Silent Planet Uprising

kän-trə-ˈdik-shən

2009-03-05T20:00:00.003-06:00

While conducting a recent search for an attorney, I came across this website, which at first glance I thought was, well... interesting. Minus the flamboyant exclamation mark after the cheesy acronym.

I mean what is so wrong with a group wanting to keep an eye on lawyers. Sort of an online word-of-mouth system... only this turned out to be so much more:

"We desire to become a national organization that is supported by the U.S. government."

And

"Justice Amendment: The ultimate goal of the A.H.A! is to pass a justice amendment to the United States Constitution. This amendment would be twofold:

1) A person would have the right to effective assistance of counsel in a civil matter if he can’t afford it (the same as a criminal matter); and
2) Computerization of evidence would be required before any lawsuits could be filed or any charges brought against a person or entity. Evidence would be presented for evaluation according to the “Farr Factor” - a computer program which is written to calculate the percentage of likelihood that the alleged defendant is guilty of the wrong for which he is accused. The “Farr Factor” is the determinating factor in any legal claim before a lawsuit can be filed or charges brought. It must be divulged to all parties prior to any litigation, and is used to calculate damages."

That's right. They want to amend the U.S. Constitution. And with an absurd (and absurdly named) "factor" that can supposedly determine the worth of litigation.

So now, I'm pretty much convinced that this group is nuts...right? But it gets even better.

If you check the "About Us" section, you'll notice that the director is Cortland Berry. Turns out that Mr. Berry is not only a suspended attorney, but also lost his securities license and his insurance license. Yes, the Director of the Association for Honest Attorneys has a lengthy track record of dishonesty.

Now, this is old news to people around here, so I'm a Johnny-come-lately. But I enjoyed this so much that I just had to share.

No, Michael, It's One of My Illusions!

2008-07-03T23:20:00.002-05:00

Shouldn't the headline of this article be something more like: Confused Woman Gives Birth? Or maybe this shouldn't be in the news at all, because there is absolutely nothing special about this. Just because she is pretending to be a man doesn't make this anything other than creepy.

One Giant Leap for Monkeykind

2008-06-26T15:46:00.005-05:00

Spanish Parliment to extend rights to Apes. It's all too silly to even talk about, but apparently we are closer to granting apes the unalienable right to life:

Philosophers Peter Singer and Paola Cavalieri founded the Great Ape Project in 1993, arguing that "non-human hominids" like chimpanzees, gorillas, orang-utans and bonobos should enjoy the right to life, freedom and not to be tortured.

My questions for Peter Singer: if you kill an ape baby in utero, is it murder? What if an ape chooses to kill its baby in utero? What if the monkeybaby is mentally challenged?

3 Quarters, 2 Dimes, and a Nickel

2008-06-13T15:17:00.002-05:00

From James Taranto's column:

Obama has gulled millions with promises of "change." But remember, change for a dollar is still a dollar.

In the Harshest Place on Earth, Love Finds a Way

2008-06-10T15:49:00.004-05:00

To combat the impending eternal darkness, the US base on Antarctica has been deluged with condoms:

nearly 16,500 condoms were delivered last month and would be made available, free of charge, to staff throughout the year to avoid the potential embarrassment of having to buy them

Something seems wrong to me, and it isn't just my anti-contraception prudishness. Here are the relevant facts from the article: There are about 125 people at the base for the approximately three months of total darkness. The population increases and flights in (presumably carrying more condoms) resume in September. Assuming 90 days, 125 people, and 16,500 condoms. Each person gets 132 condoms, which is about 1.5 per day. And it takes two to tango, so you figure two people per condom. This means each person has sex three times a day, every day, before the prophylactic supply runs out.

Now clearly this is faulty math, but I think I can glean one statistical certainty from these numbers: a bunch of new recruits volunteering to be stationed in Antarctica.

Slow News Day

2008-05-16T19:30:00.001-05:00

Just thought I would spice it up with a little home video of me about the town.

I'm just lucky this didn't catch on until after I graduated high school.

Necessary Action

2008-05-10T11:15:00.004-05:00

It is obviously a sad day when actions such as these are required, but thankfully the State of Kansas has a Catholic leader that will not allow the governor to continue to abuse her marginal association with Catholicism to the detriment of other Catholic believers in the State.

Here's his actual statement in The Leaven.

The governor has spoken to me on more than one occasion about her obligation to uphold state and federal laws and court decisions. I have asked her to show a similar sense of obligation to honor divine law and the laws, teaching and legitimate authority within the church.

I think he has always been a good bishop, but I wonder if having the support of other strong bishops to his North, South and East makes it easier to hold his ground publicly.

Blogs: The Bane of Journalism?

2008-05-04T19:10:00.002-05:00

So Bob Costas held a townhall meeting recently discussing several current topics in sports. One of those topics was the tension between newspapers and blogs, particularly in the world of sports. Here's the video and some interesting tidbits of commentary about the whole affair.

Here's an interview with Costas after the affair.

From a blog run by one of the best sports writers out there:

On W.C. Heinz: The classy and wonderful sportswriter writer Steve Wulf (who, among many other things, co-wrote Buck O’Neil’s autobiography “I Was Right On Time”) wrote in to confirm my theory that Heinz absolutely would be a prominent blogger in today’s new world.

He wrote: “Heck, in (Heinz’s) day, with multiple editions and lots of friendly competition, newspapers were the blog equivalents.”

This is really a great point, and one that just gets overlooked. There have always been blogs. What do we think Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” was? He wasn’t working for any mainstream media — there really wasn’t a mainstream media. It was a blog written long before the Internet. It was a published as a pamphlet and published anonymously — and James Chalmers (playing the role of Revolutionary Buzz) called him a “political quack.” You could certainly argue that Paine’s blog, more than any single work, spurred the Colonies to break from England.

What do we think Martin Luther’s “95 Theses“ was? A blog. Of course. There was no WordPress for him to post, so he nailed the 95 Theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenburg. The door, he found, was a better operating system than Vista.

It isn’t that I miss what people don’t like about the blogosphere. I get it. There are some dirty words out there. There are some rather embarrassing photographs*. There are some nasty and unfair rips out there. Hey, I would love to see the tone lighten up a bit. I would love to see people enjoy sports more and scream less. But that’s not the blogosphere. That’s just America. It’s been that way for a long time. In 1975, people vented by throwing whiskey bottles at players and fighting on 10 cent beer night. Now, they write angry blogs. I think that’s an improvement.

He goes on to complain about Facebook, which would make me respect him even more except for the fact that he now has a Facebook account.

Another writer for the same paper that covers the Royals and also runs a blog had this to say.

And here's a follow up from the NYTimes.

I don't have enough time, nor do I care enough about this issue to dig much further, but I do find it incredibly interesting that you have the paper writers that are facing extinction (or at least believe that they are), and their defense against this onslaught is focused on both quality and morality.

If I really believed that newpapers in particular represented those qualities and that writers before blogs sat around thinking, "At least we write really well and don't swear or smear people," then perhaps I would be inclined to jumped behind Mr. Bissinger. But I just don't see how that's the case. I think I can jump behind the idea that for the most part newspapers offer a better quality of writing. That's not to say that their content or message is desirable. If anything Bissinger's attitude reinforces the long-held perception that newspapers think they know better than we do. They don't just cover the news, they drive it and they create it. On the other hand, I think there's definite merit in attacking the moral and professional quality of many blogs and their comments, but to say that newspapers carry the standard of class and morals is rather disingenuous. I suspect that one of the reasons that blogging is so popular is that people felt the mainstream media wasn't adequately covering or discussing issues that they felt were significant. And placing the power of the press into as many hands as possible should be admirable, even if it means that many people show themselves to be completely inept as writers or just generally buffoons.

Like me, for example.

Competing Philosophies

2008-04-30T20:36:00.001-05:00

"Do, or do not. There is no try."
~ Yoda, The Empire Strikes Back

"For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business."
~ T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets

Culture, Please Apologize to My Nieces and all Other Little Girls

2008-04-29T21:56:00.002-05:00

So Miley Cyrus is getting a little sexy--is anyone surprised? Yes, the demon dressed as Culture will exploit a 15 year-old girl. Yes, her Hollywood parents allowed this to take place. Hop in the handbasket, we are heading underground. But accepting all that, there are two things in the article I find extra disturbing:

First, "Vanity Fair says her parents/handlers were present during the entire shoot."

HANDLERS? Do child actors really have handlers? Is she a circus animal? (Don't answer that, please, for the sake of my remaining sliver of innocence)

Second, "They are hard photos to look at, so humor comes in handy. Hard not because they are so sexual -- she's 15, she's entitled to a little sexuality -- but because the whole package, story and photos, was so inevitable."

Wait, she's 15 so she's entitled to a little sexuality? Goodbye Culture, you are too far gone.

No seriously...

2008-04-05T10:46:00.002-05:00

Why are we still pursuing ethanol?

Let's see... 1) Higher cost of groceries across the board:

While corn growers are reaping record profits, U.S. consumers can expect even higher grocery bills -- especially for meat and pork -- as livestock producers are forced to pass on higher animal feed costs and thin their herd size.

Check.

2) Deplete the supply of corn for feeding people and livestock by 30%:

Corn is the basic feedstock for most of the plants and about 20 percent of last year's 13 billion bushel corn crop was consumed by ethanol production. That percentage is expected to increase to 30 percent for the next crop year, which ends Aug. 31, 2009, according to Terry Francl, a senior economist for the American Farm Bureau Federation.

Check.

3) Defy all logic

Let's produce ethanol because it is a CHEAPER source of renewable energy. But by increasing demand for corn to use toward ethanol, we'll drive up the price of corn, thereby making ethanol an UNPROFITABLE AND EXPENSIVE source of renewable energy. And once you factor in all of the other increasing costs due to the rise in corn prices... it really sounds like a bargain, doesn't it? And for what? 10% less gasoline than straight unleaded? Seriously? No, no... seriously?

Check.

Ethanol Huge Mistake, GOB says

2008-03-03T11:24:00.002-06:00

According to this recent news piece, ethanol is a risky business.

However, Brown said, “if the ethanol producers stay in the market, that will disrupt the food supply.”

He added: “Because of the interrelationships among crops, a major shortfall in the U.S. harvest could tip global grain and soy markets into chaos.”

It would affect the prices of food made directly from these commodities, such as bread, pasta and tortillas, and food made indirectly, such as pork, poultry, beef, milk and eggs.

If it happened this summer, it would be especially bad because of the current pace of global food inflation.

“The rest of the world is less able to pay high prices for food. What’s annoying for us is life-threatening elsewhere,” Brown said.

Well, at least it has been a safe alternative to oil-based gasoline. . . not.

Reply Quiz: Which would you rather place your trust in: 1) Mother Nature or 2) Middle East Muslim Oil Barons and Hugo Chavez

A Quiz, question 2

2008-02-26T12:27:00.003-06:00

I know you will know the answer to this one, Qahal -- Eight gold stars at stake (extra because of my extra-long babble before I pose the question).

Here is an article arguing that parents should take their kids to more adult-themed movies (not movies found in the "adult" section; luckily even the author has some boundaries). Why? So they can discover the world of adulthood.

To frame the author's state of mind:

The same Christmas Day, my son, who is in sixth grade, went to see “Charlie Wilson’s War” with his mother and other family members. When he came back he had some hard questions, but they had nothing to do with naked congressmen in hot tubs or cocaine or extramarital dalliances, all of which feature prominently in that movie. “Why did the Russians invade Afghanistan in the first place?” he wanted to know.

Do you know why your son had no questions about nudity, sex, and drugs but was curious about this place called Afganistan? Because he has learned plenty about sex and drugs in all the R-rated movies you have taken him to. Old hat, it's all been normalized in his world. But I digress . . . Back to our author:

It’s appealing in part because it’s a grown-up movie of a kind that used to be more common. It’s brisk, funny and frank about sex and politics, demonstrating the ease and worldliness that are among the most fascinating and mysterious features of adulthood. More so, I suspect, than the nudity, smoking and swearing that are also part of Charlie Wilson’s world.

There it is -- "the ease and worldliness that are among the most fascinating and mysterious features of adulthood" -- that is what you are teaching your kid through these movies. Move over Cosby, we've got a new parenting coach in town.

But now for the quiz question. Our author then says:

Death and sexuality figure in the story, but those themes are handled with such wit and delicacy that “Persepolis” is more likely to inspire interesting conversations than awkward questions or uncomfortable feelings. The same might not be true of “Juno,” the story of a 16-year-old girl’s unintended pregnancy and her entanglement with the couple who want to adopt her baby.

Like other parents I’ve spoken to about it, I wish “Juno” were just a bit less lighthearted about teenage pregnancy, the real social and psychological consequences of which are never quite acknowledged. But the movie’s spirit is sweet and smart and youthful, and the relationships it depicts feel very tender and real. If it provokes you to have that long-dreaded talk with your son or daughter, so much the better. You might have needed to anyway.

Now I have not seen any of the movies he is talking about, so I am not making any judgments about the actual movies, but I do know that Juno is one of the recent mainstream films that is getting huge praise from those pesky pro-lifers and others who care a whole lot about kids. This is the one movie he singled out as inappropriate for kids (he was less harsh on the other movies mentioned; he didn't actually say that kids should not see There Will Be Blood or No Country for Old Men, he just wouldn't advise parents on this decision). Why is it that a man who cheers on the early adultification of children through movies would make sure to smear one adult movie that many of his probable detractors have found to be a good story about life?

Is it:
a) Christians and the like are stupid and have no understanding of what makes a good story
b) When you write for the Times, you are always working the agenda
c) Other (please explain)

Hint: he ends his article by saying: "Some of these films may be too hot or too rough, but for that reason they may also be just right."

