Chris Kyle Should Not Have His Own Holiday

In case you haven't heard, Texas Governor Greg Abbott sent out a tweet that said, "I have declared February 2 to be Chris Kyle Day in Texas." If you've been living under a rock, Chris Kyle is the American soldier who the American Sniper film is based on. Kyle accumulated 160 confirmed kills out of 255 probable kills during his illustrious career with the Navy SEALs. Get your hate speech and rhetoric ready internet, because I'm gonna tell you why this was an ill-conceived idea.

I will preface this by saying that I am not anti-war or anti-military. I think war has its place when it is absolutely unavoidable. I respect the men and women who fight for our country. They're both American heroes and simultaneously just doing their job. I don't mean that to undermine their duty or bravery, but that will be further explained later in this post. I am also from Texas. So while the rest of the internet will surely have people on a particular side of the political fence that will say Texas is foolish and immoral for creating such a holiday, very few will be like me and residing inside of it.

Chris Kyle is an American hero. He did an excellent job as a Navy SEAL during our war with Iraq and he should be commended for that. Which he has been, by the military themselves, The New York Times for American Sniper's 37-week run on their Best Sellers List, and by Hollywood through the film that was made about his life. Not only has he been remembered, he's been glorified more than any member of the military ever was. I'm not here to argue for or against if he's earned any of his previous accolades. However, I do not believe he should have a holiday, in Texas or otherwise.

First and foremost, he's a killer. I do not say that to take away credit for the accomplishments he's made. I've stated my thoughts about the job he did in Iraq, but you cannot take only the good side of what he did and ignore the ugly parts. If you give a man a holiday for being an exceptional sniper, you're also giving a holiday to a man for being an extraordinary murderer. For all the lives he saved, he also took some away. The reason he murdered people is still relevant. That's not me painting the picture the way I want it to be seen, as some would say. It's seeing the entire canvas for what it truly is.

We have a Memorial Day for our fallen soldiers. That's not to say that some members of the military don't deserve a certain amount of unique praise, which they do receive from the military themselves and by those close to them. Hell, if they're good enough they may even get awarded by the President of the United States. There is no shortage of praise given for those men and women who put their lives on the line, but we don't have enough days in the year to handpick out every soldier who did a great job and give them all holidays. Is Chris Kyle more special to us than the 3,493 Medal of Honor recipients we've awarded for their dire moments of courage and bravery during battle? No, he's not better than them. We shouldn't put him singly on his own pedestal simply because he has a movie about his life. He was a great man, like many who came before him, and he should be honored on Memorial Day with them.

With that in mind, if Chris Kyle deserves to have his own holiday, why was Johann “Hans” Breyer arrested in Philadelphia and held without bail until he died in a hospital bed awaiting his extradition hearing for Germany? Both of these men were merely soldiers during a war performing orders handed down to them. Both men were mass murderers and national heroes to their own countries during the time. The one difference is that Johann Breyer would have been killed by Hitler for disobeying his orders if he didn't act them out. So we live in a country that simultaneously sends the message that if you're a fantastic soldier who kills a lot of people for another country during a war, we'll seek out war crimes against you and ship you off to whatever country wants your head. However, if you do the same job for us, you deserve a movie deal, a New York Times best selling book, and your own holiday? Talk about mixed signals.

Eat What You Kill

I am not a hunter. I have never been hunting. That is important for me to preface this post with that statement, because I don't want you to be under the impression that I have a dog in the fight. I believe in big game hunting, under the right conditions. 

The liberal media and it's activist zealots will have you believe that every animal is sacred. I disagree. Unless you are a vegan, you eat or have eaten beef. Do you know where your beef comes from? Do you worry about the lives of those animals, or only the majestic animals that society deems are inappropriate for us to kill?

The hamburger you ate for dinner started out on a ranch. If he was in Texas or Arizona, some of his herd probably died from the heat. If he was in the more northern states, some of them froze to death instead. If they survived the temperatures, they were afforded the luxury of getting branded with a fire iron, getting their testicles ripped away, and their horns were cut or burned off. 

Once their beautiful life on the ranch has come to an end, they get sent to a feedlot. Feedlots are these wonderlands of pure enjoyment, where the cows frolic in the feces-filled holding pens and get chronic digestive problems from the foods they're given to fatten up. The air is always fresh with ammonia and methane due to the amount of manure. We give them drugs though, to keep them breathing.

These are the animals society has deemed it okay for us to eat. Not only that, these animals have to be raised in these conditions and fed to us in this manner if we don't all intend to hunt and we wish to sustain ourselves on meat. There are simply too many people with too high demand of beef for us to raise the amount of cows we need in a hospitable environment. However, there isn't a public outcry for the thousands of these cows every year that live an existence of torture and abuse. We instead focus on big game hunters who kill one lion in Africa and take a picture with it. 

First and foremost, the African lion is not endangered. That is a common misconception. The Obama administration has recently proposed listing the animal as threatened. If it is listed as threatened, it will still be legal to kill those lions even in America with the proper permits, but I'm not here to argue semantics. If it were to be listed as endangered or threatened and outlawed, of course I'm all for preservation of the species, but we aren't there yet. 

I don't believe in hunting these animals purely as a trophy. However, I do believe that as long as you eat the meat and it isn't illegal to hunt, I don't care what animal you kill. Why do we treat these predators as a majestic animal who deserve a more dignified death than the deer, cows, or pigs we kill regularly? I think the public has a delusion that the majority of the animals in the wild live a full life to begin with. While a bullet in the head is not the most humane way to go, the savage lifestyle of living as a free-range animal predominantly lends itself to dying either by starvation, weather conditions, or being eaten alive. They don't usually grow old and die like we assume. Darwinism is the most evident in these species. 

What is wrong with your balls?

The NFL has been in the news a lot this season. I already wrote about the Ray Rice issue. There are a ton of pressing issues in the league right now. A lot of players have addiction issue, there are PED’s being used, and more and more domestic violence claims unsettled. With all of this going on the powers that be are attacking the Patriots for deflating footballs during the game.

During the AFC championship game on Sunday January 18, 2015, between New England Patriots and Indianapolis Colts, the New England Patriots used balls that were under-inflated. They were not inflated to the league minimum. When a ball is under inflated it gives the players a better grip on the ball. The quarterback can get a better grip for passing the ball and the receivers can catch the ball better. From where I sit this did not cost the Indianapolis Colts the game.

The referee’s inspected the balls at half time. They noticed the balls were under-inflated and replaced them with balls that met the requirement. After this happened the New England Patriots still outscored the Indianapolis Colts 28-0 in the second half. If you are looking at throwing a game out because of an issue that could have impacted the game, then look at how the game went after the issue was noticed.

The other issue I have with this is people calling for a ban from the Super Bowl for the Patriots. You have got to be fucking kidding me. What happens when you do this? Do you just award the Seattle Seahawks the game? Do you make them champions on the count of forfeit? Do you put in the Colts who, after the balls were discovered as being altered, didn’t play well enough to win the game? If you want to fine the Patriots, suspend some people, take away draft pick, or all three then that is fine. Just think about things before you start handing out ridiculous punishments. Although it wouldn’t be the first time the NFL dropped the ball if they get this one wrong too. However, this is just the opinion of one asshole. It won’t amount to much in the long haul. It makes me feel better to get it off my chest though.