three days of debate...that has to be a record on this blog i must say.

i said earlier to scott, there is going to be no winner in this argument. every piece of an argument on this subject, has a counter argument. i know what scott is looking for, and I don't think anyone here is able to produce a sufficient amount evidence to support reasons to NOT legalize it. emperical data and statistics will not point out one or the other. those who made moves against prostitution did so from a moral and personal-belief. yes, amy's article's showed life being "not-so-hot" as a prostitute in the only state in which prostitution is legal. the exact opposite ocurrs in Amsterdam in the Netherlands at the woman's choice. she pays for her booth and charges her own prices and comes and goes as she pleases.

does this mean we should be more like the netherlands and relax our standards as a whole? not sure about that one there. our country should look at some things that the european nations do sponsor and maybe think of enacting some new standards. yet the United States in it's short history (relative to the world) has far exceeded most if not all expecations of the forefathers here. why is that? perhaps it's the staunch determinism, perhaps it's the rejected/exiled/small religious groups that came to practice their forms of religion, or perhaps we value different beliefs than they.

sorry for the digression of the topic there. to do a little role-playing/reversing the situation here; if someone legislator came up to me on the street and said: "Mr. Mack, do you think prostitution should be legal or illegal, why or why not?" I honestly say i could not say either way because EVERY ANSWER I GIVE COULD BE COUNTERED. yet, i think a better question would be: what EXACTLY do we gain by having it legal? this country has existed for many a century with it being illegal, why now all of sudden do we need/should make it legal? we've lived this long without having it, why do we really need to change now? does it further the advancement of our country in the world's eyes? does it advance our society as whole and make us a liberal and understanding people?

my two cents.

and i gladly admit defeat here. and know there are open areas to be ripped wide open...

i believe we're discussing an issue which several of us feel is an internal moral absolute. pushing an old lady down the stairs might be funny as all get out, but that doesn't mean you should do it. (thats from Chris Rock by the way). well, having casual sex, and especially having casual sex with someone for money, is something that for me is an internal moral absolute. i'm not trying to convert you to my way of seeing things. if you choose to make sex another product for sale, like popcorn at the movies or earplugs at a rock show, go ahead. if you choose to see it as something with meaning, to be saved for the confines of the marriage bed, go ahead.

what do you want as proof? do you want me to give you a sample of my soul so you can peer into it and try to fathom its depths?

scott, what the hell does your post to gabe mean? you asked amy why she feels its wrong. well gabe decided to try and explain why he feels its wrong. sometimes there's a fine line between devil's advocate and jackass...

*buzz buzz buzz*
goes the PENNDOT motorcycle saftey program's phone line
i wonder in my haze of thoughts
should this be all for naught?
then i realize the folly of my mind
and keep trying to get thru at a later time.

gabe, purchase yourself one (1) Iomega Zip Drive (preferably a 250), plug said zip drive into one said work machine. place said music from one said work machine onto a zip disk(s). transport zip disk(s) to home to said home machine. then rip onto cd from one said home machine cd burning device. you will then enjoy music all that much more.

ah, your last post at 3:54:18 restates some of my earlier thoughts, which is, aren't there really some victims of prostitution? the question is, would the harm done be lessened were it legal (ie, less prostitues beaten, it would perhaps make it harder for women with STDs to make it as a prostitute, married men who made the mistake of being with a prostitute would be less likely to infect their wives with a disease)...

i don't know. i just don't know.

the basis of the law is to protect us from harm at the hands of others. thats the social contract- you don't hurt those around you, and you get to enjoy the freedoms and liberties of society.

well, in our society, i feel there are things that are morally wrong that are legal, because if you choose to do them, you will not hurt others. you might harm yourself physically or psychologically, but that is up to your discretion.

the problem with legislating by morality is, who decides what is moral? what if the ruling powers in the government end up coming from a third party that feels that child pornography is morally acceptable, regardless of the harm it does to children. what if it is decided that it is morally wrong to publicly oppose the government, and anyone involved in a protest is thrown into jail for years? what if the government decides it is morally wrong to not wipe three times after a bowel movement? i mean, if the moral compass is the only thing used to determine what is "legally permissible", then we're all screwed.

are we arguing whether or not hate, or prostitution, is morally wrong? or are we discussing whether or not prostitution, or hate for that matter, should be criminal acts in our society, regardless of their morality?

ah, gabe, i hate to be the devil's advocate now, but you just changed the rules of the game. you went from hate to an "act of hate". there's a big difference.

a quote: "Perhaps because the genitalia are involved, people object to prostitution. In a free country people should be able to engage in behavior that others find immoral or objectionable as long as no force or fraud is involved. As an adult I feel confident that I can make my own moral judgments. For me it is not immoral to make other people feel good in a sexual way and receive payment for providing the service."

