23 & Hurricanes
On Saturday I turned 23. It was a great day. We went up with some friends to do some horseback riding in Big Bear (which was great) got some jerky from the "House of Jerky" in the Village up there, then came back and had a BBQ in the TriCity Park in Placentia/Fullerton (I don't know the third city...). It was a great day. And during the drive up to Big Bear I finally got a chance to release a rant about the situation in New Orleans in such a way that I was able to come to some firm conclusions...which I now feel able to put down in words here.
Katrina. She caused some real problems. Its tragic, and aside from the serius, obvious pains that it inflicted (deaths and injuries) it cannot be overstated that losing your home is a hard thing to live through. I lived in the Philippines, remember--I know what real storms can do. California's big record breaking 30 odd inches of rain in a year is what falls in the first hour or so of the typhoons back home. We lived, generally, in better areas, and we still had to leave our home once for a storm--though we didn't lose everything, what we did lose was hard to let go of, and the aftermath was definately no fun. I say all this to ensure that its clear...I understand the plight and have sympathy for those who have lost, some much more than simply everything they own, but even loved ones. Its a devastating thing to survive.
However...that doesn't mean that most of the skepticism is warrented. Here are some facts that people seem to be overlooking as they respond to the devastation of Katrina's wake:
1. Storms are unpredictable...and we had no way of knowing this would be the way it was till it was too late. Predictions don't count as a sure thing.
2. We're at war--whether you like it or not, that means that the nation's resources have many different needs to meet. This means priorities and sometimes things don't work out the most convenient way we hope they will. This means that we may chose not to spend money in some areas that seem like less of a problem and we have to hope, to some extent, that that's the right decision. It would irresponsible to spend money that needs to be spent elsewhere on preparing for the possibility of a natural disaster which we cannot control. In otherwords, if Bush had ordered everything to be ready to rush to New Orleans and Katrina had simply died out or hit Mexico or whatever, we would today be complaining about his tendecy to over-react or some such nonsense, and we would be saying he should be focusing on the problems we were obsessing about last week. We cannot do everything all the time. Its just a fact.
3. Even in a first world nation, its unreasonable to expect the devastation of this kind of scenario to be resolved. It still takes time, even here, to fix a city that's literally uninhabitable presently.
4. Like it or not, people stayed in New Orleans. They were warned. Even they didn't expect it to be as bad as it was...and that's just the gamble they took. That doesn't mean they aren't a priority, but that doesn't reflect on the government. There are still people refusing to leave.
5. New Orleans is hardly Maybury. People that are shocked by the evil that took place in the absence of authority need to wake up--its not exactly a surprise. If something crazy turned Las Vegas into chaos and anarchy, would you expect a bunch of upstanding citizens, or a rash of crime harming even the other affected citizens of Las Vegas? You're fooling yourself if you expect a city that is as dirty as New Orleans of Vegas to behave itself when the authorities cannot enforce the law.
6. The President is not the Mayor, neither is he the Governor. The State authority exists for a reason, and until certain steps have been taken, it would be entirely inappropriate for the President to impose his authority over that of the still standing Mayor and Governor. If they want help, they can ask...but he cannot just butt in, otherwise a line has been crossed and Pandora's box opened. The mayor of New Orleans needs to look in the mirror, or ask for help and relinquish power--but he needs to stop whining about the lack of Federal presence in his city.
7. Finally, what should be drastically clear in this situation is that we have created a poor society in this nation that are completely helpless when they are not receiving aid from the government. That's not to say that aid isn't needed...but in other nations with poor (the Philippines) and our own past, the poor know that they need to be able to fend for themselves. They create solutions--even when they don't permanently fix the problems, they don't wait for the rich person or the government to come along and help--for many reasons. The government moves slowly. The rich don't give things away for free. But the poor in New Orleans seem helpless. We have made them that way...so now they really don't know what to do with themselves. The great society the President references that rises from the rubble isn't what we're seeing in New Orleans...I could be wrong--perhaps once the initial grief has passed they will dig in and work to make their city great once again...but right now, we're seeing the result of a society that has been taught that the government is the only one responsible for their well-being. Its a bad thing.
So...those are my thoughts. God be with them...this is a hard time and I do pray for them.
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Liberty and Equality
I am teaching a high school US History class. Its a new challenge. Afterall, by the time you get to high school, either you hate school or you love it. In college things may change...I get one day a week with them and its very unlikely anything is going to miraculously open up as a result of my personal fascination with the subject. But I'm trying.Today we looked at the Declaration of Independence. Such a masterful document. So well worded. And, for my purposes, perfect for breaking down one of the questions I want my enrichment class to struggle with.I have asked them if it was acceptable for colonists to break from a mother country. I asked what the acceptable terms would be. I asked if there was a reason that the mother country should refuse to allow the colonists to decide for themselves their own future.But mostly, I asked about the nature of government. They all seemed perfectly convinced that power is the basis of most governments--in fact they didn't even consider any other way. When I even asked them about the current government of their own nation, they dismissed that as also being one of the same--governments of power, withholding and threatening.So I talked them through the Declaration of Independence. I made them examine the ideas behind the principle that all men are created equal. Initially they interpretted it as being the same as saying all men are equal, a lie our society instills in children from their first educations. Eventually they saw that it means that all men, rich or poor, have equality in certain aspects--though obviously not all. ALL men have certain rights. Specifically, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Liberty being the most interesting of those three to these kids.What is Liberty? Are we actually free to do whatever we want? I told them, yes, we are. Anyone who says differently is opposed to the right to liberty common to all men. However, that doesn't mean that our actions have no consequences. Nor does it mean that there are no laws. Liberty refers to your right, as a free person, to chose. You can chose to make something of yourself, or to live in a van down by the river. You can chose to abide by the law, or disobey the law. The choice is yours...and so is the responsibility for the consequences that come with the choices you make. A free society founded on the belief that men must have responsibility for the rights that they enjoy. How far we have come. Then class was over.
I love US History.
I am teaching a high school US History class. Its a new challenge. Afterall, by the time you get to high school, either you hate school or you love it. In college things may change...I get one day a week with them and its very unlikely anything is going to miraculously open up as a result of my personal fascination with the subject. But I'm trying.Today we looked at the Declaration of Independence. Such a masterful document. So well worded. And, for my purposes, perfect for breaking down one of the questions I want my enrichment class to struggle with.I have asked them if it was acceptable for colonists to break from a mother country. I asked what the acceptable terms would be. I asked if there was a reason that the mother country should refuse to allow the colonists to decide for themselves their own future.But mostly, I asked about the nature of government. They all seemed perfectly convinced that power is the basis of most governments--in fact they didn't even consider any other way. When I even asked them about the current government of their own nation, they dismissed that as also being one of the same--governments of power, withholding and threatening.So I talked them through the Declaration of Independence. I made them examine the ideas behind the principle that all men are created equal. Initially they interpretted it as being the same as saying all men are equal, a lie our society instills in children from their first educations. Eventually they saw that it means that all men, rich or poor, have equality in certain aspects--though obviously not all. ALL men have certain rights. Specifically, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Liberty being the most interesting of those three to these kids.What is Liberty? Are we actually free to do whatever we want? I told them, yes, we are. Anyone who says differently is opposed to the right to liberty common to all men. However, that doesn't mean that our actions have no consequences. Nor does it mean that there are no laws. Liberty refers to your right, as a free person, to chose. You can chose to make something of yourself, or to live in a van down by the river. You can chose to abide by the law, or disobey the law. The choice is yours...and so is the responsibility for the consequences that come with the choices you make. A free society founded on the belief that men must have responsibility for the rights that they enjoy. How far we have come. Then class was over.
I love US History.
Saturday, August 27, 2005
Assassination Revisited...
Though I am still not entirely sure of the ethical implications of assassination...I think I can now say that Mr Robinson would have done better not to say what he did...and this is the reason that I say this.
I don't care if the world claims that he just made us look more like the tyrants they all believe us to be. Global opinion of the strongest nation on earth is never positive--heck, even when it was us or Hitler, us or Tojo, us or Stalin, public opinion has never been all wonderful and great (perhaps I should specify that by "public opinion" I mean the opinions of Europe and parts of the Middle East...there are and have been huge portions of Asia and parts of Africa that appreciate a relationship with the United States). The French in particular have, especially throughout the 20th Century, been at best friends of convenience. So I am not really concerned with whether or not everyone likes us. However, we need to command respect, and command influence--and nobody could ever deny that being liked helps with that sort of thing.
However, this touches an issue completely apart from international politics and power. This is a Christian minister making his words concerning politics and power the center of international attention and as a result making the ministry of missionaries in Venezuela that much more difficult. And for that, Mr Robinson should not have said what he said, even if there was merit to it.
Picking our battles. As Christians its a real challenge to discern what that means. For though we are not to be of the world, we are in the world, and that should mean that we have an effect not merely in church and ministry, but in every area of life--politics and international power included. Our involvement in those other aspects of life may be harmed by our association with Christ and our belief in absolute truth, righteousness and sin, judgement and forgiveness. That is the price we pay for being in the world and not of it. However, when our involvement in those other aspects of life harms the mission of the church...then we're losing sight of our priorities.
sigh.
Though I am still not entirely sure of the ethical implications of assassination...I think I can now say that Mr Robinson would have done better not to say what he did...and this is the reason that I say this.
I don't care if the world claims that he just made us look more like the tyrants they all believe us to be. Global opinion of the strongest nation on earth is never positive--heck, even when it was us or Hitler, us or Tojo, us or Stalin, public opinion has never been all wonderful and great (perhaps I should specify that by "public opinion" I mean the opinions of Europe and parts of the Middle East...there are and have been huge portions of Asia and parts of Africa that appreciate a relationship with the United States). The French in particular have, especially throughout the 20th Century, been at best friends of convenience. So I am not really concerned with whether or not everyone likes us. However, we need to command respect, and command influence--and nobody could ever deny that being liked helps with that sort of thing.
However, this touches an issue completely apart from international politics and power. This is a Christian minister making his words concerning politics and power the center of international attention and as a result making the ministry of missionaries in Venezuela that much more difficult. And for that, Mr Robinson should not have said what he said, even if there was merit to it.
Picking our battles. As Christians its a real challenge to discern what that means. For though we are not to be of the world, we are in the world, and that should mean that we have an effect not merely in church and ministry, but in every area of life--politics and international power included. Our involvement in those other aspects of life may be harmed by our association with Christ and our belief in absolute truth, righteousness and sin, judgement and forgiveness. That is the price we pay for being in the world and not of it. However, when our involvement in those other aspects of life harms the mission of the church...then we're losing sight of our priorities.
sigh.
The Fantastic Rush Limbaugh
This will probably sound too typical; I like Rush Limbaugh. A lot. I enjoy listening to him, and have since I started listening to radio as a kid. I know that radio isn't well respected...and I know that Rush in particular gets a lot of garbage thrown his way because he makes himself an easy target...any man who consistently opens a show informing his audience that his talent is on loan from God is bound to tick someone off. But I really love listening to him, and even when he's exagerating, he's one of the best at summing up a problem and addressing it intelligently.
Well, this is pulled from his page--which I have linkedon the sidebar--pulled, more specifically from his quotes section. Mr Limbaugh, though I'm fairly sure you'll never read this, thank you. This is just awesome.
"The French found two suspicious, questionable substances in Lance Armstrong's hotel room in 1999. They were later identified as soap and deodorant."
Ah. Wonderful.
This will probably sound too typical; I like Rush Limbaugh. A lot. I enjoy listening to him, and have since I started listening to radio as a kid. I know that radio isn't well respected...and I know that Rush in particular gets a lot of garbage thrown his way because he makes himself an easy target...any man who consistently opens a show informing his audience that his talent is on loan from God is bound to tick someone off. But I really love listening to him, and even when he's exagerating, he's one of the best at summing up a problem and addressing it intelligently.
Well, this is pulled from his page--which I have linkedon the sidebar--pulled, more specifically from his quotes section. Mr Limbaugh, though I'm fairly sure you'll never read this, thank you. This is just awesome.
"The French found two suspicious, questionable substances in Lance Armstrong's hotel room in 1999. They were later identified as soap and deodorant."
Ah. Wonderful.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Hawaii or Virginia?
Having lived in both, the question was posed to me...where would you rather live: Hawaii or Virginia?
Of course, the question assumes that the means to do so are not a problem--since Hawaii is considerably more expensive than Virginia.
Some might think this is an easy question to answer. Who wouldn't chose paradise? But then I'd suggest that paradise is great to visit...but an island can be claustrophobic to live on. Plus, there are seasons in Virginia...and the great city of Washington D.C. in the north of the state. And D.C. is one of my favorites places in all the world. And then there's all that history literally all over the place in Virginia. Still...being able to go swimming and surfing literally all year long (without a stupid wetsuit) does sound ideal...fortunately both Virginia and Hawaii get a lot of rain (which I love)...but in the end, I think I would chose to live in Virginia, and have a vacation home in Hawaii.
Since money is no object, of course.
What would you do? If not Virginia, then what else compares to paradise for you?
Having lived in both, the question was posed to me...where would you rather live: Hawaii or Virginia?
Of course, the question assumes that the means to do so are not a problem--since Hawaii is considerably more expensive than Virginia.
Some might think this is an easy question to answer. Who wouldn't chose paradise? But then I'd suggest that paradise is great to visit...but an island can be claustrophobic to live on. Plus, there are seasons in Virginia...and the great city of Washington D.C. in the north of the state. And D.C. is one of my favorites places in all the world. And then there's all that history literally all over the place in Virginia. Still...being able to go swimming and surfing literally all year long (without a stupid wetsuit) does sound ideal...fortunately both Virginia and Hawaii get a lot of rain (which I love)...but in the end, I think I would chose to live in Virginia, and have a vacation home in Hawaii.
Since money is no object, of course.
What would you do? If not Virginia, then what else compares to paradise for you?
Leadership
You know that whole idea, that people complain about the way that they never get the one thing that they want, but when that thing finally comes around they ignore it completely--even attack it because they weren't actually looking for it, but for their idea of it? Well...if you are familiar with that idea, I thought you might enjoy this article. Its from Newsweek, yes, but its actually very good I thought.
We have an excellent leader. Those people that are too busy screaming their anger to think (all the while stating that they represent the only rational voice in the "dialogue") don't realize just how good a leader we have.
God be with you Mr President.
You know that whole idea, that people complain about the way that they never get the one thing that they want, but when that thing finally comes around they ignore it completely--even attack it because they weren't actually looking for it, but for their idea of it? Well...if you are familiar with that idea, I thought you might enjoy this article. Its from Newsweek, yes, but its actually very good I thought.
We have an excellent leader. Those people that are too busy screaming their anger to think (all the while stating that they represent the only rational voice in the "dialogue") don't realize just how good a leader we have.
God be with you Mr President.
100 Posts
Cool.
To celebrate this minor milestone for this blog, I will tell you about my first day teaching in a formal classroom. I know--hold onto your seats, this may get to exciting for some of you!
I was subbing. Subbing a class called "7 Habits of Highly Effective Teens". Still--my first class, officially. I was late. Traffic was awful, and we hadn't planned on the fact that we both had work this morning. I got to the school 5 minutes late, after spending over an hour driving around. I had no syllabi, no handouts, nothing. And I couldn't leave them in the classroom alone. Somehow it all went fairly well though. I gave them the "7 Habits", talked with them about what they meant, and then gave them a personality test their regular teacher had prepared for them, and them had them write a mission statement for their lives based on some of their top priorities in life. It was really cool. Some of them will have my history classes too. I think I am really going to enjoy teaching!
100 Posts. Yay me.
Cool.
To celebrate this minor milestone for this blog, I will tell you about my first day teaching in a formal classroom. I know--hold onto your seats, this may get to exciting for some of you!
