Do Not Reigister with the Do Not Call Registry

Before I address the Do Not Call Registry I have a few other items I like to discuss.
Every week I attend the movie theater because I like motion pictures and I find it to be a small way I can relax at the end of the week. I also like to watch films as a mental exercise. I try to Objectively determine if the film is good, meaning whether or not it meets Objectivist standards; however, most films are not even remotely close to expressing Objectivist themes, so I usually try to rearrange the film or add to the film to make it better. In a way film provide me with enjoyment on two levels: (1) I find it relaxing (2) I find it to be a stimulating mental exercise.
This week the film I saw was Semi-Pro, which I give a whopping one star. Semi-Pro falls under the same category/genre of other Frat Pack comedies like Anchorman, Dodge Ball, Starsky & Hutch, Zoolander, Blades of Glory, Talladega Nights, 40 Year-Old Virgin, Knocked Up, etc. I find the majority of these Frat Pack comedies hysterical, but they are usually a hit or miss; there is never an in between or decent comedy. Semi-Pro was a miss for three major reasons. Firstly, the beginning was slow, the middle was slow, and the ending was at best a light jog. The reason Semi-Pro lagged was largely because much of the film was sappy and sentimental and only moderately funny. Sentimental and comedy also work against one another so it is difficult to incorporate both into a film. The reason Semi-Pro was too sentimental is because it took too much of a generic sports film approach, like Remember the Titans. In the beginning all the players are selfish; thus, the team never wins. However, the team members reform their ways, become selfless, and they win big. The win big at the end of the movie is actually a funny joke, but this generic sports idea of selflessness over selfishness is an annoying and disturbing fallacy. The film would have obviously been better if it poked fun at selfless teams, but it did not, it followed suit, so it was no good. The problem with selfless team members is that it is basically a lie, and just perpetuates bad life styles by adding to the monotonous droning demand of altruism is virtue. As I understand it everyone behaves selfishly anyway even when they say they are being altruistic; I just want people to realize that and embrace their selfishness because it is the more logical way to live one's life. In any event these players remain selfish because though they may pass the ball more they are really just behaving logically. People play sports to win; winning is the reward for controlling one's body well, and some people like disciplining their body to a sport. Therefore, by passing the ball the player is not being selfless he is just logically understanding the game. He sees that he can win if he gives the ball to a player closer to scoring a goal. Aside from lying Semi-Pro does not even show the team's alleged transformation from selfishness to selflessness. Not enough of their mistakes were shown before the transformation to contrast to their new playing ability. The second problem with Semi-Pro was the characters were not ridiculous enough. Frat Pack comedies always have over the top characters such as the entire news team in Anchorman, Ben Stiller and Rip Torn in Dodge Ball, Will Ferrell in Starsky & Hutch, etc. In Semi-Pro the somewhat ridiculous characters were Will Ferrell as Jackie Moon and Will Arnet as Lou Redwood; however, these characters did not even come remotely close to the ones I previously mentioned. The final problem with Semi-Pro concerned the female lead Maura Tierney as Lynn. In Anchorman, Christina Applegate as Veronica Corningstone played a huge role in the development of the plot. This is also true for Christine Taylor in Dodge Ball and Zoolander. Maura Tierney barely appeared in the film. He connection to the plot was limited. She was also in some strange sex scene with Woody Harrelson which did not develop the plot or comedy. The two highlights of the film, though only marginally funny, are the bear fight and the Flint Michigan Megabowl press conference.
Now the second order of business: my roommate moved out today leaving the dorm room all to me. I have actually had a series of roommates. My first roommate, I will call him Sven, I had in fall semester until the second week in spring semester when he moved down the hall into his friends room. This is not to say Sven and I did not get along well. In actuality Sven's philosophy was far closer to mine than anyone else's at my college. The only difference between Sven and I was that Sven appeared to be too concerned with power, which is actually just another form of dependency and self-loathing. My second roommate came from the room Sven was moving into. Sven's new room had Sven's friend and Sven's roommate, which I will call Stefan. Stefan moved into my room so Sven could move into his friends room. Stefan was my roommate from the second week of spring semester until today when he moved into his friend's room. Stefan's friend's roommate took a leave of absence leaving an empty spot for Stefan to move into. Thus, the empty spot was moved to my room. Stefan and I also got along well; however, our philosophies were far different; he was no Sven. Stefan is still trapped in the relativist altruistic philosophy. Sven and Stefan could have both moved out because they did not like me; I am actually not a friendly person, meaning I am not easy to become friends with. The reason for this is because after I graduated from high school and my girlfriend and I parted ways I really began to understand Objectivism. Therefore, when I arrived at college I was not interested in finding friends. I do not need friends like other people need friends. In high school I was like other people; I was self-loathing and I needed other people to affirm my exist or affirm I was a good person. After logically adjusting my life I now know I am a good person; therefore, I do not need other people to make me feel good about myself. I rationally like myself. In turn, I have increased the value of friendship by holding it to specific standards. Neither Sven nor Stefan nor anyone else at college thus far have met my standards, so I will not be friends with them. Friends are just icing on the cake. They are not necessary; however, they do make life more enjoyable. This is exactly why I hold such strict standards. If I lower my standards for certain people those people would not make me as happy as friends should. In any event, I now have my dorm room completely too myself. I have never liked the idea of colleges forcing multiple people to live in the same room because I think one should only live with people one likes. Of course I was willing to exchange this minor inconvenience for an education, but now it appears I have made out with a bargain. I do not have to pay extra money for a single room, there are no distractions aside from the ones I create, and I do not have to behave in such a way that equally shares ownership of the room with another individual. It is at my complete disposal, which actually only goes so far because the college owns it. I like to think that I am renting my room, now completely to myself. Therefore, I have some of the same ownership as someone who rents an apartment.
