On their faith segment today, I just watched CNN talk to Jim Wallis, president of Sojourners, a liberal religious organization committed to promoting their progressive version of religious faith and dogma. Not surprisingly, they lay all blame, immorality, and sin regarding our current financial and debt crisis at the feet of the Republican party. Natch. Fine. There's a Christian Right, and despite media narratives to the contrary, a Christian Left. But at least if you're CNN, try to acknowledge the fact that this is a liberal group. Maybe - and here's a radical thought, but I've seen it put to good use against Christians on the Right - ask the fellow if he thinks there could be some fault at the feet of, oh I don't know, the Democrats. Dare I say, even President Obama?
Expecting our media to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is seeming more pie in the sky with each passing day.
Update: CNN had to break into the interview, but there was much gushing with love and adoration toward Sojourners, and it looks like they will enthusiastically be invited back!
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Saturday, July 30, 2011
And finally, the light is at the end of the tunnel
As I begin to remember the beauty and love and joy of the world after too long in a blog dedicated to ignorance used to justify evil (and remembering that not all atheists are like that, just like not all religious believers are like Fred Phelps), I turn to my older boys. The other day we had the chance to go to Highbanks park just north of Columbus. After demonstrating their rock skipping prowess, we had the chance to visit the nature center and catch a breathtaking view of the natural world that is God's wonderful gift to us all.
 |
| The two oldest prepare to throw as our eleven year old bolts...from what or to what I wonder. |
 |
| They have their moments, but they are good together (and excellent big brothers to the two year old) |
More of the family to chase away the evil
As if to wash the filth from me by purging the Nazi-like hatred of the Hate'n Jesus blog I had been visiting, I also thought I would invoke the kids. Here's our youngest, just turned two, after his first haircut! Nothing this beautiful could be by accident. Fearfully and wonderfully made.
 |
| Loving the camera as it loves him |
I've earned the right to post about the fam
After two days visiting a blog that boasts being the number one blog when the words 'I hate Jesus' are entered, I figure I earned the right to muse on the beautiful things of life that God has given me. First was last night, where we took my Mom out for my parents' 60th wedding anniversary. It was a bittersweet time since the passing of my Dad, but we made sure that they would still celebrate this, the month of their wedding 60 years ago. After all, death where is your victory, where is your sting?
 |
| The family together (wife taking picture), with one notable exception; he was very missed |
Friday, July 29, 2011
When Liberals are Fundamentalists
Over at Get Religion, a new contributor posted an article that noticed how much of the MSM was in full celebratory mode when it came to New York legalizing gay marriage. J. Calvin mentioned how it would have been nice to see some other views, like those who were willing to quit their jobs rather than compromise their values. And lo and behold, at least one commenter has demonstrated why I say there is ultimately no such thing as conservatives or liberals.
In tirade after tirade he/she makes it clear that legalizing gay marriage is the exclusive truth, which is 100% correct, and any who disagree are bigots, Nazis, KKK, or whatever. He/she doesn't hold back. There's no shame. Even when I and others have asked fair questions about the news coverage, he has hit Dislike. Maybe it isn't him or her, but my gut tells me it is. A great reminder that the only thing more close minded, judgemental, self-righteous, and intolerant than a conservative is a liberal, which is why those terms mean so little.
In tirade after tirade he/she makes it clear that legalizing gay marriage is the exclusive truth, which is 100% correct, and any who disagree are bigots, Nazis, KKK, or whatever. He/she doesn't hold back. There's no shame. Even when I and others have asked fair questions about the news coverage, he has hit Dislike. Maybe it isn't him or her, but my gut tells me it is. A great reminder that the only thing more close minded, judgemental, self-righteous, and intolerant than a conservative is a liberal, which is why those terms mean so little.
Global Warming is wrong?
Not so fast say proponents of modern GW theory. Yesterday a story shot across the news cycle that 'NASA' research suggested GW alarmists were a bit off course. This brought a wave of stories debunking this latest find. An example of it is here, at Live Science.
Now the science behind it all is a little beyond my expertise. I don't know what to think. But I noticed something. While the Live Science article did bother, beyond some of the other pieces that took offense at this latest critique of GW status quo thinking, to mention some of the actual science, it rested heavily on who Spencer, the NASA scientist in question, actually was.
Several times it was mentioned that he is a 'Global Warming Skeptic.' And? Why not say the others are 'Global Warming Advocates'? It also had a section on 'Science and Politics.' Yeah? And? Couldn't it be true that both sides could be guilty of letting non-scientific factors influence their interpretation of the data?
That's what hit me in all of this. First, the headlines said 'NASA Study suggests....' when in fact the individual was affiliated with NASA, but it doesn't look like it was a grand NASA conclusion or anything (they're busy packing up their boxes since we'll now be hitching rides with the Russians and Chinese for our space travel). Yet most criticisms came, not focused on his actual science, but focusing on him.
It reminds me of an old Charlie Brown cartoon. The girl Violet comes up to Schroeder and Charlie Brown, who are engaged in a heated debate. She hears what they are saying: "Who plays the piano all the time!", "You do, all day at that dumb piano!", "Oh, yeah! Well at least I can catch a baseball!" And on and on they go. Violet then asks them, "What are you two arguing about?" They both answer, "We're arguing over who was better, Beethoven or Davey Crockett." As Violet walks away, she gives a quizzical look as she overhears the debate continue: "Who wears a stupid shirt with a stupid stripe?", "You do..."
That's about it. Basically I get the feeling everyone is sure the science agrees with them because as soon as someone suggests either side is wrong, folks just dismiss them by attacking who they are, what 'Side' they are on, or whatever. Which makes it difficult if you think about it. It certainly does me, since I don't think either side is more prone than the other to let non-scientific purposes enter into their thinking. To paraphrase Longshanks from the movie Braveheart: The problem with science is, it's full of scientists!