I was subbing. Subbing a class called "7 Habits of Highly Effective Teens". Still--my first class, officially. I was late. Traffic was awful, and we hadn't planned on the fact that we both had work this morning. I got to the school 5 minutes late, after spending over an hour driving around. I had no syllabi, no handouts, nothing. And I couldn't leave them in the classroom alone. Somehow it all went fairly well though. I gave them the "7 Habits", talked with them about what they meant, and then gave them a personality test their regular teacher had prepared for them, and them had them write a mission statement for their lives based on some of their top priorities in life. It was really cool. Some of them will have my history classes too. I think I am really going to enjoy teaching!
100 Posts. Yay me.
Assassination
This leaves me divided in my response.
On one hand...Pat Robinson has said some really stupid things in the past...so even if he has a point, perhaps he should be quiet.
On the otherhand...he's actually right (I think). Surely I have heard, even from the Left , that when the problem seems to revolve around one man, one evil dictator, why not take him out instead of going to war? Surely this question has been asked with regards to Saddam. And we all know that it was an accepted premise that anyone with a shot at Hitler would have taken it. So I am a little curious as to why there has been such a stink over this issue.
Is it the Christian problem, or is there a problem with Assassination in general? The government suggests that we just won't deal in that kind of trade. I don't entirely accept this, but it makes a little more sense than that a Christian needs to oppose such actions. There is a difference between hoping that the government established for the protection of the people will aggressively protect us and act with justice and personally carrying out the killing of evil people. Pat Robinson hasn't crossed that line with this statement...he's expressed a desire to see a bad man removed from power--and usually the only way to effectively do that is through force.
So I am not really sure what the problem is...and my conclusion is that the Left is just starved for issues to whine about. That's ok, I guess...pretty foolish and really getting old, but within their rights to do.
This leaves me divided in my response.
On one hand...Pat Robinson has said some really stupid things in the past...so even if he has a point, perhaps he should be quiet.
On the otherhand...he's actually right (I think). Surely I have heard, even from the Left , that when the problem seems to revolve around one man, one evil dictator, why not take him out instead of going to war? Surely this question has been asked with regards to Saddam. And we all know that it was an accepted premise that anyone with a shot at Hitler would have taken it. So I am a little curious as to why there has been such a stink over this issue.
Is it the Christian problem, or is there a problem with Assassination in general? The government suggests that we just won't deal in that kind of trade. I don't entirely accept this, but it makes a little more sense than that a Christian needs to oppose such actions. There is a difference between hoping that the government established for the protection of the people will aggressively protect us and act with justice and personally carrying out the killing of evil people. Pat Robinson hasn't crossed that line with this statement...he's expressed a desire to see a bad man removed from power--and usually the only way to effectively do that is through force.
So I am not really sure what the problem is...and my conclusion is that the Left is just starved for issues to whine about. That's ok, I guess...pretty foolish and really getting old, but within their rights to do.
Saturday, August 20, 2005
Therapy
So I was away for a week at the Royal Family Kids Camp working as a relief Counselor. It was a good time...met some very neat kids, some very good adults and generally had a good week at camp. We stayed at the Green Oak Ranch down in the San Diego area--which apparently has a good deal of history itself with the old stage coach lines. I would have loved more time to find out more of that history, but that was more of a side note than anything else.
Anyways, I was out of the city and away from pretty much all types of media for a total of about 6 days...and it felt wonderful. Now, obviously I am not an anti-techie or anything like that. But at least once a year, preferably once every six months I have real value on getting away from the city and relishing the untouched, unrefined parts of life (though admittedly, in this case we weren't exactly "roughing it"--it was still camp). One night we went on a hike up a hill to a cross that overlooked a city that was on the other side of the hills that surrounded and enclosed the camp from the rest of the world. There was a full moon out, and even though you could see city lights at the top of the hill, generally the darkness was unbroken by anything but natural light in the sky. I stepped away from the campers for a moment and realized just how easy it was to believe in God and Christ in the middle of that quiet, moonlit night--and just how distracting the life in the city is. In the quiet of nature that isn't being interupted constantly by the noise we have grown accustomed too in the city, its not hard at all to believe without reservation, and its not even a struggle to decide to change one's life for a principle that you believe but cannot touch...it was truly theraputic.
I used to get time like this more often. My family would go on vacation somewhere out of the city, often to a resort on a lake, surrounded by lush grass and jungle and mountains. I would climb up to a tower and watch the sky or the sunset or the stars, or just look at the grass from the highest point around...and just absorb the beauty that was there, and when I came down, everything felt very different. I think that is an important point...the times that I removed myself and just appreciated nature to its fullest were not clouded by a lot of thought or agenda on my part. Sometimes I would pray, sometimes sing praise songs...but generally I would just watch, with as few deliberate thoughts as possible, and just enjoy what was there. In fact, often if there were concerns weighing me down, if I cleared my mind during these retreats to the top of the tower and didn't try to figure them out myself but just enjoy what God had created, when I came down I found that I had the answer almost without conciously understanding it beforehand...wisdom from God I believe. Perhaps this is why I really accept the statement in scripture that creation shows the glory of the Lord...I think God is evident in the world without the distraction of man's appetite.
This is all to say...I feel much better. I got (quite literally) beat up during this past week--from running around to wrestling with a dozen kids in the pool everyday...but I feel more rested and refreshed after these past 6 days than I have almost the whole Summer, and certainly since I last left the city to just rest in the untouched refuge of nature. I highly recommend it.
So I was away for a week at the Royal Family Kids Camp working as a relief Counselor. It was a good time...met some very neat kids, some very good adults and generally had a good week at camp. We stayed at the Green Oak Ranch down in the San Diego area--which apparently has a good deal of history itself with the old stage coach lines. I would have loved more time to find out more of that history, but that was more of a side note than anything else.
Anyways, I was out of the city and away from pretty much all types of media for a total of about 6 days...and it felt wonderful. Now, obviously I am not an anti-techie or anything like that. But at least once a year, preferably once every six months I have real value on getting away from the city and relishing the untouched, unrefined parts of life (though admittedly, in this case we weren't exactly "roughing it"--it was still camp). One night we went on a hike up a hill to a cross that overlooked a city that was on the other side of the hills that surrounded and enclosed the camp from the rest of the world. There was a full moon out, and even though you could see city lights at the top of the hill, generally the darkness was unbroken by anything but natural light in the sky. I stepped away from the campers for a moment and realized just how easy it was to believe in God and Christ in the middle of that quiet, moonlit night--and just how distracting the life in the city is. In the quiet of nature that isn't being interupted constantly by the noise we have grown accustomed too in the city, its not hard at all to believe without reservation, and its not even a struggle to decide to change one's life for a principle that you believe but cannot touch...it was truly theraputic.
I used to get time like this more often. My family would go on vacation somewhere out of the city, often to a resort on a lake, surrounded by lush grass and jungle and mountains. I would climb up to a tower and watch the sky or the sunset or the stars, or just look at the grass from the highest point around...and just absorb the beauty that was there, and when I came down, everything felt very different. I think that is an important point...the times that I removed myself and just appreciated nature to its fullest were not clouded by a lot of thought or agenda on my part. Sometimes I would pray, sometimes sing praise songs...but generally I would just watch, with as few deliberate thoughts as possible, and just enjoy what was there. In fact, often if there were concerns weighing me down, if I cleared my mind during these retreats to the top of the tower and didn't try to figure them out myself but just enjoy what God had created, when I came down I found that I had the answer almost without conciously understanding it beforehand...wisdom from God I believe. Perhaps this is why I really accept the statement in scripture that creation shows the glory of the Lord...I think God is evident in the world without the distraction of man's appetite.
This is all to say...I feel much better. I got (quite literally) beat up during this past week--from running around to wrestling with a dozen kids in the pool everyday...but I feel more rested and refreshed after these past 6 days than I have almost the whole Summer, and certainly since I last left the city to just rest in the untouched refuge of nature. I highly recommend it.
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
Intelligent Design
Its so ironic really. At the Academy, we had one of the biggest names at Biola talk about exactly this issue...and then the week that the Academy ends this story started coming out. In case you were living in a hole for the past two weeks, here's the story. This is the link from the NY Times article concerning the issue. You'll probably have to register--its free though.
There's a lot out there...I spent over half an hour yesterday writing a long post on this, including links to others with more to say (who also say it better) and my thoughts on the subversive nature of late-night comedians in this debate. I won't duplicate the post...it got lost when I tried to post it, not realizing that Blogger was down for maintinence, and trying to duplicate it would be frustrating, and probably less effective. My main thoughts were that its truly disturbing how, through a dumb little skit on the Conan O'Brien show that officially is designed to mock Bush and present him as an idiot, a comedian is also weighing in on I.D. and the question of whether or not evolution is the only science or not, etc. They didn't even do very much--they simply made their charicature of Bush read what Bush actually said and that's enough. Disturbing.
Anyways, here's the other links that I thought were really worth reading. They're to Reynold's blog, and include articles from the press that he is responding to, and a response to a letter responding to a radio program that he was on discussing the viability of teaching ID as a theory of origins in the classroom. Read, read, read! It should be noted--those are three different links. If you're interested at all in the issues being debated--and more if you want to hear a good arguement from the I.D. perspective, I suggest taking a look.
Its so ironic really. At the Academy, we had one of the biggest names at Biola talk about exactly this issue...and then the week that the Academy ends this story started coming out. In case you were living in a hole for the past two weeks, here's the story. This is the link from the NY Times article concerning the issue. You'll probably have to register--its free though.
There's a lot out there...I spent over half an hour yesterday writing a long post on this, including links to others with more to say (who also say it better) and my thoughts on the subversive nature of late-night comedians in this debate. I won't duplicate the post...it got lost when I tried to post it, not realizing that Blogger was down for maintinence, and trying to duplicate it would be frustrating, and probably less effective. My main thoughts were that its truly disturbing how, through a dumb little skit on the Conan O'Brien show that officially is designed to mock Bush and present him as an idiot, a comedian is also weighing in on I.D. and the question of whether or not evolution is the only science or not, etc. They didn't even do very much--they simply made their charicature of Bush read what Bush actually said and that's enough. Disturbing.
Anyways, here's the other links that I thought were really worth reading. They're to Reynold's blog, and include articles from the press that he is responding to, and a response to a letter responding to a radio program that he was on discussing the viability of teaching ID as a theory of origins in the classroom. Read, read, read! It should be noted--those are three different links. If you're interested at all in the issues being debated--and more if you want to hear a good arguement from the I.D. perspective, I suggest taking a look.
Wow.
Lots of stuff happening and I have been gone for a while. Ok...first, the updates...
I am currently putting together a couple of syllabi for some history classes I will be teaching. As I write them, I am shocked by how harsh they sound. Actually, in all fairness I need to say, I took the example that they passed around (having never written a syllabus myself) and editted it appropriately for a history class, changing some things here and there to meet with the actual design and function that I had in mind for my class. The overall tone was set by someone who has already taught classes and did well there as well as when she was an actual student. Maybe that's why I think its harsh--I'm guessing she wrote a syllabus based on what she knew she would expect of herself and from her experience teaching...and she was a much better student than I ever have been, and I haven't really formally taught anyone anything. I;m sure I'll be glad of the firmness inherant in her overall design, which is why I kept it...I was just shocked at how quickly I went from being annoyed with teachers like this to becoming a teacher like this. Though...again, I was more frustrated with teachers that had open-ended syllabi than the teachers that told you firmly and bluntly what they expected. So this is probably a really good thing.
Right now I am in the middle of the end of my two weeks off between the Academy and other stuff. Sunday I leave for San Diego for a week, where I will be working with the "Royal Family Kids Camp" for a week as a relief counsellor. Basically its a camp for foster kids and is an opportunity to show them some Chrisitan love without any strings attached. There's no altar calls, no follow up stuff or anything like that--its one week, unconditional love. We don't exchange information or anything like that afterwards, because the idea behind the camp isn't supposed to be that they make us their new friends or family...but its hoping to show these kids that they are important too. I have never done anything like this...I worked with AWANA's in the Philippines with the kids from the Depressed areas, but they had families--families are really big in the Philippines. So this will be something new.
I am praying that God will lead and help me to be what I am needed to be during this week. The wierd thing about doing something like this is that you know that the idea behind this camp is a good thing...and because of that I think its easy to struggle with two extremes...feeling too good about yourself, and so completely missing the point of making the week about someone who doesn't often feel good about themselves...or reacting to that and feeling a self-effacing guilty humilty. I think both are bad...both prevent you from actually helping anyone because you're too focused on yourself. It reminds me of the Screwtape letters--what the demon wrote about the nature of prayer, humilty, pride, etc. So...if you do pray for me, pray that I would be what I should be, and just that...and that I would rejoice in being that and only that.
After next week, I start working on a regular basis. Teaching US and World history at the Gorman Learning Center on Thursdays, and when I'm not doing Substituting work in public schools I'll be working on mailing letters for a loan consolidation company. Some of that is exciting...some of it sounds boring but pays. I'll leave you to figure out which.
Oh, and Aiden is even now at the doctor's office getting shots. They measured him and weighed him...apparently the boy that was so big is no longer so big (though he still seems big to me). They are estimating he'll peak at about 5'8". Doomed to a life of average height. But, at least he'll most likely not grow up and be able to tease his old man about being short...since he'll be seeing me eye to eye (literally) when he's done growing. Its ok though...5'8" puts him at a perfect height to be a very good wrestler. And he's certainly strong enough--all I need to do is help him with his speed and he'll be unstopable. I love that kid.
I'll talk about Bush and ID in my next post. This was just a brief update. Feel updated? Good.
Lots of stuff happening and I have been gone for a while. Ok...first, the updates...
I am currently putting together a couple of syllabi for some history classes I will be teaching. As I write them, I am shocked by how harsh they sound. Actually, in all fairness I need to say, I took the example that they passed around (having never written a syllabus myself) and editted it appropriately for a history class, changing some things here and there to meet with the actual design and function that I had in mind for my class. The overall tone was set by someone who has already taught classes and did well there as well as when she was an actual student. Maybe that's why I think its harsh--I'm guessing she wrote a syllabus based on what she knew she would expect of herself and from her experience teaching...and she was a much better student than I ever have been, and I haven't really formally taught anyone anything. I;m sure I'll be glad of the firmness inherant in her overall design, which is why I kept it...I was just shocked at how quickly I went from being annoyed with teachers like this to becoming a teacher like this. Though...again, I was more frustrated with teachers that had open-ended syllabi than the teachers that told you firmly and bluntly what they expected. So this is probably a really good thing.
Right now I am in the middle of the end of my two weeks off between the Academy and other stuff. Sunday I leave for San Diego for a week, where I will be working with the "Royal Family Kids Camp" for a week as a relief counsellor. Basically its a camp for foster kids and is an opportunity to show them some Chrisitan love without any strings attached. There's no altar calls, no follow up stuff or anything like that--its one week, unconditional love. We don't exchange information or anything like that afterwards, because the idea behind the camp isn't supposed to be that they make us their new friends or family...but its hoping to show these kids that they are important too. I have never done anything like this...I worked with AWANA's in the Philippines with the kids from the Depressed areas, but they had families--families are really big in the Philippines. So this will be something new.
I am praying that God will lead and help me to be what I am needed to be during this week. The wierd thing about doing something like this is that you know that the idea behind this camp is a good thing...and because of that I think its easy to struggle with two extremes...feeling too good about yourself, and so completely missing the point of making the week about someone who doesn't often feel good about themselves...or reacting to that and feeling a self-effacing guilty humilty. I think both are bad...both prevent you from actually helping anyone because you're too focused on yourself. It reminds me of the Screwtape letters--what the demon wrote about the nature of prayer, humilty, pride, etc. So...if you do pray for me, pray that I would be what I should be, and just that...and that I would rejoice in being that and only that.
