic techniques of smoke and mirrors...or in this case using a smokescreen. i know it's strange but nancy pelosi was right when she said, "i wouldn't make a big deal out of it." i believe she was talking to the democratic representative from georgia. if so then she should have followed the wisdom of pelosi (truth is stranger then fiction when pelosi begins to show inklings of wisdom). however, the democratic representative chose not to listen and now it appears she is attempting to do some backpedaling. is it possible that this democratic representative may have to try to save face? i honestly don't know, but as far as making much ado...
well;
a)the assaulted police officer didn't show up with the n.a.a.c.p., n.o.w. and several hollyweird types.
b)the assaulted police officer didn't accuse anyone of racial profiling and attempt to make that one of the central issues
c)the assaulted police officer didn't accuse anyone of improper touching and sexual harrassment (more non-existent issues)
d) the assaulted police officer didn't have a press conference with the msm.

so now comes the smoke screen...who is making a great clamor over this whole issue? the capitol police and their obsession with her new 'dew.
what is the real problem? those security pins (you know, like the one she didn't wear)
a simple apology would have gone a long, long way. hmm, it seems that's what the capitol police have done...apologized for not recognizing the democratic representative. it looks as if they have a great deal more humilty and courtesy then she does.
i must admit that i can understand her dilemna. i never have liked humble pie either and in this instance something about it's shoeleather taste would make it extremely unpleasant.

CYNTHIA WHO...??? (and the race platinum card) part 1

i had thought of titling this piece THE PROPER USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON COMMON, INSIGNIFICANT, SMALL PESTS but that would give the hollyweird blowhards and those useless and worthless organizations listed below an equivalency to something with some strength and value. so i couldn't do it in good conscience
besides, the desire for and abuse of power are only part of what this post is about.

well another democratic politician is getting some of the things she wanted when she ran for public office and was elected. notoriety, fame and power. i say this because her response to what is happening makes it obvious.
first, she attempts to circumvent a security measure because "she is in a hurry" to a meeting. now, being in a hurry is understandable,we have all been in situations when we were late getting somewhere important or needed to be somewhere quickly. but, i don't think we attempted to circumvent a security measure (avoid going through a metal detector is my understanding-from what i have heard this is standard practice of politicians with proper identification) or assault a police officer while being in a hurry .
second, she didn't have proper identification...in fact from what i have heard no identification was presented at all. instead she assumed that she was so well known among the police staff she would immediately be recognized. however, that was not the case (ouch that's gotta hurt the ego) instead the officer politely did his job. oh well, we all know what happens when we ass-u- me things.
third, she then proceeds to assault the officer. why? well according to her he was assaulting a "black female". i hope there is video of this to help clarify whether there was truly any "assault", "improper touching...etc, etc." done to her..."well mr. police officer, can't you see she was in a hurry? can't you see she is a big, important politician? mr. police officer don't you recognize her?" nevermind the fact that 535 other politicians go through there everyday and evidently 534 of them had their i.d.'s, or cooperated with law enforcement.
fourth, when charges for assaulting a police officer were/are brought against her what does/did she do?? she shows up with the n.a.a.c.p, n.o.w., her lawyer and various other "big guns". ahhh, all that power it's got to ffeeeeeel soooo goood knowing that at the snap of your fingers you can conjure up so much fire power in such a short time. so now she is not only playing the "race platinum card" but she is also trying to use her gender as an issue (not to mention her hollyweird "entertainment" friends putting in their two cents). again i say, ooooo the feel of all that power, power, POWER!!!
...to be continued work calls.

AM I A ROCKET SCIENTIST OR ARE THEY JUST MORONS? part 4a

so many issues...please allow me a little anecdote to begin my point.

