Yes, I have decided to go with the accidental title--the one of my invention--as much as I would like to feature an illustration of this asshat being thrown out with the garbage or to drop the f-bomb several times (in my series title and in my posts), I don't think I'm able to do either of those things here (at least not with my advertisers' rigid constraints, I don't think).  So, having said that, this will be the technical first of the "Chuck Norris is a Frickin' Moron" series.  Or #8, counting the previous entries responding to his stupid "articles" for World Net Daily (for those of you keeping score).  Speaking of which, here's his latest pathetic masturbatory exercise:

 

 

Yes, the title makes no sense upon first reading it.  No, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense later.  I mean, you find out why he's used the title--but it's still a crappy title.

 

Personally, I find the whole notion of Chuck Norris writing anything about the "truth" to be completely absurd.  I don't believe for one instant that he has ever been truly honest about anything--perhaps because I do not know him personally and cannot verify his various assertions and claims (especially the ones about himself).

 

This is not to say that Chuck Norris is a dirty liar--far from it.  Believe it or not, it's actually possible to lie without knowing it--and if memory serves from my philosphy class, that kind of lying is referred to as "lying to oneself."  Yes, you can lie to yourself.  While lying implies that you know the truth, but are purposefully obscuring it, lying to yourself is where you say something that you think you know is true, but have no evidence to prove that it's true.

 

In this sense, yes, everybody lies.  Even Ted Haggard, and his claim of being "cured" of his homosexuality.  I don't know Ted Haggard, so I cannot say for certain whether or not he is gay (especially since I'm of the opinion that one must declare/accept/embrace oneself as gay before actually being considered a part of the gay culture), but damn if he's not completely FUBAR...  "No, no, I wasn't having sex with that male prostitute!  I was just buying meth from him!"

 

But I digress.  It seems that the whole purpose of this stupid "article" is to further expound on Norris' mistaken opinion that the United States of America is a "Christian Nation" that needs the bible back in its publicly-funded courthouses and public schools, being established by white men who practiced varying forms of Christianity (who originated from Europe, whose people were predominantly Christian).  As I've stated before, this all means little to nothing these days, as not even varying Christian sects can uniformly agree with one another on what is morally acceptable.  AND, as I pointed out before, most of the much-lauded Founding Fathers were Deists, who did not believe that Jesus was god's son or incarnation.  And they only avoided expounding their beliefs in governmental affairs, because it was far more important to try to get everyone to work together to establish monarch-proof government and to resolve social issues--without fighting over something as trivial as whether or not Jesus was god's love-child.

 

And yet Norris is still adamantly and obstinately clinging to the desire to have his precious ten commandments posted in every government-funded building, which would give credence to the mistaken notion that Christianity is America's official religion.  Because, truthfully, America has no official religion!  And, as I've stated previously, it was never supposed to.  So what if the architect who was working on the U.S. Supreme Court building planned to have the ten commandments displayed?  Architects can plan a lot of things--that doesn't necessarily mean that all of those things will be done exactly as planned.  The client might change his or her mind and want a different design--and the architect will have to change course, as it were.  That's why architectural designs are set on paper--not stone--because layouts can be easily changed prior to construction.

 

But, in this "article," Norris mostly starts off griping about how "Lying has become so inbred in our country"--to which I wonder if he meant to say "ingrained" but wound up making a thoughtless freudian slip, which shamelessly makes light of the hot-button issue of incest.

 

He sounds off briefly about a farcical Jim Carrey film, some studies about people's lying habits, a class at Stanford in which deception is analyzed as a pattern of human behavior, and, to top it all off, Norris even has the audacity to compliment, quote and then slap down Oscar Wilde--who is one of my favorite playwrights of the early 20th century.  To imply that Mr. Wilde was immoral is a simple matter of ignorance and intolerance--and, in the past, yes, he was found guilty in the English courts of immorality for having a same-sex relationship with an aristocrat's son--but to dare to imply that Mr. Wilde was uncivil?  That is absolutely unfounded, Norris.  That is flat character assassination, and I'm not about to let anybody assassinate the characters of the writers I respect.  Now you've gone and pissed me off.

 

*interlocks fingers and cracks knuckles*

 

You honestly think that embracing Christianity or your brand of conservative "morality" makes someone "civil" and "truthful," Norris?

 

That's bullcrap, and you know it.  How can I say that it's bullcrap?

 

Because I have plenty of evidence to the contrary:

 

 

I challenge Norris--or, hell, anyone for that matter--to explain to me and the rest of the internet how any of these men, based on their actions, can possibly be both truthful and civil because of their religious beliefs.  Or I can save you the energy and say you can't.  Whatever.

 

Once again, in the end, Norris has more quotation than explanation.  Which, as I stated before, is just bad form.  Jesus is clearly not the "foundation" of American law--nowhere will you find the distinguished gentleman's name in either the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.  And so what if Washington prized honesty?  Very few people don't prize honesty, or at least they don't usually say otherwise publicly.  But, whether you like it or not, everybody lies--although not always purposefully.  And lying is not always as bad as Norris likes to think it is.

 

Would you tell your wife, for example, that, yes, the dress actually makes her look fat, if such is the case?

 

"Are you crazy?" I hear some of the married men in my roster of readers asking.

 

Why yes, good sirs.  Yes, I am.  I'm surprised it took you this long to notice.

 

*mischievous grin*

 

And, of course, most people lie because they simply don't know what the truth is.  And then they're just lying to themselves.  Which isn't necessarily bad, as it's one of the ways human beings cope with the strangeness of their existence.  And I don't think there's anything wrong with that--provided nobody gets hurt or killed as a result.  It's only when we isolate ourselves in our delusions until we completely demonize others to the point of overriding our empathetic tendencies and committing atrocities against them--atrocities that we would never wish upon those whom we care about--then there's something wrong.

 

So, no, readers, much as I loathe and despise him, I do not wish ill upon Chuck Norris.  I just think he's a frickin' moron--not simply because he is one of my sworn nemeses, but also because all of the evidence I've gathered so far points to that conclusion.