After next week, I start working on a regular basis. Teaching US and World history at the Gorman Learning Center on Thursdays, and when I'm not doing Substituting work in public schools I'll be working on mailing letters for a loan consolidation company. Some of that is exciting...some of it sounds boring but pays. I'll leave you to figure out which.
Oh, and Aiden is even now at the doctor's office getting shots. They measured him and weighed him...apparently the boy that was so big is no longer so big (though he still seems big to me). They are estimating he'll peak at about 5'8". Doomed to a life of average height. But, at least he'll most likely not grow up and be able to tease his old man about being short...since he'll be seeing me eye to eye (literally) when he's done growing. Its ok though...5'8" puts him at a perfect height to be a very good wrestler. And he's certainly strong enough--all I need to do is help him with his speed and he'll be unstopable. I love that kid.
I'll talk about Bush and ID in my next post. This was just a brief update. Feel updated? Good.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
The Academy
One week down, one left to go. Its better this year than last.
For those of you that don't know, the Academy is (presently) a summer conference that I have had the joy of working for two summers now. Presently its geared towards high school students headed towards college who will be faced with the challenge of maintaining their faith in the midst of a secular world that awaits, even in Christian Universities like Biola. An alarming number of Christian teens fall into apthay or leave the faith altogether upon leaving home, and we feel it has a great to do with the fact that they have never learned to think hard. For more info you should really visit the Academy site which is on the right of your screen even as you read this. Or follow this link. Now you can't even use the excuse of being too lazy to find my link.
So, I spent a week with amazing kids and very good friends and incredible professors talking about living a virtuous life, seeking truth, and finding courage.
My take away question, which I did ask the kids but have been thinking about myself is this: can there be courage in heaven? I think its not far off to suggest that courage requires the presence of fear...and it seems unlikely that there would be fear in heaven, so is there courage in heaven? If not...that too seems wrong, since courage is a virtue and it seems unlikely that it should pass away.
My theory? I think that there is courage in Heaven. Lets say that often sin lies in chosing one lesser good thing over a better good that has been shown to us to replace the lesser good. We become attached to the thing itself instead of simply wanting whatever good God offers us. This is because we know and love what we have and cannot be sure that the new good will actually be better for us...we doubt God or believe another good is better than what He is offering, and that is sinful and wrong. Well, in heaven, we will forever be seeing a newer and greater good, eternally replacing our previous ideal with the new that God has revealed in Himself. I believe this because, as Lewis says, there will forever be further up and further in for us to travel, always finding more and more of our great Lord.
Well, we remain ourselves--creatures of free-choice--and so while we are perfected and WILL choose the greater good rather than the lesser good, the choice remains ours, and everytime we trust that the unknown will be better than the known, that God will not disappoint us and in Christ there is ever more for us to know and love, everytime we forsake the old for the new that God reveals we are being courageous.
That's my theory. Courage in Heaven. I am very excited about one more week of this.
One week down, one left to go. Its better this year than last.
For those of you that don't know, the Academy is (presently) a summer conference that I have had the joy of working for two summers now. Presently its geared towards high school students headed towards college who will be faced with the challenge of maintaining their faith in the midst of a secular world that awaits, even in Christian Universities like Biola. An alarming number of Christian teens fall into apthay or leave the faith altogether upon leaving home, and we feel it has a great to do with the fact that they have never learned to think hard. For more info you should really visit the Academy site which is on the right of your screen even as you read this. Or follow this link. Now you can't even use the excuse of being too lazy to find my link.
So, I spent a week with amazing kids and very good friends and incredible professors talking about living a virtuous life, seeking truth, and finding courage.
My take away question, which I did ask the kids but have been thinking about myself is this: can there be courage in heaven? I think its not far off to suggest that courage requires the presence of fear...and it seems unlikely that there would be fear in heaven, so is there courage in heaven? If not...that too seems wrong, since courage is a virtue and it seems unlikely that it should pass away.
My theory? I think that there is courage in Heaven. Lets say that often sin lies in chosing one lesser good thing over a better good that has been shown to us to replace the lesser good. We become attached to the thing itself instead of simply wanting whatever good God offers us. This is because we know and love what we have and cannot be sure that the new good will actually be better for us...we doubt God or believe another good is better than what He is offering, and that is sinful and wrong. Well, in heaven, we will forever be seeing a newer and greater good, eternally replacing our previous ideal with the new that God has revealed in Himself. I believe this because, as Lewis says, there will forever be further up and further in for us to travel, always finding more and more of our great Lord.
Well, we remain ourselves--creatures of free-choice--and so while we are perfected and WILL choose the greater good rather than the lesser good, the choice remains ours, and everytime we trust that the unknown will be better than the known, that God will not disappoint us and in Christ there is ever more for us to know and love, everytime we forsake the old for the new that God reveals we are being courageous.
That's my theory. Courage in Heaven. I am very excited about one more week of this.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
The Truth About Hammas
They're a bunch of terrorists who have no interest in peace. See for yourself.
I say we make unqualified war on them and do not relent until they have been wiped from the earth...since apparently that is the viable nature of warfare as far as they are concerned.
I haven't posted anything on the bombings in Britain...but I'll take this opportunity to give my thoughts...first, the terrorists don't seem to understand that the British and the Americans are not the French or the Italians or the Spanish. We don't get scared when you bloody us--we get mad as hell and hit back harder than you thought possible. I love that every Brit interviewed about the bombings has closed every one of their responses by saying "But, well, we're British and we don't stop functioning just because someone bombed us." Hmph. And here the terrorists were expecting you to cower like a bunch of Frenchmen at war...how quickly Sir Winston is forgotten...but obviously not entirely by his countrymen.
Ok...now, the other thought that I have is that the terrorists have gotten progressively less effective. Which means we ARE winning--if we weren't there would be more of these types of attacks in our own homeland, and they'd be even worse. As it is, in the three major terrorist attacks the terrorists have conducted, the first being 9/11, the second in Spain, and the third in Britain, the death toll continues to get smaller and smaller. For the unbeatable enemy that the Left portrays them as, they seem to me to be getting pretty desperate. And while all life is sacred, if we have to live with small attacks like this for years it seems worth the price that has been paid to limit them to this extent.
And finally...all the Democrats can talk about is Karl Rove. They are ignoring the attack because it says too much against the constant doom and gloom mantra they have chantedsince before our election. How sad--they don't even spend time to think about the international affects that this is having, because they aren't negative. Spain got plenty of attention--after all, Spain cowed to the terror. Britain only reaffirmed its pride...so they're ignoring it. Typical.
They're a bunch of terrorists who have no interest in peace. See for yourself.
I say we make unqualified war on them and do not relent until they have been wiped from the earth...since apparently that is the viable nature of warfare as far as they are concerned.
I haven't posted anything on the bombings in Britain...but I'll take this opportunity to give my thoughts...first, the terrorists don't seem to understand that the British and the Americans are not the French or the Italians or the Spanish. We don't get scared when you bloody us--we get mad as hell and hit back harder than you thought possible. I love that every Brit interviewed about the bombings has closed every one of their responses by saying "But, well, we're British and we don't stop functioning just because someone bombed us." Hmph. And here the terrorists were expecting you to cower like a bunch of Frenchmen at war...how quickly Sir Winston is forgotten...but obviously not entirely by his countrymen.
Ok...now, the other thought that I have is that the terrorists have gotten progressively less effective. Which means we ARE winning--if we weren't there would be more of these types of attacks in our own homeland, and they'd be even worse. As it is, in the three major terrorist attacks the terrorists have conducted, the first being 9/11, the second in Spain, and the third in Britain, the death toll continues to get smaller and smaller. For the unbeatable enemy that the Left portrays them as, they seem to me to be getting pretty desperate. And while all life is sacred, if we have to live with small attacks like this for years it seems worth the price that has been paid to limit them to this extent.
And finally...all the Democrats can talk about is Karl Rove. They are ignoring the attack because it says too much against the constant doom and gloom mantra they have chantedsince before our election. How sad--they don't even spend time to think about the international affects that this is having, because they aren't negative. Spain got plenty of attention--after all, Spain cowed to the terror. Britain only reaffirmed its pride...so they're ignoring it. Typical.
Friday, July 08, 2005
Write a Book
I think I would love to actually write a book. I've tried before...everyone who loves books has probably. My fatal flaw was detail...I would get so worried about trying to give a detailed description of what I saw in my mind that the book was incredibly dull...or overly complicated. Of course, I was writing my great novel at the right old age of 10 years, but I was certain I could get something out that would be worth reading. After all, I made all the stories for all the games that we played as kids. Between my brother and I, we owned something like 200 GI Joes (not those large, Barbie-type dolls, but the actual GI Joes that were, I guess, small but in my opinion SOOO much better...but I digress) and the left-overs of the Star Wars figures, superheroes, even action figures from the movie Hook. We played with them for hours...and usually the majority of my time was spent setting them up in my imaginary scenarios--they had countries, kingdoms, governments, backstories, families, everything. I was reading Tolkien and Lewis, so I borrowed a great deal from those masters to sculpt my stories--mostly the names of the different lands. But there were entirely original epic wars and stories too. In fact, I was so wrapped up in it all, I didn't let my brother really play with me--and half of the toys were his. Sigh. Big brothers can be jerks...what else can be said?
Anyways, I'm thinking it shouldn't be impossible to write a good story. I've read enough...watched enough...and I am always taking in more...eventually, once you've consumed enough, if you DON'T start producing something yourself, it starts to fester, you know? We'll see. Maybe I'll never be a good story teller. More importantly, perhaps I'll never be a good writer...but it seems like it would be a worthwhile goal to try.
I think I would love to actually write a book. I've tried before...everyone who loves books has probably. My fatal flaw was detail...I would get so worried about trying to give a detailed description of what I saw in my mind that the book was incredibly dull...or overly complicated. Of course, I was writing my great novel at the right old age of 10 years, but I was certain I could get something out that would be worth reading. After all, I made all the stories for all the games that we played as kids. Between my brother and I, we owned something like 200 GI Joes (not those large, Barbie-type dolls, but the actual GI Joes that were, I guess, small but in my opinion SOOO much better...but I digress) and the left-overs of the Star Wars figures, superheroes, even action figures from the movie Hook. We played with them for hours...and usually the majority of my time was spent setting them up in my imaginary scenarios--they had countries, kingdoms, governments, backstories, families, everything. I was reading Tolkien and Lewis, so I borrowed a great deal from those masters to sculpt my stories--mostly the names of the different lands. But there were entirely original epic wars and stories too. In fact, I was so wrapped up in it all, I didn't let my brother really play with me--and half of the toys were his. Sigh. Big brothers can be jerks...what else can be said?
Anyways, I'm thinking it shouldn't be impossible to write a good story. I've read enough...watched enough...and I am always taking in more...eventually, once you've consumed enough, if you DON'T start producing something yourself, it starts to fester, you know? We'll see. Maybe I'll never be a good story teller. More importantly, perhaps I'll never be a good writer...but it seems like it would be a worthwhile goal to try.
Monday, July 04, 2005
Poverty Revisited...and an Ode to my Home
I talked with my wife and she suggested that I could express it more clearly. Plus, I watched some more news recently and found out more of what was actually going on...so I figured I would add an adendum to my first post.
Here is the problem, as I see it: Mandella and crew are saying they will remove the face of poverty from the world. As if that is the problem today with the world. As if that is even possible. The poor we will always have with us. The only man never to lie stated that plainly. I think there are higher goals to keep in mind.
While releasing poor nations from their obligations of debt does sound like a good idea if it is possible, that is not going to stop the dying. Because Poverty doesn't kill anyone. What kills people is the lack of Justice in those nations. Without freedom and justice, prosperity only means the widening of the gap between the wealthy and the poor. What the nations of Africa need is justice, not freedom from debt or financial aid.
I cannot help but think of the old adage--give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day--teach a man to fish and he'll never go hungry again. The problem in Africa is not the lack of money--plenty of people have survived that to become incredibly prosperous. The problem is, if we could send $100 Billion to them this very instant, all that would end up happening is there would be one man, or ten men with enormous fortunes and the rest of the country would still be dying. Think I'm way off? Look at the third world nations of the world. They aren't third world nations because they don't have resources--or even because they haven't received aid from more prosperous nations--they are third world nations because there is no justice present.
A prime example would be the Philippines. They've received plenty of money over decades of relations with the US. Have the people prospered from this, or have the rich got richer, the poor poorer? Sadly, its the latter, not the former.
So--things like the "Live 8" concerts...they're obviously motivated by a desire to help. But they are really naive when it comes to understanding the problem. Lyndon Johnson also said we would end poverty. Some 35 years later, I am sorry to say he was completely wrong. Poverty isn't the problem so long as unjust men continue to go free. Poverty isn't the problem when the innocent and the helpless remain defenseless and uncared for. So I think long before we address the problems of the financial world...we need to address the problems of the moral and social world that really are killing people in Africa in an endless stream.
My solution? Its time to stop beating around the bush when it comes to comparing governments. If poverty kills, certain types of government surely have their hands soaked in blood. I'm not saying we make a government cookie cutter--but the fact is there are good governments and there are bad governments--and bad government has a lot more to do with what is killing Africa than poverty.
I shouldn't boil the problem down to bad government--there are moral issues killing Africa too. Aids is an entirely defeatable disease in a moral society--yet it is running rampant in Africa. This has nothing to do with the ecconomic stability or health of the continent.
Freedom. Liberty. Justice for All. They are central to a nation that thrives and prospers. The people of this nation have had the good fortune, even providential guidance, to have an incredibly bountiful land as their home. It is these virtues that have made a great nation. If we could bestow on gift on Africa, these are what they need--not our money.
That's not to say I don't understand the desire to give money. But they are telling people that this will finally fix the problem. They're wrong.
As for the celebrities that are doing it...yes--its better that they do this rather than doing nothing. I just think it was truly ironic, from their dress to their attitude, that they were explaining the needs of the truly poor. Nothing wrong with them being involved...I just couldn't help but reflect on the irony.
Happy Fourth all! 229 years and going strong. God Bless America!
I talked with my wife and she suggested that I could express it more clearly. Plus, I watched some more news recently and found out more of what was actually going on...so I figured I would add an adendum to my first post.
Here is the problem, as I see it: Mandella and crew are saying they will remove the face of poverty from the world. As if that is the problem today with the world. As if that is even possible. The poor we will always have with us. The only man never to lie stated that plainly. I think there are higher goals to keep in mind.
While releasing poor nations from their obligations of debt does sound like a good idea if it is possible, that is not going to stop the dying. Because Poverty doesn't kill anyone. What kills people is the lack of Justice in those nations. Without freedom and justice, prosperity only means the widening of the gap between the wealthy and the poor. What the nations of Africa need is justice, not freedom from debt or financial aid.
I cannot help but think of the old adage--give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day--teach a man to fish and he'll never go hungry again. The problem in Africa is not the lack of money--plenty of people have survived that to become incredibly prosperous. The problem is, if we could send $100 Billion to them this very instant, all that would end up happening is there would be one man, or ten men with enormous fortunes and the rest of the country would still be dying. Think I'm way off? Look at the third world nations of the world. They aren't third world nations because they don't have resources--or even because they haven't received aid from more prosperous nations--they are third world nations because there is no justice present.
A prime example would be the Philippines. They've received plenty of money over decades of relations with the US. Have the people prospered from this, or have the rich got richer, the poor poorer? Sadly, its the latter, not the former.
So--things like the "Live 8" concerts...they're obviously motivated by a desire to help. But they are really naive when it comes to understanding the problem. Lyndon Johnson also said we would end poverty. Some 35 years later, I am sorry to say he was completely wrong. Poverty isn't the problem so long as unjust men continue to go free. Poverty isn't the problem when the innocent and the helpless remain defenseless and uncared for. So I think long before we address the problems of the financial world...we need to address the problems of the moral and social world that really are killing people in Africa in an endless stream.