the classroom day started as it usually did; the teacher (me) opened the door around 08:15ish so students could come in and prepare themselves for a day of teaching and learning (hopefully). they (the students) sat down after putting their backpacks and lunches away, sharpening their pencils and getting the needed papers to complete the morning assignment which was written on the board. the teacher (me again) did his best to greet students as they came in and work on organizing paperwork which needed to be filed or corrected (a never-ending job). at 08:30 the teacher closed the door to the classroom and then sat at his computer to take attendance. after attendance the teacher went up front to get the student's attention so the morning procedures could begin.
the children knew the procedures well; first would come prayer (i work at a private Christian school) then the pledges, then the weather and finally the calendar. after all this the teacher would then begin the lessons for the day. now, to the students the morning procedures went the same as usual. however, they didn't notice their teacher during the pledges ( i always stand behind the students as we all look at the flags-none of them are mexican). they didn't notice as their teacher struggled through the pledge of allegiance to the u.s. flag (not the mexican flag).
now this struggle wasn't because of lack of memory...the pledge is quite easy;
"i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands. one nation, under God, indivisible. with liberty and justice for all."
(for those in this country who do not know it).
it wasn't because i dont want to say the pledge..i am a citizen of the u.s. and this is my country and yes i would die to keep it safe.
it was because i had to keep myself from crying...you see the memory of a mexican flag hoisted above an upside down flag of the u.s. was still in my memory. the image of high school students so blatantly flaunting their hatred for this country was still in my memory. the thought of high-school principals and teachers excusing such behavior as "social invovlement"and part of their curriculum. the idea of giving those doing such actions, condoning such action and encouraging such actions a "guest worker" status and then allowing them to become citizens.
if the tears had been allowed to come they would have been tears of anger....of frustration. i know where my allegiance lies, and i know where their allegiances (the protestors and their supporters) do not lie. it is sickening that those i have elected don't care about anyone's allegiance...just what they believe to be politically expedient. i am assuming that those i have elected learned the pledge of allegiance when they were growing up, or that they are able to speak and understand english. so, perhaps (being politicians) the words that come out of their mouths have no value. perhaps they have forgotten or have not bothered to read the beginning of a rather important historical document

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

last time i checked this wasn't the preamble to the mexican constitution. note that it says "of the united states" not of mexico, or guatemala, or libya, or syria, or ireland, or iraq, but "the united states". this does not mean that when we have someone in our country (who is not form our country) that we do not attempt to extend these rights to them. however, we are a country of laws and when someone chooses to break those laws we "the people of the United States" have the right to revoke those rights. i think thats part of what"establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity," means. of course i could be wrong i am not a "con.-law" professor, or a lawyer, or a judge. just a citizen of the u.s.

UNTITLED

i am worried about my children's future. i have done my part to elect representatives that i had assumed would care about the future of our country. apparently they are not...now i can understand our worthless and selfish represenatative and senator (murray and cantwell) supporting illegal aliens, but not our president and many other republicans. they are granting amnesty to people who should not get it...i know they say it isn't but what do you call excusing a criminal act while the criminal is committing the crime? their very exsistence in this country is criminal and the only way to remedy that is for them not to be here....i am having a difficult time thinking clearly right now, the events of the past few days is very disturbing to me...don't the elected officials care about what's being done to our flag?? i need time to think it's all very...so many thoughts and emotions right now.

AM I A ROCKET SCIENTIST OR ARE THEY JUST MORONS? part 3

let me clarify two things-i am not a rocket scientist, nor do i believe those people who decided to "protest immigration reform" are morons (at least i hope they aren't) however, i will continue what i was posting earlier. so here goes,

as i was saying i had thought i might change the title of this post but have decided against it. my reasons are following;

1. i am assuming that someone making a statement as ridiculous as "i have friends that are illegal aliens but, they aren't criminals." is representational of that group.
2. it is obvious that those involved are totally clueless about what the real issues are
3. the msm is not reporting the truth about these "protests" but are choosing to ignore the true and obvious reasons that these "protestors" are gathering.
4. the msm is assuming (hoping) that we are morons by trying to make this a "racial issue" and attempting to make this comparable to the civil rights movement instituted by people such as martin luther king jr.
5. those involved in the "protests" will either believe the idiotic spins that the msm (#4 above) is attempting to put on their actions or will attempt to use their mindless spins to get what they want (a prime example is a certain female leader of the hispanic racial group "la raza").

AM I ROCKET SCIENTITST OR ARE THEY MORONS? part 2

last night i had debated whether i should change the title of this post. i had talked with a friend to ask if my logic was correct in saying that illegal aliens (immigrants) are criminals simply by being here. his answer was yes. i told him the title of this post and he said that calling people morons was insulting and that neither part was true. i.e. i am not a rocket scientist (which i whole heartedly agree), nor are those types of people who make absurd, ridiculous statements such as, "i have friends who are illegal aliens but, they are not criminals." morons. i gave that some thought and realized that i was being like people of a certain political affiliation that call our president, our commander in chief a moron simply because they dislike (hate) him so much. now, i do not want to be like them nor do i hate people that disagree with me or make incoherent statements (hey when i wake up at 02:00 in the morning i make incoherent statements also). however, i decided not to change the title of ths pos. in the following days i will explain why.