Twinkies the new terrorists, statistics say

2008-02-26T08:10:00.005-06:00

According to this article, obesity is more dangerous than terrorism. But terrorism and the sexy diseases are getting all the press:

Like terrorism, some passing health threats get major government attention and media coverage, while heart and lung disease, diabetes and cancer account for 60 percent of the world's deaths, the meeting was told.

Why bother fighting terrorism (or crime or anything else) because 100% of us are eventually going to die?

iRobots Take Over, Statistics Say

2008-02-22T21:29:00.002-06:00

Great stuff here, unless you worship Steve Jobs. According to Jobs:

the fact is that people don’t read anymore. Forty percent of the people in the U.S. read one book or less last year.

According to the article:

Last year, a survey for the Associated Press found that a much smaller number — 27 percent — had not read a book lately, which means nearly three-in-four have read a book. Steve Jobs may be many things – maestro, visionary, demi-god – but he apparently isn’t a careful reader of certain market reports.

The more compelling statistic was rarely mentioned in news accounts of the A.P. story: the survey found that another 27 percent of Americans had read 15 or more books a year. That report documents a national celebration.

And as one of the comments aptly points out: "Forty percent of Americans do not vote. Does that mean that we have no elections in the United States?"

Ah, statistics, is there nothing they can't prove?

Its Time For a Lawyer's Strike (and I'm sure many agree)

2008-02-15T08:10:00.002-06:00

Here is what Tim Long, writer for the Simpsons, did during the writer's strike:

I began the strike with lofty plans to write a novel, which soon turned into a novella, which then turned into 13 solid weeks of playing "Guitar Hero III" in my underpants.

If that comes along with unionizing, sign me up.

A Quiz

2008-02-13T17:52:00.002-06:00

Three gold stars if you can figure out why this is discriminatory:

A prominent civil rights leader has told the Democratic National Committee that refusing to seat delegates from Florida and Michigan would disenfranchise both states' minority communities.

. . .

Refusing to seat the states' delegations could remind voters of the "sordid history of racially discriminatory primaries," [NAACP Chairman Julian Bond] said.

I could see how this would be a problem if they only ignored the black votes, but they are ignoring the white votes in Michigan and Florida as well. Perhaps my subconscious racism is rearing its ugly head, but I don't see the issue here.

Why I Love the United States Postal Service

2008-02-13T10:25:00.003-06:00

I get a kick out of this website every time I use it. It is a site specifically for looking up zip codes, yet it has a box for the to enter the zip code. At least it is not a required field.

Modernopoly

2008-02-01T15:00:00.000-06:00

Why, oh why must we do things like this?

Man Without a Party

2008-02-01T09:54:00.000-06:00

James Taranto has been doing an amusing series of "Man Without a Party" articles, where he points out the fact that when the media reports the scandals of republican politician his or her party affiliation is immediately designated, whereas when the media reports the scandals of democrat politician the party affiliation is conveniently omitted. The lastest installment in this series concerned Bill Clinton (last item here). When I read this yesterday I was willing to give the NY Times a pass; Bill Clinton is so well known that it is not necessary to designate him a democrat. But then I read this article today, in which the first sentence identified Richard Nixon as "the GOP president who resigned in disgrace."

I guess you don't get a pass for being well-known or a former president; you only get a pass for for being a democrat.

Indisputable Science

2008-01-28T17:23:00.000-06:00

This is a bold statement from the Evening Sun:

it is a scientific fact that no person, regardless of size or tolerance, can stay sober after consuming two 40-ounce malt beverages

I can think of many immediate problems with this statement (e.g., what timeframe are we talking about), but I am certain that my friends and I disproved this scientific fact many, many times back in college. If only we would have focused on gravity instead of King Cobra, we could have had some real fun.

Then again, this scientific fact is as acurate as anything else we call indisputable science today. Pick another topic instead of intoxication--global warming comes to immediately to mind--and think of how many times we read and accept such statements.

gay divorce

2008-01-22T14:55:00.000-06:00

Its not like we breeders should be pointing the fingers of our unclean hands, but is one of the rights inherent in marraige really the right to get out of the marraige?

falsereligions.com

2008-01-19T23:14:00.000-06:00

In technology/religion news -- ordination is only a mouse-click away. The Universal Life Church has apparently ordained more than 20 million since 1959. They must have quite a school to train that many ministers. Actually, it is as easy as registering with any website.

“We make no religious hurdles, no hoops to jump through, no tests of loyalty, no rings to kiss and no fees to pay,” the church says on its Web site.

Being ordained is free and does not require a social security number, which is a big deal when taking an important step like becoming a minister:

“As long as I didn’t have to give my social security number, I was going to do it,” Burke said.

But what about its theology?:

“The ULC Monastery represents freedom, and to have freedom you cannot make demands upon individuals,” the church says. “In the ULC Monastery everyone is equal — the same level of greatness is enjoyed by all.”

But the Universal Life Church is really helping people. The article cites one couple that "had been together for 15 years, but hadn’t tied the knot because they didn’t belong to a church and didn’t know anybody to officiate at a ceremony." Apparently they had not heard of a Justice of the Peace.

The way I see it, if a state thinks this is legitimate, it should either (i) simply acknowledge that they don't care about the institution of marriage (thereby allowing the unawares to be properly outraged at the state of the world), or (ii) quit hiding behind some politically correct interpretation of the First Amendment and make a determination that this is a bogus religion. We as a society could easily define certain baselines that would not run afoul of guarantees of religious freedom, but we may have to hurt somebody's feelings.* I'm not sure what the standards would be, but the point is simply that we can constitutionally have standards.
_____________________________
* Wasn't there a fairly recent case involving alleged religious discrimination by Costco against a member of the Church of Body Modification, where the court found for Costco, but refused to decide if they were dealing with a legitimate religion.

Abortions and Reasoning Skills Declining

2008-01-17T10:09:00.000-06:00

In a not-so-shocking news article, the total number of yearly abortions is dropping.*

In a more shocking blow to journalism, the Washington post reported the following:

The number of abortions fell at least in part because the proportion of women ending their pregnancies with an abortion dropped 9 percent between 2000 and 2005

There can certainly be no argument with that statement -- the number of abortions have dropped because less women are getting abortions. Of course, the WaPo is not even that bold; it hedges a little, saying that this is at least part of the reason abortions are down.

___________________________________________
* Not-so-shocking because of the rise of other means to the same end like RU-486. There were some recent statistics compiled by Guttmacher (too lazy to find link) saying that the number of abortions in Nebraska had recently been decreasing 5% every year, but the use of RU-486 had been increasing 20% yearly during the same period. To be fair, the WaPo does mention this as another potential factor in the reduced number of abortions in addition to the fact that women are getting less abortions.

He's No Mr. Rogers

2008-01-15T10:36:00.000-06:00

Just remember kids, its wrong to look at a guy like this and think that he is going to hurt or abduct you. Shame on you. When you see guys like this you should immediately approach him, greet him with a hug and say: "You look like a swell guy. Maybe we can go get some hot cocoa together." How dare you be scared of him, OBVIOUSLY he's not a bad guy.

Six Feet Under/Over

2008-01-13T22:09:00.000-06:00

Well, you may not have known it, but for most of my adult life I've appeared to be a rather avid sports fan. The truth is that I've been operating undercover... pretending to love sport... in order to capture the gravity of the risk that modern popular sports poses to our culture. Why am I finally coming out of my cover? Because of this. It can't possibly get any more absurd. Just when you thought that you "can't take it with you"... well, actually, you can... sort of. If you read the really fine print on that website, I'm betting that you will find that each casket comes with a sturdy set of shackles custom fit to the departed's soul.

Life Imitates Art

2007-12-31T13:18:00.000-06:00

But at least this time, despite the absurdity, life chose some of the best art as its standard. Certain Lincoln middle schools will be switching its grading methods to better represent the rigorous standards of public education:

Study habits — including homework — and student behavior will be graded separately, with a C (commendable), S (satisfactory) or N (needs improvment).

Homework, some quizzes or worksheets will be part of the learning process, not part of the final grade.

LPS is clearly taking a page from the curriculum of Boston's Sunshine Academy. Here is a copy of Maebe Funke's report card from Sunshine Academy, so the parents in Lincoln know what to expect next year:

Arts and Sciences

2007-12-01T21:22:00.000-06:00

We have reached a new level of absurdity:

A group of scientists has studied the colors in more than 500 paintings of sunsets, including many of Turner's 19th-century watercolors and oils, in hopes of gaining insights into the cooling effects caused by major volcanic eruptions.

So we have proof that scientists are getting stupider. I blame global warming.

His Dark Materials and Our Dark Future

2007-12-01T19:14:00.000-06:00

By now we are all familiar with Phillip Pullman's novel-turned-movie The Golden Compass and the fight over its place in a decent, moral society. Plenty of other blogs have addressed the merits of this story, though I doubt that any of them have really done it well. The most reasonable approach to the debate was set forth in nine paragraphs by David Mills in the December 2006 issue of Touchstone (unfortunately the article is not online). This post does not concern the merits of the debate, so I will make you look that article up yourself (and then subscribe--great magazine).

Despite Touchstone's year-old resolution of any moral dilemmas brought on by Pullman's works, the fight is just now heating up. Here is one of the countless articles addressing the controversy. It was certainly unintended by the author, but the following excerpts of the article pinpoint the crises that are being revealed by the debate over this movie:

[Pat Leach, youth services supervisor for Lincoln City Libraries] read the first book in the series and part of the second, and found them “extremely literary books, very well written. … The first book pits good against evil, but I didn’t interpret that as organized religion or the church.”

Susan Steider, young adult librarian at Eiseley Branch, has read all three books and discussed “The Golden Compass” with teens in a fantasy book group. Steider said she doesn’t see the story as anti-religious, but rather it has many positive values, such as integrity, honesty, loyalty and courage. “Most kids see it as an adventure story,” she said.

And later:

[Kathy Magruder, manager at Lee’s Booksellers] noted that while the books deal with a fictional “church” run by evil people, readers need to remember it’s a work of fiction. “A lot of people come to a book with their own agenda,” she said. “You can take any book and make it mean what you want. It’s sad that a lot of people have put so much literal meaning into a work of fantasy.”

Did everybody get the three serious and immanent crises that threaten society? No, not Christianity vs. Atheism--this is much more serious.

First, the two librarians interviewed did not recognize that the book was anti-religious. I am not suggesting that they must denounce anti-Christian books, but these are librarians--the should at lease RECOGNIZE this. Especially considering the fact that it is not too subtle a conclusion. Pullman has made it very clear. The Washington Post has a money-quote:

"I'm trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief," says Pullman.

I know what you are thinking--its the Washington Post, hardly a credible source. I can not argue with that, but this time their story can be corroborated. The New Yorker cites one character in the book, an ex-nun turned particle physicist, who describes Christianity as “a very powerful and convincing mistake.” There is also a good review in First Things (where, despite it all, the reviewer reasonably determines that "[r]eligious people should find nothing objectionable in the moral message"). And then there is Pullman's own website, which at least acknowledges his general animus if not the specific intent of the trilogy:

. . . organised religion is quite another thing. The trouble is that all too often in human history, churches and priesthoods have set themselves up to rule people's lives in the name of some invisible god (and they're all invisible, because they don't exist) – and done terrible damage. In the name of their god, they have burned, hanged, tortured, maimed, robbed, violated, and enslaved millions of their fellow-creatures, and done so with the happy conviction that they were doing the will of God, and they would go to Heaven for it.

That is the religion I hate, and I'm happy to be known as its enemy.

The first major tragedy, then, is that these librarians--professionals in the area of books--can not recognize a very obvious theme of a children's story. I could care less what opinion they have of that particular theme, but to miss it? That is a major problem.

The second problem is the overused defense of such works that "it is just fiction and fantasy and therefore has no relation to real life." This is blasphemy of the highest order! It makes me worry for our future even more than the first-mentioned tragedy. Just fiction? With no relevance to reality? The idea that we learn about life from good stories, that fiction is a valuable tool to shape our lives seems self-evident; I'm sure everyone can think of a good work of fiction that shaped their life. To prove my point, I only need to cite one source--Phillip Pullman. From the WaPo article (emphasis added):

"What I'm interested in is what people are like as human beings, and how we grow up and how we love each other and how it's difficult to live with each other," says Pullman. "Traditionally, that sort of stuff has belonged in the domain of realistic fiction. But why not put that in a fantasy context? I wanted to make this fantasy as realistic in psychological terms as I possibly could."

And from the New Yorker article (emphasis added):

In the eighteenth century, [Pullman] explained, people . . . wisely sought ethical instruction from the theatre and in novels. “We learn from Macbeth’s fate that killing is horrible for the killer as well as victim,” he said, before reading a passage from “Emma,” by Jane Austen, in which the heroine is mortified when Mr. Knightley reproaches her for mocking poor, garrulous Miss Bates. The scene, Pullman said, shows that “we can learn what’s good and what’s bad, what’s generous and unselfish, what’s cruel and mean, from fiction”

So both Pullman and William Donahoe agree on the power of fiction, but somehow people still accept "it is make-believe" as a valid defense. Tragic.

Third, look at the TIMING of whole controversy. The Golden Compass was published over a decade ago. “The Amber Spyglass” was the first ever children's book to win the Whitbread Book of the Year award-in 2001. The WaPo article (from 2001), demonstrates the author's impact:

The critically acclaimed books -- "The Golden Compass," "The Subtle Knife" and "The Amber Spyglass" -- have been published in 21 languages. In the United States, combined sales of the three volumes have totaled more than 1 million. For most weeks since its publication last October, "The Amber Spyglass" has occupied the No. 5 slot on the New York Times Book Review ranking of children's bestsellers, just under the four Harry Potter adventures.

But now, with the opening of the Hollywood interpretation of the book approaching, people are suddenly outraged. Anyone upset with the movie should have been at least equally outraged at the massively popular books (especially considering that protesters were right on top of the innocuous-by-comparison Harry Potter in book form), but six months ago these people did not know who Phillip Pullman was. No doubt society should be reading more books, but we have apparently quit paying attention to literature all together. Perhaps we should go back to book-burning--at least it acknowledged the relevance of the printed word.

