Blog of PDub

Moving My Blog

2005-12-29T15:29:00.000-05:00

Sorry to make you journey to another website, but Randy has convinced me to move my blog to http://pdubsd.wordpress.com/ I'll be posting there from now on.

I'm Back

2005-12-23T19:22:00.000-05:00

Its been a brutal Fall. I was unable to post for a long time. The good news is that now I have all of this pent-up blogging inside me. AND...I have plenty of time to get to it. So, hang in there faithful PDub watchers, or if you weren't too faithful, come back! I promise it will be worth it.

Peace and Merry Christmas.

More Data Confirms Faith - Now What To Do?

2005-08-31T10:23:00.000-04:00

New survey data continue to support faith as a significant political divide between Republicans and Democrats. According to a new Pew Research Center poll, the perception that the Democratic party is “generally friendly” towards religion, has fallen by more than ten percent. Only 29% of the public sees the Dems as friendly toward religion, down from 40% in 04 and 42% in 02. Meanwhile, 55% of the public sees the Republican party as friendly toward religion.

This means that more and more of the public reject the Democrats because of their stances on issues of morality, faith, and values.

In the same article, The New York Times reports that “nearly two-thirds of Americans say that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public schools.”

Note that in the NYT article, the political survey results are buried in the last half of the article.

A good friend boasted last week, “This kind of data means that they (the political elites) have to start listening to me!” What he meant was that a moral/values perspective can no longer be dismissed out of hand and that power brokers will have to take seriously what are the concerns of the faithful.

In the spirit of Spiderman’s Uncle Ben, “with great power comes great responsibility,” people of faith have a job to clearly articulate what they are about and what is important to them. They must do this in a way that is winsome, not smug and certain.

This has always been a significant challenge for the voice of faith in the public square. Take the recent comments of Pat Robertson’s as an example. I even searched for the most sympathetic article about Pat’s poor decision.

It’s time to start seriously searching for new leaders and spokespersons for Christ followers in the public square. We should do it now, while support is strong. My more cynical side, however, believes that we will just get the same old pale, stale, and male hard edged rhetoric to speak about Christ’s love and hope in today’s complex times.

Values Voters to the Rescue

2005-08-11T17:34:00.000-04:00

I saw this article last week and thought it was pretty interesting. The Washington Post's Dan Balz reports on the recent findings of a new Democratic study that paints a troubling picture for the Blue Party. The study demonstrates that values issues, abortion, homosexuality, and other moral issues "trump" concerns about the war in Iraq, the direction of the country and the performance of the President.

Where Democrats hope to pick up voters from rural voters without a college education, they are fighting a huge uphill battle because these voters typically consider Democrats as "liberal", "immoral" and "anti-religous." Those are some tough perceptions to get over.

It gets even worse. That's because the groups that the Democrats studied were in states that have some strong Blue trending - Wisconsin and Arkansas, and in Kentucky, and Colorado among self-discribed "disaffected supporters" of Bush. These would be considered the most likely Democratic voters outside of urban areas.

So even in places where Bush personally is not embraces, the lack of a viable Democratic alternative on values and morality keeps voters pulling the Republican lever. This is profound because it goes beyond generic polling on party and identifies an area that Democrats are not just silent, but are percieved as hostile - the "values" voter.

I think there are two significant problems: 1) How can the "angry, anti-white Christian" party court rural white values voters? 2) Bush is now not the issue for Democrats. That is, according to this survey, moral issues are more salient than performance.

For example, look at the resent results in OH-2 where Republican Jean Schmidt defeated Democrat Paul Hackett. Here the Dems fielded the best candidate they could, an organized and telegenic Iraq war vet. Schmidt, a brash social conservative who withstood a five way Republican primary, had little momentum and poor campaign organization. She just won by 4 points.

Some have said that Schmidt poor showing in a strong Republican district spells trouble for the Republicans who may be vulnerable on the war and the economcy/gas prices. But I think it illustrates how important are "values" voters.

Hopefully Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is noting this data. Frist's latest return to his moderate roots regarding embryonic stem cell research is a gamble because he is hoping "values" voters are split on ESC research. I think it's a tough roll of the dice because first you have to get over the ideology that using a human embryo for research is cool for Christians and others who hold a moral worldview. Second, you have to show that reseach on human embryos produces cures - a claim that the biotechs have been unable to make in spite of all of their lobbying and hype.

One more thing. The timing of the release of this data is important. Only those interested in burying information releases it in the middle of August.

The Theology of the Bike

2005-07-29T13:14:00.000-04:00

People don't understand cyclists. They call them bike nuts, or crazy cyclists, or “get out of the way of my car!”

I love riding my bike - my NEW bike. Check it out!

Aside from the funny picture of me, (thanks Randy!), I have learned a little about God from my bike. I have decided to call my bike the Bumble Beast. It is black and yellow like a bee and it wants to ravage me like a beast. It's so lightweight and fast that I have to step up my output and fitness to get the most out of the bike. That's tough.

One of the features of the Bumble Beast that makes me step up my game is the close gearing. It has twenty speeds that are relatively close together. To explain what this means requires me to get into the weeds of cycling mechanics so please forgive me.

When you push on a bike pedal, the chain attached to the front gear turns the rear gear and, depending on the ratio between those gears, the back wheel turns a certain amount. If every time your had one pedal revolution, the wheel turned one revolution, you would travel the same distance as the size of your wheel.

On a regular sized bike wheel, traveling that distance with one pedal revolution would require a lot of effort to get going and maintain. That is why bikes have gears. The higher the gear, the easier it is to pedal because you are traveling less distance. The lower the gear, the more distance you are traveling per pedal stroke.

Now consider going up a hill. You reduce the distance you are traveling per pedal stroke so that you can maintain your cadence in the lowest gear possible (remember, lower is harder to pedal). If you back off just a bit, you can get up the hill at a good speed and keep your legs, heart, and lungs from exploding.

The key to cycling is in maximizing your pedal stroke and maintaining that effort for, oh, say, 100 plus miles. Guys like Lance know exactly where that effort needs to be. They boost their fitness and effort to come right up to the line of having their bodies go into a meltdown, then back off one step.

The gearing on my new bike allows me to progress between gears one little step at a time. So I can tweak it up just a hair or back off just a hair. That means my heart and lungs are constantly right on that line of exploding. As my body becomes accustomed to this level of effort and demand, it becomes stronger and my endurance increases.

As I have experienced this need to step up my effort and fitness in a new way, I am reminded of the verses in first chapter of James that start “Consider it all joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance.” James 1:2

That section of Scripture goes on to distinguish temptations and God's good gifts. What I believe is that God ratchets our lives up to a degree of effort so that we can gain some kind of spiritual or life endurance benefits and then, not being satisfied with us there, he continues to ratchet it up. Not because he wants to torture us, but because he knows it is good for us.

James 1:12 says “Blessed is the man who perseveres under trail, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.”

If you are experiencing some trial or trouble, God is showing you he means business and wants to love you. He wants to consume all of you because he loves you. Just like riding up a hill, its tough, its difficult, but it won't last forever and God has promised a wonderful downhill afterwards.

Congress Hijacks GTA

2005-07-25T13:16:00.000-04:00

In case you haven’t heard about the recent events with the vidoe game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, go to the link to get updated, then come back and read the rest of this. You may also want to examine today’s Congressional Record to see the debate that went on in the House today on the issue.

So, if you checked out the link, allow my bro Sobchek to share his thoughts on the issue. Maddox has already articulately explained a large portion of Sob's concerns. But there were a couple issues he missed, that Sobcheck would like to address.

"Congress has turned this into some sort of a witchhunt. From everything I've read about this, there was no "grand conspiracy" by Rockstar Games to sneak something by the ratings board. Access to the sex scene was only made available after someone else, a private third party with no connection to the game at all, wrote the "hot coffee" patch. Granted, the scene didn’t need to be in the game in the first place, but without the patch, it was completely inaccessible.

