A Letter to the Deceased

Dear Seung-Hui Cho,

I don't know you, nor you I and we are unlikely to have even met in this life you had until last Monday. If I could have met you somewhere between death and meeting God, I'd have liked to say a few things to you.

Christ taught us and His apostles:

And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me." Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, "Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?" And the King shall answer and say unto them, "Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not." Then shall they also answer him, saying, "Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?" Then shall he answer them, saying, "Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me." And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Matthew 25:32-46

Now that you have met our Glorious Father in Heaven upon your death and that of your college peers, has He asked you "Why do you kill me?"

I do not know your standing with God our Father, nor your ultimate for it is not mine to conjecture or know. However, I pray for you, for your actions are so tragic and against the life that God entrusted to you, and that which he entrusted to your fellow students and professors. The Lord made you, and He knows your innermost thoughts and being, indeed, He formed you in your mother's womb (Psalm 139). I am sorry that you never knew this, or if you knew it, it was only known to you intellectually and not spiritually.

Secondly, if people hurt you and it stems from the Evil one, surely should you not let it live? True, judgement is not yours to give, but it will also be their burden. Practice of Evil leads to Evil consuming the life, thus if anyone were against you and hurt you, they should have lived. Let people live with the wrongs that they have done, for judgment and punishment more powerful than what you can ever give shall fall upon them. Additionally, if they hurt you verbally, emotionally, the pain that you feel is long lasting, but the pain of a bullet that is life ending is briefer than what you feel. Better to leave it to God who is more just than we, and that they potentially get eternal fire and you eternal refuge, but you have done the more Evil act.

Did no one tell you? Or did you not listen with your heart and soul?

Abortion a Motherly Act?

Abortion a Motherly Act?
written by Judie Brown, American Life League

How strange it is for me to receive an editorial from The Times in Great Britain on the day after more than 30 people were gunned down at Virginia Tech. Strange because the title of the commentary is "Abortion: why it's the ultimate motherly act."

Imagine a woman writing about the murderous act of abortion as the motherly thing to do. How very disturbing; how very understandable in a world where so many women have surrendered their motherhood on the surgical table of an abortion mill.

The writer of this article, Caitlin Moran, is such a mother ... the mother of a dead child. Perhaps she cannot live with her choice and so she fantasizes about the "good deed" she performed.

Perhaps reality is too frightening for her. She writes, "If women are, by biology, commanded to host, shelter, nurture and protect life, why should they not be empowered to end life too?"

Moran has two living children and, she tells the reader, she aborted a third child last year. She says it was one of the least difficult decisions of her life. She says she was simply too tired to have a baby. She also says, "I didn't want another child, in the same way that I don't suddenly want to move to Canada or buy a horse."

Need I quote further? She is telling us that a child and his or her fate is on a par with buying a horse. How much more dehumanizing can you get? I guess, for those of us who live in Virginia, we know part of that answer: 34 years of murdering the innocent in utero was bound to have consequences.

Violence does beget violence.

Virginia Tech Shooting Tragedy

Copied&Pasted directly from Xanga Webpage.

I think that I may seem callous about the brief mention I made of the Virginia Tech shooting yesterday. I do care, and deeply. However at the time, I wasn't aware of the facts, of the death toll, and the situation, as I hadn't been online more than long enough to check my email and write a few sentences here on Xanga.

I think it is disgusting, disturbing, and absolutely horrible that anyone would consider opening fire on anyone else outside of a war zone (and even in war, I'd err on the side of diplomacy first). Personally, I want to keep my statements clean and precise. I don't want to make erroneous and global statements such as "this is happening with increasing frequency" because it's not. Nor do I want to say that "it's due to violent video games and crime dramas on the silver and small screens" because it's not. Nor do I want to say that we "should get rid of the second amendment because it leads to things like this;" while the ability to get guns does increase the likelihood of gun-related deaths, a large majority of those crimes are in poor neighborhoods, accidental shootings, and such. If I had time (i.e., did not have 2 10-page term papers due next week) I'd spout off statistics, show research articles, and the FBI's crime data for the last several years regarding violence, guns, and the decreasing number of gun violence among adolescents and young adults (18-24).

Perhaps one concern that resonates largely with me, is that of my fellow college students here at USC and across the nation: the lack of prompt and timely response of campus police and safety officials to assess the situation and lock the campus down earlier rather than later. USC is an open-campus. We do have gated entrances, but they don't close until late at night, and even then at least one gate is open 24 hours, 365 days because people need to get in and out of campus for various reasons (i.e., go home from 24hr library, go to the hospital, etc). We don't have safety officials checking each person who walks onto campus, that would be impossible. In most cases, this is just like any other college campus. We're relatively safe, and we're not actually located at the epicenter of South Central Los Angeles; we're closer to the nice and safer area with the sports areana, the Los Angeles Downtown business section (including a huge jewelry district), and museums. These businesses don't exist in the more rundown areas of the city.