Player Piano

2007-11-25T19:15:00.000-06:00

What do you do when you are stuck in a meaningless job and a meaningless existence in Technopoly? Like Paul Proteus, manager of the Ilium Works, you get first get the proper perspective (from Player Piano):

Farming--now there was a magic word. Like so many words with little magic from the past still clinging to them, the word "farming" was a reminder of what rugged stock the present generation had come from, of how tough a thing a human being could be if it had to. The word had little meaning in the present. There were no longer farmers, but only agricultural engineers. In the rich Iroquois Valley in Ilium County, thousands of settlers had once made their living from the soil. Now Doctor Ormand van Curler managed the farming of the whole county with a hundred men and several million dollars' worth of machinery.

Then you have to accept the reality that everyone already knows--the value of those titles bookending the business cards of Dr. Paul Proteus, Ph.D., and all his peers:

"Well, I'll be going back to work. Long as this here is going to be your farm, you might's well fix the pump. Needs a new packing."

"Afraid I don't know how," said Paul.

"Maybe," said Mr. Haycox walking away, "maybe if you'd gone to college another ten or twenty years, somebody would of gotten around to showing you how, Doctor."

That, of course, is the sentiment of the farmhand. Not so surprising, the sentiment is shared by Doctor Francis Eldgrin Gelhorne, National Industrial, Commercial, Communications, Foodstuffs, and Resources Director (Gelhorne lecturing Proteus):

"Nobody's so damn well educated that you can't learn ninety per cent of what he knows in six weeks. The other ten per cent is decoration."

"Yes, sir."

"Show me a specialist, and I'll show you a man who's so scared he's dug a hole for himself to hide in."

The government of Technopoly would be wise to enact antisabotage laws similar to those governing Ilium, strictly forbidding the publication of any books with an antimachine theme; reading this one makes me want to become a farmer even more.

Potty-mouthed and Proud

2007-11-12T22:03:00.000-06:00

Sometime ago this post on homeschooling appeared on the internet:

Aaron (doing his spelling): "Mom, what is a four-letter word that begins with Sh?"

Me: "Shit"

Aaron: "Can I really write that down?"

More noteworthy to me is this response:

If we men stand any chance of getting to heaven, it will be because we were privileged to be married to women like this.

I know that I am a bit of a prude when it comes to those popular four letter words, but this seems to be stretching the desire to be Catholic and keep your cultural relevance. Of course, my aversion to such language stems from the most anti-catholic of teachers, brother Malcolm X, who said that people curse when they do not have any better words in their vocabulary to use. (the actual quote is better, I just don't have it handy.) I do have this one by Mr. X though:

"[Bimbi the prison philosopher's discussions] ended my vicious cursing attacks. My approach sounded so weak alongside his, and he never used a foul word."

And, to keep disseminating wisdom from Vonnegut (this time from Bluebeard):

Circe Berman argues that the inclusion of once-taboo words into ordinary conversations is a good thing, since women and children are now free to discuss their bodies without shame, and so to take car of themselves more intelligently.

I said to her, "Maybe so. But don't you think all this frankness has also caused a collapse of eloquence?" I reminded her of the cook's daughter's habit of referring to anybody she didn't like for whatever reason as "an asshole." I said: "Never did I hear Celeste give a thoughtful explanation of what it was that such a person might have done to earn that protological sobriquet."

Then again, Vonnegut was a foul-mouthed S.O.B., so take it for what it is worth. . .

In the end, it is inconsequential. The swearing doesn't really bother me, but I don't see the need to praise it as the realism that will get us to heaven. Maybe that makes me culturally irrelevant. Mostly, I just don't want to have to adjust the way I speak in front of my mother.

_______________
And just so you know that I am not too uptight - the first link's headline and subheadline:

June Cleaver After A Six-Pack
Warning... Alcohol may cause pregnancy. Who knew?

Now that is funny!

This sums it up pretty well

2007-11-12T21:20:00.000-06:00

As stated by Mrs. Jack Graham, shopping-bag lady and majority shareholder in The RAMJAC corporation, in Vonnegut's Jailbird:

"I find this magazine called People in garbage cans," she said, "but it isn't about people. Its about crap."

Well put, Mrs. Jack Graham.

Oh, Sweet Irony

2007-10-31T20:51:00.000-05:00

The Nebraska Book Festival has just passed us by. And how did Nebraskans celebrate books? According to the schedule, the penultimate event of the first night was a MOVIE. Now that is the kind of stuff that would make a great story. Oh, sorry, I mean a screenplay.

the should-be-president on the won't-be-president

2007-10-26T08:06:00.000-05:00

From Pat Buchanan:

A Giuliani presidency would represent the return and final triumph of the Republicanism that conservatives went into politics to purge from power.

. . .

Rudy offers the right the ultimate Faustian bargain: retention of power at the price of one's soul.

Mutants from Space

2007-09-25T08:48:00.000-05:00

So scientists sent some disease-causing microbes up to space to see how the experience might change the microbes. Apparently, space only makes them more dangerous:

Following the shuttle flight, studies using mice showed the salmonella bacteria aboard the shuttle were "almost three times as likely to cause disease when compared with control bacteria grown on the ground," said a university statement outlining the study.

I suppose I can't fault the scientists for trying this experiment as long as everyone learned a lesson and will no longer take disease-causing microbes to space. But wait:

The scientists plan to carry out more experiments on the same theme possibly on space shuttle flights in 2008.

On the bright side, we can worry less about the scientists who are creating an army of clones that will destroy humanity, because the world will be wiped out much earlier by the super-strength diseases that are being cultivated in space and brought back to our planet.

Ernie Chambers, part II

2007-09-20T16:54:00.000-05:00

Ernie Chambers sued God to prove a point that anybody can sue anybody. It is a silly point, particularly coming from a state senator. (Also because he filed it in response to a complaint that the judge said was frivolous and demanded that the plaintiff show cause or be sanctioned, but that is a non-issue because folks like Chambers don't really care about reality).

The most disappointing part of the whole event is the true lack of spectacle. If you are going to prove a point with a grand gesture, make sure the gesture is GRAND. Ernie Chambers clearly needs some lessons in drastic statements. Fairly often there is a report in the news about somebody suing God, but this complainant shows us how to make a statement.

Ernie Chambers at his Best

2007-09-18T13:11:00.000-05:00

The craziest man in Nebraska is suing God.

I guess he does not know about sovereign immunity.

Blessed Teresa of Calcutta

2007-09-12T09:03:00.000-05:00

I tolerated this horrible article in Newsweek last night as I waited for a haircut. Honestly, I can't think of a time that I've ever read Newsweek and not been just completely disgusted at the absolute lack of journalism involved. Anyway, I was happy to have come across this article in response to all of the ignorant criticism. Fr. Groeschel, my hero, as I have well documented, knew Mother Theresa quite well, and his parting words of wisdom are applicable, I think, to all such controversies:

"The wise person, Catholic or non-Catholic, not only disengages himself or herself from this, but also intelligently and with good information stands against the tide."

How not to do it:

Sorry Bill Donahue, but how terribly ineffective. And there is nothing quite like Chris Matthews reading Mother Teresa's letters.

The better approach:

P.S. Don't ever watch Penn and Teller do anything ever again.

How Remarkable

2007-09-05T10:52:00.001-05:00

While at work a few months ago, a young man decided to kill himself by jumping from a tower only a short distance from my office building. It would have been easy to witness for anyone with an office on the west side of the building and, even after it was known to have occurred, you could still clearly see the dead body lying at the base of the monument. And perhaps that proximity was the only thing that made this event more captivativing than any other of the many tragedies that occur on a daily basis.

At least, that was until this information came out about the suicide. In response to a piece in the Kansas City Star that discussed the circumstances surrounding this man's suicide, a reader and relative of the deceased wrote in to tell a truly remarkable story. Check it out.

From My Favorite Friar

2007-08-23T11:13:00.000-05:00

Just a small tidbit on the media from Fr. Groeschel. I thought that this brief comment was particularly interesting:

Father Groeschel criticized a media for glorifying detraction and calumny.

Yes. And how many suckers so readily mimic it. The Hannitization of America...

Have you ever actually seen a banana?

2007-08-16T16:53:00.000-05:00

Other than the fact that this is yellow, I'm not seeing it. Perhaps some artistic liberties were used to catch the eye. Regardless, the Kansas City Star saw fit to place this image on their homepage.

Some more fun

2007-08-15T15:49:00.000-05:00

2nd favorite Scrubs scene ever:

Most favorite Scrubs scene ever:

Bo Knows

2007-08-15T15:03:00.001-05:00

This really makes me want to download that good ole NES emulator. I miss you video games.

The Tears of St. Lawrence

2007-08-10T15:04:00.001-05:00

Some good stuff today. I was just checking in on a weekend meteor shower and found this in the article:

August is also known as the month of "The Tears of St. Lawrence." Laurentius, a Christian deacon, is said to have been martyred by the Romans in 258 AD on an iron outdoor stove. It was in the midst of this torture that Laurentius cried out: "I am already roasted on one side and, if thou wouldst have me well cooked, it is time to turn me on the other."
The saint's death was commemorated on his feast day, Aug. 10. King Phillip II of Spain built his monastery place, the "Escorial," on the plan of the holy gridiron. And the abundant shooting stars seen annually between approximately Aug. 8 and 14 have come to be known as St. Lawrence's "fiery tears."

How about that? As if I needed more of a reason to go watch the show.

Today on Religion

2007-08-10T14:44:00.000-05:00

Well, its that time again. Time for the Today show to talk about the Catholic Church. Today's... Today story (its a video link) is about a Catholic pastor requiring Sunday Mass attendance of parents who want their children to receive scholarships to attend the parish's school. Oh, my, how awful. And why is the Today show covering this story? Because how dare that priest demand that parents attend Mass every week!* My favorite part of the coverage, which you won't see on the video is how Matt Lauer took the show to commercial before they ran the piece, referring to the pastor as an "angry priest". You'll see just how "angry" he is... yeah, pretty much the most harmless person ever.

* Our regular contributors are aware that "Mandatory Mass?" as the headline of the story reads is not a new thing. The only reason that this priest is documenting attendance is because he would rather not throw the church's money away to families that are not bringing their kids to church. Though signing in every week would be a bit annoying, I think it is a great idea. Though some parishes have used tithing as a measure of participation for these things, the great thing about using Mass attendance is that it takes the focus away from the money. There are wealthy parishes were people are more than happy to pay whatever it costs to get their kid into school there. Doesn't mean they are going to Mass though.

P.S. 200TH POST!

Ludovico Technique

2007-08-09T08:38:00.000-05:00

According to this story, classical music may soon be pumping through outdoor speakers at Lincoln's downtown theater. Sounds nice, doesn't it? Maybe it will add a little culture to the downtown. If only that was the purpose; actually, the theater will be playing the "unpopular" music to get rid of people.

Apparently they are not the first brilliant masterminds to implement this plan:

In Tacoma, Wash., city authorities recently installed speakers in public places and began playing classical music to keep criminals from becoming too comfortable in one place.

This little anecdote is even better:

Mark Shriner, who owns the Coffee House at 13th and P streets, is one who actually put bad music to the test.

When his place became a hangout for teen smokers in the mid-1990s, he turned up the classical tunes inside.

It worked.

“The younger people tended to want to puke when they heard it,” Shriner said.

It is not even that kids prefer the manufactured pop of Britney Spears or the modern musical genius of the brothers Hanson, now kids cannot even hear classical music without nausea. Any ideas how to lift culture out of this pit, Duebster?

Why Do We Go To Mass?

2007-08-07T16:26:00.000-05:00

When we could go to a hip contemporary service at a movie theater? Watch the video. You've seen the music video, but you may not have seen the singer's congregation.

The Transfiguration

2007-08-07T13:37:00.000-05:00

Benedict XVI, from the reflection given before the Angelus on March 12, 2006:

Awestruck at the sight of the transfigured Lord who was speaking with Moses and Elijah, Peter, James and John were suddenly overshadowed by a cloud, out of which came a voice which proclaimed: "This is my beloved Son on whom my favour rests; listen to him" (Mk 9: 7).

When one has the grace to live a strong experience of God, it is as if one is living an experience similar to that of the disciples during the Transfiguration: a momentary foretaste of what will constitute the happiness of Paradise. These are usually brief experiences that are sometimes granted by God, especially prior to difficult trials.

No one, however, is permitted to live "on Tabor" while on earth. Indeed, human existence is a journey of faith and as such, moves ahead more in shadows than in full light, and is no stranger to moments of obscurity and also of complete darkness. While we are on this earth, our relationship with God takes place more by listening than by seeing; and the same contemplation comes about, so to speak, with closed eyes, thanks to the interior light that is kindled in us by the Word of God.

A Reflection on the Game of Baseball

2007-07-25T21:11:00.001-05:00

As a fan of baseball and specifically the Kansas City Royals, the past few days have been generally disappointing. Scott Elarton was a member of Royals up until today. Elarton pitched much of last season for the Royals, but severely injured his shoulder and spent most of his offseason rehabbing. Because of the rules of baseball and the veteran status of Elarton (he's old for baseball), there was not much time for him to get game experience at the minor league level. So sure enough, just a few months ago, there is Elarton pitching in a major league game when everyone watching knew that he was not capable of competing at the major league level. Few things are guaranteed in sport, but it honestly felt like the team wanted to lose.

After a few poor attempts, a high ERA and a handful of losses, Elarton was placed on the disabled list. Many commentators suspected that it was a phantom injury that could buy him some more time, because an injured player is permitted a certain number of rehab appearances in the minors without actually being optioned to the minor league team. Basically it is a way to let him to practice without injuring his pride. The injury/rehab came and went, and for the past week we have been anticipating Elarton's return against the Yankees on Tuesday. Talk about a foregone conclusion. Elarton barely made it 1 & 2/3rd innings. He was taken out after giving up 7 runs.

