"Evan made a link to a message board he was posting at regarding abortion. Then I looked at other topics on the forum. I noticed that Evan said in a topic regrading religion

'Religion provides explanation for existence which science has not been able to do. Whether it's true or not is disputable, but regardless it gives many a sense of reason to live. Some people simply can't comprehend that their lives are pointless.'

I agree with this statement. Interestingly, the topic was on social control, and giving people reasons for their existance is a powerful tool to command them. So its a very relevant point."

It's great to be quoted. It's a measure of greatness, of course. And I just realized that Cliff even borrowed my idea of a downloadable "mix tape."

Today I found out that my school is actually going to do a musical, which was originally planned to not occur. And unfortunately, I very reluctantly and inadvertently got a relatively major part. Only relatively, but it's a significant part nonetheless which I certainly would be happier without. If you don't know already, I have a general fear of the stage which I haven't quite yet resolved, and don't have any idea how I will. Not to mention the play is silly and borderline offensive- the setting is in Japan, supposedly, and uses such blatantly obvious cliches of general Asian culture to an extent that it could be deemed as racist.

Anyway, enough of that. I'm progressively improving, or at least practicing, my singing. I've learned three songs tonight, a record: Rufus Wainwright's "Instant Pleasure", Belle and Sebastian's "If You're Feeling Sinister", and a vague impression of Clinic's "The Second Line." I say vague impression because a) it has unintelligible lyrics which I transposed and b) it has electronica, bass, and distorted guitar elements which I can't play with a lone acoustic guitar. So basically for the entire song I'm playing a short guitar riff and picking two notes on a single string. Sounds sort of plain, but it's very fun to sing.

I've been reading into the various political alignments, and found something amusing. I visited capitalism.org, and I went through the basic walkthrough of the ideas; surprisingly, it sounded strikingly like anarchism, in the sense that it strongly supports the individual's rights. I found that the site represents laissez-faire (hands-off) capitalism, which is the moral doctrine, not the economic system. The thing which I found humorous is that they dislike anarchism, by the first definition which means chaos and havoc, not the doctrine, though they seem to think that's what it is. And we find that the anarchists dislike capitalism, yet confusion ensues when someone claims to be capitalist but is actually aligned with the laissez-faire sort. Strange how each of these words have dual meaning, and that these two are at odds with each other, but actually are back to back. We need to reestablish clear definitive lexicon for politics, so that those who believe in the same cause can actually recognize it and join forces.