I'm working on reorganizing the content on the site to make it easier to locate information.  Right now, for instance, doing a search on the word "France" shows entries in STFU, LOL, and World, to name a few.  I am looking at implementing a sectional scheme (where multiple categories exist under a single section) or completely reorganizing the current content topics in order to better isolate like information.  Ultimately, given the sporadic nature of my thought process, things may stay just the way they are, but I will take a serious look at other ways to organize content and will implement a change if I think it will truly assist in locating information more easily.  If there are suggestions, do feel free to pass them along.

I apologize for not updating the site over the last few days.  The ol' DSL has been down for the last two days and isn't going to be back up until this afternoon — if all goes well.  Since I don't have any type of dial-up Internet access, I've been greatly hindered from doing any updates.  Not only that, but I'll be quite busy with work for the next few days with some visitors from out of town, so I may not be able to do as many updates as I would normally.  I'll do my best to keep up with my normal schedule, though, since I know you're all "jonesing" for your next fix.

For those of you who have expressed some level of discontent with the default theme in use on xenogere / strange behavior /, you'll undoubtedly be quite pleased to learn that I am in fact working on a second theme to replace this one.  I must of course remind you that this was my first jaunt down the ol' web development road, so do feel free to give me a break if it seems a wee bit childish, underdeveloped, or otherwise lacking in the bells and whistles you've come to expect from other sites.  Rest assured that I've already grown tired of the "purple rage" currently assaulting your eyeballs when you visit.  Once the new theme is complete, I will turn on theme selection for registered users, so be sure to register.  It's free, it gives you access to additional features and content, and soon it will allow you to personalize the theme used to display this site.  Stay tuned for updates as things develop… OK, bad joke.

I found an article on Wired today about clothing designer Benetton's plans to weave radio frequency ID (RFID) chips into their clothing.  The claim is that this will reduce costs for the company, and they're right.  The issue is not whether Benetton will save money, though, but instead is whether or not people will appreciate having a tracking device implanted in their clothing when they buy it.  I suggest you read the article.  I believe you'll see my point.

Had the US Supreme Court not issued a last-minute stay, Texas would have carried out its 300th execution since the death penalty was reinstated by the state in 1982.  300?  I thought that number was wrong when I first saw it.  There have only been 835 executions in the whole United States since the US Supreme Court allowed capital punishment to resume in 1976.  If Texas accounts for more than one-third of all executions out of the whole country, that leaves little room for other states to even fit into the statistics.  Virginia is the second-highest state with only 87 deaths.  Where do I live?  Oh, Texas…

Although I was once a supporter of the death penalty, I have had much time to contemplate the immolation of convicts in the hopes that their deaths would sway someone else from committing a crime.  At this point, I must say that it's no longer acceptable.

A perfect example of "do as I say and not as I do," state-sponsored and executed murder must stop.  Let us not kid ourselves into thinking it can't be called murder simply because the state does it as punishment.  This is indeed murder, no matter what wrapping paper you put around it.

Taking a life is never acceptable, regardless of the circumstances.  I realize those who have suffered through some capital crime would argue that point with me, but hear me out before you rush to judgment.

We teach our children that murder is wrong.  We explain murder as the taking of one human life by one or more other humans.

Are you following?

Given the most basic definition of murder, how can it be said that capital punishment is not murder?  Because it is murder, we are expected to accept that the state has every right to kill people?

I can almost hear the resounding "yes" coming from death penalty proponents who believe it deters others from committing the heinous acts that lead the state to kill.  That logic is terribly flawed because you have assumed that those committing a crime intended to be caught and therefore would avoid that which would lead to the death penalty.

The flaw in that logic is that no one intends to get caught when they commit a crime.  In the heat of the moment, premeditated, temporary insanity, or criminally negligent murder is never committed by someone planning their crime around the punishment they will receive.  The only way a deterrent works is if they believe they will be caught and, if they are, what punishment will they receive.

Even supplied the assumption that someone believes they may be caught, very few of those willing to commit murder clearly understand the law well enough to know when homicide becomes a capital crime.  This is the second flaw in the logic.

It cannot be said that the death penalty is a deterrent, then, since we all should know better than to assume that people plan their crimes around the punishment.

More importantly, however, is the state-sponsored killing itself not a crime — clearly premeditated and acted out to the final detail.

At what point do we as human beings evolve beyond the "eye for an eye" mentality that makes us kill in response to truly offensive crimes?

We tell our children they cannot kill, but the state is allowed to do just that.

We tell our children that forgiveness is an absolute must in all things, yet the death penalty overrides forgiveness by making it clear that we only forgive when the crime isn't so offensive that we can't forgive.

We tell our children that revenge is wrong, yet we pride ourselves when we as victims get our final revenge by the death of the perpetrator.  The death penalty is the ultimate form of revenge.

Are we not killing someone in an attempt to say that killing someone is wrong?

Closure is what it's called, I believe.  If you truly receive closure by ensuring the death of another human being, then you are far from human yourself.

When do we stop state-sponsored killing?  It's barbaric.  It's also cruel and unusual punishment regardless of how you try to explain it away.  In my opinion, that makes it unconstitutional.

Oh, and it's permanent.

And that permanency is of the utmost concern, as we've seen many cases recently when those on death row have been exonerated and set free by new evidence which clearly showed they were not guilty.  Permanent solutions are only good if the system which dispatches them is infallible.

The criminal justice system is anything but infallible.

In the end, we as human beings must take responsibility for our actions and stop this horrific, unjustified, unwarranted murder by the state.  We must remind ourselves that we have just supported the very act that we were punishing the criminal for.

In the end, we must remind ourselves that we are better than that.

Napoleon Beazley, executed in Texas on May 28, 2002, for a murder committed when he was 17 years old, said, "…I'm sorry that it was something in me that caused all of this to happen to begin with.  Tonight we tell the world that there are no second chances in the eyes of justice.  Tonight, we tell our children that in some instances, in some cases, killing is right…  No one wins tonight.  No one gets closure.  No one walks away victorious."