If you think children are the only ones to play video games, you are sorely mistaken. Adults across the country play video games. GTA: San Andreas was/is not marketed to kids. It always has been something for adults, not children. Recent statistics indicated that more than 80% of parents are actively involved in the purchase of video games their children play, and 72% consider the ESRB rating a game receives as a factor in their decision when purchasing games for their children. I find it highly unlikely that any parent that is has no qualms letting their child steal cars, run over pedestrians, pick up prostitutes, shoot cops, and launder drug money is going to have an issue with a pixilated figure performing fellatio.

The inconsistency between video games and movies is puzzling to me. Both receive ratings based on content, to protect younger audiences from exposure to indecent material. Yet, there is a much greater tolerance for indecency. Take the Godfather for example. Its a violent film--people get shot, choked, stabbed, and killed in explosions. On at least one occasion, breasts are visible (its been a while since I saw the film, so forgive me if there is more), and another scene where a couple is having sex. However, there was no outcry for the FTC to investigate whether or not the filmmakers were attempting to circumvent the rating system, or that they were corrupting our youth.

Also, why isn't anyone throwing a fit about Sen. McCain appearing in what Drudge called a "boob-filled raunch-fest,"--The Wedding Crashers? In movies, those are real breasts, real butts, but we never hear any outrage over those. Why the outcry over this one game?

Please, do not misunderstand my position on this issue as an endorsement of the “hot coffee” patch, or the other violent and debaucherous aspects of this game. Far from it. This is a criticism of a Congressional witchhunt aimed at one particular game." Sobcheck

Blessings Happen

2005-07-19T13:17:00.000-04:00

Today was the first day I drove to work in my new truck. I have a new truck because of God's great blessing. Here are the details:

At the beginning of the month I crashed my racing bike. I was in a deep depression as I ride my bike to work a couple times a week at least. It is a great source of stress relief.

My wife suggested I "be patient" before I order a new expensive bike. I complied - but I did check with the bike shop. Only 5 Greg LeMond Buenos Aires in my size existed in the entire country. And just a week later, there were none. Blackness consumed my soul.

So I am driving home in traffic one fine summer evening (the bike path parrallels the highway), and I get this thought: "Why am I driving this nice Jeep instead of riding my bike on the bike path? I will sell my car to buy my bike and buy a cheaper car!"

Now, the wife has heard plenty of silly ideas like this from me before. But instead she says "Don't sell the Jeep. I'll drive it. Let's sell the mini-van." OK

So I'm relaying this tale to my high school surfing buddy in San Diego as I prepare for a visit the following week. He says "Buy my truck. I'm moving to Spain , I gotta sell it. I'll give you a great deal ." I buy it sight unseen.

He picks me up at the airport in San Diego in the truck and signs it over to me. It is in better shape than I even imagined. But it only has an AM/FM radio. How am I going to drive across country with only a radio?

My other friend's son-in-law tells me he has a CD player and 10-disc changer that he will give me. Its brand-new and in the box. So I get it installed.

Now I have to unload the mini-van. My buddy at work buys it.

Back to the bike. I start calling around to individual bike shops to see if, by chance, they have the bike of my eye in my size in stock. One store offers to check the distributor's inventory. I say "I think I already did that." He finds one left in the country. I check w/ the wife and snatch it up. It's supposed to be ready this weekend.

Truck, CD Player, Bike - my cup over-flow-eth!

Blessings - a demonstration of God's love for me as His child. Neato!!

Pagans in Our Midst

2005-07-15T13:18:00.000-04:00

I just returned from a briefing given by Dr. Daniel Heimbach, Professor of Christian Ethics at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. The briefing was titled Addressing the Sexual War Driving Public Policy Controversy Today and featured thoughts captured in his new book True Sexual Morality: Recovering Biblical Standards for a Culture in Crisis.

Dr. Heimbach made two statements that really woke me up. First, that as a practical matter, most people adopt their worldview based on their personal ethics instead of conforming their behavior and desires to a determined worldview. Second, that the American culture is in the throes of thoroughly embracing a pagan ethos on sexuality and personal intimacy.

What this means is that our culture has moved from a modernist philosophy of sexuality that denies objective truth or transcendent precepts on sexuality so that sex is seen as just sex, to a post-modern philosophy that affirms one's own sense of deity through the sexual. That is, in post-modern thought, we become our own gods and sexuality is a component of that.

I guess I knew this but it hadn't really hit me until Dr. Heimbach made it explicit. I am well versed on liberal public policy and ideology regarding sexuality and keep up on the latest trends. When SIECUS and its former president Debra Hafner began promoting the left's religious response to conservative religious support for abstinence education, restrictions of contraception from teens, and homosexual-free school-based education on human sexuality, I thought it was just for political purposes. Dr. Heimbach refuted this notion, however, by pointing out the liberal sexual advocates are rationalizing their approach to human sexuality through explicitly pagan theology a writings.

It is not that advocates of sexual liberation are simply adopting a religious patina in order to justify their person ethos. Instead, leaders in the abortion, condom, homosexuality, and HIV/AIDS movements are embracing explicit pagan theology and crusading for their beliefs in the public square.

Does this mean that everyone who has a different perspective on sexuality that myself is a robe-wearing, full-moon celebrating, nature-loving pagan? Not necessarily. But for the most part, paganism is the worldview in which they are basing their ideology and behaviors.

A lot of you may be thinking “Well duh…” I agree.

You Are What You Watch

2005-06-30T13:19:00.000-04:00

Variety Magazine reports that those who hold religious views, while they hold distinctly different political and social norms, hold no different viewing habits on movies and entertainment. Here are some quotes from the Variety article I think are significant:

"The most reliable predictor of where people stand on these (political and moral) issues, however, was how intensely religious people consider themselves."

In the study, 32% said they were "very religious," while 45% said "somewhat religious" and 23% were not religious."

"The religious and nonreligious people in the study were nearly indistinguishable in their attitudes about their own individual movie going experience."

"Perhaps the most surprising finding in the study, though, was when MarketCast measured for doctrine within religion. Those who were the most conservative in their religious beliefs were actually more likely to have seen the violent films than those who characterized themselves as more liberal. While 18% of those who were liberal in their doctrine had seen the violent R-rated films, 29% of the conservatives said they had seen these violent movies."

"They like what they see."

Last night, at bible study, there was a little discussion about movies. I was surprised at the movies that people said they watched, including Closer and Kinsey. But I think I am just as guilty having watched and liked movies like Fight Club, Kill Bill, and The Bourne Identity/Supremacy.

Typically I'll take comfort after watching a violent, crude, or sexual movie by criticizing it. Instead of simply avoiding that which I know is garbage, I maintain my moral superiority by rolling around in crap but then expressing disdain. At least I am not alone.

The Ultimate Social Security Plan

2005-06-27T13:20:00.000-04:00

With all of the discussion about Social Security reform, its time for the PDub plan. This plan is responsible and helps contribute to an enhanced sense of national community.

Knowing that it takes two Gen X or Gen Y-ers to pay for the retirement of one Baby-boomer, what really needs to happen is to make this plan more personal so that the younger set won't resent the fact that they are paying for someone else's motor home and DVD rentals. The PDub plan gets people talking so that no-one will take the Social Security safety net for granted. In fact, this plan will create a ground swell of discussion so that it becomes reformed by both contributors and recipients.

Here is how it works: Each contributor gets to designate the two recipients their contributions will go to support. Should your retiree-of-choice already be claimed by another contributor, the Social Security Administration will randomly select a deserving recipient. The SSA will supply each contributor with a photo, address, contact information, and bio describing the recipient's life and lifestyle. It will be kind of like Save the Children or Compassion International but for domestic seniors instead of orphaned foreign children.

Just imagine a 27 year-old management trainee, working hard to climb the corporate ladder and save for his first home. Sure they have to balance work, family, and community involvement. But knowing that their two Social Security recipients are planning their trip to visit the kids in Wisconsin, or enjoying their time on the cruise, makes his hard work that much more rewarding.