I do know it's been hot this summer after a terrible winter. I know the seasons are overall different than I remember them. I know we do break records, but often they were set decades ago, or we only 'nearly' break the records, meaning there were other times it was worse. I know that the 1930s looked pretty bad as a decade, and many records were set then that still stand. And I know the climate has been changing for eons, and that things like the Medieval warm ups weren't part of some Northumbrian conspiracy to thwart children of a future age.
So what to think? My guess there's truth behind climate change since it's always been happening. Are all the pollutants and carbon we belch into the air a good thing? Probably not. Can we make changes that could at least reduce our part of the damage? Sure. Is the very presence of humanity, as some claim, the culprit? Doubt it, that's selling this old world pretty cheap, and also typical of the generational arrogance that is so prevalent nowadays.
Overall, the lesson? My lesson is this: Scientists say we should turn to science to solve our problems. Yet according to scientists into MMGW, the reason we have these problems today is that two hundred years or so ago when the scientists and inventors told everyone to give them a blank check, that they would solve the world's problems, and nothing could possibly go wrong, we said OK. Lesson learned. Science can certainly help us, but only the greatest generation of fools would say we are on the brink of destruction due to giving science, technology and industry a blank check, and then conclude our only hope is to give science and technology a blank check. Fool me once, after all.
Now the science behind it all is a little beyond my expertise. I don't know what to think. But I noticed something. While the Live Science article did bother, beyond some of the other pieces that took offense at this latest critique of GW status quo thinking, to mention some of the actual science, it rested heavily on who Spencer, the NASA scientist in question, actually was.
Several times it was mentioned that he is a 'Global Warming Skeptic.' And? Why not say the others are 'Global Warming Advocates'? It also had a section on 'Science and Politics.' Yeah? And? Couldn't it be true that both sides could be guilty of letting non-scientific factors influence their interpretation of the data?
That's what hit me in all of this. First, the headlines said 'NASA Study suggests....' when in fact the individual was affiliated with NASA, but it doesn't look like it was a grand NASA conclusion or anything (they're busy packing up their boxes since we'll now be hitching rides with the Russians and Chinese for our space travel). Yet most criticisms came, not focused on his actual science, but focusing on him.
It reminds me of an old Charlie Brown cartoon. The girl Violet comes up to Schroeder and Charlie Brown, who are engaged in a heated debate. She hears what they are saying: "Who plays the piano all the time!", "You do, all day at that dumb piano!", "Oh, yeah! Well at least I can catch a baseball!" And on and on they go. Violet then asks them, "What are you two arguing about?" They both answer, "We're arguing over who was better, Beethoven or Davey Crockett." As Violet walks away, she gives a quizzical look as she overhears the debate continue: "Who wears a stupid shirt with a stupid stripe?", "You do..."
That's about it. Basically I get the feeling everyone is sure the science agrees with them because as soon as someone suggests either side is wrong, folks just dismiss them by attacking who they are, what 'Side' they are on, or whatever. Which makes it difficult if you think about it. It certainly does me, since I don't think either side is more prone than the other to let non-scientific purposes enter into their thinking. To paraphrase Longshanks from the movie Braveheart: The problem with science is, it's full of scientists!
I do know it's been hot this summer after a terrible winter. I know the seasons are overall different than I remember them. I know we do break records, but often they were set decades ago, or we only 'nearly' break the records, meaning there were other times it was worse. I know that the 1930s looked pretty bad as a decade, and many records were set then that still stand. And I know the climate has been changing for eons, and that things like the Medieval warm ups weren't part of some Northumbrian conspiracy to thwart children of a future age.
So what to think? My guess there's truth behind climate change since it's always been happening. Are all the pollutants and carbon we belch into the air a good thing? Probably not. Can we make changes that could at least reduce our part of the damage? Sure. Is the very presence of humanity, as some claim, the culprit? Doubt it, that's selling this old world pretty cheap, and also typical of the generational arrogance that is so prevalent nowadays.
Overall, the lesson? My lesson is this: Scientists say we should turn to science to solve our problems. Yet according to scientists into MMGW, the reason we have these problems today is that two hundred years or so ago when the scientists and inventors told everyone to give them a blank check, that they would solve the world's problems, and nothing could possibly go wrong, we said OK. Lesson learned. Science can certainly help us, but only the greatest generation of fools would say we are on the brink of destruction due to giving science, technology and industry a blank check, and then conclude our only hope is to give science and technology a blank check. Fool me once, after all.
Judge decides Americans can pray after all
Judge Gray Miller dealt the Freedom from Religion Foundation yet another setback by declaring that just because you are a politician, doesn't mean the entire 1st Amendment doesn't apply to you. As usual, the FRF was trying to impose its values through censorship and oppression of all religion by filing a lawsuit against Governor Rick Perry, who later plans on attending a prayer and fasting service. This is the same group that tried - and failed - to file a lawsuit stopping President Obama from attending the National Day of Prayer.
Basically, these are the folks who act like the kid who insists everyone play his game, and when they won't, screams, hollers, yells, cries, and pulls his hair. Fortunately, it looks like some of the courts might be waking up to the fact that groups like these are not trying to promote liberty and freedom for all, but are attempting to find loopholes in the existing interpretation of the Constitution in order to strip away the Constitutional rights of all those who don't believe and think they way they demand they should.
Elsewhere, Secularists for a Totalitarian State were dealt another blow when a judge in, of all places, California actually decided that they can't allow a measure on the ballot that would ban circumcision. This drew the ire of folks, especially when pro-ban forces published materials reminding one of 1930s anti-Semitic propaganda. Now this could be because of the atmosphere in California right now. After all, gay rights groups have been screaming about Prop 8 since it passed, saying just because you have enough votes is no reason to strip away people's rights (even if the Constitution is vague on the actual issue of gay marriage). It then would be difficult to imagine turning around and pushing for an initiative that would more or less ban the freedom of religion based upon the same idea of majority rule. Of course the majority may have voted against it. But I can see that tipping the double-standard scale against those protesting Prop 8.
