Lovecats

And so I return to frivolous blogging about upcoming wedding.

Frivolous, perhaps, but also very important news because the wife and I have now secured a celebrant to legally marry us. No longer are we just having a smashing, dressy knees-up - we'll be legitimately in matrimony afterward.

However, the legitimacy of our wedding pales in comparison to the really, really big reveal: our celebrant also celebrants at pet weddings.  Ha! I can feel your envy from here.

This is exceptional news because it means that, once properly married ourselves, we might be able to snag a discount on getting our two cats hitched. More to the point, it also gives the chance to trial-run the service first, allowing us to fine-tune and perfect the ceremony prior to the cats' big day.

Yes, getting married primarily so the cats can have a smoother run for their own commitment is perfectly in keeping with the preferential treatment usually afforded to our fuzzy bundles of claws. Don't believe me? Check out the list:

1. If I were to stay out all night, slinking around in other people's backyards, I would get in trouble.
2. If I were to constantly whine about not being allowed out all night so that I could slink about in other people's backyards, I would get into trouble.
3. If I ever freak out and hide under the car, I will not be offered handfuls of my favourite food to coax me out. 
4. If I plucked at people's trousers and pleaded to be picked up, I would not be called 'adorable'.
5. I am not encouraged to evacuate my bowels in the garden.
6. I doubt very much that it will be tolerated when I am caught squirming and writhing on top of my girlfriend's shoes. (I fear this day will come very soon.)
7. Nobody else is allowed to lick his/her bum on the dining table and then have a sleep. 
8. The younger pud probably has more toys than me - and I have a lot of toys. 

Vicky is already a bit sad that the cats probably won't be able to attend our wedding, so I think having us attend theirs is a good fallback option.

Stop being so munted, will you?

Okay, so I haven't written anything in yonks, I know, and all of you are probably upset, Victoria, but the thing is, I have been well busy actually doing wedding preparation stuff - so damn busy that I haven't had time to actually think about any of it. It's all been, 'decide, decide, decide!' with no time for thought about repercussions. Anyway, I'm sure it will all work out okay in the end. That's how the world gets made, right?

But, although I was going to try really hard and not turn my blog into so many others and simply whine about things that I don't like, I just can't freaking help it today.  I am returning to blog about mind-bending numbskullery, not impending wedding shenanigans.

It seems that hundreds of bright sparks have decided that the devastating earthquake and tsunami that have killed thousands of Japanese were somehow deserved. Arsehats.

The main thrust of these complaints seem to be that because the Japanese military bombed an American naval base, completely innocent civilians deserve to die 70 years later. This is apparently "karma".

One of these pricks is a writer for Family Guy, though he has since apologised. Apparently it's only insensitive once over 201 people die.

On what neanderthal level do these nimrods' minds work? I cannot understand it in the slightest. Even viewing the obnoxious comments with a childish mindset - 'you hit me so I get to hit you back' - it doesn't make any sense.

Yes, it is true; the Japanese attacked the Pearl Harbor naval base. About 2,500 men were killed. That's a tragedy - there's no denying it, even when one considers that the majority of these men were naval officers, not civilians (though there were, of course, civilians as well). But here's the kicker: this happened in 1941. The current president of Japan wouldn't even be born for another 5 years.


Seventy years later, and the death toll of the Japanese earthquake/tsunami is expected to top the tens of thousands. I don't know the equivalent numbers of ex-military personnel aged over 85 who will be among those affected but I bet it's insignificant. 


If this is karma, it's the equivalent of repeatedly punching a little girl in the face because her grandfather cheated you out of a nickel. 


But, before any Indian theologians correct me and point out that karma can be a reward or payback in this life or the next, let's consider the numbers. 


When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, approximately 2,500 mostly military personnel were killed. That's awful.


The death toll from the earthquake and tsunami in Japan is likely to be at least four times that amount at over 10,000, mostly civilians. That's terrible. 


Perhaps for every death at Pearl Harbor, there were 4 Japanese involved: planning the attack, piloting the ships and flying the planes. Most of these men could then have been reborn as other Japanese. It's possible; I won't deny it. I don't really understand reincarnation, so I won't say it can't happen. 


Personally, I would have thought that any retribution that Americans owed the Japanese was delivered in full, with interest, and with an exceedingly generous return on August 6 and 9, 1945. When the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, up to 250,000 people died within the first 4 months. Thousands more would die from burns and radiation sickness in the years to come. In both cities, most of the dead were civilians. This is obscene. 


If karma really works like that - and I truly hope that it doesn't because what atrocious, vengeful hideousness that would be  - what the fuck does America have coming for it in the next four years? 


Smarten up, jerks. 


Matt. 


PS. I'd also like to point out that all the "research" I did for this blog on the unfortunate loss of life in all events, the dates at which they occurred, and the most basic understanding of karmic concepts took me about 4 minutes. It's mostly google and wikipedia. If you can use facebook - and some of you only barely can, I'll admit - you ought to be able to use those. Fuckwits.