Since each contributor will have a face and contact information to personalize Social Security, they can provide helpful tips on how seniors manage their retirement income or just let them know how they feel. Perhaps the SSA can link people together through the Internet so that the connection between Social Security partners can be made strong and vibrant. Maybe through Instant or Video messaging, every person involved in the Social Security program can be involved in a truly real-time and national dialog.

I think you can already imagine for yourselves the changes that will occur once this debate is truly shifted to the people and away from the politicians and so-called experts. Let's truly secure the future of retirees, support the PDub Social Security Plan.

We All Need A Lift Sometimes

2005-06-24T13:22:00.000-04:00

This week’s Sports Illustrated issue, Rick Reilly does another tremendous job in chocking me up and causing me to fight back tears. His article, Strongest Dad In the World, (not yet available on line) describes the relationship between Dick Hoyt and his son Rick.

Rick was born with significant brain damage and for about eleven years of his life was considered a vegetable. He had no ability to communicate or control his limbs.

Without the ability to express his choices, many medical and bio-ethicists would deny Rick’s person-hood, in the same way they denied Terri Schiavo’s person-hood. But Dick, Rick’s father, knew better than to listen to the “experts” and finally found a way for Rick to communicate by controlling a computer with movements from his head.

Rick convinced his dad to push him in his wheelchair in a five mile charity run. Since then, Dick Hoyt has pushed Rick 85 times in marathons, pushed, pulled in a boat, and cycled with Rick in 212 triathlons, and has run the Boston Marathon 24 times.

Clearly, the story of the Hoyt’s demonstrate the wonder and determination of a father’s love for his child regardless of that child’s ability or perceived intellectual capacity. It also shows that given the right support, understanding, and love, the humanity of all people - including the differently abled – can be strengthened and celebrated.

In contrast to Rick Hoyt, Terri Schiavo was denied therapy, denied contact to those who loved her and wanted to provide for her, and was eventually starved to death with the complicity of the courts.

Instead of being shut up in a hospice room, Terri Schiavo should have been pushed and loved and challenged like Rick Hoyt. No one knows what she could have experienced or accomplished.

This prospect is not reserved for those judged human enough. It is not limited to only those deemed acceptable by a medical ethics board or a court of law. It is the intrinsic quality of being human.

No Freedom of Speech at JDRF

2005-06-24T13:21:00.000-04:00

Advocacy is simply a part of doing business in government. And advocates often need to be "on message" so that they are consistent and clear. Being on message, however, is not the same thing as lying and silencing the truth.

The Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, one of the leading proponents for unethical embryonic stem cell research and human cloning, recently required its participants in its Children's Congress to take a loyalty oath on embryonic stem cell research. The oath states: "If there is a discussion of such controversial topics as embryonic stem cell research, I will either embrace the JDRF legislative position on such topics or will not work agasint the JDRF position."

The choice JDRF puts forward to its participants is advocate for ethically questionable research or be silent. No discent, no differing of opinion, no freedom of speech.

Now remember, JDRF is asking kids with diabetes to visit their legislators and support research and treatments for diabetes. These aren't scientists, nor lawyers, nor professaional lobbyists. They are kids. Kids of all backgrounds, all religions, and all viewpoints - except for the fact that JRDF cannot tolerate all viewpoints.

Not only does JDRF impose a litmus and loyalty oath on its pint-sized advocates, it has such disdain for the truth that it must distort facts and re-define truth. For example, during consideration of an amendment to ban human cloning - cloning that is technically called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) - JDRF lied to Members of Congress telling them that SCNT and cloning were two separate things.

Representative David Obey (D-WI), carried the water of the pro-cloners/pro-ESC researchers right down to the threats to obstruct billions of dollars in federal funding should human cloning be prohibited. Rarely do Members of Congress of Obey's seniority threaten to use any means necessary to bog down important legislation. But Obey's display showed how threatened BIO and JDRF are by attempts to limit biomedial research to only ethical means.

So its no suprise that JDRF would discard speech freedoms to continue its campaign of lies and deception. Unfortunately, not only are constitutional liberties its victims, but so are the young children who are being taught to lie in promoting JDRF's agenda.

Lies Against Women

2005-06-22T13:23:00.000-04:00

The left will stop at nothing to advance its agenda. They lie and distort the truth as is convenient. Recently Democrats were called on the carpet for lying that abortion rates were increasing. Now, in an attempt to win support for wide availability of the morning after pill, abortion advocates are making up statistics about the number of pregnancies that occur during rapes.

The New York Times published a guest opinion citing 25,000 pregnancies are the result of rapes. Their argument suggests that these pregnant rape victims should have access to the morning after pill.

Unfortunately, the NY Times published a false statistic. According to the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN), up to 4,065 pregnancies MAY have been the result of rape. This is a far cry from 25,000.

The real damage of this lie is that it minimizes what rape victims really need - counseling services. To forward the notion that the first thought of a rape victim is how to deal with a potential pregnancy reduces the extreme emotional and physical damage that occurs during rape.

It also shows how abortion advocates will use women and their exploitation for their own purposes.

Someone De-Program Katie Holmes - Please!

2005-06-21T13:25:00.000-04:00

The first comment I heard referring to the Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes engagement was "This is soooo fake." But, hey, knowing how wacky Hollywood celebs are, who am I to get agitated.

This story, however, describes exactly what I have thought happened all along: Katie Holmes has been brainwashed by Tommy boy's Scientology cronies.

Picture it, Katie goes to be interviewed for the next MI, she is taken in by Cruise's charm, he suggests they have dinner w/ some of his "perfectly normal" brethren in the Scientology cult. Tommy gives these boys the wink and ... Wham-mo! ... she is a sudden devotee of purging "engrams" from her soul.

Okay, okay. There could be a perfectly good explanation to this weird public relationship. One could be that Katie noticed the boost to Nicole Kidman's career after being dumped by Cruise. Notice, also, how both Kidman and Holmes are Catholic.

There is a lot here that is not at all clear as crystal. All I want is the truth, whether I can handle it or not.

Don't Let This Memorial Stand

2005-06-21T13:24:00.000-04:00

img src='http://randythomas.info/images/etclogopdub.jpg' align="left" hspace=10 vspace=10 alt='' />

This is the headstone of Terri Schiavo. It expresses some troubled thinking about life and person-hood.
I know that Michael Schiavo thinks he promised to carry out Terri's unsubstantiated wishes to not be kept alive "like that." What this says about the incapacitated is just gruesome. He is suggesting that there are those among us - the intellectually disabled, the brain injured, the less abled - that are "departed" from the earth.

I also wonder what other promises he maybe referring to that are less obvious. Promises to himself to not left Terri live? Promises to his new love interest to do away with Terri? Promises to his bizarre attorney to promote his spiritually and morally confused philosophies?

The definition of travesty is "a debased, distorted, or grossly inferior imitation." This is a travesty of a memorial.

You Are Your Brain

2005-06-16T13:26:00.000-04:00

How has your brain been feeling? I hope it’s okay because following the autopsy of Terri Schiavo and the subsequent media reports, your brain’s status is critical to your personhood.

According to Dr. Jon Thogmartin, the Pinellas-Pasco medical examiner, Terri’s brain was so atrophied and damaged that it was irreversible and no amount of therapy would have helped her improve. Thogmartin describes Terri’s vision as blind and reactions as simply reflexes.

In short, the medical examiner’s report confirms what those advocating for Terri’s death have always said. That is, personhood depends on cognition/self awareness.

It’s a point that has been around for a while as Wesley Smith has been arguing. And, with the Schiavo autopsy as the latest touchstone, science has become the sole method to explain who and what we are as people. Those unruly and irrational believers in antiquity and superstition are the sole objectors to science’s authority over our culture.

What would bioethicists say about Christina Santhouse? She only has half a brain. Her left hand doesn’t work and her peripheral vision is poor. So, Christina’s brain function is only half better than Terri Schiavo’s.

The cases of Christina and Terri have in common the fact that we are so much more than the collective firings of our neurons. Science will never get that. So take care of your brain.