Of course the Judge in this case said that the state, not the city, has the right to do such things. And also mentioned that pesky 1st Amendment again, that a growing number of post-modern ignoramuses believes says Congress shall impose separation of church and state in order to establish a secular nation. When in fact it says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF. Though things look bleak for America's future, it is nice to know there are folks who read the Constitution and realize yeah, before we give rights to people based on what the Constitution never said, we should at least make sure we are protecting the rights of people based on what it clearly said in black and white.
Basically, these are the folks who act like the kid who insists everyone play his game, and when they won't, screams, hollers, yells, cries, and pulls his hair. Fortunately, it looks like some of the courts might be waking up to the fact that groups like these are not trying to promote liberty and freedom for all, but are attempting to find loopholes in the existing interpretation of the Constitution in order to strip away the Constitutional rights of all those who don't believe and think they way they demand they should.
Elsewhere, Secularists for a Totalitarian State were dealt another blow when a judge in, of all places, California actually decided that they can't allow a measure on the ballot that would ban circumcision. This drew the ire of folks, especially when pro-ban forces published materials reminding one of 1930s anti-Semitic propaganda. Now this could be because of the atmosphere in California right now. After all, gay rights groups have been screaming about Prop 8 since it passed, saying just because you have enough votes is no reason to strip away people's rights (even if the Constitution is vague on the actual issue of gay marriage). It then would be difficult to imagine turning around and pushing for an initiative that would more or less ban the freedom of religion based upon the same idea of majority rule. Of course the majority may have voted against it. But I can see that tipping the double-standard scale against those protesting Prop 8.
Of course the Judge in this case said that the state, not the city, has the right to do such things. And also mentioned that pesky 1st Amendment again, that a growing number of post-modern ignoramuses believes says Congress shall impose separation of church and state in order to establish a secular nation. When in fact it says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF. Though things look bleak for America's future, it is nice to know there are folks who read the Constitution and realize yeah, before we give rights to people based on what the Constitution never said, we should at least make sure we are protecting the rights of people based on what it clearly said in black and white.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Brat bans?
The nice thing about a society that has become so evil that its business establishments begin to offer the slogan equivalent of 'Hate kids? Then we're for you!', is that it won't be around much longer to trouble the unhappy world. The reason for the babyphobia is all too obvious, just ask much of Europe:
"When did kids become the equivalent of second-hand smoke? Blame a wave of childless adults with money to spare. "Empty nesters continue to wield a huge swath of discretionary spending dollars, and population dips in first-world countries mean more childless couples than ever," writes AdWeek's Klara."Being childless is increasingly not seen as a curse, or even a choice, but a world view. Those who do it have no intention of having kids so they can live a completely self-absorbed life of narcissism and hedonism, care not a rip about what happens to their society's future, and then laugh at all the dolts and losers who do have kids because it will be their kids and grand kids who get screwed over when things fall apart. Yep, the good thing is, they'll be gone soon. The bad thing is those who don't follow their brand of self worship will be forced to watch their posterity pay the price.
Friday, July 15, 2011
And that's the way it was?
So I'm off for several weeks trying to learn a new job. It ain't easy, and it ain't a sure thing. But we'll see. Right now here's hoping. But blogging, as I've said, has taken a back seat to more pressing matters. In the meantime, I've also become somewhat bothered by the tenor and tone of so many blogs out there. I'm not sure they were ever that great, but at least some of the ones I've followed over the years have taken on a more fundamentalist stench.
So I was wondering what, if anything, I would want to write about if I had the chance to return. Well, first off, I want to avoid the tendency on so many blogs, including such notorious blogs as the Huffpost, of being all partisan vitriol and demagoguery. And yet, no sooner do I sit down to take a look at things after taking an early Friday off, than I see this headline: California to require gay history in schools.
Now, someone tell me: just what the hell is 'gay history'? Would anyone tell me? Do we know 'gay history'? Do we know who was and wasn't gay in history? Will they just take people they know to be gay and look at what they did, both good and bad? Will they assume anyone with any affection toward anyone was gay? Will they just happen to take all of history's heroes and assume they were gay? Will they look at cultures that had various takes on homosexual relations and look at those, both good and bad? Or will they take any culture that was the slightest bit open toward non-heterosexual normality and paint in the most Utopian stripes?
I fear this is state sanctioned indoctrination, which is already just about there anyway. Our public education system has made it clear that those who question non-heterosexual normality are not welcome in our school systems, any more than someone advocating evolution or questioning our Cold War policies was welcome in our schools of yesteryear. Of course, the line between education and indoctrination has always been fiber-optically thin. And the public schools systems of any society naturally promote the values of that society. But as one who does not embrace the dogmas of the post Christian, post modern secular left, it doesn't warm my heart to think of the challenges that will be placed before me and my children and grandchildren in years to come.
So I was wondering what, if anything, I would want to write about if I had the chance to return. Well, first off, I want to avoid the tendency on so many blogs, including such notorious blogs as the Huffpost, of being all partisan vitriol and demagoguery. And yet, no sooner do I sit down to take a look at things after taking an early Friday off, than I see this headline: California to require gay history in schools.
Now, someone tell me: just what the hell is 'gay history'? Would anyone tell me? Do we know 'gay history'? Do we know who was and wasn't gay in history? Will they just take people they know to be gay and look at what they did, both good and bad? Will they assume anyone with any affection toward anyone was gay? Will they just happen to take all of history's heroes and assume they were gay? Will they look at cultures that had various takes on homosexual relations and look at those, both good and bad? Or will they take any culture that was the slightest bit open toward non-heterosexual normality and paint in the most Utopian stripes?
I fear this is state sanctioned indoctrination, which is already just about there anyway. Our public education system has made it clear that those who question non-heterosexual normality are not welcome in our school systems, any more than someone advocating evolution or questioning our Cold War policies was welcome in our schools of yesteryear. Of course, the line between education and indoctrination has always been fiber-optically thin. And the public schools systems of any society naturally promote the values of that society. But as one who does not embrace the dogmas of the post Christian, post modern secular left, it doesn't warm my heart to think of the challenges that will be placed before me and my children and grandchildren in years to come.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Blogging on hold for a while
There's two reasons. One, my new job, helping my Mom move since the passing of my Dad, and generally just making time for the family isn't allowing the time needed to really do a good work on the blog. Second, I'm really, really reconsidering what kind of a blog I want. Two reasons for this are best seen in the comments here and here.