Elarton was released from the team today, something that fans have been demanding for weeks, myself included (in spirit). There was no justifiable reason to keep running him out there. And yet the Royal's organization persisted. Again, it was almost like they wanted to lose.

Well, after hearing the news of Elarton's release today, I got to thinking. Perhaps this thing that frustrates me so as a fan, is actually a redeeming quality of baseball. I can't imagine another profession where Elarton's performance would have inspired his employer to give him so many opportunities. He would have been gone months ago. He wasn't producing results. He was old. He was in the way of the team's youth movement.

But he is also a human being. He had worked hard to rehabilitate his shoulder. He wanted to get back to help the team. He was assisting the younger players on the side with his experience. The team's manager, Buddy Bell, said, "It's really hard to release a guy that has that much character and cares that much about the organization, but at the same time, guys like that make it easier for you. . . ." The team gave this man of character every possible opportunity to turn things around. And to me there might just be something noble about that. Even though in the end it turned out just as we thought it would and, as Bell said, "[Releasing Elarton] is something that had to be done."

Baseball is clearly a business, but there are moments when you can see past the dollar sign. Letting Elarton go was a business decision, because ultimately what baseball values most is winning. But maybe this was a case where baseball valued virtue too. Perhaps I'm trying to not get too worked up over a sport, or perhaps I'm trying to force a justification, but it is at least possible that the Royals did something just by valuing Elarton by more than his ERA and wins & losses.

I guess a part of me (the weak part of course) wishes that I could have spent the past year in a similar environment. Even if I would have ultimately failed, I would have been treated justly, and in the end I would only have myself to blame. So, as always, I wish that the rest of life looked more like baseball (except for the whole looking the other way during a really bad call thing), and I wish that I wouldn't have wished so hard for the team to let Elarton go weeks ago.

Brave kid

2007-07-20T10:27:00.000-05:00

This kid is pretty brave, just reaching over and grabbing the Holy Father's cross like that.

Here's a link to the whole video if you are interested. Just the Holy Father hanging out in the countryside. The kid is right at the end.

Men in Tights

2007-07-17T15:54:00.000-05:00

Here's another great article by Anthony Esolen discussing the need for masculinity in the liturgy as a proper means of inspiring vocations to the priesthood. I think it is particularly applicable to those of us who have been man enough to bear a son.

Insofar, then, as the liturgy is seen as a feminine enterprise, so will it fail to interest boys. I don’t mean that they will reject it consciously. We are not talking about something bad that happens, so much as about something good and necessary that does not happen. They will not say, “I don’t like holding hands, I don’t like the soprano at the piano bar, I don’t like the cutesy slogans on the banners.” It’s simply that their minds and hearts will wander. They will not be inspired to devotion.

Although, I think in my case it has rapidly become a conscious rejection. But since I am not a child, nor a candidate for the priesthood, I digress.

For boys are those strange creatures who fail at the simplistic and the frivolous, and succeed at the seemingly impossible. Set the bar low, and many of them will fail to come up to it; set it high, and many of them, often the very same, will clear it. They who cannot pass a tedious geometry test can take apart and reassemble a motorcycle.

He suggests that one way of raising the bar is to embrace the danger:

There is no sensed danger at a picnic; therefore Mass should never be a picnic, even when it is celebrated at the park. The holy is dangerous because it is holy, set aside: “Put off thy shoes from off thy feet,” said God to Moses, “for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground” (Ex 3:5). The holy, the wondrous can shatter all that we think we know. It can drown us in itself, kill us, and give us a new name and a new life. Most welcoming were the men of the Middle Ages who chose to carve, over the entrance to their churches, the Last Judgment, with saints in trepidation and sinners weighed in the balance and found wanting! They knew exactly what they were doing. Over that door, always facing the setting sun that is the end of the day and our reminder of death, we see the dread moment each of us, saint and sinner, will have to face. Some churches nowadays trawl for members by advertising that they welcome all. Let the door and the Mass rather be welcoming because they are forbidding; because they open out onto that strange place that we need and seek; because if we step beyond that threshold we may never be the same again.

Fun vanishes with the occasion, but solemnity has the power to bring us a deep and abiding joy, whose wellsprings remain with us even in times of grief. We are solemn when we understand the surpassing import of what we are doing and when, knowing how unworthy we are to be there, we place ourselves full-heartedly under the direction of our betters, our forefathers, our teachers, our God.

And then he discusses a distinction between men and women and how we receive truth:

Many a woman will believe the truth because she loves the man who speaks it. That is why it is relatively easy to convert a woman to the truth by manly kindness; consider the strong touch of Jesus’ hand as He defended the woman who had anointed His feet with oil, saying to her at last, “Thy sins are forgiven” (Lk 7:48). Indeed, a woman who is responding in love to a man who speaks the truth will often catch his meaning instantaneously, instructed by a praiseworthy desire to follow the truth, and him who speaks it, to the end. In this regard they are almost always much quicker than their brothers. For when the angel at the tomb gave the holy women the good news of the resurrection, repeating for them the words of Jesus, they remembered those words, and hurried to tell the apostles, surely reminding them too of what Jesus had said. But the apostles had to see to believe, for “their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not” (Lk 24:11).
The apostles had to run to the tomb to see for themselves. Thomas would not trust even his brethren, but had to probe the wounds with his own hands before he finally confessed, “My Lord and my God!” (Jn 20:28). Do we not recognize the men here, suffering from their peculiar weakness? Men are more difficult by far to convert. They are stubborn. They do not often embrace the truth because they love the speaker. More often they learn to love the speaker because they have come to see the truth of what he says.

Karma Tycoon

2007-07-13T11:56:00.000-05:00

Hey Qahal, maybe your wife would let you play this video game.

Slow Motion Emotional Manipulation

2007-07-06T19:55:00.000-05:00

So I'm trying to enjoy a peaceful dinner in the firm cafeteria tonight as I take a short break from my labors. I'm forced to watch CNN on the TV because it is the only channel that comes in.* And after a whole two minutes of news coverage they cut to a five minute commercial break that included this:

Now at this point I fully expect Doobie to be weeping like a little school girl. But they are just animals. Now, don't get me wrong, I love animals, but I refuse to care more just because you slow the film down. And I refuse to equate them with starving children in Africa.

Now, before I get accused of propagating a "genocide" against pets (which of course would imply another human correlation), I will recommend a more tempered piece on animals that can be found here.

And if you want to see one of the funniest things ever, in slow motion, go here. The video quality is poor (and loud), but enjoy nonetheless.

* Of course I believe that this is an attempt on the part of the firm to brainwash us all with the liberal media. Well, at least it is an attempt to prevent me from ever enjoying a meal in peace.

Modern Christian Artists

2007-07-06T00:01:00.000-05:00

Thomas Howard has written about the difficulty for Christian novelists in our modern world: "You can't write about the devil and expect your New Yorker readers, or your graduate departments of English, to take you seriously. It is a problem." Howard wrote this regarding Walker Percy's The Moviegoer, which smuggled ideas of grace and sin into a story that the New Yorker crowd would appreciate. No argument with him here. Perhaps a well written piece of literature with Catholic themes can appeal to the literati if done so subtlely as not to offend, but it can not be done very easily.

I recently attended a reading by two authors: one was William Kloefkorn, the state Poet Laureate of Nebraska, the other was a creative writing professor from some university who had written a novel that the New York Times hailed as brave and powerful, blah, blah, blah, for its extremely pro-abortion story line. Kloefkorn read first and read a selection from his memiors. It was well-written and pretty funny. It received a few laughs and polite applause. Next up was the other author. She was introduced by another professor (I believe) who said she was excited for the reading because it promised "something dirty." It was a crowd of adults, but they cheered that introduction with the zeal of a bunch of 14 year-old boys who had just found a stash of dirty magazines. The author then approached the podium and began with an apology. She said that she had been suffering from a long bout of writers block and for the past few years has been able to write about nothing but teenage sex and therefore the short story she chose to share was about teenage sex. Again, this comment was received with enthusiastic applause. Her story was not only about teenage sex, but her adult fantasies of infidelity to her husband as well. Ignoring the content, the story was not at all compelling and not even that well written, but I suppose I will let that go as my opinion (although it was objectively poor). Her story garnished many applauses, most notably when she described her husband's penis, at which point she broke from her narration to inform the crowd that that was her favorite part of the story, too.

After the two readings, it was clear which was the crowd's favorite. It had nothing to do with the quality of the stories, but the shock value of the content. Who cares that this was an event about literature, the night would have been a success if they had just played clips from the Howard Stern Show. I could not help but think that they would have loved the Kloefkorn memior if he had told about some fleeting love affair from his youth instead of a more meaningful event. It seems that the modern writer has an even more daunting task than writing for New Yorker readers, but in fact has to write to please adolescent libidos.

Of course, the problem is much worse. The masses don't care about literature, anyway. All that matters these days are the talkies and the moving pictures. I wonder if one can make a 'moral' movie that appeals to the moviegoing equivalent of the New Yorker readers and graduate departments of English.* Apparently not. The New York Times offered criticism of Hollywood for its "Anti-choice" position in such movies as Knocked Up. Nevermind the fact that the movie centers on premarital sex, it is apparently not progressive enough for the Times. I have not seen the movie, but (as shameful as it is) I have seen the same writer/director's movie The 40 Year Old Virgin and have a hard time believing that there can be anything more than the most superficial moral message to Knocked Up. I wonder if the Times also criticized Wedding Crashers because it portrayed the anachronsitic institution of marriage? (This, of course, begs the question as to what self-respecting Christian cares what the Times has to say about anything, but that is another story.)

So, as bad as the Christian novelist has it, the Christian screenwriter has it much, much worse. The novelist is allowed to smuggle the True Things into a good story; the screenwriter is only allowed to tell the bad story. I suppose if I must arrive at a point in this post, it is simply this: quit watching movies, or if you are going to watch them, only see movies like Transformers (right Qahal?).
_______________

*The typical moviegoer is a different story. The Passion and all those Pixar cartoons have done fine at the box office, but what do us common folk know, anyway?

The Nuge, part II

2007-07-05T23:09:00.000-05:00

The Nuge is on a roll. Here he is popping up in the Opinion Journal. Keep those editorials coming, my good man.

Ten Commandments

2007-06-20T17:00:00.000-05:00

I saw something similar to this in the Lincoln paper and thought it was a joke. I guess it is for real.

The Nuge

2007-06-19T14:59:00.001-05:00

If you checked Drudge today, then you would have seen this, but I didn't want to leave it to chance. This guy doesn't just write incredible songs and put on amazing live concerts, he is clearly a great editorial writer, too. I know that the Deubster is a huge Nugent fan.

P.S. For a really good time, click on the "click-2-listen" link just under the article's title.

Priests Love Cake

2007-06-19T10:39:00.000-05:00

This is a funny commercial for DQ. I love that he smacks his lips at the beginning.

An Attempt To Regain Our Dignity

2007-06-15T14:16:00.001-05:00

This is the best article I have read in a long time. Enjoy.

Imagine that instead of "verbing" Calvin was talking about our crybaby culture. I think we have officially made language a complete impediment to understanding.

I am uneasy, but I cant look away

2007-06-13T19:07:00.000-05:00

Ransom's Greatest Fear

2007-06-08T08:34:00.001-05:00

For those of us who are contemplating home-schooling our children, there is always that little nightmare hidden in the back of our minds. What if our child turns out like this:

But I think that the Ransom family can rest easy. Ransom, Jr., already has way more personality than this kid. And besides, your last name is nearly impossible to mispronounce.

Here he is in a much more comfortable setting:

More Favorites

2007-06-06T11:56:00.000-05:00

This commercial captures two other favorites. One old, one new. The new favorite is soccer. The old favorite, well...

Candy bars!! What were you thinking?

P.S. This video is also a partial metaphor for me on this blog of late. Yeesh.

My Favorite Band on My Favorite Show

2007-06-05T16:54:00.000-05:00

Reasons why this is my favorite show: Example 1) About 2:00 minutes in, check out the model's face when she open's up the $750,000 case. Priceless.

2) Everytime the contestant says, "No deal," they are turning away free money, mostly because they either think they deserve more money or because they somehow think they can earn more money.

3) About 6:00 minutes in, the contestant, as they almost always do, defers to the judgment of their family and friends. The result is always the same.

Reasons why Hanson is my favorite band: 1) 1:00 in, They take risks. These guy are no panzies, despite how high they can sing.

2) 5:00 in, Howie says, "$35,000 to anybody is very serious money!" Except for Hanson. They rake in that kind of money in the time it takes you to say mmmbop. They spend that much on a roll of toilet paper.

3) 1:00 in, These guy perform what is arguably the greatest pop song of all time, composed when they were younger than Mozart when he composed his first musical piece, and they do it on a moment's notice. Oh, and in case you didn't notice, there are no instruments either. It is absolutely scrumtrulescent.

4) 4:00 minutes in. Howie says, "$83,000 is a huge amount of money." Again, except to Hanson. Look how indifferent they are. They just made twice that for having to listen to Howie's stupid stalling methods.

Now I realize that I just brought this blog's rep down a notch, but I refuse to hide my love of these two great American wonders. And the fact that they came together for one glorious night of entertainment is something that the world needs to know.

Some Thoughts on Contraception

2007-05-23T21:53:00.001-05:00

From the monthly Miles Christi newletter:

• Contraception: the chief cause of the Church’s swift decline

Contraception is certainly one of the worst problems that plague society and the Church. It is also a point where dissent to the perennial Magisterium of the Church becomes quite apparent. This opposition is found not only in many books on moral theology and in many seminaries (where future priests are formed), but also in the confessionals, where it can cause direct harm to souls. The encyclical Humanae Vitae, promulgated by Paul VI in 1968, clearly presents Church teaching on this matter.