My solution? Its time to stop beating around the bush when it comes to comparing governments. If poverty kills, certain types of government surely have their hands soaked in blood. I'm not saying we make a government cookie cutter--but the fact is there are good governments and there are bad governments--and bad government has a lot more to do with what is killing Africa than poverty.
I shouldn't boil the problem down to bad government--there are moral issues killing Africa too. Aids is an entirely defeatable disease in a moral society--yet it is running rampant in Africa. This has nothing to do with the ecconomic stability or health of the continent.
Freedom. Liberty. Justice for All. They are central to a nation that thrives and prospers. The people of this nation have had the good fortune, even providential guidance, to have an incredibly bountiful land as their home. It is these virtues that have made a great nation. If we could bestow on gift on Africa, these are what they need--not our money.
That's not to say I don't understand the desire to give money. But they are telling people that this will finally fix the problem. They're wrong.
As for the celebrities that are doing it...yes--its better that they do this rather than doing nothing. I just think it was truly ironic, from their dress to their attitude, that they were explaining the needs of the truly poor. Nothing wrong with them being involved...I just couldn't help but reflect on the irony.
Happy Fourth all! 229 years and going strong. God Bless America!
Sunday, July 03, 2005
Death...by Poverty?
I can see the news report now..."Yesterday, a man was walking down the street and suddenly collapsed, dying instantly. Witnesses say he reached into his pockets and turned them out, let out a loud gasp and fell roughly to the ground, never to move again. Officials are looking into further leads, but it seems clear that this was just another in a long steady stream of recent sudden deaths on our streets. It is believed that upon discovering that his pockets were empty, the man fell victim to Extreme Poverty--the fourth known case this week alone. We would like to urge all our viewers to keep at least a $10 bill on them at all times. You never know when Extreme Poverty may strike, and being prepared with even the smallest amount of cash on hand may be the only hope of stalling what many officials are already calling an epidemic. Back to you Jen."
While in the midst of settling in for a (hopefully) restful Fourth of July Weekend, I had the TV on tonight to give me some background noise as I made dinner. Sheri was spending some time with Aiden, so I could listen to whatever I wanted too...and I came across some sort of public charity event being MC'd by Will Smith. I paused to figured out what was going on...and he was talking about the "Declaration of Inter-Dependence"...that the people supporting this charity were making a statement regarding a need. He said that in the poorest nations in the world (Africa) a baby dies every three seconds of "Extreme Poverty". Then they flashed an Ad with Brad Pitt, Justin Timberlake, Jamie Foxx, George Clooney, etc, snapping every three seconds, while they flashed the statistic once again. Every three Seconds. A Baby dies. Of Extreme Poverty. And of course, all the celebrities were dressed in very simple jeans and white t-shirts.
Now...a couple of things crossed my mind watching this ad and listening to Will Smith. I realize they may sound a little callous...but hear me out.
First, nobody ever died from being poor. That's not what's killing these people. Its a way of life that's killing them. Its starvation. Its disease. Its endless wars. But its not the amount of money they do or do not have. So, that was my first reaction--its just a ridiculous claim to say "Poverty" killed anyone. It may have made their situation more dire--but it didn't kill anyone.
Then, as I was digesting this, another thought crossed my mind; these celebrities who are blaming the ills of the world on the lack of available funds have a great deal of gall. Now please understand--I have no problem with anyone making money--I myself am a great fan of money and the things it can offer. However...before you start blaming the problems in the world on money and asking for a hand out to solve them...perhaps you should pause and reflect on buying diamonds the size of my fist for your third wife...or toying with your three or four different multi-million dollar houses. The reason this struck me as sadly ironic is because nearly everyone that appeared on this Ad have had their share of publicity all about how extravegantly they have enjoyed the fruits of their fame--something I have no problem with--but the irony was too much for me to accept without SOME reaction. "Extreme Poverty" may be killing people...but its not slowing the spending of our concerned celebrities. Notice--these also tend to be the same people who suggest to everyone that the "simple, obvious" reason America is presently mobilized for war is ecconomic factors. Yet, for people who claim to understand the needs of the rest of the world and the greed that drives all international affairs, they remain unphased in their own spending habits and contractual demands.
As I say, I have no problem with a man who has millions deciding to build a house four times, or buying ridiculously huge stones for his lady of the month. Its may seem extravagant, but they worked for it, its theirs, so whatever--they answer for it, not me. But don't dress up in jeans and a t-shirt and try to lecture the world on the needs of the common man and the dangers of poverty. If you're really wanting to help, take a moment and consider exactly what is really contributing and maintaining the squallor of the poorest nations in the world. Try investing in something that will establish stability in the turbulent world of the third world nations instead of throwing money at the problem.
I can see the news report now..."Yesterday, a man was walking down the street and suddenly collapsed, dying instantly. Witnesses say he reached into his pockets and turned them out, let out a loud gasp and fell roughly to the ground, never to move again. Officials are looking into further leads, but it seems clear that this was just another in a long steady stream of recent sudden deaths on our streets. It is believed that upon discovering that his pockets were empty, the man fell victim to Extreme Poverty--the fourth known case this week alone. We would like to urge all our viewers to keep at least a $10 bill on them at all times. You never know when Extreme Poverty may strike, and being prepared with even the smallest amount of cash on hand may be the only hope of stalling what many officials are already calling an epidemic. Back to you Jen."
While in the midst of settling in for a (hopefully) restful Fourth of July Weekend, I had the TV on tonight to give me some background noise as I made dinner. Sheri was spending some time with Aiden, so I could listen to whatever I wanted too...and I came across some sort of public charity event being MC'd by Will Smith. I paused to figured out what was going on...and he was talking about the "Declaration of Inter-Dependence"...that the people supporting this charity were making a statement regarding a need. He said that in the poorest nations in the world (Africa) a baby dies every three seconds of "Extreme Poverty". Then they flashed an Ad with Brad Pitt, Justin Timberlake, Jamie Foxx, George Clooney, etc, snapping every three seconds, while they flashed the statistic once again. Every three Seconds. A Baby dies. Of Extreme Poverty. And of course, all the celebrities were dressed in very simple jeans and white t-shirts.
Now...a couple of things crossed my mind watching this ad and listening to Will Smith. I realize they may sound a little callous...but hear me out.
First, nobody ever died from being poor. That's not what's killing these people. Its a way of life that's killing them. Its starvation. Its disease. Its endless wars. But its not the amount of money they do or do not have. So, that was my first reaction--its just a ridiculous claim to say "Poverty" killed anyone. It may have made their situation more dire--but it didn't kill anyone.
Then, as I was digesting this, another thought crossed my mind; these celebrities who are blaming the ills of the world on the lack of available funds have a great deal of gall. Now please understand--I have no problem with anyone making money--I myself am a great fan of money and the things it can offer. However...before you start blaming the problems in the world on money and asking for a hand out to solve them...perhaps you should pause and reflect on buying diamonds the size of my fist for your third wife...or toying with your three or four different multi-million dollar houses. The reason this struck me as sadly ironic is because nearly everyone that appeared on this Ad have had their share of publicity all about how extravegantly they have enjoyed the fruits of their fame--something I have no problem with--but the irony was too much for me to accept without SOME reaction. "Extreme Poverty" may be killing people...but its not slowing the spending of our concerned celebrities. Notice--these also tend to be the same people who suggest to everyone that the "simple, obvious" reason America is presently mobilized for war is ecconomic factors. Yet, for people who claim to understand the needs of the rest of the world and the greed that drives all international affairs, they remain unphased in their own spending habits and contractual demands.
As I say, I have no problem with a man who has millions deciding to build a house four times, or buying ridiculously huge stones for his lady of the month. Its may seem extravagant, but they worked for it, its theirs, so whatever--they answer for it, not me. But don't dress up in jeans and a t-shirt and try to lecture the world on the needs of the common man and the dangers of poverty. If you're really wanting to help, take a moment and consider exactly what is really contributing and maintaining the squallor of the poorest nations in the world. Try investing in something that will establish stability in the turbulent world of the third world nations instead of throwing money at the problem.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
The Batman
Really late, but a wonderful movie. Others have said this very well, of course. Blows all the other Batman movies away in my opinion--makes them truly forgetable actually. I've heard somewhere that they are doing a Superman movie too, and if this is any indication of how much better they can do these movies now, it'll be one of the only times I can remember relishing a remake over the original. Batman Begins is one the of first--it was excellent, and I left the theatre very grateful that there will be more on the way.
The look of the movie was fantastic--you could tell that the director appreciates comic books. The image of Bruce and his dead parents most vividly stands out in my mind. I am no comic enthusiast, but I have read a few and appreciated the look of this movie in light of comic book art.
The biggest element that sold this movie was character. It was driven by character--with action to keep it interesting, but unlike so many bad Comic-book movies (i.e. DareDevil) this movie spent the time to make you care. It didn't become overly dramatic--there were still lines that sounded as if they were literally lifted from the pages of a comic and put in the script ("Nice Coat" for example)--but there was depth here that we just haven't been treated too before. The best Superhero movies prior to this would be Spiderman 2 and the X-Men movies (but more X2 over the first one). This one left them far and away behind. Why? Because it dealt with character. And movies that care about the character--that respect the audience by giving them a story--a real story and not just an excuse to tie one action sequence to another--will always rise about the average "blockbusters" out there.
But most of all...this was the first time that they really dealt with the philosophy behind Batman. Its a rich idea in and of itself--best seen in a graphic novel by...the guy who did Sin City I believe...like I said, I am not a comic book guy, just a light-hearted fan...but the whole question of whether or not society needs a Dark Knight to ever have justice or if a Superman can give humanity the chance it needs to be its naturally good-self? A great question--and when its done right (which it was in the comic books I read) there are reasons on both sides. Good reasons...which is what makes for great story-telling.
Thanks to Nate Marshall, one time room-mate, for my meager comic-book education. I went out and bought a graphic novel that he lent me once--it was possibly the best one that I had read and I wanted to give it another look after watching this movie--"The Long Halloween"--a very good story. Anyways, not much else to say--I loved the movie and am eagerly looking forward to news of the next Batman.
Really late, but a wonderful movie. Others have said this very well, of course. Blows all the other Batman movies away in my opinion--makes them truly forgetable actually. I've heard somewhere that they are doing a Superman movie too, and if this is any indication of how much better they can do these movies now, it'll be one of the only times I can remember relishing a remake over the original. Batman Begins is one the of first--it was excellent, and I left the theatre very grateful that there will be more on the way.
The look of the movie was fantastic--you could tell that the director appreciates comic books. The image of Bruce and his dead parents most vividly stands out in my mind. I am no comic enthusiast, but I have read a few and appreciated the look of this movie in light of comic book art.
The biggest element that sold this movie was character. It was driven by character--with action to keep it interesting, but unlike so many bad Comic-book movies (i.e. DareDevil) this movie spent the time to make you care. It didn't become overly dramatic--there were still lines that sounded as if they were literally lifted from the pages of a comic and put in the script ("Nice Coat" for example)--but there was depth here that we just haven't been treated too before. The best Superhero movies prior to this would be Spiderman 2 and the X-Men movies (but more X2 over the first one). This one left them far and away behind. Why? Because it dealt with character. And movies that care about the character--that respect the audience by giving them a story--a real story and not just an excuse to tie one action sequence to another--will always rise about the average "blockbusters" out there.
But most of all...this was the first time that they really dealt with the philosophy behind Batman. Its a rich idea in and of itself--best seen in a graphic novel by...the guy who did Sin City I believe...like I said, I am not a comic book guy, just a light-hearted fan...but the whole question of whether or not society needs a Dark Knight to ever have justice or if a Superman can give humanity the chance it needs to be its naturally good-self? A great question--and when its done right (which it was in the comic books I read) there are reasons on both sides. Good reasons...which is what makes for great story-telling.
Thanks to Nate Marshall, one time room-mate, for my meager comic-book education. I went out and bought a graphic novel that he lent me once--it was possibly the best one that I had read and I wanted to give it another look after watching this movie--"The Long Halloween"--a very good story. Anyways, not much else to say--I loved the movie and am eagerly looking forward to news of the next Batman.
Saturday, June 25, 2005
Not Dead Yet
No, I am not. I am still around...just finding it hard to write much recently. However, some gems have been passed around on the radio and what not, and I thought I would finally say something about them...
First, Eminent Domain. Kinda scary. Scratch that--really scary. Now, I don't expect our government to abuse it...perhaps because I am a blind optimist who trusts those in authority before I take it for granted that they are simply looking for more ways to take advantage of me...but its still pretty scary. Interestingly though, the conservative judges were the ones voting against it. For all the doom and gloom coming from the left, all the talk of the imperial designs of the Bushes and the Right Wing Religious Fantatics (I've been listening to a lot of Air America recently...for some reason I enjoy making myself sick I guess)--yet inspite of all of this, the conspiracies that Bush actually planned 9/11--the Left has hardly blinked this new interpretation of Eminent Domain. Something that actually endangers the common man...and they don't care. Ironic, no?
Second...again, from Air America...I actually heard a liberal say that war was so important that when America goes to war, there can be no question of whether it should be right or not, no need to sell the war to the public--and that if we have to sell it, something's wrong. Well that sounds very idealistic...and completely crazy. If I could have spoken with this Liberal I would have asked if she was under the impression that all the previous necessary wars in our history were wars which the public naturally supported? The Cold War? World War II? World War I? The Civil War? Heck, the Revolution? Wars are sold. Its a fact--and another fact is that we have almost never had universal support for the decision to go to war. The closest we came would probably be right after the firing on Fort Sumpter and the Bombing of Pearl Harbor. Still, in the course of 5 YEARS of fighting the wars that came after those suprise attacks, and the rebuilding that came after, it was necessary for our government to sell the war on numerous occasions in order to keep the public interested and devoted to the cause. If we hadn't, we'd have remained a divided nation...or Europe would belong to Germany, Asia to Japan.
Here's my point--war is tough. People die in war--and that's never easy to deal with--and I respect and honor every man and woman who has served--every family that has sacrificed. But sacrifice doesn't mean that this war is bad--nor does it mean that we're losing it. The only reason there continues to be a reason to "sell" this war is because the Left continues to insist that the nation has been lied to by leaders looking for ways to secure cheaper oil...as gas prices rise...who sounds like they are talking out of their butts and who sounds like they are doing what America has always done when faced with challenges in war?
I know, I know--too much politics. Soon to come--my thoughts on Batman. I just bought a Graphic Novel--very excited!
No, I am not. I am still around...just finding it hard to write much recently. However, some gems have been passed around on the radio and what not, and I thought I would finally say something about them...
First, Eminent Domain. Kinda scary. Scratch that--really scary. Now, I don't expect our government to abuse it...perhaps because I am a blind optimist who trusts those in authority before I take it for granted that they are simply looking for more ways to take advantage of me...but its still pretty scary. Interestingly though, the conservative judges were the ones voting against it. For all the doom and gloom coming from the left, all the talk of the imperial designs of the Bushes and the Right Wing Religious Fantatics (I've been listening to a lot of Air America recently...for some reason I enjoy making myself sick I guess)--yet inspite of all of this, the conspiracies that Bush actually planned 9/11--the Left has hardly blinked this new interpretation of Eminent Domain. Something that actually endangers the common man...and they don't care. Ironic, no?
Second...again, from Air America...I actually heard a liberal say that war was so important that when America goes to war, there can be no question of whether it should be right or not, no need to sell the war to the public--and that if we have to sell it, something's wrong. Well that sounds very idealistic...and completely crazy. If I could have spoken with this Liberal I would have asked if she was under the impression that all the previous necessary wars in our history were wars which the public naturally supported? The Cold War? World War II? World War I? The Civil War? Heck, the Revolution? Wars are sold. Its a fact--and another fact is that we have almost never had universal support for the decision to go to war. The closest we came would probably be right after the firing on Fort Sumpter and the Bombing of Pearl Harbor. Still, in the course of 5 YEARS of fighting the wars that came after those suprise attacks, and the rebuilding that came after, it was necessary for our government to sell the war on numerous occasions in order to keep the public interested and devoted to the cause. If we hadn't, we'd have remained a divided nation...or Europe would belong to Germany, Asia to Japan.