Your Law Enforcement At Work

2005-06-15T13:27:00.000-04:00

So you think a conspiracy exists to use law enforcement to help states and localities raise revenue? Here is the skinny on speeding tickets. Check out the amount of camera tickets in DC: 423,000!!! Add to this that most people who drive in DC are from Virginia or Maryland - oh what a scam!!. This is the equivalent of a commuter tax - taxing people who work in the city but live outside the city for city revenue raising.

Embryo Stem Cell Fantasies

2005-06-13T13:28:00.000-04:00

In Friday's The San Francisco Chronicle, Peter J. Bryant, a professor at UC Irvine, sees how embryo stem cell research could be the solution for the loss of limbs our military wounded are experiencing in Iraq. Bryant see ESC research as a way to produce spontaneously regenerating limbs for the military.

Now this is just silly and gross. It reminds me of the Men In Black scene where the alien's head is shot off, only to immediately regrow a new one.

"Do you know how much that stings?" Complains the alien.

Bryant writes "But many scientists are hopeful that with enough research, we will be able to harness the abilities of embryonic stem cells to form all of the cell types in the body, so that even whole limbs might be regenerated just as they are in a salamander, and neurons could be replaced and reconnected with each other and the organs they control."

Instead of war wounded experiencing surgery, rehabilitation, and prosthetic fittings, they may just need to wait until embryo stem cell treatment causes their stumps to bud new limbs. Or new limbs could be grown in the abdomens of special animals. That's right, arms and legs growing in the belly of a beast. That's what some of the comment traffic speculates in various ESC and bioengineering list serves.

They are looking to when a 5 week aborted embryo will grow when placed in the abdominal cavity of a special animal. If scientists could get cloned embryos to respond through bioengineering and research, they could harvest useful limbs and organs.

Bryant uses his article to criticize Bush's embryo stem cell policy as based on his religious beliefs - not as ethically problematic - but totally ignores the fact that all his speculation is science fiction. He mentions mouse and rat reaction after ESCs are immediately injected in the site of spinal cord injuries, but fails to mention that no sustainable improvements have every been created in animals or in humans with embryo stem cells.

The ESC advocates are typically cut from the fanciful selective fact cloth. They see a Utopian world this is so close to reality. If only they could get nature to follow the script of their futuristic fantasies.

All of this science fiction talk causes my brain to fire-off my favorite Charlton Heston sci-fi quotes. I can just hear these quotes now applied to the embryo stem cell issue.

"Soylent Green is people!" and "You finally did it. YOU MANIACS! YOU BLEW IT UP! DAMN YOU. *** DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!!"

Americorps for the Church

2005-06-06T13:31:00.000-04:00

Most people have heard of Americorps, the federal program that pays people to volunteer in various community-based efforts. It’s an initiative of Bill Clinton’s and has been embraced by the Bush Administration.

Americorps has some very positive aspects to it including the ability of Americorps participants to initiative their own efforts to serve needy people. The Americorps participants I known help out with Habitat for Humanity building homes in low-income areas, serve as reading mentors for children and adults, and work with the elderly who are unable to take care of their homes or care for a spouse with Alzheimer’s.

One of the things I really like about Americorps is the dedication and commitment required of their participants. Americorps volunteers are available 24/7 and are required to jump to any emergency or issue that may come up. They all carry pagers or cell phones to respond immediately should their help be needed.

This is something that the Church should embrace. Now, I know that we are all busy and that serving in the choir, or with the coffee guild, or as part of the children’s ministry is very important. But do you know where in your church you can go to get immediate help? Does the pastoral staff or committee chairmen get back to you later in the week by the time other outside resources have been found?

Why is the Church so anemic in addressing the nitty-gitty needs that rise up in peoples’ lives? Why aren’t our churches considered the go-to agencies when sin starts swinging its fists and causing damage?

For example, consider the story of a woman I know who was suddenly divorced by her husband, who accused his wife of being mentally unstable to maintain custody of their two children. She was basically thrown out of her house and family.

The church in which they were members did nothing besides put them on the prayer list because they did not want to get in the middle of a spousal dispute. Outside of the spiritual/church discipline issues (and the great church gossip), I believe the church has a responsibility to help this woman find housing, furniture, and services like counseling.

If church volunteering required the 24/7 commitment of Americorps, it would transform churches, communities and Christ followers. It would activate our demonstrations of faith from beyond prayer and providing a meal to striving side-by-side with individuals and families struggling to make sense of the circumstances around them. It would move some of the academic/theological discussion to practical considerations of what it means to feed the poor, and care for widows and orphans. It would also demonstrate the gospel in a powerful and tangible way.

Maybe your church already has a rapid-response team to support families in the midst of divorce, when drug use and addiction occurs, or some other source of broken-ness. Maybe I’m late to the dance in advocating this kind of approach to serving our communities with the love of Christ. Or maybe there is a case here of government getting it right in a way that makes sense for churches to duplicate.

The Eternal Commission

2005-06-06T13:30:00.000-04:00

The New York Times demonstrates that the next best thing to eternal life this side of heaven is a federal commission. In its' coverage, the Times reports that the people who have achieved semi C-SPAN stardom, such as Thomas Keane, Richard Ben-Veniste, Jamie S. Gorelick and Bob Kerry, are itchin’ to keep at the White House and Congress to do more of what they recommended.

Even the Times, no stranger to political posturing, recognized the self-servitude with which the former commissioners are engaged. It states “The moves, which may not be welcome at the White House or among Congressional leaders, represent an unusual effort by members of a high-profile federal commission to retain their political viability and to lobby for their recommendations long after their official investigation came to an end.”

The objectives of the 9/11 Public Discourse Project seem to be threefold: 1) to “ask a lot of questions;” 2) to see if Congress and the White House does what the 9/11 Commission said; and 3) to issue another report. I would do the same thing seeing that report number one was a national best seller – gotta keep the fans happy.

Another goal of the public discourse project is to encourage the Administration to “demonstrate their commitment to preventing new terrorist attacks.” Astonishing. Who can question our resolve? Have the former commissioners not noticed the wholesale removal of belts and shoes when boarding a plane? Or have they not noticed the commitment of troops to Afghanistan and Iraq? Yes, they are fighting a war against terror!

As a firm supporter of the First Amendment, if you have something to say, I will defend your right to say it. What I object to is this effort to mask individual and political agendas as public agendas. Why else would these now private citizens assume a posture of public service? They set themselves up as arbiters of the truth knowing full well that a complicit media will report their opinions as facts and their accusations as substantive.

These people are unelected and unaccountable – like most of the media.

I am not worried, however, by the desire for grandstanders to keep talking about terrorism and the exposure to potential threats that comes with living in a free land. What’s more, the American public understands that President Bush is taking the fight to the terrorists. His record is clear and the facts are indisputable. No other president has done more to secure democracy against tyranny and protect our homeland than President Bush.

Moreover, the real obstacle to the 9/11 Public Discourse Project will be the Congress. Just like the old inside-the-beltway adage “Never come between a candidate and a TV camera,” Members of Congress are jealous of their oversight authority.

Maybe that is the solution. Instead of assuming pot-shot authority, and play-act at relevance, the former commissioners should run for Congress and receive their authority by the people. It provides accountability and its Constitutional. What a concept!

Why Democrats Are Lying About Abortion Rates

2005-05-27T13:32:00.000-04:00

By now the news that Howard Dean's mouth got ahead of the facts regarding abortion has been heard around the blogosphere. If you haven't heard the news, check it out at wizbang. Factcheck has all the details.

My question is: Why lie that abortion rates are increasing if Democrats want abortions to be “safe, legal, and rare?” They don't bring up abortion in terms of rates and the act. Instead, they bring up abortion in the context of women, empowerment, and privacy. Because Democrats do not want to be associated with abortion, they couch their support of the issue as “rights talk” instead of “life talk.”

It is totally reasonable to assume that liberals talk to the public one way and to their base another way - particularly about an issue as contentious as abortion. The fact that the original claim was made by Fuller Theological Seminary's Professor of Ethics Glen Stassen and published in the social-justice minded Sojourners may suggest that Democrats are trying to shore up support among more liberal but still faith-based voters.