Scott, prostitution is for me a moral issue. I believe it to be morally wrong, the same way i feel murder to be wrong. Its partly due to my religious convictions, and partly due to my moral compass, my conscience. To me, it is black and white. I really don't know how to explain that to you. And i'm not saying you have to see it my way. Also, as stated before, I just don't know where I stand on the subject of legalizing prostitution. Is it harmful, and does it victimize the innocent? If so, then it should not be legalized.

scott, discussing the moral nature of prostitution with you is going to be a futile enterprise. one may as well try to convince jeffrey dahmer that eating dead bodies is bad.

the war on drugs is a criminal enterprise if ever there was one. our country locks up people for marijuana offenses, takes away everything they have, and in the prison system they certainly aren't learning how to blend back into society. shoot, they're likely to be providing slave labor for any number of large US corporations.

indie, i've heard people saying we'd create a large number of junkies if mary jane was legalized, but i think that the number of abusers would start to decrease. much like the way with alcohol. people still abuse much like others would abuse the drug, it would take time for people to realize, "eh, it's there, i might take a hit here or there." yup, you are right about putting it on the shelf, that's where regulation would come in, but can you imagine how many people would write books then and sell them on amazon to "Create Your Pot Farm"? look up home brewing, i'm sure there'd be TONS there.

I wonder if there are any sites out there that show how much the "war on drugs" costs america each year.

ah, nothing brings joy to my heart like trying to navigate jayna through downtown oakland on her cel-phone. i gave her faulty directions (said go through two stop-lights, but was mistaken becauset what i thought was the second stop-light was a stop sign. nevermind the fact that she's been with me half a dozen times when i drove into oakland, she still missed the turn). so she's mad at me to begin with for my bad directions... and she is not receptive to my questions of "what road are you on?"

argh

de-criminalization of marijuana for adults age 21 and over. or criminalization of alchohol. one or the other. but paul, you're right, the government can't keep marijuana from being grown all over the country when its illegal, so how can it hope to regulate and tax it?

prostitution, geez. if legalizing, and regulating, prostitution would reduce the risks of transmitting STD's and HIV, then an argument could be made. and again, like marijuana, what sense does it make for hard-core pornography and strip-clubs to be allowed, but not prostitution. personally, i would not support legalizing prostitution. perhaps an argument can be made that legalizing prostitution would make it easier for husbands to cheat on their wives, leading to broken marriages and innocent victims. course, the same argument could be used the other way, which is with prostitution illegal, a married man who "dates" one is likely to give his wife an STD, and there's an innocent victim.

when the only victim is yourself, it should not be the government's place to regulate. if you, as an individual, have a moral or religious objection to some activity, then abstain from it. legal prostitution would not be an invitation for all men to go find a brothel. maybe it would actually clean up some of our streets, get the skanks off them and into established whorehouses, where they would be given blood tests and screened for HIV, perhaps stopping the spread of disease. of course, the men who are stupid enough to have unprotected sex with a hooker now would probably be just as likely to have unprotected sex with an illegal hooker (one not operating in an approved brothel) if prostitution were legal.

i don't know, if anyone has some more insight on this, feel free to chime on. morally, i am opposed to prostitution. however, does that necessarily make it the government's job to make it illegal? after all, some people are morally opposed to a family praying at a restaurant, but i don't think the government should make that illegal.

victimless yes, but they are morally offensive to people. and let's face it, our country gets worked up over things such as this. femine movements would scream at the legalization of prostitution (eventho it's legal in nevada), which almost begs the question...why is it only legal there? as for marijuana, who knows why our country has not legalized it. perhaps it's because they can't regulate it easily. every person could grow their own crop, and have their own slice of heaven...if you like drugs that is. there is a fear of abuse of the drug, yet there is abuse of alcohol just as bad and has mind altering side-effects too. i see no problem in legalization of marijuana, there'd be a curve of abuse until people were past the novelty of it and then it would die out.

nor does real blood micah, nor does real blood.

i think i may start working on some of the zombie bubba script here soon...we need some inspiration...lemme know when you get bad taste :)

i've got- nothing to say. nothing to say.

well, practice went until midnight last night. the stage tech is going pretty badly- there should be about a half-dozen people doing stage-tech and instead there's two. i'll be helping out a lot, i think. i don't think that the show is ever going to run in under 2 and a half hours, i hope i'm wrong, but i think thats about how long its gonna stay. and oh yeah, fake blood does not wash off easily.

can we say that it's a shame i haven't listened to helmet in oh so very long? oooh, yes, it's a low down dirty shame!

