Rising Son

Freedom of the Ride

It perhaps seems redundant to keep writing about my interest in riding motorcycles. But in the context of an autobiography, it's really does shed light into who I am.

Just about any biker will tell you that riding a motorcycle is perhaps the closest thing to freedom they can experience. I agree with that as well.

When I was a kid, during my step-child years, I wanted to run away. I actually attemped it when I was 16. But I had enough common-sense to pull me back. My mother actually ran away from home when she was 16, and never went back. When I showed up home again, she knew what happened and tried her best understand me.

In those years, I would frequently spend a lot of time walking for miles and miles on my own, venturing out into areas my family had only driven through. I had done this on bicycle too, roaming as far 40 miles out and spending almost the entire day, returning late at night.

Being alone in such unfamiliar territory caused me to reflect deeply into myself. When all you have is yourself, all you think about is yourself, from survival, to eating, and just relying entirely on your own faculties.

Jumping on a motorcycle and riding for miles out into countryside is perhaps an extension of that. I get away from everything else familiar to me, and rely upon myself. It helps me understand the person I am.

I suppose you could do this in a car too, but a car tends to provide you with a certain amount of protection. A motorcycle leaves you out in the open, just you against the elements. It also gives you that old familiar sense of freedom.

Freedom is a very important part of my ideological thinking. In my childhood, I had always wanted to run away and find a someplace to belong to. That's really what riding a motorcycle means to me.

Now days I belong to a riding club, but still get on my own sometimes. I do like riding with other riders though. Perhaps many of the folks I ride with have at least something in common with me. I may not wear the tattoos, or the jewelry piercings, but I do feel like I belong.

Labels: Childhood, Motorcycles, Philosophy

Posted: Friday, November 17, 2006
0 comments | Post a Comment | Perma Link

The War Against Junk Food

There is a war going on against the junk food industry. You've all probably heard about some of the battles, where people are trying to ban sodas from public schools, or making movies that scare people away from fast food.

Read my article entitled, "Fast Food Nation, Yeah So What?", where I dive into this some more.

I can't understand how people can forget history.

We had an all out ban on alcohol in the 1920's, dubbed "Prohibition". It caused to people to buy their alcohol underground, which in turn, caused organized crime to flourish. In the end, our country had to repeal the ban just to put an end to organized crime.

The fact is that you cannot stop people from getting the things they want.

I've come to believe that what junk food opponents are really against is corporate America. They hate business. They hate money. It's not the bad food they hate, it's that companies are making money selling it.

McDonald's takes a lot of heat for selling so many Big Macs. Of course we all know that eating Big Macs is not healthy. But what is a Big Mac anyways other than hamburger, bread, mayo, mustard, pickles, lettuce, and tomatoes?

You can go to a grocery store and buy hamburger meat, not the lean stuff, but the low-quality stuff. You can also buy hamburger buns there, and buy pickles, and lettuce, tomatoes, and everything else.

Hamburger meat, whether it's pure beef, or a mix of beef & pork, or even a mixture of meat, intestines, and tongues, is still high in cholesterol, still high in fat, and can still clog your arteries. Doens't matter if it's in the form of a Big Mac, or in the form of a casserole that you baked yourself.

So why aren't junk food opponents protesting moms making casseroles?

That's why I said, junk food opponents are not against junk food, they're against corporate America. That's all it is.

Labels: Junk Food, Philosophy, Politics

Posted: Wednesday, November 15, 2006
0 comments | Post a Comment | Perma Link

Why I Hate Animal Rights Groups

It all comes down to wacked ideology.

Animal rights groups like PETA, HSUS, et al, have this philosophy that anything having to do with mankind is inherently unnatural.

Dogs are essentially animals that man created, even cats as well. This is true. Centuries ago, perhaps as far back as the Ice Age, man was able to breed the wolf, and through a process of natural selection, kept the offspring that he found desirable. Eventually, man learned how breed these animals for specific traits that suited his needs.

That's where dogs of today came from.

But groups like PETA believe this is wrong, and the path to end all dog suffering lies in eliminating dogs. They feel that the reason why we have too many unwanted dogs is because we have a love affair with buying perfect puppies and paying a high price to get pure bred animals. And that's true we do. But PETA considers this to be animal suffering.

They point out certain tragedies like the high number of unwanted dogs euthanized in animal shelters as Man's fault for even having created the dog breeds. It was not normal for Nature to have domesticated dogs, and now the euthanization of dogs is Man's fault.

So their solution is to get rid of all the dogs. No dogs means no euthanasia, which means over population, which means no animal suffering.

PETA actually kills the dogs they "rescue". I wrote an article about this subject entitled, "Faces of Dog Death", which points out that PETA actually admits to killing EVERY dog and cat they get their hands on, at least in the State of North Carolina.

And people are donating money to PETA on the grounds that they're out to save animals?

PETA uses slick marketing campaigns that capitalize on current events. Recently, when Israel began shelling Lebanon in an attempt to kill Hezbollah terrorists, PETA sounded an alarm about the USA not allowing fleeing Americans to bring their dogs on board US Naval ships. They pleaded for people to donate money to their cause, but the truth is that there's nothing PETA could have done to convince the US Military to change its position. PETA could have used its resources to rescue those dogs, but they didn't. In effect, they seized upon an opportunity to collect more money for their campaign to eliminate the world of domestic animals.

PETA even made lots of noise about the dog tragedy going on in China, where the government is killing ALL medium to large dogs in an attempt to stamp out rabies. But PETA isn't doing anything to rescue these dogs. They're using the opportunity to collect donations.

I even wrote an article about the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a bill in Congress to punish anyone who commits harm and destruction to other people and property associated with pet shops, breeders, circuses, county fairs, and food processors. PETA signed on in opposition to this bill. Why? Isn't PETA against violence. Apparently not. They think it's ok to burn down a building as long as that building contributes to the perpetuation of domestic animals.

The bottom line is that Animal Rights groups are not friendly towards domesticated animals. They don't want to save them. If you're a dog owner, then PETA is not your friend.

If anything you, should support Animal Welfare groups. These are the rescues and charities that seek to help domestic animals, give them permanent homes, treat their illnesses, and feed them food.