On one hand, you have folks coming out and blasting the media for exploiting the death of Caylee Anthony for its own purposes by basically exploiting the death of Caylee Anthony in order to blast pro-choicers, the press, talk radio, or any one of a hundred not-me types while getting in an all-too-common "America Always Sucks" meme. And of course, they miss the irony of their own hypocrisy in doing so. But alas, far too many ideological blogs appear to be going that direction I'm sad to say, and that's the direction of the fundamentalist.
But on the other hand, you have someone defending Dan Savage, the Gay Rights Movement's answer to Fred Phelps, or at least Jack Chick. A man who spews hatred and loathing at anyone who doesn't conform to his values, who wishes to turn kids against their parents while teaching them the glories of anal sex (even in an age of AIDS), and who has more than once said that he feels anyone in any school who speaks out against homosexuality should be treated like a bully. In short, they should be punished. His comparing certain individuals to fecal matter was not condemned, but rather passionately defended. And when I and others suggested Savage might be a bit on the bad side of things, note the resistance on the part of some.
The blogosphere is a place, apparently, where people go to say there are no rules, just my side winning - becoming the very things they so often condemn. Not wishing to repeat that, and not wishing to bring back the comments section since I noticed that stopping people from acting that way caused most of the commenters to leave, has made me want to think through just what I want from this blog.
So until then, once more, I'll turn to the things that matter so much to me, and that's my family. Here are the boys at COSI (that's Center of Science and Industry) in Columbus striking an interesting pose outside of the Dinosaur exhibit (which could have been a day trip in and of itself). The Adventure exhibit, where you wander through ruins looking for clues, was equally fun. Will be back when I can, and hopefully will see some light at the end of the blogging tunnel and escape the pitfall that is, sadly, all too common on the blogosphere (a pitfall I'm afraid even Catholic blogs seem unable to avoid in the long haul).
![]()
Note the examples I give are not unique to those sites. It's unfortunate that they are simply indicative of what it seems goes on across most blogs. I could have spent an entire post on the Huffpost and other such locations that make these seem tame by comparison, as I have mentioned before.
On one hand, you have folks coming out and blasting the media for exploiting the death of Caylee Anthony for its own purposes by basically exploiting the death of Caylee Anthony in order to blast pro-choicers, the press, talk radio, or any one of a hundred not-me types while getting in an all-too-common "America Always Sucks" meme. And of course, they miss the irony of their own hypocrisy in doing so. But alas, far too many ideological blogs appear to be going that direction I'm sad to say, and that's the direction of the fundamentalist.
But on the other hand, you have someone defending Dan Savage, the Gay Rights Movement's answer to Fred Phelps, or at least Jack Chick. A man who spews hatred and loathing at anyone who doesn't conform to his values, who wishes to turn kids against their parents while teaching them the glories of anal sex (even in an age of AIDS), and who has more than once said that he feels anyone in any school who speaks out against homosexuality should be treated like a bully. In short, they should be punished. His comparing certain individuals to fecal matter was not condemned, but rather passionately defended. And when I and others suggested Savage might be a bit on the bad side of things, note the resistance on the part of some.
The blogosphere is a place, apparently, where people go to say there are no rules, just my side winning - becoming the very things they so often condemn. Not wishing to repeat that, and not wishing to bring back the comments section since I noticed that stopping people from acting that way caused most of the commenters to leave, has made me want to think through just what I want from this blog.
So until then, once more, I'll turn to the things that matter so much to me, and that's my family. Here are the boys at COSI (that's Center of Science and Industry) in Columbus striking an interesting pose outside of the Dinosaur exhibit (which could have been a day trip in and of itself). The Adventure exhibit, where you wander through ruins looking for clues, was equally fun. Will be back when I can, and hopefully will see some light at the end of the blogging tunnel and escape the pitfall that is, sadly, all too common on the blogosphere (a pitfall I'm afraid even Catholic blogs seem unable to avoid in the long haul).
Note the examples I give are not unique to those sites. It's unfortunate that they are simply indicative of what it seems goes on across most blogs. I could have spent an entire post on the Huffpost and other such locations that make these seem tame by comparison, as I have mentioned before.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
When all else fails - the Fab Four!
Not that fab four, I mean my boys. I guess with our schedule being crazy, me delving into my new career at Aflac, and trying to get my Mom moved around, what little time I have left over goes to the family. Right now my sister-in-law is in from Florida helping with the moving. But when time is scarce, I can't see spending too much time on a computer when I have four wonderful boys waiting to be played with. Here are the latest in a series of action shots. It was at the Harding Memorial in Marion, after my Fathers Day dinner.
 |
| The gang |
 |
| The only way you can get a picture of our youngest is if someone holds onto him |
 |
| Our oldest looking casual |
 |
| Our twelve year old, as enigmatic looking as ever |
 |
| An unusually laid back shot of our usually over-the-top soon to be eleven year old |
 |
| I'm not sure what our ten year old is doing, but it got an uncharacteristic public burst of laughter from the older two |
A note about the recent posts on gay rights
It might appear that I have been spending an inordinate amount of time on this issue. Some might think it's because of some latent sexual identity problem I have. Not really. First, it's because I don't have time to blog much due to various reasons. Second, when I sit down it seems as if the latest gay rights story is what everyone is talking about. Third, the Gay Rights Movement is about the only thing getting what it wants right now.
Our rather dull and incompetent president, who is no doubt a good family man and decent fellow, continues to fail on almost every front. I mean it. The guy is a joke at this point. If everything was equal and he was a Republican, (and be honest, a white Republican), why there probably would be calls to remove him from office. As it stands, the liberal propaganda machine in our educational, media, and entertainment industries are bending over backwards to find something - anything - for which they can praise him. And in 2012, woe be to him who dares criticize him.