CPR: hahahaha...riiiight
PPR: oh, one could only hope

now spinning: HELMET aftertaste

oh, don't move on yet! i just thought of something.

i'm not using the generic word "mainstream" because it means so little. i'm going to use the terms "Major Record Labels" and "Independent Labels". major labels put albums in all record stores, in wal-mart, in circuit city, in k-mart, on amazon. indie labels have limited distribution to record stores and sell mostly through catalogue or at shows.

at the major label, millions of dollars are poured into an album in the hopes that it will turn out a huge profit for the label. decisions are calculated in order that the widest profit margin may be attained.

at the indie label, thousands of dollars are spent on an album in the hopes that it will at least recoup its losses. decisions are made based on what's best for the band.


i'm not going to argue if either side is right or wrong, or why one is better than the other. you know where i stand. but that's the way it is, and thats one reason some people embrace the underground.

Ahhh yes the look back.

By Crom, Conan appreciates the look back too.

the official in charge of sacking the editor has been sacked.

Hmmmm, " I ask you..... Conan!, what are the best things in life?".... do any of you know the answer?

my apologies for censorship to jen and scott and micah.

i'm an ass. it was a bad attempt at trying to make things better, instead, only outraged the parties involved.

my deepest apologies.

allright, i think for about seven posts now i've been dis-avowing any sort of "underground sainthood" or "genre-worship". there are a lot of underground bands that suck. in fact, there's a lot! musically, the bands on the radio are pretty tight. you might not hear a lot of crazy stuff going on, but its solid at least. indie bands are held to the standards of the label they're on, with no radio expectations, so you're gonna come across a lot of indie bands who are not musically solid, who have a bad drummer, or a bad bass player, or a singer who cannot hit the right notes.

now i'll get started on the subject of getting rich......

hey scott, no need to remove your post which conveniently bolded my inflammatory remarks. if i was dumb enough to say something like that, you're allowed to point it out.

i will not be missing anything that i would enjoy. in re-reading that i realized it sounded bad. and that's the problem, i suppose, in this realm of who likes what, is its just as easy to say something off-hand without realizing you said it as it is to take offense at something which was not intended.

if one of my bands becomes popular, then good for them. i'll still listen to them. radiohead and pearl jam seem to be household names, and last time i checked i still listened to 'em. the fact is, most of the bands i listen to will never attain widespread popularity. if for some reason the sound i like got big, and stayed true, and the radio started to play it, then i'd start tuning in the radio.

however, it won't happen. it almost happened with the whole emo thing, but then the things about it that made it unique (angular second guitar parts, extended bridges, non-linear song structures) dissappeared and the songs that radio would consider "emo" are not much different from blink-182.

hmm. you know folks, i thought i was in the middle of this whole argument but i guess i really have nothing to do with anything. scott, you've got a lot of good points.

let me say, when i mention "truth of the human experience", i refer to the good and the bad. the occasional triumph of good vs evil. the survival of a person's ideals under pressure. and you know what? i think all of us listen to music because we enjoy it.

and in response to the brand-new post from jen, regarding artists who say "Please do not listen to my music...". well, i've heard what amounts to the exact opposite of that. "Please Please Please listen to my music! My record label spent millions marketing it and I did lots of photo shoots for Hit Parader and Spin, and gave a bunch of reviewers a lot of free stuff so they'd like me! Please Please Please listen to my music!"

so, if you want to get worked up because i avoid the mainstream, go ahead. i know what i like and i know i'm not missing anything. that said, if you, or a close personal friend, enjoys the mainstream, thats your perogative. i know i can sometimes come off as condescending, and my apologies if that has been the case.

i'm starting to think music is like politics...it's one of those things that shouldn't be discussed.

people are all different and look to different ways to express/involve/understand themselves. music is sometimes one way to do that. we all have strong feels towards the music we like. jen has fondness to hardcore and the like regardless of popularity etc., i (i can't speak for my other friends here) tend to go towards music that involves introspection and thought about what's going on around us, scott likes music that he enjoys, whether it be pop punk or carribean. would all of us agree to love each other's music? more than likely not. jen would you listen to buffet all week long? micah/gabe would you listen to godsmack all week long? scott would you listen to Sunny Day Real Estate or fugazi all week long? the answer is a resounding NO.

i find no joy in listening to dance music, i find a trying task to even come within an ear's shot of it, but that's MY taste and MY choice. i want to reiterate micah's one point too: "a good story, novel, or film can show us some truth of human existence, so too can a good song."

this debate could easily stem out from music even, to books, poems, movies, etc...all of which are part of our lives and make up our own individuality.