The doctrine of the Church which recognizes contraception to be a grave sin HAS ALWAYS been anchored in the Magisterium and is therefore irreformable doctrine. It is useless to try to say that contraception is okay in certain circumstances. Contraception is, in itself, a grave sin. When it is truly a moral act of contraception, it is always seriously wrong. This is the permanent doctrine of the Church and cannot change. Priests are quite well aware of this, since the Magisterium of the last thirty years has been very firm on the matter. Many clerics, therefore, have adopted another strategy: they do not speak about it, and when they hear a confession of a sin of contraception, they act as if they hadn’t heard it, thus giving it no importance. Fr. Thomas Euteneuer, president of Human Life International, wrote of this in an article for the HLI e-newsletter:

“The beloved founder of Human Life International, Fr. Paul Marx, was not known to mince words when it came to what he called the “conspiracy of silence”... on the issue of contraception, but his insights of twenty and thirty years ago were right on target and remain true to this day. ‘Future generations,’ he said, ‘will wonder why so many Catholic bishops and priests in the West didn’t see contraception as a seminal evil and the chief çause of the Church’s swift decline.’
“There is the core issue. Priestly silence about contraception is deadly both to the Church and to our society.
“To this day the vast majority of Catholic clergy refuse to talk about contraception despite their moral obligation to do so. I can tell you that it is not only in the United States that this is the case; it is true in every part of the world. The reasons for this negligence range from outright heresy to lack of moral courage to inexcusable ignorance of the subject matter. Whatever the reason, the effect is the same: something I call clerical contraception.
“Contraception itself is a rejection of God’s sovereignty over one’s marriage and a refusal to obey the Lord’s command to ‘be fruitful and multiply.’ The priest, though not married, analogously contracepts the life-giving seed of truth when he refuses to preach the Catholic Faith — all of it. Faith comes through hearing, says St. Paul, and it is through the priestly ministry that Christ transmits the Faith to His bride, the Church, so that she can be fruitful and multiply the souls who are brought to salvation.
“This is probably the main reason why so many Catholics today contracept or sterilize themselves and see absolutely no contradiction in receiving the Eucharist every Sunday and believing themselves in perfect communion with the Church. They’ve never been admonished that it is a mortal sin to use contraception or get sterilized. They’ve never been told of the physical and spiritual danger of these practices, and they’ve never been made aware of the magnificent, life-giving alternatives that the Church offers to the ideology of infertility.
“Priests who are silent about the teaching on contraception also forget two very important things: first, priestly vocations generally come from large families. Failure to preach openness to life and generosity with children has a direct effect on how many men will be standing in the trenches with us later on. Contracepting this teaching has the same effect as contracepting the marital act: sterility. The persistent sterility of priestly vocations in the West is caused by priests who are silent about the plague of contraception among the laity and forget that their own vocations are the result of their parents’ generosity with life. Overworked priests will be reaping the fruits of their silence on contraception for a long time.
“Secondly, priestly silence about contraception has eternal consequences. The price of that silence is the loss of souls. Contracepting men and women who are not warned of their sin and who therefore do not repent of it risk the death of their immortal souls, and that is a scandal of immense proportions. To be warned is to be forewarned, especially about something so crucial. Perhaps the only danger of greater consequence is the danger to the priests themselves who don’t do their job: they risk their own spiritual deaths because in the end they will be held accountable for preaching the Church’s full message ‘in season and out of season.’
“All priests should read the Lord’s message to the prophet Ezekiel to know the high stakes of failing to preach the fullness of Christ’s teaching: ‘If I say to the wicked man, you shall surely die; and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his wicked conduct so that he may live: that wicked man shall die for his sin, but I will hold you responsible for his death’ (Ez 3:18).
“May every priest take this warning to heart!” (FR. THOMAS EUTENEUER, “Clerical Contraception,” Spirit & Life, vol. 1,no. 36, Oct 6, 2006).

Most Rev. Elio Sgreccia, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, has recently said that attacks against life at any stage means “marching toward a self-genocide of the human race... The weakness of the Christian community and the strength of secular society could spell disaster.” He asked Europe to reverse direction: “Until now it has accepted the culture of death, and that path leads to self-destruction.”

Ummm....

2007-05-18T23:41:00.000-05:00

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,273834,00.html

Up To Their Old Tricks

2007-05-18T08:25:00.001-05:00

A typical liberal tactic on the abortion front is to make an example of those who do not have a uterus. For example, in my time as the president of my college pro-life group, it was pointed out to me that I did not have a uterus. In fact it was written very clearly in chalk on a major thoroughfare of the campus, "[Qahal] does not have a uterus." I don't remember ever suggesting that I did have one, or that I needed to have one to take a position on abortion, but clearly that was the implication of the sidewalk chalk.

Well, it looks like those crazy abortionistas are up to their same old tricks. Apparently Sam Brownback doesn't have a uterus either.

Commies and the Wall Street Journal

2007-05-11T14:15:00.000-05:00

In Pulp Fiction, Mia says that you can either be an Elvis person or a Beatles person, but you can't be both. I am not sure I buy it with rock and roll, but I don't think anyone would disagree that the same is true for the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times: You are either a Journal person or a Times person, but you can't be both. That is, except for some friends of mine.

By pure happenstance and lack of any real friends, I belong to a certain social club that consists of Underhill, me, and a bunch of geriatric socialists. It provides a few moments of enjoyment and entertainment, but for the most part it is a couple hours wasted every time I attend a meeting. Last night was similar to any meeting until we started talking about the evil war and the awful president. That discussion was no different, it is how we end every meeting, but last night one member mentioned that she was a Wall Street Journal reader. I raised an eyebrow, wondering how anyone is this group would choose a source other than the Old Gray Lady. She automatically qualified her response--of course she found the WSJ's editorial section deplorable and fascist--but she admitted that the WSJ was the only major paper that actually objectively reported news. To be fair, she got back to form quickly when she added that her other "unbiased" sources of news were NPR and a government-controlled Chinese news station she gets on satellite.

I was impressed that she could distinguish NYT news from the NYT editorial section (which, even she admitted, are practically the same thing). Yet I can not understand how someone who admitted (not in these words, of course, it would have broken the socialist code) that NYT news is unreliable, exaggerated quasi-truth, could somehow support it when the same unreliable, exaggerated quasi-truth is written as an editorial.

(Similarly, after an earlier meeting, I had a conversation with a different member who would never stray from the NYT. I asked him if, without choosing which one is right and which one is wrong, he saw any problem with the fact that two papers could give such divergent stories about the same events; if he saw any problem with the fact that one had to be either reporting poorly or blantantly lying. He said that he saw no problem, because he liked the news the Times reported better. Ten minutes of circular argument later, we just had to agree that our worlds contained different news.)

The theme of the club has always been "there is no right or wrong, only each person's opinion which are equally valid and important regardless of what is actually being said", but last night was the closest someone came to saying "I know that X is the truth, but I like Y better so that is what I choose to believe." They hint at it a lot, but last night someone almost admitted it.

Von Richthofen, Armed Hordes, and James Dean

2007-05-02T09:31:00.000-05:00

Have you guys ever seen "Rebel Without a Cause?" Well, there is one scene in the classic film that I thought about today. The scene has outlander James Dean getting involved in a little scuffle with some local boys. Well, instead of just wailing on each other like a Springer episode, two of the guys, one of whom is James Dean, (From Indiana, "Where Cool was Born"), decide to fight with knives and set up rules so that no one is permanently injured. After a few slices, they all go home and get ready to go back to school. "Cool" indeed. (BTW Axl and Slash are both from Indiana, as is our chief Justice and Jim Davis of Garfield acclaim.)

I saw this scene a long time ago and have always loved it. Two guys want to fight, they don't hate each other, they just need to fight. So they go at it with something the world used to know as "class." When I went into high school, I had probably fought with all of my friends up to that point. But when we mixed in with different groups of people, there was this us/them mentality that snuck in and now if there was a fight, it was a brawl and you might get shot.

What is it about these days where men back-stab, gang up, and if they lose, claim that they were "screwed" or cheated? There used to be rules to the game. If you got in a fight at school, you went after school to the gym and boxed. You don't take cheap shots and you don't gang up and "jump" people. When you fight, you fight for a reason and you fight with respect.

I don't really know why things are the way they are exactly. Part of it is probably sissy education. Part of it is that kids don't spend much times with their father while he is interacting with other adult men. Part of it is race and tribalism in American democracy but on a local level, I think it is due to laziness, television, and the inability of men to have friends.

Well, whatever the causes, today, May 2, is the birthday of Manfred von Richthofen, probably the greatest flying ace ever. The "Red Baron" served Germany with complete military honor and was deeply respected by all sides of WWI. He was a model soldier and patriot.

Back in those days, there was a saying amongst the old European fighters, "We kill the machine, not the man." There are stories of aces going to great lengths to not shoot the cockpit of the airplanes but to damage the engine. In many instances, after battle or capture, enemy soldiers were treated extremely well. (A good movie on this is the French film "The Grand Illusion")
Remember, in the East in WWI, the war was really between three emperors. It was an isolated land battle with non conscripted troops many of whom were led by nobility into war like the magnificent Karl I of Austria. This war was brutal, but man, these people did have class.

So, then the US gets involved and despite pleas for peace from Austria-Hungary, Wilson and his Puritanical brethren don't do anything but indoctrinate their troops, massacre an Empire, and leave Europe with a power vacuum ripe for another Austrian to take hold of a few years later. From then on, war in the West has been near total, ideological, and racial. Soldiers are to be like machines doing the will of the commander. You don't hear the same stories coming from WWII. You do hear about the US starving 1.2 Million German soldiers, the fire-bombing of Dresden, the atomic bombs in Japan, and of course the Holocaust. (Read "Monarchy and War" online by Erik Leddihn)

Fukuyama and the neo-cons say that democracies never start wars. Well, that is debateable, but they certainly know how to finish them... with a lot of innocent people dying. WWI was an insane lust for the blood of Catholics and old Europe. It was nothing more than the French Revolutionaries coming back for more death and democracy. And with that hatred and egalitarian indoctrination, nothing was sacred, not even the Churches.

When the "Red Baron" died, his pall-bearers were Australian soldiers. His death was mourned by soldiers from Germany to America. A picture of his procession led by the English is below. Americans would take their hats off when he was around. Battle to him was a chess-match between men of honor, men you want to have a cigar with afterwards, leave, and come back to fight again.

So somehow we have gone from Joe Louis to Mike Tyson, from Hank Aaron to Barry Bonds, and from Karl I to George W. I don't know how to get back, but guys like von Richthofen make me realize that we are today missing something fundamentally masculine that even some cool kid from 1950's Indiana understood but has since been, in my estimation, forgotten.

Requiescat in Pace

Excessive Entanglement?

2007-04-26T21:44:00.000-05:00

An old friend brought this to my attention today. I don't care all that much for a lay person's take on the law, but it is rather humorous that supporting a Jesuit institution isn't considered excessive entanglement with the Catholic Church. Although the built a sports arena, not a church for cryin' out loud.

Catholic "Radio Radio"

2007-04-19T22:08:00.000-05:00

No, this isn't about Elvis Costello, but it could be if Elvis worked for EWTN.

Tonight I went to a Catholic radio fundraiser in Indy. I of course was invited as I could not afford shelling out the few hundred bills it would have taken otherwise.

Anyway, the speaker was Fr. Mitch Pacwa and he spoke about the last few decades in the Catholic Church, the challenge of secularism, and the challenge of Islam. I don't know if you guys know about Fr. Pacwa but he is an excellent speaker and linguist with an extremely deft understanding of contemporary cultures from Europe to the Middle East. Here are some points that Fr. Pacwa addressed that I would like to share.

First and foremost, echoing some of the sentiments Qahal and I have expressed on another blog, he explained how strong Catholic positions on cultural-political matters are. He explained that for some reason, at about the time that Archbishop Sheen went off the air the Catholic confrontation with contemporary issues switched from active engagement to outright cowering. Catholics were almost universally portrayed as good and valuable through to the early 60's and then were treated with outright contempt which is one of the reasons Mother Angelica started EWTN.
The problem wasn't Vatican II, it was something more like a passivity that crept into the ranks coupled with an increasing antagonism on the part of Hollywood. (E. Michael Jones's book "Libido Dominandi" makes the case that Hollywood was ruled by Catholics until guys like Leo Pfeffer took the kulturkampf into the Sup. Ct.)
Pacwa of course stressed that Catholics have nothing at all to be ashamed of. He related that in parishes and schools where teachers and priests push a sort of moral relativism the people involved will always slouch toward the lowest of aspirations. Interesting to say the least. I have had a few friends convert from Protestantism and none of them came into the fold because the Church was all inclusive, it was because it was ideologically exclusive; oh, and because we venerate some Saints that have killed people. I guess we can say with Aristotle that the passions want that kind of garbage and the intellect wants the good stuff. (Note how these relativist Catholic people are the same that looooove guitar Masses and couldn't tell the difference between Mozart and Bach if the fugue was right in their face.)

Second, he showed that since the election of John Paul II, the quality of priests and seminaries has steadily increased. He had just returned from Indonesia where the seminaries are turning people away en masse. Good news eh? Looks like the "priest shortage" news is actually pushed mostly by people pushing for women's ordination.

Most importantly, he talked about secular humanism (SH) and how it is preparing the West for absolute destruction be it from Islam or nuclear holocaust. SH presumes both anarchy and nihilism. It weakens social institutions and the ability for valid authorities to shape and affect individual choices. As nice as it can sound "you believe what you believe and...blah blah blah," the moral and psychological effect is devastating. The upside to SH is that Catholics are uniquely poised to offer the panacea so long as they know their faith and are unabashed about it.
America is religiously Catholic and it has been for pretty much 100 years. Protestant ranks are dying out except for charismatics who are disorganized and anarchial. SH is, well, meaningless and barren. So gentlemen and lady, Fr. Pacwa thinks that the future belongs to us as long as we keep up the good work of having kids, catechizing them, and bringing as many non-Catholics the good news as possible. Lets go smoke 'em.