Some of these are the very “moral-issues” voters that broke for George W. Bush in the 2004 election on issues like life. To demonstrate that Bush is long on talk but short on results in issues like abortion, might be enough for these voters who would also strongly weigh other criticisms like those against education funding, homelessness, and the environment.

So to strategically decide to ratchet up rhetoric on abortion makes some sense. But I think this is part of a larger, grander plan as well.

One of the Bush administration's policies the left and abortion advocates love to hate is community-based abstinence education. Conservatives have long promoted abstinence education as a “supply-side” solution to abortion. It also gets liberals where they live; in the schools.

School-based contraceptive, HIV-AIDS, and condom education ran unabated for twenty years until conservative activists with values and chastity on their minds began running out the 'condom-pushers' school district by district. In their place, they implemented abstinence education programs and have shown that kids listen to the message and respond by choosing to wait.

In fact, community-based abstinence education programs are federally funded and are part of the welfare reform initiatives that reward states for lowering teen birth rates without increasing abortions. Therefore, showing that abortions are increasing is a double hit for the left. They can show that abstinence education is not working and that welfare reform is failing as well.

The trouble is, just like the supposed rise in abortion rates, abstinence education is burgeoning. Community and school demand regularly outstrip funding and program capacity.

This hasn't stopped liberal abortion advocacy groups from putting their money and their efforts on the state and local level. They are currently engaged in a coordinated campaign to turn abstinence education back into condom, homosexuality, and contraceptive education. Because of these organization's defeats in rolling back federal policy regarding life and abstinence education, they have focused on school districts and friendly state legislatures.

Nothing would make liberals like Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi happier that to point to states and communities that refuse Bush Adminstration funding for community-based abstinence and welfare programs as failures. Lying about abortion rates is just a small detail - but such details have sunk more formidable Democratic campaigns.

Penalized for Being Stupid

2005-05-25T13:33:00.000-04:00

The Washington Post reports that Jennifer Wilbanks has been indicted for making a false police report and lying about being kidnapped. She could spend six years in prison for high-tailing it to New Mexico to avoid her wedding ceremony and then saying she had been abducted to cover up her embarrassing actions.

This case is amusing for the lengths a person would go to avoid being honest. Miss Wilbanks made up a story fit for a six year old unwilling to face the music over her wrong-doing.

There is an old adage that says there is no law against being stupid. It seems, however, that the Gwinnett County DA may have found a loophole and is planning to prosecute.

While I think it is appropriate for the County to recoup its losses for being led on a wild-goose chase, I would be much more satisfied if the same media attention and public outcry were focused on real crimes. Crimes like, say, child abuse and molestation, domestic abuse, distribution of illegal substances, drunk driving, and sexual assault and rape.

The story of the Runaway Bride demonstrates that people have a lot to say about what they feel is appropriate community behavior - particularly when it involved emergency services. But it also shows that law enforcement - in this case the Gwinnett prosecutors - will act in response to public pressure.

I don't have much tolerance for stupid. But I think a distinction can be made between acts of stupidity and acts that threaten the life and well-being of our families and communities.

Crossing That Bright Line

2005-05-24T13:33:00.000-04:00

Today the House of Representatives went where America has never gone before. In its vote on embryonic stem cell research, the House, by a vote of 238-194, has approved federal funding for the destruction of human life. The House has taken the utilitarian approach of sacrificing the smallest and most vulnerable in order to advance science. The science it hopes to advance is the science of experimenting on people and using their parts to potentially cure disease.

Some of the arguments that were made in support of embryonic stem cell research are mystifying. For example, they said that we must kill eight-cell human beings because we can't stand by and allow people to suffer with diabetes, spinal cord injuries, or Parkinson's disease.

I don't see anyone standing around satisfied that people's lives are cut short by accident, disease, or misuse.

Members of Congress argued that because millions of people will develop Alzheimer's, we should use embryos to see if there is a cure. They support the killing of human embryos that may be discarded and flushed down the toilet, so we should at least conduct research on them and benefit from that effort. As I recall, that same argument was made in Nazi Germany.

Still another argument to destroy nascent human life went this way: because people hope in potential cures - we must not deny their object of hope. There is no evidence that embryonic stem cell research will yield one human treatment or cure. Yet, because some have been led to believe in a false hope, we should destroy absolute life.

Death and the avoidance of death were big themes in this debate. Statements were mostly centered on how awful death is in one's teen or young adult years or how death by disease should be defeated.

I wonder what they will do when they realize that death will continue no matter what research produces or that this line of thinking discriminates against those close to death or are somehow incapacitated but fully alive?

Fortunately, our system of government is slow, cumbersome and perilous. This decision by the House still has to survive the Senate and the President has already explicitly stated his plans to veto this decision.

For the soul and conscience of our country, the President will keep America from crossing the bright line of creating life only to destroy it.

Sex Ed as Religion

2005-05-11T13:52:00.000-04:00

Montgomery County, Maryland has been taken down a peg or two after a federal judge rebuked it for violating the free speech rights of students and citizens in schools. The Court also found that the County violated the Establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution regarding religion.

At issue is the new and improved sex-ed curriculum approved by Jerry Weast, the Montgomery County Superintendent of Education. In the new material, Montgomery County promotes one-sided information, denigrates Baptists and Fundamentalists, and irreparably harms the good people of the County.

Think I’m being too extreme? These are the conclusions of U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams in his decision immediately stopping the continuation of the program.

The subject and location of this action are phenomenal.

First, liberals have explicitly injected religion into the issue of sex-ed. It is astonishing that the same folks who hoot and holler about abstinence education being too moral or values laden are hoisted on their own petard. Montgomery County doesn’t just venture into religious indoctrination; it “bounds”, in the words of Judge Williams.

The Court rules against the County because it takes sides pitting one theology against another, by promoting certain religious denominations against another, and by excluding viewpoints not those of the County’s. Montgomery County – in its eminent ability for godly discernment – has determined that religions “tolerant” of homosexuality are to be preferred over those with more orthodox doctrines. It has determined to instruct children that Unitarians, Quakers, and the Metropolitan Church are not homophobic like Baptist churches. And, it instructs teachers and students that no other views are to be considered on the matter.

Breathtaking.

Now consider Montgomery County, Maryland. This county has a history of liberal activism. It was one of the first to affirm homosexuality in its libraries, county benefits, and hiring policies. Its zip codes are among the top in the nation in giving to the Democratic Party.

The fact that Montgomery County undertook an extensive revision process of its sex-ed curriculum convening a 27-member citizens advisory committee that have been working more than three years to result in patently un-constitutional material is astounding. Its hubris is demonstrated by the fact the many of the individuals bringing suit against the County were part of the citizens advisory committee. Surely these people were not silent regarding the objectionable material.

Montgomery County is proud of its early adoption of progressive policies. What is on display in Montgomery County will certainly trickle to other parts of the country with some tweaks and improvements here and there. What will remain the same, however, is the ideology that tolerance toward homosexuality is the standard by which religious doctrine shall be judged. And no intolerance against that viewpoint will be allowed to stand.

A Child's Enterprise

2005-05-10T12:01:00.000-04:00

Of the top stories in last night’s evening news, two out of three were about murder and sexual exploitation of children. The top news is of the two second grade girls in Illinois that were murdered in the park near their homes.

It really makes me angry that our society accommodates child murderers and sexual predators. We accommodate them by not sentencing them to the most severe of penalties and allowing them to move right into our neighborhoods. Check out the number of sexual offenders that live in your zip code. Mine has seven.

What this means is that kids no longer have the freedom to wander in fields, ride bikes on trails, and take long hikes into the woods all by themselves. Parents must keep tabs on their kids whereabouts at all times, lest their little ones become the subject of an abduction, manhunt and gruesome discovery.

As a kid, when the weather was good, I was expected to be out of the house until called in for dinner. My boy-hood mission was to explore every inch of territory for places to build forts, for trees to climb, and for fields with spiders and praying mantises to catch.