you know, my last two posts weren't really meant to start an argument. and this is very much a personal preference thing. also, i don't think i'm in the same boat as indiemo and lance, because frankly, i don't know what their boat is. i think indiemo is frustrated with the state of music. i think lance has hopes for a grand new musical "movement". all three of us have a tendency to be musical elitists.

now, as for your last 'personal preference' comment, and "revolving around genre", well, for me and mine, genre can take a hike. you want some examples, i'll list them. i don't instantly reject the mainstream, i just don't pay it much mind. as far as being an elitist goes, i guess thats where my mainstream media bias comes in. i like a band that puts out good records, doesn't play up the hype, and cares about their music. the guys on MTV, the bands with little twenty second teaser TV ads, the bands taking out pages in Rolling Stone to advertise themselves, that right there is not my thing.

if its your thing, thats fine. doesn't make either of us better than the other.

oh yeah, rocket from the crypt can make the dead get up and dance....

oh, and while i'm at it, musical movements are over-rated. by the time a new musical direction is so widespread and noticed that its become a 'movement' and then a 'fad', its probably barely worth paying attention to. its the bands doing something new, something that you've never heard before, they're the ones to watch. Nirvana when they put out Nevermind, that was where it was at. when Bush put out Sixteen Stone three years later, get off the bus, its too late.

yes gabe, i think your point is, to us, music is not just entertainment.

much like a good story, novel, or film can show us some truth of human existence, so too can a good song. and its that search for truth that is sometimes depressing, because the mainstream has little to offer. radio, rap-metal, etc, so much of what is pushed at us is nothing but a bunch of bullshit posturing- "I'm bad, I'll kick your face in and take your girl, I'm bad, did I mention I wear a scary mask, oh man I'm so bad".

i guess i have better luck finding things that suit my taste, because i've never felt like i've found all that there is to find. every week i hear of a new band, read interviews with a new band, hear a new band, or if i'm lucky, see a new band.

oh dear freakin' lord...this is probably one of the funniest things i've EVER read!!

http://www.yankthechain.com/mailvampire.html

LOL LOL LOL

the music scene is quite the tricky one. if you start out on the indie scene and you become popluar outside of there and become bigger, you get labeled a sell out. much like grunge was taken over by larger corporations, the indie scene is bound to have the same thing happen to it. let's face it, most of today's youth is looking for something to distinguish themselves from the next person...what better than music. and the indie/punk scene affords kids many different options. it has it's own fashion style and intricacies about it. think about how many shows you go to and you see the horn rimmed glasses, hoodies, dickie pants, uncombed hair and retro clothes? not to mention a lot of mainstream stores (i.e. gap, american eagle, etc) are making clothes in the same style. and most of those kids are probably kids of yuppy parents who think this is a way at getting back at their parents at some form of self expression. others do it because it's the style and get labeled a poseur, because they're not a true fan. i guess i could be considered a poseur too, i don't dress the part, but i like listening to the music and what it has to say about life. i don't particularly like listening to music with lots of "ooo baby baby, don't cha know i just wanna be with you." i like the substance to it.

and what will be the next movement? who knows, perhaps you won't like it. maybe it will be rap/bluegrass/hardcore. wow, that's a scary thought. but i think new wave came from punk, but thru time it evolved from punk influence to what it became....a phase in time that defined a generation of people. much like grunge defined a generation of people as well. as did music for 60's, 70's, etc. what will define the 00's? it's too early to tell and why should we care? let's just see what happens, maybe it'll be good.

hmm gabe. you mention the punk movement (started in the 70s, meant nothing in the 80s) and grunge (burned out on hype after big business took it over)... both the things you mentioned were trends in modern rock n roll. there are some meaningful things going on in the world, and there's certainly enough worthy causes to get behind.

question: how many punks does it take to change a light bulb?
answer: none- punks can't change anything.

ok, so i have to tell everyone about this dream from last night. i'm not sure if everyone knows what a bubba is or not. but a bubba is the stereotypical southern slob. with that said...let us begin.

so i was living in some small southern community...seemed like it would be kentucky, why, i have no idea. so there was talk of zombie bubba's attacking the townspeople. i was outside on the cordless phone talking with the president of the United States. a lil diaglogue if you will:

president: you know it's unusual for the bubba's to be attacking. usually they're friendly creatures.
me: yup, i've never heard of them attacking before.
president: well, that's ok, i'll be down and i'll shoot myself some a couple. help yins out.
me: well, i'm not going to kill any unless me or my family are threatened.

yeah, so we say goodbye and look forward getting together and having a drink or two. and by this time i'm in the house and watching tv and then my wife screams. it seems that one of the zombie bubbas have started to hit the door with it's big ol' meaty palm. which is quite sizeable...imagine about a 1/4 of the door. sooo, i end up getting mr zombie bubba off my porch and notice there are more zombie's digging up my front lawn and a man in a pink medical scrub outfit comes up out of one of the holes. it is, believe it or not, andy dick.