Here's my point--war is tough. People die in war--and that's never easy to deal with--and I respect and honor every man and woman who has served--every family that has sacrificed. But sacrifice doesn't mean that this war is bad--nor does it mean that we're losing it. The only reason there continues to be a reason to "sell" this war is because the Left continues to insist that the nation has been lied to by leaders looking for ways to secure cheaper oil...as gas prices rise...who sounds like they are talking out of their butts and who sounds like they are doing what America has always done when faced with challenges in war?
I know, I know--too much politics. Soon to come--my thoughts on Batman. I just bought a Graphic Novel--very excited!
Friday, June 17, 2005
If I Could Save Time in a Bottle...
the first thing that I'd like to do is to save everyday till eternity passes away just to spend them with you...
So much going on right now...and all I wish I could do is find the pause button. It doesn't exist this side of eternity. More thoughts, more hopes, more new dreams. More new realizations...more challenges...too much for tonight. Tomorrow morning I am taking the CBEST. I've been told its a piece of cake. I have, historically, done well at these sorts of standardized tests...so lets just pray that the status quo is maintained. So...instead of trying to express everything (since I have to get to sleep, and I'm not even sure you'd like to hear it all...) I'm going to cover just a few thoughts...mostly in blurb form, and I'll leave you with a few questions.
My parents left today. The life of a missionary family is a puzzling one. We have many wonderful blessings. I know what it means to see the world. I have a realistic idea of what is out there--and what home actually means. And though I'd never ask them to stay, I cannot help but miss them all more each time they go. Its true of my wife's family as well (also missionaries)...the miles feel very long, the world very wide, when they are leaving. Everytime it makes me yearn deep down for the day when I CAN ask them to stay and just be. Just be. Hmm.
One thought...a common cliche in movies is the statement, roughly, "26 years later and I still ended up being my father!" I was watching one tonight that had this line in it...and I had to wonder...when did that become such a bad thing? Or do no parents exist that are worth modeling ourselves after? Have the hippies never died and we still falsely imagine that all parents are these idiotic, power-hungry, hypocritical, conniving creeps? This seems truly destructive to society.
Another thought...have you noticed that those little rubber braclets which originally started with Lance Armstrong's "Live Strong" campaign have now spread to almost every facet of life? I admit--I finally bought one--the check-out lady asked me if I want to let them charge me a dollar for Prostate Cancer, and as my Grandpa died of Prostate I quickly said yes and now I have a light blue braclet on my wrist. Not sure if it works for me...but I'll wear it for a little while anyways.
I watched Madagascar the other day with the family. A lot of fun...though like most dreamworks animation productions, pretty mature in comparison to Pixar. I love Pixar. My favorites have to be between the Incredibles and Nemo. Such great messages--generally not watered down sop stories of equality and what-not. Real morals--very refreshing, especially (and frighteningly) for the younger audiences--kids stuff today is getting worse and worse when it comes to values. I know. I watch Saturday morning cartoons. :) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles all the way baby!
Well, that's all for tonight. Mostly, I needed to have SOME outlet for everything...I am thinking about too many things to go straight to sleep. But I DO have to wake up at 7-ish tomorrow morning, so I should get to sleep. There's simply not enough time..."there never seems to be enough time to do the things that you want to do once you find them." But...if I could save time in a bottle...
the first thing that I'd like to do is to save everyday till eternity passes away just to spend them with you...
So much going on right now...and all I wish I could do is find the pause button. It doesn't exist this side of eternity. More thoughts, more hopes, more new dreams. More new realizations...more challenges...too much for tonight. Tomorrow morning I am taking the CBEST. I've been told its a piece of cake. I have, historically, done well at these sorts of standardized tests...so lets just pray that the status quo is maintained. So...instead of trying to express everything (since I have to get to sleep, and I'm not even sure you'd like to hear it all...) I'm going to cover just a few thoughts...mostly in blurb form, and I'll leave you with a few questions.
My parents left today. The life of a missionary family is a puzzling one. We have many wonderful blessings. I know what it means to see the world. I have a realistic idea of what is out there--and what home actually means. And though I'd never ask them to stay, I cannot help but miss them all more each time they go. Its true of my wife's family as well (also missionaries)...the miles feel very long, the world very wide, when they are leaving. Everytime it makes me yearn deep down for the day when I CAN ask them to stay and just be. Just be. Hmm.
One thought...a common cliche in movies is the statement, roughly, "26 years later and I still ended up being my father!" I was watching one tonight that had this line in it...and I had to wonder...when did that become such a bad thing? Or do no parents exist that are worth modeling ourselves after? Have the hippies never died and we still falsely imagine that all parents are these idiotic, power-hungry, hypocritical, conniving creeps? This seems truly destructive to society.
Another thought...have you noticed that those little rubber braclets which originally started with Lance Armstrong's "Live Strong" campaign have now spread to almost every facet of life? I admit--I finally bought one--the check-out lady asked me if I want to let them charge me a dollar for Prostate Cancer, and as my Grandpa died of Prostate I quickly said yes and now I have a light blue braclet on my wrist. Not sure if it works for me...but I'll wear it for a little while anyways.
I watched Madagascar the other day with the family. A lot of fun...though like most dreamworks animation productions, pretty mature in comparison to Pixar. I love Pixar. My favorites have to be between the Incredibles and Nemo. Such great messages--generally not watered down sop stories of equality and what-not. Real morals--very refreshing, especially (and frighteningly) for the younger audiences--kids stuff today is getting worse and worse when it comes to values. I know. I watch Saturday morning cartoons. :) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles all the way baby!
Well, that's all for tonight. Mostly, I needed to have SOME outlet for everything...I am thinking about too many things to go straight to sleep. But I DO have to wake up at 7-ish tomorrow morning, so I should get to sleep. There's simply not enough time..."there never seems to be enough time to do the things that you want to do once you find them." But...if I could save time in a bottle...
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
Hail to the Chief
Its about time, Mr President.
Interestingly (and predictably) little notice has been given to the White House recently by the press. Being disappointed that he won, they are trying to avoid recognizing him as the victorious President that he is by ignoring him and instead merely referring to the White House's supposed agenda.
Well, President Bush finally presented himself as the leader of the majority. Bravo! About time! Take notice, those on the Left: this is an accurate summation of the politics of the Democrats. The minority IS trying to destroy our nation and government.
Sigh. But--the speech was beautiful.
Its about time, Mr President.
Interestingly (and predictably) little notice has been given to the White House recently by the press. Being disappointed that he won, they are trying to avoid recognizing him as the victorious President that he is by ignoring him and instead merely referring to the White House's supposed agenda.
Well, President Bush finally presented himself as the leader of the majority. Bravo! About time! Take notice, those on the Left: this is an accurate summation of the politics of the Democrats. The minority IS trying to destroy our nation and government.
Sigh. But--the speech was beautiful.
Sunday, June 12, 2005
A Great Day
My family is here this week. They're missionaries in the Philippines and they are headed back there after having spent a year on home ministry. And, naturally, before going back they are getting some quality time with us. Its a priority because the miles are long and the environment is at least mildly dangerous (for them) and they don't get to go through without spending time with us. We always have a good time--working out those little adjustments that come with growing up and being friends with your parents--and we always do something that I remember for a long time afterwards.
Today was particularly good though. We had decided to drive up to Big Bear and spend the day up there. For those of you not in California or unfamiliar with Big Bear...its really beautiful up there--a town built about 7000 ft above the rest of us around a beautiful lake. We don't get to go there often...so the charm really hasn't worn off. Not whole lot to do up there (if you're not intending to spend a lot of money) beyond walk and look at shops and what not...but when you go with that in mind, it can be a lot of fun. Today really was.
And I needed that. These past two weeks have been a little difficult. Having never known exactly what I wanted to be, over the past few months that has been a serious issue...and it only intensified over the past two weeks. So, needless to say, it was a real relief today to just get (literally) above it all and walk in the trees and think only about how beautiful it all was.
On a less reflective note...I heard today that once again people are trying to outlaw spanking. How ridiculous will we get?!?! Any sane person knows that there's a difference between discipline and beatings...and I gotta say I think in many cases spankings are almost necessary. I admit, I am relatively new to the whole fatherhood deal--and I have had very little reason to spank Aiden--the kids is barely old enough to deal with it and he's basically the sweetest kid around anyways. However...when you get to be dealing with children that are...going to school...interacting with other frequently...pushing new boundaries constantly...I think its important at times to show that certain transgressions are not just "oops" instances...sometimes there's pain involved. Not because I want to harm my child--but so that he will learn to consider the gravity of his actions. I don't think this is easily impressed on a 6 year old by making them sit for 15 minutes. It sounds a little old-fashioned...but pain is a very effective teacher in most cases. I recognize there will be exceptions--there always are. However...it appears that those exceptions want to start making rules. That's inappropriate. Most kids can learn from a proper spanking (by which I mean, a sound whack to the behind as a result of disobedience and a warning)...its just silly to say that it cripples kids. "Spare the rod, spoil the child." Right?
And of course...the parent shouldn't spank out of anger--that's dangerous. Spankings are tools for instruction...which is why its really silly to me that they are viewed as extreme measures. Anyways...that may be me. I was spanked...maybe I'm ill-adjusted and don't realize my problems are making me miss the reality of the dilemma.
Whatever.
My family is here this week. They're missionaries in the Philippines and they are headed back there after having spent a year on home ministry. And, naturally, before going back they are getting some quality time with us. Its a priority because the miles are long and the environment is at least mildly dangerous (for them) and they don't get to go through without spending time with us. We always have a good time--working out those little adjustments that come with growing up and being friends with your parents--and we always do something that I remember for a long time afterwards.
Today was particularly good though. We had decided to drive up to Big Bear and spend the day up there. For those of you not in California or unfamiliar with Big Bear...its really beautiful up there--a town built about 7000 ft above the rest of us around a beautiful lake. We don't get to go there often...so the charm really hasn't worn off. Not whole lot to do up there (if you're not intending to spend a lot of money) beyond walk and look at shops and what not...but when you go with that in mind, it can be a lot of fun. Today really was.
And I needed that. These past two weeks have been a little difficult. Having never known exactly what I wanted to be, over the past few months that has been a serious issue...and it only intensified over the past two weeks. So, needless to say, it was a real relief today to just get (literally) above it all and walk in the trees and think only about how beautiful it all was.
On a less reflective note...I heard today that once again people are trying to outlaw spanking. How ridiculous will we get?!?! Any sane person knows that there's a difference between discipline and beatings...and I gotta say I think in many cases spankings are almost necessary. I admit, I am relatively new to the whole fatherhood deal--and I have had very little reason to spank Aiden--the kids is barely old enough to deal with it and he's basically the sweetest kid around anyways. However...when you get to be dealing with children that are...going to school...interacting with other frequently...pushing new boundaries constantly...I think its important at times to show that certain transgressions are not just "oops" instances...sometimes there's pain involved. Not because I want to harm my child--but so that he will learn to consider the gravity of his actions. I don't think this is easily impressed on a 6 year old by making them sit for 15 minutes. It sounds a little old-fashioned...but pain is a very effective teacher in most cases. I recognize there will be exceptions--there always are. However...it appears that those exceptions want to start making rules. That's inappropriate. Most kids can learn from a proper spanking (by which I mean, a sound whack to the behind as a result of disobedience and a warning)...its just silly to say that it cripples kids. "Spare the rod, spoil the child." Right?
And of course...the parent shouldn't spank out of anger--that's dangerous. Spankings are tools for instruction...which is why its really silly to me that they are viewed as extreme measures. Anyways...that may be me. I was spanked...maybe I'm ill-adjusted and don't realize my problems are making me miss the reality of the dilemma.
Whatever.
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Nanny 911 VS Super-Nanny
Fox and ABC have their respective versions of the Nanny reality TV show. Basically...families with clueless parents, and out of control kids get British Nannies (Americans are too crude to be nannies apparently) to help them. Of all the reality shows out there...these are actually interesting, and beneficial to the audience--Sheri and I always have discussions about what the parents should be doing and talk about how we will deal with the challenges we see them dealing with.
However...there's a clear quality difference. Nanny 911 (Fox) out-does Super-Nanny (ABC) in almost every way. First, N-911 has a variety of Nannies, led by a Nanny who served the Royal Family of Britain. So the cool factor is definately on the side of Fox. Secondly, while the N-911 nannies give instructions and rules but basically make the parents do everything for themselves so they finally learn, the nannies of SN actually do the work for the parents the first day. Though they DO actually leave the parents to the task the next day, the instruction is lacking--by doing it for the parents, the parents never have to figure out for themselves (suing the guidelines set out by the nannies) what was wrong with their previous approach. Instead, the parents essentially do none of the things the nanny did, because they just watched the nanny do the work--and the kids may respect the unfamiliar nanny, but the parent is not getting used to asserting authority. And finally...the nannies of N-911 wear proper English Nanny outfits and are very proper in their behavior and language. The SN nanny dressed like your average person...and was pretty coarse--was basically mocking the mother in her observation period.
Hands down, watch Fox's version on Monday nights. Its actually a really good show.
Fox and ABC have their respective versions of the Nanny reality TV show. Basically...families with clueless parents, and out of control kids get British Nannies (Americans are too crude to be nannies apparently) to help them. Of all the reality shows out there...these are actually interesting, and beneficial to the audience--Sheri and I always have discussions about what the parents should be doing and talk about how we will deal with the challenges we see them dealing with.
However...there's a clear quality difference. Nanny 911 (Fox) out-does Super-Nanny (ABC) in almost every way. First, N-911 has a variety of Nannies, led by a Nanny who served the Royal Family of Britain. So the cool factor is definately on the side of Fox. Secondly, while the N-911 nannies give instructions and rules but basically make the parents do everything for themselves so they finally learn, the nannies of SN actually do the work for the parents the first day. Though they DO actually leave the parents to the task the next day, the instruction is lacking--by doing it for the parents, the parents never have to figure out for themselves (suing the guidelines set out by the nannies) what was wrong with their previous approach. Instead, the parents essentially do none of the things the nanny did, because they just watched the nanny do the work--and the kids may respect the unfamiliar nanny, but the parent is not getting used to asserting authority. And finally...the nannies of N-911 wear proper English Nanny outfits and are very proper in their behavior and language. The SN nanny dressed like your average person...and was pretty coarse--was basically mocking the mother in her observation period.
Hands down, watch Fox's version on Monday nights. Its actually a really good show.
Interesting
First...I was driving today, and this post has been inspired by a man who called the radio station I was listening too...this caller said (and was affirmed by the host of the show I was listening to) that America needed to realize that the greatest threat to our way of life was not the terrorists but NeoCons. Neo Conservatives. Threating the American way of life. More so then any man who ever flew a plane into any building...more so then any man who beheaded innocent civilians...more so then any tyrant with aspirations of world domination and brutal genocide.
Initially, I could only laugh. Clearly, this pinko-commie was off his rocker. But I had to wonder...how could anyone seriously postulate that the Religious Right of America honestly represented a greater threat to the "American Way" then terrorists? Whether it should have or not...this troubled me. So I thought about it a long time.
And finally I grasped the truth; the stereotypes have truth in them after all. In the past election year, I learned that to be taken seriously on any "meaningful" level, you have to remove yourself from the Fox News, Drudge Report pundits--supposedly if you enjoy cartoons lampooning the left you're just another right wing nut-job whose opinion isn't as valid as, say, the Michael Moore's and Dan Rather's out there. However...I am beginning to doubt the accuracy of this opinion. Whether I read Fox News or not...whether I allow myself to laugh at a cartoon dipicting all Lefties as Pinko-Commies or not...I am regarded as a serious threat to Democracy by men like this caller--and I have to assume he's not alone since the host of the radio show affirmed and encouraged his depiction of the Right. They think its legitimate. Why?