It's all well and fine to lock down campus and sequester students in their dorm rooms, unless you're a commuter. There are more than 4,900 undergraduate commuters and nearly all graduate students here at USC are commuters as well from as far away as Chino or Newport Beach (2+ hours one-way trip). USC might think they have it all planned out, but I as a commuter have not been made aware of what they would do concerning my safety. I don't know where I would go. I often don't have more than $20 on me, so I could only feed myself for so long on campus if an emergency such as a shooting or an earthquake should occur while I am on campus. I have not been made aware of what provisions would be made for commuters in such circumstances. I'm not sure many other students who live on or near campus are aware themselves of the univeristy's plans for emergencies either.

What about other students? I'm guessing you feel and think along the same general lines?

~*~

Regarding Daniel's comment: I don't think something like this can be planned for, and I'd certainly swap staying in a dorm room waiting for a killer to go away for commuting on another LA freeway any day.

I had a jumble of thoughts in my mind this morning as I commuted to campus, and I just kept thinking that USC wouldn't bother to have thought of our safety yesterday if this tragedy had not occured. It was the same when Columbine occured. My teachers and principle did not care about my friends and I getting bullied day in and day out (I'm not exaggerating here) until after Columbine's shooting occured in 1998. By the time my teachers bothered to care, the damage was done. I had been depressed, I had been suicidal and no one gave a fuck, because its just "teasing" its just "fun and games." I understand the hindsight is 20/20. Let that not be your excuse.

Events like this cannot be planned for, but precautions should be taken before hand, not afterwards. It's foresight that would save us all from a lot of grief and pain

A quotation

" 'Miss Elizabeth Bennet!' repeated Miss Bingley. 'I am all atonishment. How long has she been such a favourite? - and pray when am I to wish you joy?'
'That is exactly the question which I [Mr. Darcy] expected you to ask. A lady's imagination is very rapid; it jumps from admiration to love, from love to matrimony in a moment. I knew you would be wishing me joy.'
'Nay, if you are so serious about it, I shall consider the matter as absolutely
settled. You will have a charming mother-in-law, indeed, and of course she
will be always at Pemberley with you.'
He listened to her with perfect indifference, while she chose to entertain herself in this manner, and as his composure convinced her that all was safe, her wit flowed long."

Go on and dream for a bit!

If your daydreams, your dreams, your desires could whisk you away from this present life to anywhere in the galaxy, to any point of time in the past or future (distant or near), any gender (male or female), any personality (icy or warm), &c., what would it be?

Unfortunately time travel is not possible, well not in its entirety.

Book reading is time travel.

I always remain female, although some features may change such as I would be less thin, and a little more rounded out, a few curves more ample in just the right places. While I am presently just fine with my body, it would not do in steel-and-bone corset at all. Thus imaginary adjustments are made. Same for the hair, if it is seen as straight, there are side corkscrew curls framing the face.

My character changes, more submissive than it is now, although it does have a bit of the spunk seen in Jane Eyre after she leaves Mr. Edward Rochester, or the fiery criticisms of Miss Elizabeth Bennet. Presently, while I know that I am pretty, I try to restrain that aspect. It shows: very little, if any makeup, sparse jewelry, hair simply pulled back unless braided and pinned. I wear jeans everywhere although I much prefer floor length skirts. Indeed I own very few dresses or skirts that allow even the slightest peek of my knees. I dislike tan skin, so while I am in the sun, it’s never for the purpose of browning and toasting me to a crunchy crisp. Hair is the natural dark brown, regardless of other’s idea that it’d look better in a lighter, dyed shade. Been there, done with that and not going back. Why? because a man’s flattery of my looks will get him nowhere at all. Indeed, if a male compliments me he’ll get spurned.

What’s lacking? Oh, time period. During 1850s deciding to go westward would be great, towards a free state or a territory. As would the late 1700s or the Regency era (i.e., Jane Austen’s novels). Although I do like the Renaissance (1400s-1500s) and Middle Ages (especially the 1100-1200s) I’d have to be among the highest of the court members if I were to ever think of entering that time period.

Do you indulge your imagination, or do you stifle it?

Oh! Indulge, indulge, and indulge. If I don’t it’d pester me until I fed it and let it run out of life.

Do you feed it with background information, or do you let it run with what ever information you have and let it starve out?

I feed it until it runs it’s natural course. I never stop it short. I have to find out how the story ends.

Do you let it invade your waking life and adopt aspects of your imagination in order to keep it alive, or do you keep it desperately underwraps?

I let it invade my waking life and adopt aspects of my imagination into my daily functions in order to keep it alive. I adopt manners of speech, usage of makeup increases, hair is played with, smile a bit more often, glance away from guys, a little more open to the idea of marriage overall, expectations of people and society change, &c.