People of Intelligence

2007-04-19T16:48:00.000-05:00

Here's a midly interesting commentary on the recent Imus controversy. This guy is a sports writer that has been picked up into the national spotlight recently because of his criticism of Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. He did an occasional fill in on ESPN, but he lost his job writing for Page 2 because he called out the guys he worked with. Ironically enough, you can see that he doesn't exactly speak all that intelligently. The really funny thing is that I can't stand his opinions when he writes about sports, but he starts talking about culture and it's not that bad. Although, he does quote Hillary Clinton: "It takes a village," but his point I find interesting: Pop culture is so pervasive that families can't avoid its influence no matter how hard they try.

Snoop Dogg can speak to your child daily, and he does. He and many other entertainers of every color are abusing that privilege. They’re corrupting minds and redefining cultural norms that were once set by people of intelligence.

The idiots are running the world now, and they’re telling our kids to sell crack and shoot each other over the slightest disrespect. We’ve even dressed the idiots up and passed them off as respectable, influential members of society. Snoop Dogg is as mainstream as apple pie. Any intelligent person who thinks today’s pop culture is as harmless as yesterday’s hasn’t raised a child, or he has a financial stake in the continuation of the cultural genocide.

Our Thumb, Their Eye

2007-04-18T09:41:00.000-05:00

Score one for our team. I called the Right to Life office about the Supreme Court decision today and heard what could only have been loud and celebratory drinking in the back. What a day. I will say, however, that in my short experience, the cogs of law and culture move really slowly. There is a big question that folks our age are going to have to reckon with in the next 10-15 years which is whether the right will maintain its socially conservative/economically libertarian model once the abortion issue is not such an issue anymore. So excuse me for not joining in with the wine, I am planning on taking down a lot of whiskey in the future and don't want to get ahead of myself.

But despite the ominous future of the right in America, the opinion was great. I just read it and wanted to share with you some of the lil' nuggets of wisdom that I found interesting.

Ginsberg, bitching about disrespect for Casey affirmed, "[abortion rights] do not seek to vindicate some generalzed notion of prvacy; rather, they center on a woman's autonomy to determine her life's course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship." Awesome, autonomy and equality right there in the same sentence, but it seems that privacy isn't the issue anymore.

She later states, "THis way of thinking reflects the ancient notions about women's place in the family and under the Constitution-ideas that have long since been discredited." She is referring to the bond between woman and child. Apparently when my wife gets real excited about baby clothes she is actually going through a rational process of self-determination in radical choice theory. Awesome.

Finally the Yenta speaks, "Today's decision is alarming." Not to us, but to some dried up scion of a dying generation. Say hi to Brennan when you get to the other side, I am sure you two will have a lot to talk about.

On the flip side, the decision is pretty specific in its claims and isn't really all that interesting. Thomas, my main man, joins with Scalia affirming that Roe has no foundation in the Constitution and then takes a swipe at the other side wondering why no one challenged the act on jurisdictional grounds under the commerce clause. I don't know why he said this, maybe he was just pointing out the fact that the foundations of Roe are all but vanished and if the ladies of the left want to play ball in Roberts' SCOTUS, they are going to have to leave the garbage that they learned from Prof. Judy Rodham-Trotsky and rethink their strategy. What do you guys think?

Monthly Crisis Check-Up

2007-04-17T14:50:00.000-05:00

Here were some mildly interesting articles in the most recent Crisis issue. While I could just tell you all to read it monthly, I figure it is just easier to peruse it myself for articles that I think you would appreciate. That's just how much I love you guys.

Here's a snippet on the best novel ever written, per Mr. and Mrs. Ransom.

And here's a somewhat lacking inquiry into the roots of neoconservatism with Michael Novak. It left me with the impression that neoconservatism is merely a reactionary political ideology. I think I would be more drawn to an original political approach that can be based on Catholic principles. Instead I see two somewhat distinct principles trying to coexist:

Alexis de Tocqueville asserted in Democracy in America that someday Catholics would be able to give the best arguments in favor of the American system. The Catholic sense of community and its distinctive feeling for equality, as well as the long Catholic sense of history, add new notes to the American mind. On equality, for example, whether you are a peasant or a serf or a noble, a count or a duke or a king, you meet at the same communion table. My point is: There are real riches in the Catholic tradition, which are highly instructive in interpreting the American experience. That is why Father Neuhaus, who was not a Catholic until 1990, wrote that in trying to understand social policy, one is well-advised to look at it through such Catholic notions as subsidiarity, associations, the common good, subjectivity (in Pope John Paul II’s sense), and the person as distinct from the individual. In this way, the day-to-day language of America is becoming more and more Catholic. The American genius, in forming associations on the local level, owes a great deal to the confraternities and associations of the Catholic medieval period, and so does Anglo-American common law.

But later he says:

We have an implicit rule in the United States that is not often articulated, but it is there nonetheless. It says: “Bring your own heritage with you; you do not have to renounce it. But do not make it geographical. You cannot declare a piece of land as your community, with your own values and customs. You must become part of the larger community, with its own laws and rules. There must be one law for all.” Now this has worked very well for us; but as I said, not many Americans have ever made this rule explicit, as it should be.

By the way, wouldn't the incorporation doctrine applying the federal bill of rights against the states be a pretty explicit rule in that direction?

P.S. I suggested to my pastor that I was interested in helping out with high school religious ed. Yesterday I met with the lady in charge of S.O.R. (school of religion, I think) to talk about how I could be involved. I regrettably discovered a youth group for the high school kids rather than a religious ed program. This woman happily described the current state of affairs, generally beginning her sentences as such, "Well, the kids would really like to..." or "The kids decided to..." I don't know if it is a product of hiring parish workers that are incompetent or perhaps have too much on their plate and are therefore forced to take a hands-off approach (or maybe it is both). What other position can you think of where people get hired to run a program and then don't contribute anything to it whatsoever other than taking surveys? Can you imagine a coach saying to high school athletes, "What do you want to do for practice today?" or a parent asking their kids, "How do you want us to spend our money on you this month?" or a priest asking his congregation: "How do you want to worship?" Wait, that last one actually happens.

Anyway, I've come up with a new term that I will use to refer to this backward approach that only seems to pop up in youth ministry. Youthanizing. This lady has youthanized her high school religious education program, and I'm not really sure if I should try to jump in and resurrect it.

Preference and Malevolence

2007-04-15T18:48:00.000-05:00

To keep with the theme below, I wanted to show you fellow uprisers out there this test that you can take online that will show your automatic preference for blacks or whites... er... african or european americans.

http://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

Here is what I got.

Preference:
Strong White 27%
Moderate White 27%
Slight White 16&
No Preference 17%
Strong Black 2%
Moderate Black 4%
Slight Black 6%

Big surprise right? Try it out and see what you guys get. Most people prefer their own race even if they are nappy headed white lawyers.

Nappy Headed Hos (the non-offensive kind)

2007-04-13T17:51:00.000-05:00

This article (first item) is pretty good, but I posted it because I couldn't help but laugh when I read the lyrics to Ludacris's popular(?) song, "You'Z A Hoe":

Ho (Ho)
You'z a Ho, (Ho)
You'z a Ho, I said that you'z a Ho (Ho)
You'z a Ho, (Ho)

You'z a Ho, (Ho)
You'z a Ho, I said that you'z a Ho (Ho)

You doing Ho activities
With Ho tendencies
Hos are your friends,
Hos are your enemies

This should shed some light to Underhill's post about an ignored Josh Bell--he has a lot to compete with in popular music. Maybe he just isn't as good as the article tried to portray him. Think about it, that Bach guy's music that Bell was playing doesn't have any lyrics, let alone lyrics that reach this level of poetric transcendence.

The Business of the Feminine Mistake

2007-04-13T13:04:00.000-05:00

Following up Qahal's post, here is an Opinion Journal article on the subject.

What is Beauty?

2007-04-11T22:40:00.000-05:00

What is beauty? Is it a measurable fact (Gottfried
Leibniz), or merely an opinion (David Hume), or is it a little of each, colored
by the immediate state of mind of the observer (Immanuel Kant)?

I don't read the Wasington Post, so I need to credit gillie17 for finding this gem.

Must Read

2007-04-10T16:23:00.000-05:00

If you get a chance, check out this article about Jared Cheek and the guy who lost control of the car they were in.

High-Risk Behavior?

2007-04-03T09:33:00.000-05:00

So the Today show is back with some more "news". They interviewed the author of a new book called The Feminine Mistake. Here is an excerpt. There's actually a pretty funny typo in the introductory paragraph:

There's been a lot of talk about career women who give it all up to raise their children. Some say it's a throwback to another generation. But for those who can afford to be stay at home Moms, it's a difficult, and very personal, decision. A controversial new book, “The Feminine Mistake”, by Vanity Fair writer, Leslie Bennetts looks at the risks women take when they put their careers on hold, even for a short time. Leslie Bennetts was invited to appear on TODAY to discuss his book.

The author is a woman. She is apparently an angry woman. She's angry that women would have the audacity to stay home and raise their children. Here's an interview with the author. And here's a video of her interview on the Today show.

This is just another case of people using exceptions to develop a rule. Even if those exceptions are prevalent, they are still abnormalities. I don't need to preach to the choir about the beauty of sacrifice within marriage and the joy of service to your spouse and children. This author prefers to invest in work rather than family:

But the truth is that meaningful work is the source of great rewards in many women's lives, and a lot of the ones I interviewed found it unexpectedly refreshing to be given permission to talk openly about how satisfying it is to have your own work, your own identity, your own money, your own recognition, and your own agenda, particularly as your children get older and don't want you hovering over them all the time.

Sounds like a big, fat "Me" Monster. But apparently the author is just trying to get women to look out for themselves, because marriage is a high-risk behavior:

Our culture is not informing women adequately about the dangers of depending on a man to support them, and I think the media have misled women into thinking that the stay-at-home life is a better and less stressful choice. The facts would indicate otherwise -- working women tend to be not only happier but even healthier than full-time homemakers, as I have documented in the book.

And what is so dangerous about this course of action you might ask? Well, what if the marriage ends in divorce or the husband dies? Or what if the husband loses his job? Hmmm... 1) Exception, 2) Exception, and 3) Exception to the norm. And here's three alternatives: 1) Life-long commitment and fidelity to your spouse. 2) Life insurance (term life is so cheap for our age its ridiculous not to have it). 3) Have your husband get his ass out there and get another job.

This scenario, oddly enough, reminds me of youth ministry. It starts as a solution to situations in which there is a break from the norm (parents not educating their children). Then it goes from simply a solution or an alternative to a norm of its own (We need youth ministry because it is good). The Good has been twisted entirely. On what basis? Exceptions. Sins. Thankfully, we have a new Good: Every woman for herself. Have fun with that.

making easter even better

2007-04-01T14:21:00.000-05:00

I am not sure how to go about it, but I would like to petition for a replacement of the traditional Easter Animal. Sure, the Easter bunny has been a steadfast symbol of chocolate and egg hunts and all things secular about Easter, but I think my new mascot, the Easter miatonic goat, symbolizes the Resurrection in a very tangible way:

Also, to focus your Holy Week, here is a little spiritual video to meditate upon:

Left Behind

2007-03-29T20:56:00.000-05:00

Don't get mad at me for this guys. There are some good posts on here and I don't want to obfuscate our most holy mission. In addition, Ransom, I don't want to take your play on delighting us all on the running Evangelical joke. Here is a joke, "A grasshopper walks into a bar and sits down on a stool to order a pint. The bartender says, "Hey, do you know that we have a drink named after you?" The grasshopper, perplexed, says, "You have a drink named 'Kevin?"

That is funny, this is funnier.

So we know about Left Behind and all the junk pop-theo/fiction out there. I am sure that you are like me and think that it is funny in a sort of laugh-at-a-well-meaning-fat-person sort of way. Well, not wanting to miss any commercial goodies, the boys of the series have come out with a game. "Left Behind, Eternal Forces." Awesome! Check leftbehindgames.com for more. Best part, they also had a gamin conference to bring kids in to play.... and witness to each other.

This game in particular is great. Dr. E. Michael Jones says the following: "In the new video game Left Behind: Eternal Forces, born-again Christians in post-apocalypse Manhattan use prayer and song to convert infidels or, if unsuccessful, blow them away with tanks and snipers. Says the reviewer for Focus on the Family: “Eternal Forces is the kind of game that mom and dad can actually play with Junior.”

Wow, another hit Christian video game sure to get kids into Jesus. Lets think of some others.

Well, there was the classic "Exodus." Here is a screenshot:
Who can forget "Bible Buffet"?
And my favorite: "Forgiveness, The First Chapter"

Ransom and Qahal, I now know what I will be getting your children for Christmas, you can thank me later. See you at Willow Creek on Sunday.

Like Jesus Camp on Human Growth Hormone

2007-03-29T11:22:00.000-05:00

Okay, so maybe that's not the actual tag line of this movie. But it should be.

Not as Cool?

2007-03-29T08:53:00.000-05:00

Apparently the Today show thinks that Pope Benedict XVI isn't quite as cool as his predecessor. They led off yesterday's broadcast with this segment. Somehow this is news. Rule #1) It isn't cool to talk about hell. Rule #2) It is cool to have Bob Dylan sing for you, and the current Holy Father wouldn't have allowed it to happen.

To the Today show I offer this. That's pretty darn cool. Maybe King is actually trying to set up a match between Fr. Pat Egan and the Pope. Imagine the amount of people that would pay to see that. You would make millions, King, millions.