I finally got it. Because, democracy, to the Left, means enforced Equality, without absolute values of any meaningful kind--because that interferes with Equality. To the Left, I, a Right Wing Nut-Job, have much more in common with the terrorists then I do with them. I believe in absolute truths which require a life that changes in the light of truth. To the Left...this is incomprehensible. And, because I am an American, which supposedly means I should support the idea of democracy as one that prizes equality above all else but I don't...I really AM a bigger threat to the Left's interpretation of America's way of life then any terrorists--I'm right here, trying to ensure that Deomcracy is defined not by Equality, but Liberty.
Liberty and Equality. Two very different values.
Those that prize Liberty suggest that all men are created with equal rights and gives the freedom to enjoy those rights--with the faith that men given the opportunity to make whatever life they want for themselves WILL find prosperity. They believe in absolutes, because Liberty allows for right and wrong--as right as it is for men to be free, it is wrong for men oppress others--and they value life, authority, etc. Those who value Liberty were men like Churchill. Eisenhower. Reagan. Lincoln. Washington. Heroes.
Those that prize Equality suggest that all men deserve to have exactly the same opportunities--and that when those opportunities don't materialize we should enforce equality; they believe that to have equality, we cannot value anything absolutes because that suggests that those who don't agree wouldn't be on an equal playing field with us--the only absolute is the need for absolute Equality. The best examples of enforced Equality is the French Revolution at the end of the 1700's and the Russian Revolution at the beginning of the 1900's. Both brought death and terror. Equality brings the uprooting and upturning of all that holds society together, and ironically tyrants spring forth everytime in the wake of a revolution of enforced Equality. Napoleon and Stalin didn't rise out of liberty. They came about at the hands of "Citizens" and "Comrades."
Because I prize liberty I am a threat. Of course they'll never say it...that's the truth. I am poor...I don't want a hand-out, nor do I want to penalize the rich for the fact that I am poor. I am therefore a traitor.
I believe in absolutes and consider such truths to have a direct effect on my life--and see black and white, right and wrong. There tends to be little room for undistinguishable Equality in such a world. I am public enemy #1 to the Left...along with everyone else that holds a similar belief.
I don't think all Democrats fall into this category--I have friends that are independents and even Democrats who would think that this idiot was as stupid as I do. But there is a large majority on the Left that would agree with the comment made by this insightful radio caller. And I finally understand exactly why. Interesting.
First...I was driving today, and this post has been inspired by a man who called the radio station I was listening too...this caller said (and was affirmed by the host of the show I was listening to) that America needed to realize that the greatest threat to our way of life was not the terrorists but NeoCons. Neo Conservatives. Threating the American way of life. More so then any man who ever flew a plane into any building...more so then any man who beheaded innocent civilians...more so then any tyrant with aspirations of world domination and brutal genocide.
Initially, I could only laugh. Clearly, this pinko-commie was off his rocker. But I had to wonder...how could anyone seriously postulate that the Religious Right of America honestly represented a greater threat to the "American Way" then terrorists? Whether it should have or not...this troubled me. So I thought about it a long time.
And finally I grasped the truth; the stereotypes have truth in them after all. In the past election year, I learned that to be taken seriously on any "meaningful" level, you have to remove yourself from the Fox News, Drudge Report pundits--supposedly if you enjoy cartoons lampooning the left you're just another right wing nut-job whose opinion isn't as valid as, say, the Michael Moore's and Dan Rather's out there. However...I am beginning to doubt the accuracy of this opinion. Whether I read Fox News or not...whether I allow myself to laugh at a cartoon dipicting all Lefties as Pinko-Commies or not...I am regarded as a serious threat to Democracy by men like this caller--and I have to assume he's not alone since the host of the radio show affirmed and encouraged his depiction of the Right. They think its legitimate. Why?
I finally got it. Because, democracy, to the Left, means enforced Equality, without absolute values of any meaningful kind--because that interferes with Equality. To the Left, I, a Right Wing Nut-Job, have much more in common with the terrorists then I do with them. I believe in absolute truths which require a life that changes in the light of truth. To the Left...this is incomprehensible. And, because I am an American, which supposedly means I should support the idea of democracy as one that prizes equality above all else but I don't...I really AM a bigger threat to the Left's interpretation of America's way of life then any terrorists--I'm right here, trying to ensure that Deomcracy is defined not by Equality, but Liberty.
Liberty and Equality. Two very different values.
Those that prize Liberty suggest that all men are created with equal rights and gives the freedom to enjoy those rights--with the faith that men given the opportunity to make whatever life they want for themselves WILL find prosperity. They believe in absolutes, because Liberty allows for right and wrong--as right as it is for men to be free, it is wrong for men oppress others--and they value life, authority, etc. Those who value Liberty were men like Churchill. Eisenhower. Reagan. Lincoln. Washington. Heroes.
Those that prize Equality suggest that all men deserve to have exactly the same opportunities--and that when those opportunities don't materialize we should enforce equality; they believe that to have equality, we cannot value anything absolutes because that suggests that those who don't agree wouldn't be on an equal playing field with us--the only absolute is the need for absolute Equality. The best examples of enforced Equality is the French Revolution at the end of the 1700's and the Russian Revolution at the beginning of the 1900's. Both brought death and terror. Equality brings the uprooting and upturning of all that holds society together, and ironically tyrants spring forth everytime in the wake of a revolution of enforced Equality. Napoleon and Stalin didn't rise out of liberty. They came about at the hands of "Citizens" and "Comrades."
Because I prize liberty I am a threat. Of course they'll never say it...that's the truth. I am poor...I don't want a hand-out, nor do I want to penalize the rich for the fact that I am poor. I am therefore a traitor.
I believe in absolutes and consider such truths to have a direct effect on my life--and see black and white, right and wrong. There tends to be little room for undistinguishable Equality in such a world. I am public enemy #1 to the Left...along with everyone else that holds a similar belief.
I don't think all Democrats fall into this category--I have friends that are independents and even Democrats who would think that this idiot was as stupid as I do. But there is a large majority on the Left that would agree with the comment made by this insightful radio caller. And I finally understand exactly why. Interesting.
Monday, June 06, 2005
Christian Love and Evil
First, let me say--I love comments. Please comment--if you agree or disagree. Discussion is wonderful--what better way to know more truth than to open-mindedly discuss with others? In the comments it was asked: why do we need "Christian Love" and where does evil come from?
The answer to both of these questions, in my opinion, revolves around one major issue: humanity's selfishness.
First to say, Love that doesn't know Christ is flawed, and is never really love. At its best it is a twisted version of the authentic. Love without Christ is ultimately, without exception, about yourself. Its about satisfying your desires for whatever it is that you cling to in the name of "love". For a truly great experiment in examining humanity's version of love, read C.S. Lewis' Great Divorce. I've read it/listened to it...oh, at least a dozen times now--and each time I see a little more clearly how manipulative we are when we speak of love that is seperated from Christ.
Why is Christian love unselfish? Because--its author, its model, its King gave up Himself when there was nothing to gain but love. Christ loved when we could not even comprehend what that meant. Paying the price in Himself, He enabled us to be redeemed...more importantly--He gave us an example of what real love looked like (selfless, sacrificial and stronger than Hell itself in its joy) and then bizarrely told us to follow His lead.
That's why Christian love is necessary. Its the only real love there is--certainly its the only love that would ever offer us anything other then torment and destruction.
As for evil...perhaps you can already guess what I am going to say...evil is selfishness. Its putting our will before God's--chosing our preferred, lesser good, over the greater good offered to us by our creator. In so doing, we exalt ourselves to a position we were never intended to occupy--deciding what is our best good for ourselves--and we sin against God. As we do this...the lesser good that we cling too (and it IS a lesser good--evil only exists as a perversion of the good--in itself it is nothing) that good becomes an evil thing, not because the good that originally attracted us is wrong--but because we have undermined God, using our freewill to chose our way before His way, we have destroyed the very thing we would have given up heaven to keep for ourselves.
Think of a bubble. Everybody, as a child, loved bubbles. They're wonderful, beautiful magical things. Every kid wants to reach out and grap that mysterious floating ball...and the instant you try to close your hand on the bubble, the bubble disappears. The only way you can handle a bubble is by using the Bubble Wand--any other approach and the bubble is gone. So it is with any good that you try to hold onto when it is outside of the will of God.
Sex. Money. Power. Love. Fame.
No person who has achieved their ends when pursuing one of these things for itself has ever found satisfaction. But those who try to impliment the ideals of Christian love into their life...if and when any of those lesser goods come into their lives--they discover the joy that those good bring, and as they were satsified merely to love God and live the life that His love leads us towards, their satisfaction cannot be shaken.
First, let me say--I love comments. Please comment--if you agree or disagree. Discussion is wonderful--what better way to know more truth than to open-mindedly discuss with others? In the comments it was asked: why do we need "Christian Love" and where does evil come from?
The answer to both of these questions, in my opinion, revolves around one major issue: humanity's selfishness.
First to say, Love that doesn't know Christ is flawed, and is never really love. At its best it is a twisted version of the authentic. Love without Christ is ultimately, without exception, about yourself. Its about satisfying your desires for whatever it is that you cling to in the name of "love". For a truly great experiment in examining humanity's version of love, read C.S. Lewis' Great Divorce. I've read it/listened to it...oh, at least a dozen times now--and each time I see a little more clearly how manipulative we are when we speak of love that is seperated from Christ.
Why is Christian love unselfish? Because--its author, its model, its King gave up Himself when there was nothing to gain but love. Christ loved when we could not even comprehend what that meant. Paying the price in Himself, He enabled us to be redeemed...more importantly--He gave us an example of what real love looked like (selfless, sacrificial and stronger than Hell itself in its joy) and then bizarrely told us to follow His lead.
That's why Christian love is necessary. Its the only real love there is--certainly its the only love that would ever offer us anything other then torment and destruction.
As for evil...perhaps you can already guess what I am going to say...evil is selfishness. Its putting our will before God's--chosing our preferred, lesser good, over the greater good offered to us by our creator. In so doing, we exalt ourselves to a position we were never intended to occupy--deciding what is our best good for ourselves--and we sin against God. As we do this...the lesser good that we cling too (and it IS a lesser good--evil only exists as a perversion of the good--in itself it is nothing) that good becomes an evil thing, not because the good that originally attracted us is wrong--but because we have undermined God, using our freewill to chose our way before His way, we have destroyed the very thing we would have given up heaven to keep for ourselves.
Think of a bubble. Everybody, as a child, loved bubbles. They're wonderful, beautiful magical things. Every kid wants to reach out and grap that mysterious floating ball...and the instant you try to close your hand on the bubble, the bubble disappears. The only way you can handle a bubble is by using the Bubble Wand--any other approach and the bubble is gone. So it is with any good that you try to hold onto when it is outside of the will of God.
Sex. Money. Power. Love. Fame.
No person who has achieved their ends when pursuing one of these things for itself has ever found satisfaction. But those who try to impliment the ideals of Christian love into their life...if and when any of those lesser goods come into their lives--they discover the joy that those good bring, and as they were satsified merely to love God and live the life that His love leads us towards, their satisfaction cannot be shaken.
D-Day
By the way...before the 6th becomes the 7th...take a moment and reflect on how the world changed when thousands of young men didn't reflect on their own desires, but instead stormed the beaches of a land far away to defeat a man who had decided that war was a viable option for venting his hatred. At Normandy, the world changed.
To those that gave their lives...and to those who survived and lived lives of honor; thank you. The world was changed by your sacrifice and by your determination. May this new generation learn from you before it is too late.
It is a truly disturbing thought to me that my son will likely never actually know anyone who was alive and served during the Second World War.
By the way...before the 6th becomes the 7th...take a moment and reflect on how the world changed when thousands of young men didn't reflect on their own desires, but instead stormed the beaches of a land far away to defeat a man who had decided that war was a viable option for venting his hatred. At Normandy, the world changed.
To those that gave their lives...and to those who survived and lived lives of honor; thank you. The world was changed by your sacrifice and by your determination. May this new generation learn from you before it is too late.
It is a truly disturbing thought to me that my son will likely never actually know anyone who was alive and served during the Second World War.
Semi-Charmed Life
Its cliche, I know, but I haven't written in a while and I needed a title...sue me.
I am tired of being in between stages of life--always developing, never being. It used to be that when I felt like this, there was some "event" coming up that I could throw my energy into (in point of fact, often the event was the source of the angst)...but now I am anxious over life. How tiring.
Disatisfaction is...disatisfying. Heh...I am tired. I am signed up to take the CBEST on June 18th. I'm applying for jobs anywhere that it looks like it might pay enough to support us...and I am dealing with the reality that whatever else may happen, I may not be doing any of the things that I would love to do in the near future (at least, not full-time) because it just doesn't seem possible that everything will work out. Do what I love AND get paid well for it?!?! Not likely...or so I am coming to see.
Generally I like to think that I have lived a charmed life, and partly as a result, imho, I am generally an optimist. A realist...but an optimistic realist--the reality of life is that there are problems but there's also a loving God. And I've had a good time...never broken a bone...never gotten terribly sick...usually get more than I deserve--including Sheri and Aiden...but getting through the stress of establishing yourself in life is daunting even for me. Too many things would have to simply fall into place.
However...I DID just get an i-Pod as a Graduation present, and the music has been playing constantly ever since. Nothing can be too daunting when the music's playing, right?
I think there is something to the myth that song is at the heart of the universe. The peace that comes from the harmonies and melodies--from the simple beat--of a favorite song is more calming than any nap, hot chocolate, sunny afternoon...apart from the rare chance to lose yourself in unspoilt nature, music is one of the best chances of touching something deeper than your own petty thoughts. Therapy for the soul...and a lot of fun for the rest of you.
Its cliche, I know, but I haven't written in a while and I needed a title...sue me.
I am tired of being in between stages of life--always developing, never being. It used to be that when I felt like this, there was some "event" coming up that I could throw my energy into (in point of fact, often the event was the source of the angst)...but now I am anxious over life. How tiring.
Disatisfaction is...disatisfying. Heh...I am tired. I am signed up to take the CBEST on June 18th. I'm applying for jobs anywhere that it looks like it might pay enough to support us...and I am dealing with the reality that whatever else may happen, I may not be doing any of the things that I would love to do in the near future (at least, not full-time) because it just doesn't seem possible that everything will work out. Do what I love AND get paid well for it?!?! Not likely...or so I am coming to see.
Generally I like to think that I have lived a charmed life, and partly as a result, imho, I am generally an optimist. A realist...but an optimistic realist--the reality of life is that there are problems but there's also a loving God. And I've had a good time...never broken a bone...never gotten terribly sick...usually get more than I deserve--including Sheri and Aiden...but getting through the stress of establishing yourself in life is daunting even for me. Too many things would have to simply fall into place.
However...I DID just get an i-Pod as a Graduation present, and the music has been playing constantly ever since. Nothing can be too daunting when the music's playing, right?
I think there is something to the myth that song is at the heart of the universe. The peace that comes from the harmonies and melodies--from the simple beat--of a favorite song is more calming than any nap, hot chocolate, sunny afternoon...apart from the rare chance to lose yourself in unspoilt nature, music is one of the best chances of touching something deeper than your own petty thoughts. Therapy for the soul...and a lot of fun for the rest of you.
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Life After Biola
Start with life as we know it today...
As you probably caught, I graduated this past Saturday. I have a B.A. now...and I am, surprise, unemployed. So, I am looking for a job, while my incredible wife helps us make ends meet by picking up extra hours. The problem in finding a job--I can get a job--but I need a job that pays enough to let Sheri stay home during the week. These are hard to find. SO I continue looking. Meanwhile I am home with Aiden. He's amazing, and developing so fast its frightening. He also requries a lot of time and attention--in fact, this is stolen time...and I have to go help him right now. So, I'll be on here a little less in the foreseeable future--at least till things pick up a little more. Maybe in the evenings.