During the school year, I dropped off my book bag and grabbed a football, bike, or baseball mitt. In the summer, our games would pause for dinner then resume until the last bit of light was gone.

Often, we would head into the woods to follow a trail that would lead to a creek. The creek was a place to skip stones, throw rocks at bottles, play army, swim, and search for crayfish, toads, and bugs. It was were you learned new swear words, played with matches, and – maybe – kissed a girl.

The only threats were from mosquitoes, poison ivy, a stray bb, and bullies who tried to invade your turf. Sometimes big kids would be making out or smoking cigarettes.

The woods are getting smaller now and more soccer fields and bike paths are being built as a part of housing developments. But often these amenities are abandoned except for organized activities. Today, kids are protected through endless after school activities, video games, and DVDs. In my neighborhood, kids still play in the cul-de-sac, but never too far from Mom’s watchful eye.

Of the seven sexual offenders who live in my zip code, one has failed to re-register and may be wanted. The other six all are required to re-register in the next few months. Somehow, I am extremely unconfident in their compliance.

Our system of justice seems bent on helping criminals learn to be good citizens instead of punishing lawbreakers in a way that sends an unquestionable signal that crime will not be tolerated. What has been lost is more than the safety of our communities. What has been lost is the ability of children to feel secure in their own enterprise and space.

Christopher Hitchens: Thought Provoking or Just Provoking

2005-05-05T11:43:00.000-04:00

In todays Wall Street Journal, Christopher Hitchens rails against religious conservatives taking over the Republican party. In his argument he states that Republican leaders who identify with faith in general and the Ten Commandments in particular are making a career-ending mistake.

Hitchens goes on to convey his dismay at how anyone with a brain can sustain an authentic faith, particularly faith in Jesus. And, he is further bewildered that any thinking political leader would promote faith as a means to guide good government and policy making.

Hitchens answers his own questions in his own article. Hitchens says, basically, when it comes to faith I dont understand.

This is demonstrably true as Hitchens fails to understand that people of faith are diverse and nuanced. By painting Christians with a broad brush both as un-intellectual and hypocritical, Hitchens goes beyond thoughtful consideration to condescension mud slinging.

Here are some of Hitchens errors that leapt out at me:

1) Quoting Barry Goldwater as an argument against faith in the public square. One of the reasons that Reagan went on to win the nomination and the Presidency and Goldwater was routed was Reagans embrace of faith. Reagan was not solely a moral candidate but Goldwaters hostility toward faith forced the religious to simply reject him.

2) Poor exegesis of scripture. I have never heard of Luke 18:20-22 as being considered the greatest commandment. In fact, Jesus, when asked Of all the commandments, which is the most important? replied The most important one is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these. Mark 12:29-31

3) Assuming the Moral Majority or the Religious Right represents the beliefs and political views of all Christians. What hubris to describe Americas millions of faithful as shallow, demagogic sectarians! To see one example of how some oppose the rhetoric and tactics of the Religious Right, see one of my earlier posts.

4) Offering the false choice between religious extremism and secularism. American troops, many of them religious believers, are not fighting in Iraq and around the world against Islam but against terrorism. Hitchens is blind to the fact that religious pluralism has flourished in America providing enormous social good without inciting terrorism. Pairing terrorism and faith is a denial of reality. American troops fight for freedom, not the establishment of secularism or faith.

These errors notwithstanding, Hitchens portrays himself as just as simple minded as the bigots he impugns. Where are the nuances and shades of grey I have come to expect from Hitchens prose? Describing politicians choices as only enlightened secularist or idiot believer does nothing but reflect badly on Hitchens and his ability to perceive the fiber and soul of America.

Hitchens is making the same mistake that Barry Goldwater made: railing against that which they do not understand. Fortunately, for conservatives and people of faith, the model of Reagan and his vision of a City Upon A Hill continues to provide valuable guidance for integrating faith into government and politics.

The Cures are Coming

2005-05-02T08:52:00.000-04:00

Coming to a TV near you are political ads designed to promote the notion that cures to diseases like diabetes, spinal cord injuries, and Parkinson's are just around the corner. The only thing standing in the way of this wonderful new world is religious extremists and scientific stick-in-the-muds.

The push is coming from interests and corporations with lots of money. They want to provide us with a better way to deal with disease. So, from what I understand, they have enlisted the likes of Harry and Louise to pressure Congress to overturn the President's policy of not funding or allowing certain research on human embryos.

So get ready for ads asking you to call Congress and "tell your Congressman that cures shouldn't be stopped by religous ideology."

Oh sure. According to the biotech companies promoting ESC, the objections to embryonic stem cell research are all driven by religious neanderthals that don't understand that only Dr. Suess believes that "A person's a person, no matter how small." Only in Washington, DC and on TV does selective truth telling not count as lying.

Here is the un-selective truth:
The cures are coming and, in fact, are already here - but they have little to do with embryonic stem cells and everything to do with adult stem cells. The President's Council on Bioethics reports that adult stem cells have outbenefited embryonic stem cells in their ability to treat human patients 58 to none. Embryonic stem cell research has not helped one sick person.

So why the big push? Why aren't the big biotech companies pouring their dollars into adult stem cell research instead of embryonic stem cell research? Bait and Switch.

They know that they can't possibly win approval to start cloning people in the form of embryos. (They already have the technology.) And they also know that ESC is not going to pan out in the kind of research that will provide real treatments on the cellular level. The proponents of ESC are looking for something bigger. Replacement body parts that are your specifications from the genetic factory.

This is called therapeutic cloning and is so close to embryonic stem cell research that most folks can't distinguish the two. So start with a political win on research on embryos "left-over" from your friend's invitro fertilization. Hey, they are just going to get thown out anyway and they could cure your grandmother's dementia.

But there is the rub. These slick TV ads will feature words like "could," "potentially," "promising," and "immenently." Gosh, I'm "almost" convinced. Particularly when I understand that more of the ESC/therapeutic cloning cash is going towards changing our minds about these "brave new cures" than the actual research itself!

The ads will most likely appeal to your best sense of high-mindedness and progress. They will feature persuasive personalities like Governor Arnold Swartzenegger and First Lady Nancy Reagan. Who could argue with them?

Nobody. Because advocates for adult stem cell research and bans on human cloning can't afford a nation-wide TV campaign. Only the big biotechs and venture capitalists can plunk down this kind of coin for their own political advantage. They only spend $20 million to get the California taxpayers to cough-up $3 billion to subsidize their "future" success.

This kind of one-sided debate should make you worried.

Rejoice! The Return of Woody Woodpecker!

2005-04-28T11:17:00.000-04:00

Amid the hushed and sophisticated tones of National Public Radio, a rapturous celebration is being promoted. For the first time ever a species thought to be extinct has been sighted – the ivory-billed woodpecker.

Truly a religious event for the enviro-faithful, the fact that fourteen people have confirmed “solid sightings” explain the sublime joy emanating from your favorite tree-hugger. The white smoke has come forth from the swamps of Central Arkansas. “This bird is here!”

The NPR story reports with stifled glee the fact that the chosen few were able to keep such a secret under wraps for more than a year. They needed time to confirm - and to take more land. (Everyone knows the solution to any environmental problem is found in the power of eminent domain.)

But not until the modern day high-priests of environmentalism - experts associated with the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology in New York and The Nature Conservancy – was the silence able to be broken.

Undoubtedly, the media will spin this story to suggest that we need to do more to protect (read have the federal government buy) fragile environments (read any place that holds standing water). It will also suggest that the House of Representatives decision to explore the Artic National Wildlife Reserve for oil should be turned back by the Senate in the light of this dramatic discovery.

What the media won’t report is that scientists are often wrong. They were wrong about the ivory billed woodpecker being extinct – unless this is truly an act of God’s grace, they are wrong about oil exploration damaging wildlife in ANWR, and they are wrong about many things.

Gosh, if scientists can be wrong about a bird in Arkansas, could they be wrong about global warming, or cures coming from embryonic stem cells? As a kid, I was told that by 2000 we would all be riding around in flying cars.

