-William James
What does a misanthrope do for fun, or don't they have fun?
I think that we have fun. I have fun, anyway. But fun is another thing that is completely subjective. Most people consider getting drunk fun. I've never understood that, because there's no challenge in getting drunk. Anybody can do it. Why do something that just anyone can do? I'd rather find something to do that's creative, since not everyone can be creative. For me, the only times that I've been drunk has been when I've been depressed. I guess I used the alcohol to temporarily numb myself mentally. It was really stupid, though, because the next morning I was still depressed, but I also had to deal with an upset stomach and a pounding headache.
So what do you think of people who just get shit-faced for a good time?
It's their decision really. If their life is that empty that the void has to be filled with alcohol, I feel bad for them, but I'm just going to live my life. At the same time, though, it's different for people who physically crave the alcohol. That's a dependency or addiction, and it's not a choice. There's a difference. I would just hope that the people who are addicted to it can get help.
A few days ago you were talking about pet peeves when it comes to grammar, spelling, and speech. What were they again?
Well, the following words DON'T exist: "Gonna," "wuz," "prolly," and "cuz." You should try to refrain from starting sentences with "but" and "and," and for Christ's sake say "should have," "would have," and "could have," instead of "should of," "would of," and "could of." The last thing was that the word "than" and "then" CAN'T be interchanged. "Than" is to compare things.
Since you mentioned Christ, what are your thoughts on religion?
Organized religion is really a huge mistake. It helps to keep people from thinking for themselves, and it also helps to prevent people from questioning anything. You're not supposed to question faith, after all. I was confirmed as a Lutheran when I was younger, but I'm non-denominational now. I questioned too many things in the Bible, and it didn't go over well at church. I asked if you had to honor your father and mother if they abused you, and that didn't go over well. I wondered how it was possible that Judas Iscariot died two different ways in the Bible, and that didn't go over well. I got tired of it and simply left. I don't think that you need God in your life to be a good person, however. I've always tried to be a straight arrow and keep my nose clean, and I don't credit God, Jesus, or Mary for that.
Who gets the credit for your not being a bad person?
I've just never wanted to go to jail. I don't want to be the bitch for some fat guy named "Bubba".
With jail comes the whole death penalty thing. Being a misanthrope, would you support the death penalty?
I do. I actually believe in cruel and unusual punishment. If you have proof that some sick son-of-a-bitch molested a kid or raped and murdered someone, I think that you should make the perpetrator suffer. You've taken the life of someone who was a son, a daughter, a brother, a sister. Their lives are over from that point on. The murderers, molesters, or rapists should lose their rights to be treated in a civil fashion. I don't think the death penalty should be used as a deterrent, either. I think it should be a form of punishment.
What about those people who say that the death penalty is wrong because it kills?
Isn't it funny that you very rarely see an anti-death penalty person feel sorry for the victim? They always care about the murderer. Fuck them. I can only hope that they die a cruel death, too.
Is this anti-mainstream attitude of yours the whole reason that you have all the previous views on things like politics, sports, and music? It's kind of "punk" in a manner of speaking, isn't it?
Well, I wouldn't really put it that way, but the term "punk" has really become bastardized anymore. (See, again I'm back to discussing music.) I'm not really trying to get off topic here, but today you have bands such as Sum 41, Blink 182, Green Day, and Good Charlotte, who have become considered "punk". They're not punk. There are no elements of punk to their attitude. It's pop music, pure and simple. If you want punk, listen to T.S.O.L, Verbal Abuse, Minor Threat, or Dr. Know. Even the Sex Pistols. But these new so-called punk bands aren't punk. The punk movement was an attitude, not an image. Yet again, it goes back to style over substance - people want the look of a package and don't care anymore what's actually IN the package.
This goes back to the celebrity worshipping that you mentioned earlier?
Yeah. So many people think that celebrities are wonderful - but it's because of their image and not because of their substance. The sad fact is that too many celebrities don't have much substance. Think about it: We're talking about people who read scripts for the bulk of their lives. They really don't have to think for themselves. Then when they try to sound intelligent and offer their opinions on something, they sound like idiots. But they look good doing so, and that's what the public basis their value upon.
Can I ask if you have any celebrities in mind?
The ones I would think of first are people like Alec Baldwin, Sean Penn, Johnny Depp, George Clooney, Susan Sarandon, and Barbra Streisand. They're entertainers, yet they want to use their status to make believe that they're experts on public or foreign policy, or domestic social issues. I really admire Lars Ulrich, who in a recent statement said that he wouldn't comment on the current war in Iraq because he said that people shouldn't really listen to political statements from a rock drummer. Sure, he has his opinions on the war, but he didn't use his status to promote those views.