Andy Dick: You will NOT destroy my army of bubbaaaaaas!!!

riiight. so that was pretty much it. odd yes/no?

well practice last night went smoother, got out at 11:20. we ran the thing in under three hours, which is a plus, and i was in costume (along with one or two other people) and that made it a little more fun. not that it isn't fun, it just made it more fun.

i think the harlots are going to take a crack at getting a few songs on an area comp by 814 records, and we're gonna swap shows with the mad cows (from punxsy). keep it real.

paul, if hot snakes or the sultans (john reis from RFTC current side-bands) tour again, and they hit philly or DC again, whatsay we be there? the sultans rock and i'm getting the hot snakes album any day now.

chuck norris ain't riding a bike in the two thousand and two. well, he'll be riding his mountain bike, but not a motorcycle. chuck norris is getting out of debt with his karate-chop fist of minimal-spending.

cuckoo's nest practice ran until 11:45 last night. the set is half built. its a two hour show and it took over 3 to run it last night. no light or sound cues were set last night, and that was supposed to be the whole point of last night's practice. but i think its going to come together.

bring me the head, yeah, don't bring the heart. now spinning: RFTC - group sounds.

guys, you might relate to this- my shoes have passed into the dead zone. these nights of practice, a couple times i've had my shoes on from 7 in the morning until 11 at night... and they are not happy. their foul shoe odor is now perceptable even when they are on my feet. i'm going to buy odor eaters and dr scholl's powder, but i do not have high hopes. which is a shame, cause they haven't started falling apart yet.

we took chris out riding last night and he did darn good for only riding his second time ever. a lil work on getting the feel of the clutch and some down shifting work and he'll be ready for some road experience.

i got on his bike last night as well and it just felt so good, feeling the acceleration of the bike, wind whipping around me, and the unbelievable feeling of freedom that you get on a motorcycle. mmm, april can't come soon enough!

*sigh* you can't beat it....but darn it...you'd like to

i just saw the IMDB page for the guy that played lurch on the addams family TV show. he went to school for directing and film-making and ended up as an actor. here's an excerpt from his mini-biography. perhaps, if you are of the same inclination as I am, you too will laugh out loud.

He was "discovered" as an actor at the corner of Hollywood and Vine in Los Angeles by a lady who had abandoned her car in the middle of the street, calling after him: "We need you for a movie!". The movie was 'Sergeant Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band". The turning point in his acting career however was 'Ewoks II', a George Lucas film.

how uncanny! because it was 'Ewoks I' that was the turning point of Warwick Davis' acting career!

mm, i don't believe that was a coen brother's movie. i think you're mistaken gabe.

oh yeah, go see THE MAN WHO WASN'T THERE at westwood plaza theater immediately!!! best movie i've seen in a long time (and i'm not even comparing it to Lord of the Rings, which was a good movie that failed to transcend its INCREDIBLE source). i'm so blasted busy this week with the play, but ~hopefully~ westwood theater will still have it next week so i can go see it once or twice more. the coen brothers can do no wrong.

its always painful to watch the Steeler's blow a big game. here's my analysis:

1. special teams lost the game. take back the FG block and the punt return, and you subtract between 4 and 14 points off the board. Steeler's win.

2. Kordell didn't win the game. He tried too hard at the end, forced it like back in the old days, and threw two bum interceptions in the final four minutes. He really matured this year, but the great ones thrive under pressure in the final five minutes. Kordell performed less like Joe Montana, and more like Neil O'donnell. I think he has the potential for greatness, and I think in the AFC Championship game next year, he will prove it.

3. The offensive play calling was piss-poor. In the first half, I was reduced to a babbling mass of insanity as they tried to pitch it to Jerome Bettis and run him around the ends. No. That doesn't fly. Run Amos Z. around the ends, and keep Bettis between the tackles. Mike Mularkey was a fantastic offensive coordinator all year, but today he really blew it. I think they got "Bus-itis", and forgot about the talent and speed of Amos Z.

now playing: helmet, aftertaste. man does this album kick my butt. CPR: 0% (i'm typing this). PPR: 100% (as i study my cues for cuckoo's nest). HHDG [Hopeful High Duckpin Game]: 178 (i think i have it in me, and last week i really picked it up as the night went on, so i'm hoping to start out at a higher level than i started last week).