Start with life as we know it today...
As you probably caught, I graduated this past Saturday. I have a B.A. now...and I am, surprise, unemployed. So, I am looking for a job, while my incredible wife helps us make ends meet by picking up extra hours. The problem in finding a job--I can get a job--but I need a job that pays enough to let Sheri stay home during the week. These are hard to find. SO I continue looking. Meanwhile I am home with Aiden. He's amazing, and developing so fast its frightening. He also requries a lot of time and attention--in fact, this is stolen time...and I have to go help him right now. So, I'll be on here a little less in the foreseeable future--at least till things pick up a little more. Maybe in the evenings.
Saturday, May 28, 2005
Peace in This World
I'll go right ahead and spoil the ending...I believe the notion of establishing peace in this world to be a false hope.
Please understand; its not that I like the idea of war. Nor do I accept the Hobbesian idea that all of mankind is involved in an internal struggle for power, that civilization exists only as the best mediated path to avoid mutual destruction in the otherwise endless and unavoidable wars.
My reasons for doubting world peace are, in a way, simpler than that. I believe man is sinful--and that while there ARE men who prize peace and want to see men live together in Christian love, there are also plenty of men who will chose to burn in Hell even as they look on the throne of Christ.
I'm not trying to get into a theological discussion on the nature of salvation. What I am talking about is the story told in John's Revelation--that after 1000 years of life on earth with Christ as our King, the number of those that will rise up with the Enemy to defy heaven will be as the sand on the sea shore. Humanity is fallen--it is only by divine grace that we desire goodness.
Why am I arguing this? Because I am frequently chastized by other Christians for ignoring the call to love in the Bible. I have been told that I ignore the commandment not to kill. The problems with the translation of scripture aside (the literal translation of "thou shalt not kill" means no murder, not no war, captial punishment, etc).
There seems to be a disconnect when it comes to reality and those who oppose any and all wars. Realistically, it seems to ignore the fact that there are people who will chose to go to hell even when they have seen God Himself. Realistically, it overlooks the fact that those same people will not hesitate to destroy paradise for their own ends--and while there will come a day when God's strength will answer any selfish desire, in this world, to live justly requires not merely minds and souls that cherish love and peace, but strong bodies who will defend those same ideals from men that hate the very thought of a world without war.
It assumes that America is one of the great instigators of that desire for carnage. America has flaws--nobody would thoughtfully suggest otherwise--but you would be overly cynical and as closeminded as the "war mongers" if you could not believe that those who suggest peace through strength don't understand the appeal of a world where love and peace rule supreme. The reality is, such a world will not exist this side of heaven. Christians shouldn't imagine that they can extricate themselves from the burdens of this world by living for the abstract peace while terrorists and tyrants burn the innocent and helpless.
For every successful "people power" movement, there is always the realistic threat that in the end, if need be, the tyrants will be overpowered by force. The people power revolts that were successful happened when the tyrants realized that the time had come to take the money and run (think Philippine dictator Marcos) rather then run the risk of certain death by trying to fight. Ultimately, force was still a factor--the only reason those instances were resolved peacefully was because the tyrants were smarter/bigger cowards then others who clung on to the bitter end (think Saddam).
Peace in this world is a false hope. But I told you that already. I do believe that it is important to always try to avoid the destruction of war--but a good leader understand the difference between peace and appeasement. Look forward to heaven, and trust that in the meantime God will give us the strength and the faith to endure in a world of darkness and evil men. For the sake of my son, I certainly hope that God will protect us.
I'll go right ahead and spoil the ending...I believe the notion of establishing peace in this world to be a false hope.
Please understand; its not that I like the idea of war. Nor do I accept the Hobbesian idea that all of mankind is involved in an internal struggle for power, that civilization exists only as the best mediated path to avoid mutual destruction in the otherwise endless and unavoidable wars.
My reasons for doubting world peace are, in a way, simpler than that. I believe man is sinful--and that while there ARE men who prize peace and want to see men live together in Christian love, there are also plenty of men who will chose to burn in Hell even as they look on the throne of Christ.
I'm not trying to get into a theological discussion on the nature of salvation. What I am talking about is the story told in John's Revelation--that after 1000 years of life on earth with Christ as our King, the number of those that will rise up with the Enemy to defy heaven will be as the sand on the sea shore. Humanity is fallen--it is only by divine grace that we desire goodness.
Why am I arguing this? Because I am frequently chastized by other Christians for ignoring the call to love in the Bible. I have been told that I ignore the commandment not to kill. The problems with the translation of scripture aside (the literal translation of "thou shalt not kill" means no murder, not no war, captial punishment, etc).
There seems to be a disconnect when it comes to reality and those who oppose any and all wars. Realistically, it seems to ignore the fact that there are people who will chose to go to hell even when they have seen God Himself. Realistically, it overlooks the fact that those same people will not hesitate to destroy paradise for their own ends--and while there will come a day when God's strength will answer any selfish desire, in this world, to live justly requires not merely minds and souls that cherish love and peace, but strong bodies who will defend those same ideals from men that hate the very thought of a world without war.
It assumes that America is one of the great instigators of that desire for carnage. America has flaws--nobody would thoughtfully suggest otherwise--but you would be overly cynical and as closeminded as the "war mongers" if you could not believe that those who suggest peace through strength don't understand the appeal of a world where love and peace rule supreme. The reality is, such a world will not exist this side of heaven. Christians shouldn't imagine that they can extricate themselves from the burdens of this world by living for the abstract peace while terrorists and tyrants burn the innocent and helpless.
For every successful "people power" movement, there is always the realistic threat that in the end, if need be, the tyrants will be overpowered by force. The people power revolts that were successful happened when the tyrants realized that the time had come to take the money and run (think Philippine dictator Marcos) rather then run the risk of certain death by trying to fight. Ultimately, force was still a factor--the only reason those instances were resolved peacefully was because the tyrants were smarter/bigger cowards then others who clung on to the bitter end (think Saddam).
Peace in this world is a false hope. But I told you that already. I do believe that it is important to always try to avoid the destruction of war--but a good leader understand the difference between peace and appeasement. Look forward to heaven, and trust that in the meantime God will give us the strength and the faith to endure in a world of darkness and evil men. For the sake of my son, I certainly hope that God will protect us.
Thursday, May 26, 2005
DONE & DONE.
I handed in my last undergrad paper just now.
Five years and I am done. The relief was almost too much--I had one last exam this morning and the anticipation made it almost impossible to write my last two essays.
Its hard to explain...everything feels a little better--the breeze and the sun outside feel more promising than they have in a long time. I could get used to this.
The only reason I am inside typing right now is because I am waiting for a ride and I wanted to listen to some music in the meantime--which is also my only present complaint--the stupid library computers have all the volume set extremely low--even on the earphones--so for all the exhileration I am presenting feeling, I cannot enjoy music at a volume that would be suitable for this occasion. Oh well--I won't have to be at the library anymore (at least for a while) so I can listen elsewhere. Always a silver-lining. :) Hurrah!
Done.
Done
DONE
DONE
I handed in my last undergrad paper just now.
Five years and I am done. The relief was almost too much--I had one last exam this morning and the anticipation made it almost impossible to write my last two essays.
Its hard to explain...everything feels a little better--the breeze and the sun outside feel more promising than they have in a long time. I could get used to this.
The only reason I am inside typing right now is because I am waiting for a ride and I wanted to listen to some music in the meantime--which is also my only present complaint--the stupid library computers have all the volume set extremely low--even on the earphones--so for all the exhileration I am presenting feeling, I cannot enjoy music at a volume that would be suitable for this occasion. Oh well--I won't have to be at the library anymore (at least for a while) so I can listen elsewhere. Always a silver-lining. :) Hurrah!
Done.
Done
DONE
DONE
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Indulgence
They say that one of the signs of being a person that rises above the rest is adaptability. Looking at change, adversity, disappointment, and seeing not failure or frustration, but opportunity; hope that something better will come as a result of the new, unforseen path that life inevitably takes.
Still, letting go is difficult. Attaching yourself to ideas, to institutions, to plans that can change within the blink of an eye is a risk for everyone. Allowing those same ideas, institutions and plans to evolve--possibly into something you would never have originally contemplated is difficult. In an odd way, those intangible investments are a part of you, and to see them tossed to the wayside is even painful, and certainly discouraging. You want to indulge yourself--to refuse to change, to stand still and appreciate the comfort of the plans that you have invested in.
Unfortunately, we're not here to indulge our pride. Nor are we here to avoid risk. We're here to change the world, and that cannot be accomplished by resisiting change, cowering from adversity, or caving to frustration. We need to let go and follow where the changes in life lead--as James says, "Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away." As all things lay in the hands of our God, how can we desire our original path over the new one that presents itself?
Sigh. Knowing this truth doesn't make it easier. But, hopefully, its enough to make us act; truth used to be enough to compel men to act. Now we have surrendered the idea of truth, as Screwtape says, so that we have conflicting "truths" floating simultaneously in our heads without ever realizing the dilemma that places us in. However--this is a truth...and indulgence is false hope, a fool's pride. And if we are ever to grow, we cannot indulge ourselves forever.
I am flawed...but I am cleaning up so well.
They say that one of the signs of being a person that rises above the rest is adaptability. Looking at change, adversity, disappointment, and seeing not failure or frustration, but opportunity; hope that something better will come as a result of the new, unforseen path that life inevitably takes.
Still, letting go is difficult. Attaching yourself to ideas, to institutions, to plans that can change within the blink of an eye is a risk for everyone. Allowing those same ideas, institutions and plans to evolve--possibly into something you would never have originally contemplated is difficult. In an odd way, those intangible investments are a part of you, and to see them tossed to the wayside is even painful, and certainly discouraging. You want to indulge yourself--to refuse to change, to stand still and appreciate the comfort of the plans that you have invested in.
Unfortunately, we're not here to indulge our pride. Nor are we here to avoid risk. We're here to change the world, and that cannot be accomplished by resisiting change, cowering from adversity, or caving to frustration. We need to let go and follow where the changes in life lead--as James says, "Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away." As all things lay in the hands of our God, how can we desire our original path over the new one that presents itself?
Sigh. Knowing this truth doesn't make it easier. But, hopefully, its enough to make us act; truth used to be enough to compel men to act. Now we have surrendered the idea of truth, as Screwtape says, so that we have conflicting "truths" floating simultaneously in our heads without ever realizing the dilemma that places us in. However--this is a truth...and indulgence is false hope, a fool's pride. And if we are ever to grow, we cannot indulge ourselves forever.
I am flawed...but I am cleaning up so well.
When Things Go Very, Very Wrong
Amnesty International. Not a big fan.
Today they have made ridiculous comparisons to the American prisons for terror suspects and war criminals to the gulags of the Soviets--essentially death camps.
Here's a hint, Amnesty: spend your time, money, and limited talent trying to take on the actual gulags in our world. I find it truly funny that America's prisons are the topic of a lot of hype and angst amongst those who are against the war on terror...but if America allows terrorists to be sent to prisons in other nations, that's clearly much worse. It doesn't get the press that America's prisons do--but everyone knows we're not the modern gulags.
If we were as bad as they say...would it be better if we turned them over to, say, Pakistan? Turkey? Whatever problems may exist in our prisons, the exaggerations in the accusations should make it clear that their skewed evaluations of the United States are baseless. Looking at that fact, its really curious (and kinda sad) that people can still accept the ridiculous premises offered by the slanderers that this war is a war for profit and power.
As long as people continue to look to the US to provide justice and freedom, the accusations that we have been overwhelmed with corruption have no meaning. As long as they continue to accuse us of losing our moral ground, I think its safe to say that we know we haven't. Nobody tells Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Pakistan, etc that they've devolved and become institutions of corruption. That's almost all anybody yells at the US.
The irony is thick this morning.
Amnesty International. Not a big fan.
Today they have made ridiculous comparisons to the American prisons for terror suspects and war criminals to the gulags of the Soviets--essentially death camps.
Here's a hint, Amnesty: spend your time, money, and limited talent trying to take on the actual gulags in our world. I find it truly funny that America's prisons are the topic of a lot of hype and angst amongst those who are against the war on terror...but if America allows terrorists to be sent to prisons in other nations, that's clearly much worse. It doesn't get the press that America's prisons do--but everyone knows we're not the modern gulags.
If we were as bad as they say...would it be better if we turned them over to, say, Pakistan? Turkey? Whatever problems may exist in our prisons, the exaggerations in the accusations should make it clear that their skewed evaluations of the United States are baseless. Looking at that fact, its really curious (and kinda sad) that people can still accept the ridiculous premises offered by the slanderers that this war is a war for profit and power.
As long as people continue to look to the US to provide justice and freedom, the accusations that we have been overwhelmed with corruption have no meaning. As long as they continue to accuse us of losing our moral ground, I think its safe to say that we know we haven't. Nobody tells Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Pakistan, etc that they've devolved and become institutions of corruption. That's almost all anybody yells at the US.
The irony is thick this morning.
Another Quiz...
I know there's little clever about posting personality quizes on your blog...but I don't care. I have fun with these every now and then--everyone needs a distraction from time to time (or more in my case...) and besides--the quizes I post tell you what you would be if you were yourself in another life. Now admit it...that's fun, right?
Which Saint are you? This is me:
I know there's little clever about posting personality quizes on your blog...but I don't care. I have fun with these every now and then--everyone needs a distraction from time to time (or more in my case...) and besides--the quizes I post tell you what you would be if you were yourself in another life. Now admit it...that's fun, right?
Which Saint are you? This is me:
 |
| You are Athanasius! You are willing to fight a losing battle, just to make sure that the truth is told. But don't get discouraged; sometimes it takes more than one lifetime for truth to triumph. |
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
Terri Schiavo...
I know its been a while since she was in the headlines. Almost two months. I didn't blog then, so I write something now.
I was rereading an article on her death, and the various arguments that surrounded her situation. The quotes that particularly interested me was this: "Patients in vegatative states seem deceptively aware. Experts write off their smiles, tears, and gestures as involuntary reflexes. But families still struggle with the decision to remove life support, as the story of Terri Schiavo makes clear." This was a Newsweek article by the by--I doubt they'd track me down and post porn on my blog, but I guess better safe than sorry. In case you're wondering--I didn't write it. :)
The impression I received from this statement is that its foolish nonsense to assume that there remains any meaningful life when someone has passed into a vegitative state. Nothing is intentional--therefore how could anything be worthwhile, right? It passes over the protests of the families--because they're motivated by love and clearly cannot be objective to the reality that when the body fails, life stops...or should stop. At least, that's the message I get from this statement. This really re-enforces the suggestion that more and more we ARE embracing death in our society.
Its not worth fighting to give people a better life (even if we fought for oil, the people of Iraq will be better off in a free environment than they were under Saddam) but refusing the essentials of life from an otherwise self-sufficent woman makes sense--because her life isn't worth living, somehow. The deaths of civilians in the course of opposing terror and a cruel dictator aren't justified--because their lives, no matter how tortured or deprived, were somehow worth living and it wasn't worth risking lives to save them.
I don't get it.
Perhaps I am not being clear...
On the one side, the side that is labeled as war mongering etc, I see values that go beyond the simplistic clinging to the "value" of life as above all others. It suggests that all life is sacred--which applies to Terri--and that since all life is sacred it is the duty of the strong to protect the lives of the weak.
The other side seems to boil down to this: life has a value which can be taken away by the quality of the life--though somehow that quality doesn't include the lack of freedom, the presence of terrorized oppression. In those cases, it seems that this side would say that while it may not be a great life, its still life and its more important to protect that then to end lives in the pursuit of a better life for the majority of people living in that terrible situation. However--people physically incapable, or mentally damaged have lost the true value of life--and shouldn't be made to endure the burden of life any longer then necessary.