AM I A ROCKET SCIENTIST OR ARE THEY JUST MORONS? part 1

i went on the web to see if i could get a rather simple definition of illegal. here is what i found

illegal adj.
1. prohibited by law
2. prohibted by official rule

n.
an illegal alien

it seems like a pretty clear and simple defimition to me. if i perform an illegal act then i am doing something that is breaking the law.

you might ask what lead me to this query. the answer is quite simple; it was a statement i heard on the radio when the media was covering the "protests" in l. a. (you know the second capital of mexico). one of their extremely intelligent protestors made a statement which seemed at its' best, absurd. if i remember the statement correctly it was simply this, "i have friends that are illegal but they are not criminals." when i heard that i had to stop myself and go, "huh?" i wondered if i had a brain freeze or maybe i had heard the statement incorrectly. perhaps my car radio was malfunctioning. maybe there was some static at that precise moment when they were airing that comment. but, i had to keep driving and i wanted to keep listening so, i figured i could come back to that statement later.

well, i did come back to that statement later. i asked a friend if he had heard it and his response was yes. so eveidently there had been nothing wrong with my hearing, my brain or my car radio. well we both had a laugh about the statement and it's absurdity. but, i had to wonder what kind of person would make such a statement. after all, if i am an illegal alien then my very existence in the country makes me a criminal. at least i think it does. i confess that i do not understand all the subtle "nuances" (to use a kerry word) of the law. i am just a plain and simple school teacher that takes words at their face value and definition. i am not a rocket scientist.

TIRED...

i am tired...tired of the idiotic left and their idiotic arguments. tired of the idiocy of political correctness. i am finding that i would much rather be t.c then p.c.. in fact i don't want to be p.c. at all. what is t.c.? truly Christian...yes i am a Christian, or at least i try to be. one thing you'll find out about Christians is that they are quite aware that they are imperfect, incompetent, unable and so often don't have what it takes. it is this realization that is part of what brings a person to rely on Christ. it is half of the equation, but not the whole thing. a man must realize his need for something greater then himself in order to even begin the journey toward God. i often lie awake at night thinking of all my short comings. not that i am masochistic, it is not a pleasnt experience and often i find that i think of things or do other things to drive out those voices, but eventually i have to face them. i will only run away for a little while and then do what i can to deal with them. sometimes they are like so much bad music on the radio...that is to say they lack any substance, validity or truth. so i hvae to go through the sorting process to find those that are valid, truthful and substantive. otherwise i just turn off the radio...anyways got towork.

CIGARETTES, SECOND HAND SMOKE AND HOMOSEXUALITY part B

so now i will talk a little more about what i was discussing earlier...ok as i was saying if someone did even a little honest historical research they would find that way back when the good ole u.s.a. was much, much younger tobacco and its use (smoking, chewing) was touted (by some) as being beneficial to ones health. note that i say some. in the "early tobacco days" there were those who looked at it's use as something less then beneficial and certainly not glamorous or acceptable. usually they were conservative individuals and those who's religious leanings were right of center. in other words those from (to use a totally ambiguous leftist term) the religious right. now i did not live back then but it is possible that those who were in favor of tobacco, it's use and who promoted it's benefits found those against it's use to be amusing, funny, backwards...they may have possibly thought them to be close minded and to use a p.c. term of today "intolerant". why do i say this? because more then likely their reasons for objecting to the use of tobacco were based on their religious convictions. remember, back then they did not have the medical data and reseach that we have today. so it would seem logical to conclude that the main argument against tobacco and it's use may have been one based on that of morality (or religion if you choose). what is interesting is that those who objected to tobacco and it's use for religious/moral purposes (there had to be at least a few) back then have since been proven to be correct by science and medical studies. stick with me there's more to this...

CIGARETTES, SECOND HAND SMOKE AND HOMOSEXUALITY

funny how so many things come to me while driving in my car. this sunday i was driving to church and in the car in front of me were two ladies merrily puffing away on their cigarettes. as i watched them sucking away on their coughin' nails and blowing out their "evil, insiduous second hand smoke" (hey at least they were polite enough to stick their cigarettes out their partially opened windows when they weren't inhaling them). i began to wonder several things... "hmmm, i wonder how they got started with this addictive habit?, haven't they heard any of the anti-tobacco company...oops smoking commercials? don't they know the hazards of smoking? if so i wonder why they continue sucking in potentially lethal carcinogenic agents?' (possibly because it can turn into a very lucrative cash cow for them). my thoughts turned to the history of tobacco in this country. if anyone bothers to do even a little honest historical research they will find that tobacco, and smoking in particular were touted for it's/their medicinal purposes and how smoking was beneficial. of course now, a couple of hundred years later and after some scientific research we find that those ideas don't hold much water. in fact we would find them quite laughable if cigarettes and lung cancer weren't so serious. so what does all of this have to do with homosexuality?...hmmm lets see not much on the surface, but if we think about it a little we find that there might be more in common then homosexuals and advocates of "it's just an alternative lifestyle" want to admit. both issues deal with attitudes and trying to convince others that something that is unhealthy and unnatural is "ok", healthy, and quite natural. ...to be continued work calls.