And for those of you who believe in the Pentavirate run by the Gettys, the Rothchilds, the Queen, the Vatican and the Colonel, check out this latest development. For all we know they're putting an addictive chemical into this sandwich that will make us crave it fortnightly.

schooling at home

2007-03-27T22:56:00.000-05:00

This post is for Mrs. Ransom. I assume she still checks the blog occassionally and I want her to read this. Some weeks my stupid job does not allow us much time to talk, so I'll just pass along the article for her to read. I realize that I run a risk here--I can already hear her saying, "If you have time to peruse the internet, then you have plenty of time," but part of my job is to be informed about what is going on, so I think I get a free pass with on-line periodicals (at least I didn't post her a YouTube video, then I would have been in real trouble).

So read up, wifey, I can't wait to talk about it with you someday.

I Don't Really Know What To Say

2007-03-27T16:42:00.000-05:00

This is absolutely shocking. I guess in some backwards way this might be a sign of hope. I can't imagine any court holding that the child in this case is anything other than a person. Perhaps this defense will not only backfire, but will create a shockwave unhinging the weak foundation of Roe.

The End of Marty Haugen

2007-03-15T17:21:00.000-05:00

Does this mean no more drums at church?

"In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration. Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons. Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the synod fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy."

Pope Benedict XVI has obviously never heard the Holy Spirit-inspired guitar solos at Christ the King in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

On Chipmunks

2007-03-13T15:13:00.000-05:00

I had no idea that Chipmunks were so intelligent. Apparently getting rid of them is no small chore. Don't worry, this website is looking out for you.

First, don't be fooled by their appearance:

In most cases, the first signs of chipmunks are welcomed. These small animals are both cute and innocent looking. Most people like to watch them as they forage for food and move about in the yard. But don't let their harmless looks charm you. Chipmunk infestations can quickly grow out of control and once established, they can be difficult to remove!

Once you have accepted the danger they present, you have several options. Apparently chipmunks are incredibly selective animals, but they just can't say no to a helping of Trapper's Choice Pecan Paste:

Chipmunks are fussy and only seem to like tasty and selective foodstuff generally not available in a "bait" form.... Chipmunks are more finicky and may readily hoard bait placements for a later date.... [So if you want to poison them] you may try mixing it with bird seed, [but] it is very likely the local chipmunks will simply hoard your bait placements. If you want them to consume the product quickly, mix the Liquid Poison with TRAPPERS CHOICE PECAN PASTE. This paste is rich with nuts, oils and sugars. Chipmunks can not resist eating it immediately.

And don't try to insult their intelligence (or ability to evolve):

Although you may get an animal or two [with a rat trap], the rest of the population will quickly learn to avoid them.... [And] typically, the chipmunks which inherently are coy enough to escape pets reproduce and their offspring inherit these same qualities which allow them to survive as well.

But wait, lest you despair over their infestation, they are not invincible. Apparently they are very easy to trap... as long as you are using Trappers Choice Pecan Paste! Of course! But once you trap them:

You'll have to cart the animals at least 5 miles away before releasing them. Chipmunks can travel several miles so make sure you don't give them a chance to get back to your property.

And in case you hadn't thought of it yet:

Remember, you can also destroy them if you want to be completely sure they won't return.

Don't just kill them. Destroy them. There's an interesting approach.

(Portions of this post were contributed by Mrs. Qahal)

Goodbye, Chief

2007-03-13T14:48:00.000-05:00

The drum has finally stopped beating for Chief Illiniwek. The fertility-dancing is over for the long established mascot. He will no longer entertain the throngs of college sports fanactics gathered to support the Fighting Illini. Instead, he will ride his stolen horse into the sunset of obscurity where he will pass away and be buried by Political Correctness.

But wait... perhaps there is more to this than meets the eye. The Chief certainly retired without much fanfare. Maybe the University is holding out for one last pagan ritual. I've heard rumors from certain people indicating that if the Fighting Illini pull off the impossible and win the NCAA men's basketball national championship, that the celebration will center, not on the basketball team, but on Chief Illiniwek.

First, a herd of buffalo will be released into the Georgia Dome. They will be recklessly slaughtered for their furs by the members of the opposing team. As this develops, if one were to look closely, a tear will gently fall from the Chief's left cheek. He will rush up to the dead buffalo, rip out one of their hearts and eat it as his sadness quickly changes into fury. He will engage the opposing team by throwing tomahawks and scalping them alive. After conquering the opposing team's starters, members of the white-man's bench will offer firewater and smokes as a sign of peace. Shortly thereafter, in a drunken stupor, Chief Illiniwek will abruptly light the Georgia Dome on fire (ironically symbolizing the torching of the prairie). Once the wreckage has been cleared, Atlanta can okay the building of the Chief Illiniwek Hotel and Casino where the dome once stood. That would be a most extravagant tribute fitting to mark the end of the Chief's reign. He who has been retired because his mere presence is offensive.

Maybe that would be true, if he evoked all that I just described. But he doesn't. He stands in front of fans who are more interested in watching the sport than the mascot. He claps, shouts, cheers and sweats. And that's it. What's the big deal?

People for the Ethical Treatment of Robots

2007-03-09T11:34:00.000-06:00

I don't think we have had any posts about robots lately, and that is a shame. Thanks to this poorly thought out excuse for an article, that streak ends here. We start with Isaac Asimov's "three laws of robotics":

- A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm

- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law

- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law

Problem solved ("I, Robot" excluded, of course), right? Only for the short sighted. Luckily the author and scientist does a little thinking outside the box (which is a prerequisite for scientists who are grappling with ethical issues regarding a future world of robot people):

These three laws might seem like a good way to keep robots from harming people. But to a roboticist they pose more problems than they solve. In fact, programming a real robot to follow the three laws would itself be very difficult.

For a start, the robot would need to be able to tell humans apart from similar-looking things such as chimpanzees, statues and humanoid robots.

This may be easy for us humans, but it is a very hard problem for robots, as anyone working in machine vision will tell you.

The author lacks clarity here (probably because he is writing nonsense), but this can either be taken one of two ways. First the problem could be that robots that are programmed to kill chimpanzees and destroy statutes would not be able to do their job because they would be confused about their targets. This seems to be a minor problem, and for someone advocating robot ethics, it is doubtful that chimp-exteriminating robots would be acceptable anyway. So I am going to assume the problem he describes is that a robot will not be able to distinguish whether a command comes from a monkey or a man. I guess when you are making up robot fantasy worlds it is easy to forget that a chimpanzee can not speak to a robot or program a robot. If evolution brings us to the point where super-intelligent chimpanzees are programming computers at the level of humans, we have bigger problems than the robots.

There are other important ethical issues raised here as well:

If robots can feel pain, should they be granted certain rights? If robots develop emotions, as some experts think they will, should they be allowed to marry humans? Should they be allowed to own property?

First suggestion, assuming you could program robots to feel pain, just don't do it! Problem solved. As for allowing robots to marry humans, again I think the author forget to think about what he was writing. I'll leave it for my two year old to explain the problems with this.

I know that this is at least the second post I have written where I disagreed with robot ethicists, but bear with me. I am trying to get all my thoughts out before the robot lawyers pass robot hate speech laws.

Have a happy Friday, or as the robots would say, "01010011 0011 1011."

Fly Me To The Moon

2007-03-02T11:17:00.000-06:00

So I guess that Germany thinks they can make it to the moon. That's funny.

Mary, Protestants, and Quantum Physics

2007-03-02T09:50:00.000-06:00

Here is a good little article on Evangelicals and the Mother of God. I particularly liked this quote from then-Cardinal Ratzinger:

The Christological affirmation of God’s Incarnation in Christ becomes necessarily a Marian affirmation, as de facto it was from the beginning. Conversely: only when it touches Mary and becomes Mariology is Christology itself as radical as the faith of the Church requires. The appearance of a truly Marian awareness serves as the touchstone indicating whether or not the Christological substance is fully present. Nestorianism involves the fabrication of a Christology from which the nativity and the mother are removed, a Christology without Mariological consequences. Precisely this operation, which surgically removes God so far from man that nativity and maternity-all of corporeality-remain in a different sphere, indicated unambiguously to the Christian consciousness that the discussion no longer concerned incarnation (becoming flesh), that the ?center of Christ’s mystery was endangered, if not already destroyed. Thus in Mariology Christology was defended.

The article also contains what, I think, is probably a protestant's major difficulty with Mariology (besides inculcated prejudices against things that are so explicitly Catholic):

Good Catholics know, of course, that Mary is not the object of worship or the kind of adoration given only to God (latria), but rather of veneration (doulia), albeit of a special kind (hyperdoulia). But this distinction often seems to get lost at the local level.

I leave it for the others to discuss, but a proper veneration of Mary alongside a proper adoration and worship of Jesus is often difficult for the young protestant armed only with a Bible (as well as the young Catholic flanked with both Bible and Cathechism) to distinguish. This criticism can not hold up to even a small amount of study or genuine curiousity, but I think that it is an immediate problem on the local level, as the author puts it.

The reason I leave it to the others to discuss anything more about this is because they are a lot smarter than me. I found this clip (with Max playing the part of Ransom and Quantum Physics playing the part of Theology) that sums up the Silent Planet quite well:

Some Good Stuff

2007-03-01T22:05:00.000-06:00

I thought that today's readings were exceptional and here's a little tidbit from the 1st Reading:

Est C:12, 14-16, 23-25

Queen Esther, seized with mortal anguish, had recourse to the LORD.She lay prostrate upon the ground, together with her handmaids, from morning until evening, and said: “God of Abraham, God of Isaac, and God of Jacob, blessed are you. Help me, who am alone and have no help but you, for I am taking my life in my hand. As a child I used to hear from the books of my forefathers that you, O LORD, always free those who are pleasing to you. Now help me, who am alone and have no one but you, O LORD, my God.

“And now, come to help me, an orphan. Put in my mouth persuasive words in the presence of the lion and turn his heart to hatred for our enemy, so that he and those who are in league with him may perish. Save us from the hand of our enemies; turn our mourning into gladness and our sorrows into wholeness.”

That just sounds like a lawyer's kind of prayer if you ask me.

Social Control Update

2007-03-01T13:46:00.000-06:00

Remember when people were hired for positions because they were the most qualified? Not anymore. I've been wondering how I could sue my way into either a job or some money, but I guess that I'm out of luck because I'm not black.

Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act makes it illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of race.

And nowhere in this article is there any discussion of evidence of racial discrimination nor of any particular cases where there are allegations of racial discrimination. There is also no mention whatsoever of the qualifications of these black applicants. Its a statistical conclusion and we're supposed to just assume that there's discrimination. We don't actually have to prove that, we can just trust that its the case, because I mean come on, there's got to be more than six qualified black coaches right? If that's the case why can't they actually prove it, with evidence. Show me the specific cases of actual discrimination. Don't make some lame statistical argument that has no place in court. Title VII has been allowed to stretch a bit too far from its 14th and 15th Amendment moorings.

Pet Peeve

2007-02-28T16:28:00.000-06:00

Alright, time to get back to actual work. Let's start with something light. I can't stand stories that try to make us believe that predatorial species are interacting with each other in friendly and totally unnatural ways. (I'm certain that Ransom's distrust of child-friendly (much like the Masons) Disney draws in large part from their unnatural propaganda called the Fox and the Hound)

"This is unusual and would never happen in the wild," said zoo keeper Sri Suwarni, bottle-feeding a baby chimp on Wednesday. "Like human babies, they only want to play."

"LIKE HUMAN BABIES"???? Are you serious. They are not like human babies, but I know that this article exists because that is what we are supposed to believe.

"When the time comes, they will have to be separated. It's sad, but we cant' change their natural behavior," she said. "Tigers start eating meat when they are three months old."

In other words, this story is worthless and certainly shouldn't qualify as news. Its cute for sure, but I will absolutely enjoy the sweet comfort of inevitability when the follow up story breaks, "Orangutan missing. Friend, Tiger, found picking teeth with twig."

The Day France Killed Bach's Viola

2007-02-16T08:40:00.000-06:00

Today is February 16. Yes, one of the darker days in history. We remember these days in their infamy. D-Day, V-Day, VE Day, Vday Day, Election day 2000 and the like are enshrouded by clouds of gore and death. (Awesome pun definitely intended).

But February 16th is the day that we should all remember as the point in history where the Enlightenment took its smiley social science to ruin the first of the seven artes liberales, the music of the spheres.

Here is the scene, pitch in music (the fundamental frequency of notes/sounds) was consistently defined according to different composers based on the nature of the music and instruments that were being utilized. For example, one may note.. (ahem) that pitch in Bach's organ fugues (as distinct from some of his other works) are relatively high owing to his own Leipzig pitchpipe placing A at near 500 Hz. This is unlike his English counterparts who placed the A at would be around an F or E# on Bach's organs. Therefore, Handel's work (Primarily written with English instruments in mind) translate inconsistently in Germany where Bach's well-tempered clavier set the standard for how keys are separated.

I know what you are thinking. This is crazy, how can this be, why cant we all have one standard? Well, start with this, what has standardization done for us lately? Standardized testing in the schools, standardized railways at the Civil War, standardized professional necessities for lawyers... they haven't done much other than squelch creativity in favor of the soft glow of mediocrity. So for the WTO people out there loving on the internet revolution and a women in pants in every country, this isn't for you.

France in 1859 was the first nation to, by legislation, standardize pitch. They standardized the A at 435 hz which is a very democratic and tolerant pitch comporting well with Enlightenment values. I would have moved that it be named the "Robespierre Pitch" in a sly honorarium to the great leader of our positivist past hung in the gallows of his own rational promulgation.

Ok, so here is the thing with all of this. I am ok with a standard pitch as long as it is taught as an innovation. The "hertz" unit is a modern designation that has a certain grounding in empirical science again owing to its Enlightenment forebears. Science and music is a lot like science and religion. You can talk about the same things, but your language is essentially different.