But in fairness, he has done well for gay rights. He may be accomplishing nothing overseas. He may be plunging into one non-war war after another. He may be playing with our military for purely political reasons, promising to reduce our troop numbers to twice what they were when he took office. He may be assuring us that the economy is better since gas is all the way down to only about a 1.50 over what it was two years ago. He may be looking desperate as he can't figure out how to fix the debt, the unemployment, and our soon to collapse entitlement system. But by goodness, he has gone in there and given his all to gay rights supporters, and for that we Americans thank him.
It's been the dual sides of this that has hit me when I've had time to sit and blog. On one hand, while everything is floundering, while wars, genocides, pandemics, economic collapse, and hopelessness continue to grip America, the West, and the World, the GRM continues to have such disproportionate power to see to it that its desires are addressed if nothing else is given the time of day. And on the other hand, the very movement born under 'there's no absolute moral truths, nobody has a right to legislate morality, we should all live in peace and agree to disagree' continues to use the crushing iron gauntlet of censorship, oppression, ostracizing, and general eradication of those who refuse to go along with the demand for conformity and group think.
It's a strange brew. When all else is falling apart, the only thing making headway is a movement founded on diversity and peopled and supported by among the highest income earners who are increasingly demanding society punish all who fail to conform to its dogmatic demands. Again, a thousand years from now I can't imagine what people will think when they look at this, the twilight of Western Civilization. But I have a pretty good idea of why they will think it.
Our rather dull and incompetent president, who is no doubt a good family man and decent fellow, continues to fail on almost every front. I mean it. The guy is a joke at this point. If everything was equal and he was a Republican, (and be honest, a white Republican), why there probably would be calls to remove him from office. As it stands, the liberal propaganda machine in our educational, media, and entertainment industries are bending over backwards to find something - anything - for which they can praise him. And in 2012, woe be to him who dares criticize him.
But in fairness, he has done well for gay rights. He may be accomplishing nothing overseas. He may be plunging into one non-war war after another. He may be playing with our military for purely political reasons, promising to reduce our troop numbers to twice what they were when he took office. He may be assuring us that the economy is better since gas is all the way down to only about a 1.50 over what it was two years ago. He may be looking desperate as he can't figure out how to fix the debt, the unemployment, and our soon to collapse entitlement system. But by goodness, he has gone in there and given his all to gay rights supporters, and for that we Americans thank him.
It's been the dual sides of this that has hit me when I've had time to sit and blog. On one hand, while everything is floundering, while wars, genocides, pandemics, economic collapse, and hopelessness continue to grip America, the West, and the World, the GRM continues to have such disproportionate power to see to it that its desires are addressed if nothing else is given the time of day. And on the other hand, the very movement born under 'there's no absolute moral truths, nobody has a right to legislate morality, we should all live in peace and agree to disagree' continues to use the crushing iron gauntlet of censorship, oppression, ostracizing, and general eradication of those who refuse to go along with the demand for conformity and group think.
It's a strange brew. When all else is falling apart, the only thing making headway is a movement founded on diversity and peopled and supported by among the highest income earners who are increasingly demanding society punish all who fail to conform to its dogmatic demands. Again, a thousand years from now I can't imagine what people will think when they look at this, the twilight of Western Civilization. But I have a pretty good idea of why they will think it.
Gay Rights victory in New York!
There's a shock. Actually, what continues to shock me is just how many Americans are still dragging their heals when it comes to supporting gay marriage. What with the entire popular culture machine, the Democratic party, the national news media, and our public and higher education systems firmly behind the movement to ramrod gay rights into American society, I'm amazed at how many are still on the fence. In addition, given the growing ostracizing and public denouncements of those who do not follow the dogmas of non-heterosexual normality, it's even more amazing. It's almost as amazing as the ability of a movement backed by endless billions of dollars worth of support by never ending streams of millionaires and billionaires and political power brokers, a movement that has among the highest standards of living and is generally set apart for the usual rights most already enjoy, to continue to insist it is the weak and helpless party in this entire drama. Even while they force entertainers and other public figures to grovel and beg forgiveness whenever the movement is insulted, they still manage to hold a flail in one hand and a wilted daisy in the other, claiming that its weakness is the only part upon which we should focus.
Of course we see that the good old Republican dominated senate of New York made all of this possible. Increasingly, the GOP is tiring of the old social and religious conservatives. And while debates can be made as to whether abandoning the only party left that's even close to traditional world views and values is a good idea, a strong case can be made that just leaving both parties to their fate is the only direction to take for a conscientious voter.
It's especially heartening to see that one of the prime movers of the gay rights victory is none other than an openly Roman Catholic GOP senator. Once again in one swipe showing just how abysmal is the moral track record of the Republicans, and the educational and devotional track record of the American Catholic Church.
Of course we see that the good old Republican dominated senate of New York made all of this possible. Increasingly, the GOP is tiring of the old social and religious conservatives. And while debates can be made as to whether abandoning the only party left that's even close to traditional world views and values is a good idea, a strong case can be made that just leaving both parties to their fate is the only direction to take for a conscientious voter.
It's especially heartening to see that one of the prime movers of the gay rights victory is none other than an openly Roman Catholic GOP senator. Once again in one swipe showing just how abysmal is the moral track record of the Republicans, and the educational and devotional track record of the American Catholic Church.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Goodbye Columbo
I hated to learn of his own struggles with Alzheimer's, as that was the plague of my own Dad in his later years. I know what that is, and what it does. By the time it is over, you feel that the loved one has long since left. But in his day, he was the consummate scene stealer. It is as if no part he ever played didn't fit him. From working with Blake Edwards, to being the kindly grandfather in The Princess Bride, he seemed to be just right. The tributes in the article say it well. Falk was, in a way, Columbo. A short, physically less than stellar man with one eye and a speech impediment, and yet he moved mountains in his chosen craft.
How inspiring. Goodbye Peter Falk. You will be missed.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Sexual Orientation and some other diversity
OK, I'll stop in a minute. I said there would be light blogging, but when I sit down to write one post, I'll often see a couple other stories that leap out at me. In this case, I thought I would check on my OSU Alumni page and see if there is anything in the news about any tickets for the 2011 football season. Either tickets will be sold out because everyone is dying to see what happens, or there will be truckloads available. So I go to the site to see that there is no news yet. OK. Then a link catches my eye: Diversity.