THOUGHTS ON ST.PATRICKS DAY AND THE CHRISTMAS TREE WARS

as i was driving to work this morning i listen to some news. one of the features on the radio news was the yearly st. patrick's day parade in new york city. they talked about how people were wearing green and the excitement...they even interviewed people. hmmm...seems like a big event. i began thinking about the various ways that people celebrate this unofficial holiday in this country. you know, wearing green, visiting irish pubs, drinking green beer, playing irish music, having parades, etc.. i thought of all the little school children that would be wearing green and eating green frosted cookies and cupcakes. of all the shamrocks you would see in classroom windows and all the construction paper shamrocks....then it hit me, isn't this holiday something of a "religious" holiday. after all we are celebrating SAINT patrick and what he did for ireland. isn't he the patron SAINT of ireland? hmmm how could the atheists have allowe this to happen? then i remembered the idiocy of this past Christmas...you know; "holiday" trees not Christmas trees, not being allowed to wear red or green at schools, not being allowed to use red or green paper plates and napkins at your "winter" parties, the "happy holidays" or "seasons greetings" phrases that school children (and some store employees) were required to use. hmmm, i wonder what would happen if we applied this to st. patrick's day? that means children could not wear anything green this day, they could not eat anything green, employees and stores could not have anything green that even remotely hints at the holiday. there could not be any construction paper shamrocks or shamrocks in the windows... they would have to be called clovers (not shamrocks). there just seems to be no end to the "possibilities". an atheist could have a blast with this holiday. oooo, better not let the a.c.l.u. know about there obvious blunder. who knows we might be banned from driving green cars on march 17th every year.

SHADES OF GREY

here i am again and just as i had anticipated my wife and i are the only ones reading my blog. i was working on "the big three" and shall continue to do so...but, i want to give a little more thought to the subject before my next post about it. this post shall deal with some interesting news i heard from a friend. we got onto the subject of j.k. rowlings (author of the harry potter series) and my friend made the comment that she had profeesed Christianity (that is that she was a believer in Jesus Christ) in an interview (possibly on 60 minutes). i had assumed that my friend was joking but later that evening he assured me thst he had seen it on t.v.. this definitely gave me some "food for thought". i have done some unintentional research on j.k. rowlings when i began researching tolkien (you know j.r.r. tolkien of "the hobbit" and "the lord of the rings" fame). when the movies came out i began wondering (again) why some Christians view harry as morally bad/evil literature but l.o.t.r. (and the chronicles of narnia) as morally good literature. i had to ask myself if there really was a difference (YES THERE IS DEFINITELY). in order to find the answer i have begun doing research on tolkien and lewis. it turns out that researching c.s lewis and his chronicles series was quite easy. lewis, after all, was an atheist who became a believing Christian and because of his faith he wrote chronicles. tolkien however, is requiring a little more study. first of all tolkien did not necessarily write his series because of his faith but, you can see his faith, his moral and ethical belief system plainly reflected in his works. to say that l.o.t.r. is a Christian work in the same sense as chronicles is wrong. lewis put in intentional one to one correlations in the chronicles (aslan=Jesus, aslan's sacrifice and death=Jesus' sacrifice and death, etc.) but not so with tolkien's l.o.t.r. the l.o.t.r. series does not have the direct one to one correlations but it does strongly reflect Christian values (the values of the author)....once again i must stop due to time constraints and the necessity of sleep...but i shall return, i am enjoying seeing these thoughts processed, i.e. putting them down on paper is enjoyable and quite clarifying for me.

i am new at this and i do not even know if i have set up my blogspot properly. so i ask that you all please bear with me as i am learning. although i honestly doubt if i will get a great many readers. i haven't even set up my profile yet. getting this all together is going to take awhile. i am starting this for different reasons one of which is that my wife suggested it. she has a blog which i will try to visit everyday. anyways i wanted to see what a post on my blog site looked like.