This seems very wrong.
I know its been a while since she was in the headlines. Almost two months. I didn't blog then, so I write something now.
I was rereading an article on her death, and the various arguments that surrounded her situation. The quotes that particularly interested me was this: "Patients in vegatative states seem deceptively aware. Experts write off their smiles, tears, and gestures as involuntary reflexes. But families still struggle with the decision to remove life support, as the story of Terri Schiavo makes clear." This was a Newsweek article by the by--I doubt they'd track me down and post porn on my blog, but I guess better safe than sorry. In case you're wondering--I didn't write it. :)
The impression I received from this statement is that its foolish nonsense to assume that there remains any meaningful life when someone has passed into a vegitative state. Nothing is intentional--therefore how could anything be worthwhile, right? It passes over the protests of the families--because they're motivated by love and clearly cannot be objective to the reality that when the body fails, life stops...or should stop. At least, that's the message I get from this statement. This really re-enforces the suggestion that more and more we ARE embracing death in our society.
Its not worth fighting to give people a better life (even if we fought for oil, the people of Iraq will be better off in a free environment than they were under Saddam) but refusing the essentials of life from an otherwise self-sufficent woman makes sense--because her life isn't worth living, somehow. The deaths of civilians in the course of opposing terror and a cruel dictator aren't justified--because their lives, no matter how tortured or deprived, were somehow worth living and it wasn't worth risking lives to save them.
I don't get it.
Perhaps I am not being clear...
On the one side, the side that is labeled as war mongering etc, I see values that go beyond the simplistic clinging to the "value" of life as above all others. It suggests that all life is sacred--which applies to Terri--and that since all life is sacred it is the duty of the strong to protect the lives of the weak.
The other side seems to boil down to this: life has a value which can be taken away by the quality of the life--though somehow that quality doesn't include the lack of freedom, the presence of terrorized oppression. In those cases, it seems that this side would say that while it may not be a great life, its still life and its more important to protect that then to end lives in the pursuit of a better life for the majority of people living in that terrible situation. However--people physically incapable, or mentally damaged have lost the true value of life--and shouldn't be made to endure the burden of life any longer then necessary.
This seems very wrong.
The Revised Post I was Trying To Place When Blogger Went on the Fritz
There was a picture here, but apparently I missed the fact that the artist didn't intend to have the pictures on his public site viewed elsewhere. Since I have no way of contacting him I decided it would be best to simply remove the picture. My apologies--I am still relatively new writing online and hadn't considered that content (particularly a picture) posted on the World Wide Web would be considered private. I in no way intended to take credit for the pictures--was merely enjoying them. Oh well.
There was a picture here, but apparently I missed the fact that the artist didn't intend to have the pictures on his public site viewed elsewhere. Since I have no way of contacting him I decided it would be best to simply remove the picture. My apologies--I am still relatively new writing online and hadn't considered that content (particularly a picture) posted on the World Wide Web would be considered private. I in no way intended to take credit for the pictures--was merely enjoying them. Oh well.
Manila Sunsets.
I recall Thanksgiving evening, my Senior year of high school. I walked by myself out of the main building where several of the missionary families had gathered to share some holiday fellowship, to watch the sunset. It was the most beautiful sunset I had ever seen--with stronger golds, purples, violets, reds, pinks, oranges, and blues than anything I had ever seen, and to this day I don't think I've seen an equal. The thing about Philippine sunsets...at least in Manila, the colors are there because of the pollution. So, its beautiful, but your lungs are being destroyed. Despite this...I loved sunsets in Manila. Our school was on a hill above the city and the smog, and looking out at the Sunset you really could be convinced that life really was that beautiful--that even smog only produced more beauty.
Come to think of it--that was an odd truth about the Philippines--no matter how "bad" something was, it only ended up making things that much better in an odd way. When the torrential rains came, it was bad...but the day after the storm was the cleanest day for the city in a month, and the night after the typhoon, you could see more stars in the sky than you can imagine. One of my favorite memories was laying out on a basketball court with some friends and watching the universe swirl over us.
Good coming from bad--or in spite of bad. Is it foolish optimism that assumes that hope is worth clinging too? Or is there something to it--something that even the sometimes harsh reality of nature bears witness too?
One of my mentors once spoke in chapel on the virtue of Hope: a Distinctly Christian Virtue. One of my favorite messages--I have it on my computer at home and listen to it every now and again because I think he really touched on a truth. It seems inherantly wrong to assume that the worst is and will be our only reality. I don't believe that I have earned some special repreive from the troubles of this world...I am simply convinced that the valley of death will inevitably end in green pastures and cool springs. Christ promised a hope that goes beyond the material concerns of this world--not that our material concerns are unimportant, but we must recognize that they are finite in their scope. The hope of the Christ speaks of deep waters. It involves an answer to the question of the purpose of life, to the fears of death...and when accepted, offers peace unshakeable by even the dying world we live in.
For centuries man has known nothing but fear of the unknown. Death and the gods were to be feared because we couldn't know them, and many of the greatest minds to live tried to understand them better, or to find hope outside of understanding the incomprehensible. The Hellenistic Epicurean Philosophers (old greek guys) suggested that ethics pointed us towards goodness and pleasure--and though they have often been labeled hedonists (those who live for pleasure) they defined pleasure as that which brought us closer to a good life (so they were not into the whole drunken orgy scene). They knew that the Stars and the Planets weren't gods (they believed in gods, but only as very distant, entirely well-intentioned beings who rarely interfered with men). They also believed that the soul was made of matter like everything else in your body. These two beliefs allowed them to logically escape the fear of death and the fear of the gods--because the gods didn't care and death meant nonexistence--so there was no need to fear for tomorrow. Atheists and deists alike have used variations of these reasonings to find hope in an otherwise dismal existence.
Christ's answer to this fear was to offer a reality that showed the false hope just how hollow it truly was: He offered evidence of a real God that was not waiting to destroy humanity, and showed that physical death need not be the end of joy. Instead of an inpersonal god or a god who seemed only to act out the same passions as regular men, Jesus Christ revealed a God both powerful, personal, and intimately interested in us. In salvation, we receive not merely a reprieve from the second death--the destruction of the soul which does not cease to exist--but we also may find a God who has always been present and will always care for us.
So where does hope come in? Besides the hope of salvation from judgement...the knowledge that we are not alone, that God knows us and desires to be known, that death itself is not the end and there is a meaning to life beyond the everyday monotony...this is hope. Hope that this life, which attracts the attention of a loving God, holds promise of more than just suffering or meaningless pleasures. Eternal foundations available to the undulating finite man. A hope that someday, the constant swell and recession that man, who is both spirit and physical being, will finally no longer be a burden--we will cease to war with ourselves. That there will be a joy in release--that though life may be at times a struggle, we toil not in vain for the light will dawn. In this light, the demands of the moment become less daunting for we have hope. In this hope, unshakeable, unbreakable peace may stand in the midst of heartache and worry and be unconerned.
...hmmm...well that's not nice.
So, there are nasty people on the internet. Not really news--I'm not one of them if you were curious. If you checked this blog in the last few hours...I would imagine you were less then pleased with what you might have seen. I know I wasn't happy seeing what I saw. Particularly in the Library. Ah well. If you missed it...be glad.
Short story: I went looking on Google for pics of Manila at Sunset. To my understanding, anything to be found on the World Wide Web is fair game--not to claim it as your own work, but you know--pasting a photo you found online has never been off limits when you're just appreciating it. I certainly didn't say "I took this photo"...if I posted a painting of George Washington I would assume I need not clarify that its not my painting.
Well, apparently I was wrong--or at least, I made someone mad and apparently he had the ability to do something about it. I was going to unsend the post and remove the original pic of a sunset--and then blogger started having problems. I figured I would come back in a few hours to take care of it then. Sigh.
I came back and the person had replaced the photo I had posted to a fairly graphic adult photo that is really not in keeping with my blog. I guess I had copied a live link to his picture or something like that. Anyways--I am sorry if you saw it. Unfortunately I am not really computer savy enough to have anticipated that problem--though I will do my best to keep that from happening again.
So now...all I can do is say that I am sorry for the offensive adult nature my blog took on for a couple of hours...fortunately I'm fairly confident that having protected the photos he has made available to the world, the tresspasser will probably leave me alone now. And, we return to our regularly scheduled PG 13 (at the worst) blogging.
Sigh.
So, there are nasty people on the internet. Not really news--I'm not one of them if you were curious. If you checked this blog in the last few hours...I would imagine you were less then pleased with what you might have seen. I know I wasn't happy seeing what I saw. Particularly in the Library. Ah well. If you missed it...be glad.
Short story: I went looking on Google for pics of Manila at Sunset. To my understanding, anything to be found on the World Wide Web is fair game--not to claim it as your own work, but you know--pasting a photo you found online has never been off limits when you're just appreciating it. I certainly didn't say "I took this photo"...if I posted a painting of George Washington I would assume I need not clarify that its not my painting.
Well, apparently I was wrong--or at least, I made someone mad and apparently he had the ability to do something about it. I was going to unsend the post and remove the original pic of a sunset--and then blogger started having problems. I figured I would come back in a few hours to take care of it then. Sigh.
I came back and the person had replaced the photo I had posted to a fairly graphic adult photo that is really not in keeping with my blog. I guess I had copied a live link to his picture or something like that. Anyways--I am sorry if you saw it. Unfortunately I am not really computer savy enough to have anticipated that problem--though I will do my best to keep that from happening again.
So now...all I can do is say that I am sorry for the offensive adult nature my blog took on for a couple of hours...fortunately I'm fairly confident that having protected the photos he has made available to the world, the tresspasser will probably leave me alone now. And, we return to our regularly scheduled PG 13 (at the worst) blogging.
Sigh.
Hope Confirmed!
Everything is going to be just fine.
I'm elated.
Two weeks ago, none of this seemed possible. There was simply too much--a variety of factors (some of them my fault, others not so much) had all come together to give me nearly 100 pages of work to do (my earlier estimate of 70 pgs was a little low it turns out) in order to graduate, and two weeks to do it.
Today, there is about 10 pages between me and walking, and they'll be done before Thursday morning.
Its really frightening how much you can do when you really don't have any other choice. Of course, part of the reality is I'm at the top of my educational game right now. I can read and write better and faster now than I ever have before. That won't last long--I am actually a little worried about what happens after grad with regard to that. I was talking with a man who is getting ready to return to school in the Fall after years of working with his B.A. Looking at M.A. programs, he's really unsure how juggling a family, work, and school will work. Well, I'm doing it now and honestly I don't know how its happening myself sometimes. I have to admit, even though I am only just getting to the first jumping off point, I recognize those concerns--it only gets harder. Sometimes it feels like my brain is swimming--half the time I am looking at the computer screen my eyes are blurring (right now actually). It wasn't this hard when I was a Freshman in College...how hard will it be three years from now when I try to go into studying again full-bore? Sure there are tricks to studying quickly and accomplishing quality work in a short amount of time...but you stop practicing and it gets harder and harder.
However...I said I am elated--and elated I shall be, without spending time to worry about what being out of school may or may not mean. Hurrah! The end is in sight!
Everything is going to be just fine.
I'm elated.
Two weeks ago, none of this seemed possible. There was simply too much--a variety of factors (some of them my fault, others not so much) had all come together to give me nearly 100 pages of work to do (my earlier estimate of 70 pgs was a little low it turns out) in order to graduate, and two weeks to do it.
Today, there is about 10 pages between me and walking, and they'll be done before Thursday morning.
Its really frightening how much you can do when you really don't have any other choice. Of course, part of the reality is I'm at the top of my educational game right now. I can read and write better and faster now than I ever have before. That won't last long--I am actually a little worried about what happens after grad with regard to that. I was talking with a man who is getting ready to return to school in the Fall after years of working with his B.A. Looking at M.A. programs, he's really unsure how juggling a family, work, and school will work. Well, I'm doing it now and honestly I don't know how its happening myself sometimes. I have to admit, even though I am only just getting to the first jumping off point, I recognize those concerns--it only gets harder. Sometimes it feels like my brain is swimming--half the time I am looking at the computer screen my eyes are blurring (right now actually). It wasn't this hard when I was a Freshman in College...how hard will it be three years from now when I try to go into studying again full-bore? Sure there are tricks to studying quickly and accomplishing quality work in a short amount of time...but you stop practicing and it gets harder and harder.
However...I said I am elated--and elated I shall be, without spending time to worry about what being out of school may or may not mean. Hurrah! The end is in sight!
Monday, May 23, 2005
Special Notice
Special notice to a new link under "People": Jim. This link will take you to a truly enjoyable , if somewhat odd, blog maintained by the genius that is James Harrington. Enjoy.
Special notice to a new link under "People": Jim. This link will take you to a truly enjoyable , if somewhat odd, blog maintained by the genius that is James Harrington. Enjoy.
Dino
Today's a day for Dean Martin. Maybe some Frank later in the day...but for now, definately in the mood for some Dino. Keeps my fingers typing without my mind wandering. Speaking of which...probably time to close the blog window, eh?
Speaking of the Rat Pack...have you seen the movie, The Rat Pack? If you're a fan, its interesting. Not to mention that you get an inside look at the politics of JFK, whom the Rat Pack pretty much helped get elected. Anyways...Mambo Italiano baby.
Today's a day for Dean Martin. Maybe some Frank later in the day...but for now, definately in the mood for some Dino. Keeps my fingers typing without my mind wandering. Speaking of which...probably time to close the blog window, eh?
Speaking of the Rat Pack...have you seen the movie, The Rat Pack? If you're a fan, its interesting. Not to mention that you get an inside look at the politics of JFK, whom the Rat Pack pretty much helped get elected. Anyways...Mambo Italiano baby.
Hypocrisy
Hypocrisy is telling someone that they're wrong when you also doing exactly the same thing. Hypocrisy is suggesting that someone else is truly awful because of problems that they have, while ignoring or denying the problems that exist in your own life. And hypocrisy, as the loud, irritating Chairman of the DNC showed clearly, is also hypocritically preaching that someone else practices hypocritical preaching. Good move there Dean. Call Rush Limbaugh out for calling for moral values based on the fact that he's not a saint (a fact he's admitted and dealt with). What does this mean about the Democrat party? Have they abandoned the call for morality in our society? Or is Chairman Dean actually suggesting that the Dems, unlike the pain-killer abuser Limbaugh, are squeaky clean, without any moral dilemmas whatsoever? Either way...I think Dean's saying something he didn't want to say, but is too arrogant to realize.
Hypocrisy is telling someone that they're wrong when you also doing exactly the same thing. Hypocrisy is suggesting that someone else is truly awful because of problems that they have, while ignoring or denying the problems that exist in your own life. And hypocrisy, as the loud, irritating Chairman of the DNC showed clearly, is also hypocritically preaching that someone else practices hypocritical preaching. Good move there Dean. Call Rush Limbaugh out for calling for moral values based on the fact that he's not a saint (a fact he's admitted and dealt with). What does this mean about the Democrat party? Have they abandoned the call for morality in our society? Or is Chairman Dean actually suggesting that the Dems, unlike the pain-killer abuser Limbaugh, are squeaky clean, without any moral dilemmas whatsoever? Either way...I think Dean's saying something he didn't want to say, but is too arrogant to realize.
A Sign of the Return of Sense?
This sounds very hopeful. I realize that there is still a long ways to go--but the laws protecting even minors from having any sort of accountability seem ridiculous--especially given the seemingly random assignment of accountability ages for voting, drinking, etc.
This sounds very hopeful. I realize that there is still a long ways to go--but the laws protecting even minors from having any sort of accountability seem ridiculous--especially given the seemingly random assignment of accountability ages for voting, drinking, etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