Diversity. That's one of those words today that doesn't mean what you probably think it means. Growing up, that meant a society that embraced live and let live, agreed to agree to disagree, and believed there was no real absolute moral truth anyway, so you certainly couldn't legislate it. Well today, it mostly means celebration of non-heterosexual lifestyles. And Voila! I click on the link and this is what I see:
So homosexuality - the linchpin in any sexually permissive society - continues to be the one single issue that matters. Vague cultural and social issue? Sure. Ethnic? Of course. Some other forms of diversity? Yeah, to a point. But there's Sexual Orientation above all! When billions flounder, millions die, war and genocide and poverty and natural disasters and the end of Western Civilization all lurk on the horizon and in the daily headlines of out age, we make sure the really important issue is handled properly. Sigh. I can't imagine just how stupid this period of time is going to look to people a thousand years from now, but I can guess.
Diversity. That's one of those words today that doesn't mean what you probably think it means. Growing up, that meant a society that embraced live and let live, agreed to agree to disagree, and believed there was no real absolute moral truth anyway, so you certainly couldn't legislate it. Well today, it mostly means celebration of non-heterosexual lifestyles. And Voila! I click on the link and this is what I see:
The Office of Equity and Diversity provides leadership, oversight, and an infrastructure for the College of Education and Human Ecology's initiatives. The key objective is to help the various units of the college diversity, our student body, faculty, staff, and programs to foster a climate that recognized and celebrates cultural, ethnic, socio-economic, linguistic, socio-linguistic, sexual orientation, and other diversity.You see that? Foster a climate that recognized and celebrates (I'll assume they mean recognizes) ethnic and cultural, socio-linguistic(?), and sexual orientation. Oh, and some other diversity, too. I assume that's where religion fits in. That just made me laugh out loud. Sex,drugs and bathroom humor are the only thing the Left really has to sell. The censorship, elitism, thought control, and government acquisition of our daily lives doesn't go down too well without the promise of orgasms and endless partying.
So homosexuality - the linchpin in any sexually permissive society - continues to be the one single issue that matters. Vague cultural and social issue? Sure. Ethnic? Of course. Some other forms of diversity? Yeah, to a point. But there's Sexual Orientation above all! When billions flounder, millions die, war and genocide and poverty and natural disasters and the end of Western Civilization all lurk on the horizon and in the daily headlines of out age, we make sure the really important issue is handled properly. Sigh. I can't imagine just how stupid this period of time is going to look to people a thousand years from now, but I can guess.
Our government protecting us from lemonade stands everywhere
Just a quick post. If you want to know what's wrong with our country in a nutshell, if you want to know why we seem to be charging headlong toward the ash heap of history, read this story. There was a time when such industry would have been celebrated by all. But in our age of billion dollar bureaucracies, endless reams of forms and files, eternal procedures, and intelligence sans common sense, you get the authorities rushing in to put a stop to these ambitious youngsters and their dangerous lemonade stand trying to raise money for pediatric cancer. Why is America what it has become? There you have it.
Clarifying my take on Catholic blogging
After I reread my post yesterday, you know the one that said I wouldn't be posting much, I thought I needed to clarify. Readers of my blog who have followed it for the last several months, ever since I first started the thing, know there has been a little issue about just how Catholic my blog is. I have repeatedly explained that I don't see myself as, nor do I want to be, a Catholic Blogger. Yet my little title summary seems to suggest at least some Catholic behind my posts.
Well, the actual obvious 'Catholic Identity' might not always be there. I post a lot on politics, social and cultural trends, the media, and occasionally things like history or religion. Occasionally I'll reflect on something, or post on something that moves me or gets me to thinking. Once in a while my posts might reflect an overt Catholic perspective. As often as not, a person could be forgiven for reading a rant on the latest attempts to squelch freedom by way of Gay Rights, or what this or that politician has done, and conclude nothing at all about my faith.
Now I've explained that, in a way, my faith often informs just what I think is important. After all, it wasn't some innate culturally impressed notion that has caused me to reject human homosexual normality. As an agnostic, I had no problem with the stuff. Live and let live was my motto. Though I think I would have been somewhat dismayed at the modern Gay Rights 'celebrate us or watch your butt' approach to its agendas, I wouldn't have cared one way or another about the lifestyle. When I became a believer, however, I was forced to confront the fact that the overwhelming witness of Scripture, and the Christian Faith in general, has always been to reject that particular lifestyle. So when I see the creeping 'there ain't room enough in this world for the two of us' approach of Gay Rights today, it's my faith that compels me to take notice from the POV that I write.
But still, I can see where folks might see that as a cop out. Just me trying to wade one toe in the pool, while allowing myself the freedom to wander around and post on anything under the sun whether it pertains to the Catholic Faith, my Catholic Faith, or anything Catholic at all. In a way, they would be correct. I said long ago that I just started this blog because some individuals I know persuaded me to start a blog so I could have a platform for putting down my thoughts and insights. So I did. And I didn't want to be confined to a single 'type' of blog. If that has cut me out of this or that little blogging community, so be it. It was just so I could toss out some ideas, and hear back from those who read my ideas.
But a few things have happened. First, the comments section disappeared. Something went screwy with the blog some weeks ago, the whole thing went down for a day or so. The Comments boxes vanished, and I've not had the time or the desire to look into where they went and how to get them back. Visitors may not return when they see no comments available. But to be honest, that's OK. Though I appreciate those few who did come by and post their thoughts, they were few. And while there is always the quality, I noticed that once I stopped a few readers from coming in and just insulting people and saying stupid things (and yes, I know that sounds harsh, but some of the things were nothing else, even by the most gracious assessment), the number of comments dropped off exponentially. It's as if the Bloggosphere is where people want to go in order to behave in ways we would never behave in any other setting. And when I said I want good, reasoned debate that is polite and not just a drive by insult-fest, folks stopped coming by.