With the room news out of the way I can now address the horrible tyrannical problems with the Do Not Call Registry. Today I was sent an email from a relative of mine explaining that I should register with the Do Not Call Registry for cell phones. Apparently cell phone numbers are going "public" tomorrow. I was not aware they were secrets. Basically, people are registering their cell phones with the Do Not Call Registry before the numbers go public tomorrow and telemarketers can begin calling peoples' cell phones. Here is the problem with the Do Not Call Registry. The government, specifically the Federal Trade Commission, in accordance with an act from Congress has created a registry that people can sign. This registry is a list of numbers telemarketers are not allowed to call. If a telemarketer calls someone on the Do Not Call Registry the telemarketer can be fined by a federal court. I have chosen not to register for the Do Not Call Registry because I would be giving the government permission to initiate force against someone who has initiated no force against me. No one ever has the right to initiate force because all initiations of force or threats of violence are threats of murder, and no one has the right to illegitimately violate an individual's natural right to life. This is the fundamental problem going on here. By registering with the Do Not Call Registry one gives the government permission to violate an individual's natural right to life. Here is a clear explanation. You have signed the Do Not Call Registry, but a telemarketer calls you so you complain to the FTC. The FTC investigates brings the telemarketer to court and a fine is established. In other words, someone has to pay the government money, in addition to his taxes, because he called you. This telemarketer has initiated no force. He has not violated any of your natural rights. He called you on the phone. This is equivalent to someone speaking to you on the street, or even more similar your neighbor down the street, whom you have never met, calling you on the phone. It is the same thing; however, for telemarketers it is now a crime, but it is not a crime for them to speak to you on the street or for some stranger in your neighborhood to call you. However, this is not the major problem. In this hypothetical situation the telemarketer does not pay the fine. There is no reason for him to pay a fine. He has not violated any one's natural rights. He does not nothing to warrant any use of force against him. So he does not pay the fines. He will probably receive a few letters until the police arrive to investigate. Aside from the blue uniforms, the badge, and the guns the police are just people to use force against those that have used force against others. That is what the police are for; the legitimate use of violence. However, this individual has not initiated any force. The police should not be looking for him. In other words, these men are strangers trying to kidnap him. If he had initiated force it would be arrest, but he initiated no force so it is kidnapping because the police are initiating the force. It is the police who are using force illegitimately in this case. Consequently, this innocent individuals resists and tries to escape. The police try to subdue him. The individual fights back. Violence continues to escalate. The individual is trying to kill the police now because the police are trying to beat him or kill him. Remember every use of violence or force is the threat of murder. The individual is not at fault. He is being completely logical. Strange men are using force against him, possibly trying to severely injure him or kill him, so he is trying to kill them. He is using force legitimately as a counter to the initiation of force. Eventually the police shoot and kill this man because this man is rationally trying to kill them. A man is killed because he made a phone call. By registering with the Do Not Call Registry you give permission to the government to kill certain people who call you. Firstly, you do not have the right to give anyone the permission to initiate force against anyone else. No one has that right, but Congress gave that authority to you. This is not a reason to use it. To use it is irrational. Anyone registering with the Do Not Call Registry has not considered what it means. The Congressional Representatives who voted for this bill should be voted out for creating such an evil power for the people. However, this is still not the larger problem. Everything so far is certainly a problem and a very severe one at that, but there is a bigger more disgusting issue at work. The people being called by telemarketers are claiming to be victims. This is incredibly perverse. People who receive calls from telemarketers claim to be victims even though no one has violated their natural rights. It is like saying I am a victim because a stranger spoke to me on the street or someone I do not know called me. Even more disturbing is that the telemarketers are the actual victims; they are the ones who must pay cause their is a gun to their head. The telemarketers are the ones who are having their rights violated, but the people they call are the ones claiming to be victims. This would be like if I shot a man I don not know who talked to me on the street or called me on the phone, and then I claimed to be the victim. The whole situation is incredibly perverse, and the most disturbing thing is that this is not an isolated case. In different forms the government and people are making the same mistakes. I cannot claim that what I have just argued is completely my own. I originally heard this argument made by Stefan Molyneux on Freedomain Radio about a similar set of circumstances for a completely different issue.
There is a serious problem with the way the government operates. Unlike Stefan Molyneux I am not an Anarcho-Capitalist; I believe some incredibly limited form of government is necessary, but American government has been perverted. The reason for this perversion is utter irrationality. People are not using their reason. People are choosing to be ignorant, one of the greatest vice. In order to correct one's logical fallacies I would recommend listening to Freedomain Radio available as a free podcast. Stefan Molynuex also has several books, which I have not yet read, but from his radio show I would recommend them. I would also recommend Ayn Rand's Anthem, The Fountainhead, and Atlas Shrugged. In order to live happier lives, which involves correcting and limiting the government, one must live consciously. The mediums I recommended will help in understanding how to live consciously.