I think this is one of those situations where people get all up in arms over something that was never true in the first place. It’s kind of like thinking you left the stove on at home and worrying to death during your vacation that you are going to return to a black burned-out shell. When you do return, you feel a little foolish wasting all of that energy over nothing.

I’m happy to hear that the woodpecker has been sighted. I just hope that those scientists don’t start making more predictions on how our policies should be changed this way or that way because of their inability to verify the existence of a bird.

The Problem with Superheros

2005-04-25T11:53:00.000-04:00

Recently I have been riding my bike to work. As the weather gets warmer, and the price of gas continues to increase, I am pushing the pedals to keep more of my hard-earned dollars in my pocket.

I love bike riding. I used to semi-race. That means I used to train with racers and do well...more than ten years ago.

I also love my bike. It's a 1989 LeMonde Ventoux mostly Campagnolo. It's so old that when my rear hub broke, I had to scrounge and improvise with a bike mechanic to prevent having to replace the entire drive train so it could be cassette compatible. So I ended up w/ a Shimano freewheell on an older Campy Super Record high flange rear hub...Oh it's sweet.

OK, sorry to bore you with bike technicalities. Here is the deal with superheros: Changing into lycra and getting ready to respond to emergencies takes a lot longer than comic book writers would have you believe.

I change out of my work clothes into my lycra bike stuff and get my bike ready to roll in about ten minutes. My shorts, shirt, shoes, gloves, helmet, and sunglasses take about 8 minutes because I hang-up my work clothes and try to keep things neat. I need to get water for my water bottle and make sure the tires are properly inflated and then I am ready to go.

This seems to be a fair comparison to what superheros need to go through. Unitard, cape, cowl, gloves, boots, and utility belt. Not to mention making sure all your gadgets work. Even Spidey needs to make sure he has enough web-fluid.

Granted that Superman can change in the blink of an eye because of his super speed. OK, the Justice League seems to just hang out in the Hall of Justice in their costumes. But Batman, Spiderman, even the X-men have to change at normal speed.

And how about logistics. I have to plan a couple of days in advance to make sure I have my underwear, socks, belt, shirt and tie all together for the days I do cycle in. I have had entire days at the office with one or more of these critical components missing. Not good. If I had my own bicycle Alfred to be my personal valet...well, I wouldn't be spending my time at the office.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not down on all the great Superheros. I understand that my only superpower is the ability to get home with my own carbohydrate driven engine and that it would be better to have Silver Surfer's board. I just challenge you to change into spandex in the blink of an eye to meet the great challenges of the day. Easier than it looks.

Selling the Drama

2005-04-13T09:18:00.000-04:00

I can't quite figure out what they think is drama on the Fox Network. I point out House and 24 as the specific objects of my bewilderment. I have only seen a few full episodes of 24 and have never seen an episode of House - so go ahead and condemn me for not knowing what I am talking about by not taking the time to review the object of my scorn. But that is part of the thing that perplexes me - who wants to watch people screaming at each other about tense situations? I get enough of that between my teenage kids.

Every commercial for 24 has poor Keifer Sutherland screaming at someone to comply with him for the sake of national security. Don't you think the bad guys in 24 know that Keifer's only real weapon is his pistol and his at-wits-end verbal commands? Oh, and don't forget the cell phones.

And every commercial for House has some person convulsing in a hospital bed. How many diseases out there cause such violent convulsions? I would think the staff at the hospital featured on House would be pretty competant at this point fto efficiently deal with these flailing sick people. Or, at least make sure that this one sallow looking miracle worker doctor is followed around by a crash team.

I guess my point is that all of this screaming and scrambling and tension is just so unattractive to me. I negatively motivates me to tune in. Maybe its like a car wreck where you can't look away from the carnage.

But I think something bigger is at work here and that is the shock of repulsion. TV promoters are making the repulsive and unattractive attractive.

In last week's issue of People magazine is an ad for A&E's new show Knievel's Wild Ride. No, this is not a show about amusement parks attractions but Robbie Knievel's adventures in search of crazy motorcycle stunts.

The ad is particularly noteworthy. It features Robbie Knievel in a skeleton design leather motorcycle jacket and half a dozen surly looking male members of what I assume is his team of stunt assistants. They all are sporting black leather with crossed arms, tattooed shoulders and not a smile among them - OK, one guy has kind of a smirk.

Knievel has a female member of his team who is his daughter, Krysten. She looks equally disaffected and sort of threatening. I'm sure she is pretty, if she would smile, but she just seemed depressed and oppressed by all the cross-armed black leather wearers. The promo says that Krysten doesn't want any part of doing motorcycle jumps and worries about her dad.

The expression on Robby Knievel's face is one of resignation. He doesn't seem like he likes what he is doing but that he has gained a certain level of expertise in doing stunts and breaking bones and, therefore, here is where he establishes his kingdom.

This all just seems so serious. No one smiles, no one is optomistic. No positive vision. It all seems to me so unentertaining. Exactly - unentertaining.

Maybe I just don't get it. Like watching NASCAR, playing Dungeons and Dragons or listening to scream-o bands. So for me, as for the drama - I'm not buying.

Open My Eyes, Lord!

2005-04-02T21:11:00.000-05:00

Good news! My friend and brother in Christ called to report that his son is doing much better. It seems that there was some kind of infection that may have caused some swelling on his optic nerve, causing vision problems. After a dose of meds, his one eye has returned to normal and the other is better but still blurry. My friend thanks everyone who offered prayers on behalf of his son.

"I will sing of your mercy that leads me to valleys of sorrow to rivers of joy."

Sharing Pain

2005-04-01T11:48:00.000-05:00

I have been praying for the sixteen year old son of my mentor and friend who has been suffering with leukemia. He underwent a bone marrow transplant which seemed successful but the cancer returned. Another bone marrow transplant occurred and he is now cancer free.

Except last night I received a call that my friend's son has lost the sight in one eye and may be experiencing failing vision in the other. They say it could be brain cancer, an infection that has caused swelling and is pressing on his optic nerve, or some other problem.

What do you say to someone experiencing such pain? I am not a disseminator of platitutes, nor am I particularly empathetic. I can only share his grief, his pain, and inability to understand what God is doing.

For me, the best rendering of this dark landscape is found in the lyrics of The Valley Song by Jars of Clay. They paint a real picture of crying out to God in the midst of our suffering and how our hope is in God's power .

I like this song because it is not a platitude. I like this song because it focuses on God's mercy in the midst of the crisis. The way it is performed convey its sincerity much more than just reading the lyrics.

One of my friend's favorite sayings is "The will of the Lord be done." I pray that he will be conforted in his time of pain.

The Valley Song

You have led me to the sadness
I have carried this pain
On a back bruised, nearly broken
I'm crying out to you

I will sing of Your mercy
That leads me through valleys of sorrow
To rivers of joy

When death like a gypsy
Comes to steal what I love
I will still look to the heavens
I will still seek your face

But I fear you aren't listening
Because there are no words
Just the stillness and the hunger
For a faith that assures

I will sing of Your mercy
That leads me through valleys of sorrow
To rivers of joy

Alleluia, alleluia
Alleluia, alleluia

While we wait for rescue
With our eyes tightly shut
Face to the ground using our hands
To cover the fatal cut

And though the pain is an ocean
Tossing us around, around, around
You have calmed greater waters
Higher mountains have come down

Alleluia, alleluia

Oh, Lord sing of Your mercy, Mercy Your mercy

Playing politics with the Bible

2005-03-31T15:10:00.000-05:00

In a gross display of pandering to their evangelical base, the Family Research Council stated “Colorado Supreme Court Declares Bible Irrelevant.” FRC is inferring that the State of Colorado is now a Bible Free zone and that only cretins and the ignorant would dare site the Holy text in public discourse in the Mountain State.

Unfortunately FRC got it wrong and displayed how little it knows about jurisprudence. FRC’s spin is egregious in suggesting that the Colorado Supreme Court is ushering in a new era of religious martyrdom and persecution.