Yes, I was still visited by some great people who continued to comment and give me insights and suggestions, and I'm very thankful for that. But if I had to have folks coming in and acting like little brats in order to increase the number of comments and visits, I would rather have no comments at all. So for those who kept coming back with reasoned insights and thoughtful and polite comments, I do miss you. But I will let it be for a while at least, enjoying not seeing random and anonymous folks swinging by, throwing out insults and the latest intellectually vacant talking points from various radical sides of any given debate. Someday I might find a way to bring back the comments, but it will be a while.
Another thing has also impacted how I do this blog is the Catholic Bloggosphere. Why don't I want to be a "Catholic Blog"? Well, because of what I've seen happening in the Catholic Bloggosphere, that's why. And when I have time, I'll drop back by and post on just what I mean, and the sadness I have over what I've been reading in so many Catholic blogs over the last year or so. Right now, I have places to go and people to see. I'll be back, and continue this little train of thought then. Till then, TTFN.
Well, the actual obvious 'Catholic Identity' might not always be there. I post a lot on politics, social and cultural trends, the media, and occasionally things like history or religion. Occasionally I'll reflect on something, or post on something that moves me or gets me to thinking. Once in a while my posts might reflect an overt Catholic perspective. As often as not, a person could be forgiven for reading a rant on the latest attempts to squelch freedom by way of Gay Rights, or what this or that politician has done, and conclude nothing at all about my faith.
Now I've explained that, in a way, my faith often informs just what I think is important. After all, it wasn't some innate culturally impressed notion that has caused me to reject human homosexual normality. As an agnostic, I had no problem with the stuff. Live and let live was my motto. Though I think I would have been somewhat dismayed at the modern Gay Rights 'celebrate us or watch your butt' approach to its agendas, I wouldn't have cared one way or another about the lifestyle. When I became a believer, however, I was forced to confront the fact that the overwhelming witness of Scripture, and the Christian Faith in general, has always been to reject that particular lifestyle. So when I see the creeping 'there ain't room enough in this world for the two of us' approach of Gay Rights today, it's my faith that compels me to take notice from the POV that I write.
But still, I can see where folks might see that as a cop out. Just me trying to wade one toe in the pool, while allowing myself the freedom to wander around and post on anything under the sun whether it pertains to the Catholic Faith, my Catholic Faith, or anything Catholic at all. In a way, they would be correct. I said long ago that I just started this blog because some individuals I know persuaded me to start a blog so I could have a platform for putting down my thoughts and insights. So I did. And I didn't want to be confined to a single 'type' of blog. If that has cut me out of this or that little blogging community, so be it. It was just so I could toss out some ideas, and hear back from those who read my ideas.
But a few things have happened. First, the comments section disappeared. Something went screwy with the blog some weeks ago, the whole thing went down for a day or so. The Comments boxes vanished, and I've not had the time or the desire to look into where they went and how to get them back. Visitors may not return when they see no comments available. But to be honest, that's OK. Though I appreciate those few who did come by and post their thoughts, they were few. And while there is always the quality, I noticed that once I stopped a few readers from coming in and just insulting people and saying stupid things (and yes, I know that sounds harsh, but some of the things were nothing else, even by the most gracious assessment), the number of comments dropped off exponentially. It's as if the Bloggosphere is where people want to go in order to behave in ways we would never behave in any other setting. And when I said I want good, reasoned debate that is polite and not just a drive by insult-fest, folks stopped coming by.
Yes, I was still visited by some great people who continued to comment and give me insights and suggestions, and I'm very thankful for that. But if I had to have folks coming in and acting like little brats in order to increase the number of comments and visits, I would rather have no comments at all. So for those who kept coming back with reasoned insights and thoughtful and polite comments, I do miss you. But I will let it be for a while at least, enjoying not seeing random and anonymous folks swinging by, throwing out insults and the latest intellectually vacant talking points from various radical sides of any given debate. Someday I might find a way to bring back the comments, but it will be a while.
Another thing has also impacted how I do this blog is the Catholic Bloggosphere. Why don't I want to be a "Catholic Blog"? Well, because of what I've seen happening in the Catholic Bloggosphere, that's why. And when I have time, I'll drop back by and post on just what I mean, and the sadness I have over what I've been reading in so many Catholic blogs over the last year or so. Right now, I have places to go and people to see. I'll be back, and continue this little train of thought then. Till then, TTFN.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Where I will be for many moons to come
Having started a new career at Aflac, I am more or less the beginner of my own business. That means, as any small business owner knows, work, and work, and work, and work. And lots and lots of time. Given that I do guard my time with my family, and do it jealously, I'll be giving what time I have left over to them. I might actually be able to do more with our parishes because if the schedule can be back breaking, it is at least somewhat normal, and it is mine to (usually) plan. After the first couple months that is. Until then, it will be many hours gone, training, getting certified, passing tests, and doing all that fun stuff.
So while our good president continues to focus on the one thing he seems passionate about, and leaving those other things like the economy and foreign wars to just multiple and divide as the course of events move themselves, I will rest at ease. I may pop in once in a while to cheer on the Gay Rights movement for being the one demographic that commands the attention of our illustrious leader while all other things are collapsing, but otherwise will have to pick and choose the time I have to post.
I also will take this time to reevaluate my identity as a blogger. I have not tried to be a "Catholic Blogger", for there are too many temptations to go off the straight and narrow doing that. In my six years of looking toward Catholicism, I have been saddened by just how many Catholic blogs can end up sounding so, well, Protestant. Sort of 'it's their Catholic Church and everyone else is wrong." And because the Church lets so much of its discipleship be done by lay people (not a bad thing), there is a tendency for those blogs to attract a particular brand of followers who enjoy being told their way is The Way, the Truth, and the Life, and nobody will get to Jesus through the Church but by them. Yet I also know that as a Catholic, the way I see the world is defined by that title, and it should mean something. My blog says 'Catholic Musings", and during this time of light blogging, I will revisit just how that will impact what I write - letting the Catholic influence, without going the way of 'Dave's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Blog.'