Before tuning forks and electronic tuners grounded musical expression according to accepted standards (though after Quantum theory, I don't see it lasting) people interpreted music an a generally "interpretive" way. That is to say, without the faux exactness of science, the impetus was much like reading a poem and augmenting tone and pitch in a way to express the author's intent. This is the essence of interpretation which the modern mind has collapsed in favor of meta-analytical schemes designating art according to social values rather than as human expression. That all began on this day in France, our divorce from awe.

Let music be music. Let it catch us up and connect us to the heavens. Let Hildegard von Bingen's tonal lowness bring us to prayer and Allegri's haunting High C in the Miserere bring us to contrition. Let the telos guide the praxis and burn to ashes this tradition of placing mind over matter, and nature over grace. There is an intelligible order to it all. It is enshrouded in mystery but only takes a willing mind. It cannot be broken down into its mereological constituents and those that try will be doomed in their humanist quest. Death to protestant and modern crafts that defy the order, long live the musicians who preserve our Father's creation.

Chouans!!!

Do (re) Be

"Without a 'music of the spheres' to approximate, modern music, like the other arts, begins to unravel. Music's self-destruction became logically imperative once it undermined its own foundation."

The SPLC

2007-02-14T10:18:00.000-06:00

Well, it is February so I figure that it is time to post about the celebration of black America. For the most part, I don't have a big problem with black history month. I think that it is pretty uneventful. It is pushed as a sort of secular liturgical moment, but no one really feels that it is anything deeper than an advertisement for 20th c. revolutionaries.

I am not black and never really identified with blacks all that much as a child and certainly never ever wanted to become a baptist preacher or rapper. (See Qahal for X-Dash merch). So for me, it is kind of an annoyance that there is all this talk about being black where I could easily spout off 100 facts regarding my particular Western European heritage that includes religious persecution under Bismark, nobility and title, Catholic orthodoxy, etc... that pound for pound outrivals anything I have ever heard come from black America. But that really isn't a problem because some of us have learned to deal with this phenomena from an early age. (I once was slated to wrestle a girl in high school but after I hurt another male opponent by wrenching his wrist, she forfeited, I was relieved).

Now in Indianapolis, the North of the north, I am constantly surrounded by attempts of people to make me aware that there are black people around me and that they are distinct. Fine, I see that and I notice them every time I go to work. I work with them and enjoy a collegial and friendly atmosphere of which many different races are a part. Things are fine, there is no elephant in the room.

Now, I won't go into the idiocy of the liberal education establishment to push white guilt to the point of totally obfuscating the serious moral depravity of a person like King. That is an either/or in our world. Either you know that what you are being told is pretty much scripted or you are a lemming worried more about your quotidian diversions than anything. What has driven me nuts this month is that the greatest proponents of race conscious laws, civil rights reform, and movements for black rights (an not inconsequently black solidarity) are Jews.

Some quick facts. After DuBoise left, the NAACP was run by Jews until 1977, over 60 years. The SPLC has been Jewish run forever and came under fire for not hiring blacks and offering hearty salaries to the East coast Jew elites. (Remember: P stands for poverty). The persecution of Marcus Garvey was almost totally Jewish as was much of the resistance to Malcolm X (solidarity is not their M.O.). Many of the Jews were associated with Soviet Bolsheviks and their speech bears striking resemblance to the tenants of early-stage Bolshevism. There is more out there, go to Michigan Law School for a class and you will hear all about how Jews saved everything from whites. Thank God for Michigan!

Well, as we sit in the world of the height of Jewish legal/cultural hegemony, I think that some organizations are getting too big for their britches. For example, in Indy, the Jewish organizations around here almost universally support cloning and stem-cell research not to mention abortion on demand. I believe that most people will for a small part see these issues as civil rights issues which has proved to be problemmatic for a socially conservative black population. "Aegrescit medendo" I say. Black leaders in the last 15 years or so have become uncomfortable with Jewish dominance of their movement and have since pushed for more black voices. (Like Kwase Mfume and Julian Bond). I welcome this as a push for solidarity amongst blacks which is sorely needed as minorities that have been used by the Jewish elite.

What I think this shows is that Jews supported civil rights not necessarily because of their identification with injustice, but rather because it offered them an opportunity to eschew a social order through law, litigation, and media. They were not welcomed universally but made a lot of money in areas of prostitution, pornography, and other "unclean" industries. That power was used to leverage the civil rights movement away from solidarity to democratic pluralism and tolerance-speak. (Look at what happened to Fr. Coughlin for a great example) That is just my theory, it is incomplete, but that I what I see at this point.

Now today, I see the SPLC, still Jewish, has just come out against some of the Catholic church's faithful sons and daughters. This has never been so overt and I am glad that the SPLC has found the chutzpah to show exactly what they are. They are people who really don't like traditional Catholics. They loved to see Chicago and Detroit fall into their present ethnic nonsense and get really nasty on abortion issues as Catholics are their number one foe. This is really what they want, to destabilize Christianity rooted in tradition and family. Read their "Dirty Dozen" list of dangerous anti-Semites. (The Remnant??? WTF?) I'd like to hear what you guys have to say about this.

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=719

Duebster

The Best Baseball Video Game Ever Made

2007-02-12T13:22:00.000-06:00

MVP '07 NCAA Baseball was just released on PS2. Here's what Sports Illustrated had to say about it:

MVP 06 was the best baseball game released last year, and saying that it might be the best baseball video game ever made shouldn't be considered hyperbole. So when MVP 07 hit my grubby hands this week, I was stoked. I convinced my wife I was tired and would be falling asleep on the couch, and once she went off to bed I hopped up, grabbed the game from my bag and fired up my PS2. And for the next few hours, I immersed myself in a haze of peppy fight songs, junior college transfers demanding playing time, the ping of aluminum bats and Rosenblatt Stadium.

Who wouldn't play possum to grab a late night treat like MVP '07?

In case my wife is reading this, I will let them try to explain:

For those of you who aren't gamers, you may think video games by their very definition are soulless; simple burned discs of plastic carrying an endless series of 0's and 1's which somehow translate into a series of images on our TV screens. This is understandable, though video games -- at least the really good ones -- absolutely have something there more than just images and sounds. In my opinion, this is what differentiates ultra-successful games like Grand Theft Auto, Halo and Madden from all the series that imitate them. If you play video games, you probably understand what I'm talking about.

Yes, I do.

What Am I, A Farmer?

2007-02-12T10:19:00.000-06:00

If I were to ask you if there were any occupations that were beneath you, how would respond? Would you ever pick tomatoes or make beds in Las Vegas? I know, that's crazy talk. How about document review?

On the list of political issues that get me fired up, immigration is pretty far down the chain. But I think that this blogger is tinkering with a larger truth and that's what has me interested. As one of our former non-Catholic classmates would say: "It all comes back to the dignity of the human person." That's right buddy and defense wins championships. *wink* But certainly, there is truth in the author's point that there is no such thing as work that is beneath us.

At the same time, his approach seems insincere. He would have everyone take on manual labor, including his own children. Well, at least in their youth. I mean, we don't want them to have to do it their whole life. And naturally, if someone works hard as a lawn mower or hamburger-flipper, then they are bound to move on at some point right?

As Tocqueville wrote: "In the United States professions are more or less laborious, more or less profitable; but they are never either high or low: every honest calling is honorable." The farther we move from that notion, the closer we come to the idea that the lawyer is somehow better than the parking-lot attendant, undercutting the very foundation of republican government.

Not surprising that he uses the lawyer as his "better-than-thou" exemplar. Again, I think that it is true to say that a lawyer is not better than a parking-lot attendant. But I'm afraid that the attendant is largely stuck with the lot he has drawn. Pun very much intended. And the lawyer isn't likely to ever quit his document reviewing job to go work at a parking lot. In real life, princes don't end up working at a fast food chain in the big city like Eddie Murphy in Coming to America. And in real life, beggars don't end up working on Wall Street like... Eddie Murphy in Trading Places.

The problem isn't the President's immigration plan. I'm sorry, but its not going to undercut the very foundation of republican government. As if that is something that is supposed to make us take up arms. The problem here is that the United States is wearing two faces. Tocqueville and the American Dream are two different things entirely. And this writer is trying to have both at the same time. Either all honest callings are honorable or they are only good inasmuch as they allows the person to progress in status. And our nation as a whole has progressed so far that we can now say that there are certain occupations that are beneath us. And we can all pat each other on the back because we earned it through hard-work and determination.

I'm not really sure what my point is here. I would like to hear what you guys may have to offer on this topic, but I will leave you with this little tidbit that came to mind when I read this article. Watch all the way until the end:

P.S. If America has a democracy Bible, Tocqueville is the gospel writer and the Federalist Papers are the epistles. Am I right?

The Un-P.C. Detectives

2007-02-11T21:06:00.000-06:00

My mother-in-law happens to be a grade school librarian with access to many old children's books and often provides the Ransom family with literary treasures. The one I am currently reading is "The Hardy Boys: Footprints Under the Window." As a young lad, I read a substantial portion of the Hardy Boys series, but I can't say that I remember many of the details of these adventures. This masterpiece by Franklin W. Dixon is at least as good as the books about that Harry Potter kid (which, despite the cries from Qahal, is unfortunately the new standard by which we must judge). But what has amused me most about this nostalgic book, copyright 1933, is its political uncorrectness. A few quick examples:

In a moment before the mystery has begun, Frank and Joe Hardy need their shirts laundered:

"We'll take them down to Sam Lee," decided Joe. "He's the best Chinese laundryman in town . . ."

This innocent errand leads to a series of escalating run-ins with Chinamen (despite what Walter Sobchak says about the proper nomenclature, this is Dixon's word choice throughout) whose dialog is all similar to this:

"No good. Catchee much tlouble sometime. No Likee."

And then there is this little narration, when Frank and Joe have discovered a spy lurking nearby:

Was he friend or foe? Chinaman or white man?

But Dixon won't just infuriate the overly-sensative when it comes to nationalities; he provides fuel for the feminists, too. There is a point when one of the good Chinamen has to disguise himself as a woman to escape the Chinese gang that is hunting him down. According to the story, his disguise makes him look like an attractive woman, so it will pass a visual test, but the good detectives want the disguised man to convincingly play the part of the woman, so they offer him this advice:

"You'll get away with it as long as you don't talk too much. And you musn't forget to giggle every few minutes, for no reason at all, and powder your nose whenever you see a mirror."

I don't have anything else to add, but now that I know the Duebster is having a child I figured I would let him know about the quality literature he should invest in if it is a boy.

What's In A Name?

2007-02-07T12:49:00.000-06:00

Hopefully I didn't completely destroy my credibility by referencing a cartoon. Even if it is an awesome one.

I've been meaning to carry over a conversation that was recently begun by the Duebster regarding the language used by John Paul II (or as the Duebster fondly refers to him, St. John Paul the Great) and the postconciliar Church in general. I think there are a range of Catholics that have viewed the change in language (and I don't mean translation) that took place after Vatican II as affecting a change in meaning. These vary from Pope Michael through sede vacantists to "normal" SSPX-ers and on to those like the Abbe de Nantes, who do not seek to separate from the Roman Church but still believe that the modern Church has become corrupt by heresy. They all seem to agree that changing the wording has changed the meaning, but they differ regarding the degree of damage that has been done and what should be done in response.

I've been trying to find a balanced article looking into this debacle, and I found this. Though not entirely on point, it certainly provides a solid foundation to discuss this issue. Here are a few excerpts to whet your appetite:

Vatican II had placed upon us all the necessity of restating Catholic doctrine in a way which carried a meaning to contemporary society. There were all sorts of reasons for this. But the primary reason was that of compassion and love. The Church, like Christ, had compassion on the multitude. It wanted to share its treasures with the world. It realized that the Church and the world had drawn apart and were speaking a different language. Pope John had prepared the way for this, and the Council was an acceptable time for implementing it, offering the truth to the world in its own language and without rubbing their noses in it. The whole ecumenical movement was born of this compassion, a sincere and lively compassion. But its very compassion, if misplaced, could be its worst enemy. We carry the precious gift of the Faith in frail ecumenical vessels, and any false concealment, any false accentuation born of false compassion, and we have a heresy on our hands. The ecumenist who, knowing that a particular truth of the Faith carries little meaning or conviction to contemporary man, thereby plays it down or conceals it, instead of painfully searching for a language which would be relevant, is a false shepherd who feeds nobody but frightens everybody. He may not have angry sheep on his hands, but he still has hungry ones.

The overriding necessity here is to recognize that speaking this new language is the most difficult task that the Church has ever assigned herself. We are exploring new country, cutting new trails, balancing truth on a razor's edge.

If the ears are itching, it is up to us to speak our old doctrines in a language which takes care of the itch. This is never easy. It is not made any easier by those who are too ready to see heresy in very turn of phrase, or by those who are too ready to repudiate the magisterium.

I gather several things out of this article that I find compelling. First, it doesn't really ask the question of whether Vatican II was necessary. And perhaps this is because, for the purpose of analyzing the Church's actions after Vatican II, it is a moot point. Second, the author clearly believes that it is possible to rightly carry out the desire of the Council, albeit an extremely difficult task. So whether or not Vatican II was necessary, its goals are achievable. If this is true, then these accusations of heresy should be directed to individual men and not the institution of the Church itself. The institution has not faltered, it has set out to accomplish a difficult, but possible task. That is why I believe this author places both the challenge and the fault upon the "ecumenist" rather than the Church itself.

We all agree that the doctrines of the Church have not changed after Vatican II. At the same time, we could find many instances where members of the modern Church have communicated these ancient truths in very different ways than before. Perhaps many have failed in walking the line and have betrayed these ancient doctrines, but I don't believe that is an indictment upon the institutional Church.

The new language of the Church is not meant to replace the ancient one, but to extend it. The new language is not meant for those of us who already believe, but rather for the world. And we hope that when they respond to this new evangelization that they in turn come into the depth of the ancient language of the Church.