So we'll see what happens. Things may not change at all. But for a while, it will be light, lighter than other light periods have been. It has been a wild, eventful year. And hopefully and prayerfully things will turn around and all of the events will finally yield blessings and happiness. In the meantime, please keep coming by. I'll toss things out when I can. I still take emails and prayer requests. Till then, enjoy this, one of my favorite Youtube videos of all time, in celebration of all the tests and testing I have had to pass so far (not as bad as a math test, but after 20 years after the last exams in school, they feel like advanced math tests!):
So while our good president continues to focus on the one thing he seems passionate about, and leaving those other things like the economy and foreign wars to just multiple and divide as the course of events move themselves, I will rest at ease. I may pop in once in a while to cheer on the Gay Rights movement for being the one demographic that commands the attention of our illustrious leader while all other things are collapsing, but otherwise will have to pick and choose the time I have to post.
I also will take this time to reevaluate my identity as a blogger. I have not tried to be a "Catholic Blogger", for there are too many temptations to go off the straight and narrow doing that. In my six years of looking toward Catholicism, I have been saddened by just how many Catholic blogs can end up sounding so, well, Protestant. Sort of 'it's their Catholic Church and everyone else is wrong." And because the Church lets so much of its discipleship be done by lay people (not a bad thing), there is a tendency for those blogs to attract a particular brand of followers who enjoy being told their way is The Way, the Truth, and the Life, and nobody will get to Jesus through the Church but by them. Yet I also know that as a Catholic, the way I see the world is defined by that title, and it should mean something. My blog says 'Catholic Musings", and during this time of light blogging, I will revisit just how that will impact what I write - letting the Catholic influence, without going the way of 'Dave's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Blog.'
So we'll see what happens. Things may not change at all. But for a while, it will be light, lighter than other light periods have been. It has been a wild, eventful year. And hopefully and prayerfully things will turn around and all of the events will finally yield blessings and happiness. In the meantime, please keep coming by. I'll toss things out when I can. I still take emails and prayer requests. Till then, enjoy this, one of my favorite Youtube videos of all time, in celebration of all the tests and testing I have had to pass so far (not as bad as a math test, but after 20 years after the last exams in school, they feel like advanced math tests!):
Sunday, June 12, 2011
A scandal named Weiner
I'm not one who follows every political scandal under the sun. The emphasis placed on this or that scandal is often up to the whims of the media, who recently had its bubble deflated when thirteen thousand emails of Sarah Palin didn't turn up a smoking gun. I can't remember the last time a politician was forced to release over ten thousand emails, but then I can't remember a politician that the MSM both hated and obsessed with like Sarah Palin. Alas, it looks as though they will have to build some faux narrative to tell the "real story of Sarah Palin' by way of the non-revealing emails.
Part of me thinks they were hoping to find something that would take the focus off Anthony Weiner. A year or so ago, he was a rising super star in the Democratic Left. Willing to say up yours, shut up, you hate the sick, and just about anything else to the Republicans, even while standing next to them in an interview, he was the darling of Left wing media, blogs, and politicians. So it had to come as quite a blow to find out that he has been doing some of the dirty thing when it comes to keeping his pants zipped.
At first, he denied it, and the press dutifully followed his lead, either focusing on hacking, or emphasizing the myriad other sex scandals in history. Since he admitted he has been doing the naughty thing with women he doesn't happen to be married to, at least electronically, the MSM has rushed out to spin it again, wondering if such things should really force a man to resign. After all, during the Clinton sex/perjury scandal, we were told that such things as sex, sexual misconduct (can there be any such thing in our modern culture?), lying, character, truth, values, morals, no longer mattered. Certainly that should still apply.
According to at least one poll of his constituents, most don't care either. Perhaps we've reached a time where such things really don't matter. We truly have bought into the notion that what a person is individually has no bearing on what they are publicly or corporately. We reject the notion that if a man treats his own family this way, he might treat others (like us voters) the same way. Or we just imagine that all have sinned, there is none who are righteous, no not one...so who cares? Apparently some, as a growing list of Democrats are begging for him to leave, though that could be less because of some lofty moral standard and more because he is taking away the steam they were building by convincing Americans that the GOP wants to end Medicare and kill senior citizens.
I dunno. I'm only spending about three ounces of care when it comes to this story, as he never impressed me anyway. He came off as boorish and rude, and his denials, lies, victimization, and whining have done nothing to change my opinion.
Part of me thinks they were hoping to find something that would take the focus off Anthony Weiner. A year or so ago, he was a rising super star in the Democratic Left. Willing to say up yours, shut up, you hate the sick, and just about anything else to the Republicans, even while standing next to them in an interview, he was the darling of Left wing media, blogs, and politicians. So it had to come as quite a blow to find out that he has been doing some of the dirty thing when it comes to keeping his pants zipped.
At first, he denied it, and the press dutifully followed his lead, either focusing on hacking, or emphasizing the myriad other sex scandals in history. Since he admitted he has been doing the naughty thing with women he doesn't happen to be married to, at least electronically, the MSM has rushed out to spin it again, wondering if such things should really force a man to resign. After all, during the Clinton sex/perjury scandal, we were told that such things as sex, sexual misconduct (can there be any such thing in our modern culture?), lying, character, truth, values, morals, no longer mattered. Certainly that should still apply.
According to at least one poll of his constituents, most don't care either. Perhaps we've reached a time where such things really don't matter. We truly have bought into the notion that what a person is individually has no bearing on what they are publicly or corporately. We reject the notion that if a man treats his own family this way, he might treat others (like us voters) the same way. Or we just imagine that all have sinned, there is none who are righteous, no not one...so who cares? Apparently some, as a growing list of Democrats are begging for him to leave, though that could be less because of some lofty moral standard and more because he is taking away the steam they were building by convincing Americans that the GOP wants to end Medicare and kill senior citizens.
I dunno. I'm only spending about three ounces of care when it comes to this story, as he never impressed me anyway. He came off as boorish and rude, and his denials, lies, victimization, and whining have done nothing to change my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)