The Colorado Supreme Court is exactly right in making sure that extraneous material is not considered in the deliberations of guilt or sentencing in a judicial proceeding. Anyone who has fulfilled an obligation of jury duty understands that! The bottom line is: Where the Bible verses entered into the record and part of the facts and law instructed by the judge for the jury to consider?

It is not prejudicial to direct jurors to limit their deliberations to the matters of fact and law entered into the court record. It is how judicial proceedings have been conducted for centuries. The purpose of this limitation is to be sure that jurors are not prejudiced by information or extraneous matters not part of the facts of the case or related to the application of the relevant law. A fair trial requires that all facts and information presented therein have the opportunity to be challenged and cross-examined. Anything less would be unfair.

As reported on CNN: “Jay Horowitz, a former assistant U.S. attorney and former University of Denver law professor. He said the law bars jurors from considering evidence not presented at trial.

But he noted it was unreasonable to expect them to set aside moral standards when they step into a jury room, though there must be limits. "In fact, people do bring their background and thoughts and impressions, and you can't separate from that, and shouldn't try to," he said.”

But let’s play Devil’s advocate. Perhaps certain biblical verses were allowed into the record instructing the jurors in their sentencing decision. Opposing counsel has the right to rebut, refute, and call their validity and application into question. Perhaps one counsel has a more persuasive argument than his counterpart but bad theology? Should that go unchallenged?

Nothing in a trial or the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision is biased against Christianity – even if the Ten Commandments are not on display. If the jurors were consulting the Koran or the Rosetta Stone or Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance as an extraneous source, they would be similarly reprimanded and the sentence would be thrown out as well.

It seems totally inappropriate to suggest that the Colorado Supreme Court is somehow anti-Bible or anti-Christian based on this decision. FRC should do a better job of vetting their issues.

By relying on sloppy research, the Family Research Council undermines its claim as an institution of research. It also maintains a poor stereotype of Christians as misinformed and unsophisticated.

Terri Schiavo Dies

2005-03-31T11:03:00.000-05:00

"Law without mercy can be cruel and cold."
The Reverend Jesse Jackson

Andrew Sullivan: Religious Bigot

2005-03-28T17:32:00.000-05:00

Andrew Sullivan, in his Quote of the Day for Friday, raises the boogieman of the “religious right” by misconstruing Glenn Reynolds’ post. Sullivan says “…Glenn Reynolds, coming to terms with what the religious right is doing to conservative principles. The important point is that religious zealotry cannot be incorporated into conservatism. It is the nemesis of conservatism. And it has to be purged in order for conservatism to be revived.”

The mistake that Sullivan makes is common. He equates any action that deals with the respect of life as coming from “religious zealotry.” Sure lots of people who take their faith seriously care about life – but they are not the entire universe. In fact, disability rights groups, people interested in end of life jurisprudence, and plain old Constitutional observers care about the outcome of the Schaivo matter. Does Sullivan paint them as part of the “religious right?”

Sullivan’s bias is in full display when he reads into Reynolds’ post any religious context. No one on the post says anything even remotely approaching a religious or faith-based motivation for Congress’ involvement in the Schaivo matter.

His claim that “religious zealotry” as intolerable for conservatism and that it must be “purged” sounds more like hate-speech than freedom. People motivated by principle, even if it is a little of the
“high-octane” variety is what makes conservatism great. In fact, some would say that religious zealotry is what founded this country and brought about the creation of the most freedom-promoting documents the world has ever seen – the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Instead of considering the merits of Reynolds’ argument, Sullivan mimics the Democrats who censor their critics and enforce faith and values litmus tests. Why does he do this? Is it because Sullivan is religiously intolerant?

Conservatism hardly needs revival, as the last election attests. That’s because conservatism is tolerant in the real sense of the word. Tolerance is not the unilateral embrace of that which agrees with your political worldview. Instead it’s allowing the existence of diverse thought even though one disagrees or rejects that thought.

Maybe Sullivan can refrain from exhibiting his religious bigotry. I doubt that will be the case unless those motivated by faith somehow agree with him on gay marriage. In the meantime, infusing religious intolerance into a discussion of whether Congress’ remedy in the Schiavo matter followed conservative principles is like a religious zealot finding the “gay agenda” behind every issue.

To the Death

2005-03-28T07:35:00.000-05:00

This Easter weekend our church showed a short video clip of Barabbas about the crucifixion of Christ. The scene of the crucifixion had some differences from The Passion that I thought were notable. The Jesus in Barabbas was less determined than in The Passion and how they hoisted the cross was also different.

How the Roman guards were depicted in Barabbas was the element I thought was particularly interesting. It seemed to me that the Roman guards in Barabbas were really aggressive towards the crowd. They shoved people who were rushing to either save or jeer at Jesus with the staff of their spears and pretty much threw people around. It was a pretty violent scene.

When Jesus is hoisted up on the cross, the guards clear a perimeter and keep the crowds away at spear point. One guard at the foot of the cross takes a particularly aggressive stance setting his feet, lowering his spear and menacing toward the crowd to keep them from rushing the cross.

This one guard was saying in his posture "I will fight to make sure this man, Jesus, is crucified to death."

As I watched this scene, I thought of the police officers dispatched to guard Terri Schiavo against those who would like to save her. I thnk of those police as the Roman guards and Judge George Gree as Herod, the insane authority governing this event.

In fact, an aborted conflict between the forces to make sure Terri Schiavo continued starving to death and those attempting to save here is reported here by Knight Ridder.

We have witnessed the fight to legally kill Terri and now police forces are using their power to insure it. For those who believe that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, that our system of laws and government was not meant to end the life of the innocent, and who are committed to preserving life, the spear is now pointed at us.

Celebrating Death

2005-03-24T08:43:00.000-05:00

It now seems clear that Terri Schiavo’s family’s desire to save her from starvation and dehydration will not meet with success. Unless something extraordinary occurs, Terri will be dead in a matter of days. It’s incredible that Terri has held on this long.

As Terri’s estranged husband and his attorney have emphatically repeated, the will of Terri Schiavo is to be starved to death instead of living as she does now. And according to the medical experts with which the court sided, and the pundits applaud, Terri feels no pain and is unaware of what is going on. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with just letting her body ‘turn off’ naturally.

Even during floor debate over the new law that overwhelmingly passed Congress, the pro-death-to-Terri advocates kept saying “this is what Terri wanted” and “how dare we inject politics into such a personal matter.” The ethos being promoted here is self-rule over all.

If this is truly the case then when Terri finally dies, I expect to see celebration and joy from husband Michael Schaivo, attorney George Felos, and Judge George Greer. I want her death to be the top story in the news with broad smiles and cheerful discussion. Mostly, I want those who have been so adamant and nasty in objecting to those of us who believe that starving Terri to death is the wrong thing to do – I want them to dance in the street, hold parties, and feel proud of themselves and the success of their ideal.

When her wishes are finally fulfilled, it will mean a victory for self-determination. There will be no loss – only gain. And, to those who support this ideology, for this they should be happy.

But, I doubt that this will be the case. This scenario is unrealistic because people do not celebrate death. They avoid death – they fear it.

Those who have deluded themselves into thinking that death is good – euthanasia – seem to me to be myopic. They have not considered the possibilities that may exist outside of their own rationalism. Their faith is limited, their hope is constrained, and their eyes are fixed only on what they can see.

Death is and always will be a loss and it will be so in the starvation and dehydration death of Terri Schiavo. As the scripture says: “Oh Death, where is your victory?”

The Big Deal About Terri Schiavo

2005-03-15T09:25:00.000-05:00

The issues surrounding Terri Schiavo and her impending starvation and dehydration are many and complex. In fact, they are a bit like a Rorschach test where people make out their own interpretations revealing deep and significant insights on their psyche.

Just look into the images of Terri Schiavo’s face. For some, Terri is brain dead and “reflexive” without much hope for rehabilitation – a vegetable. For others, Terri is active and attentive full of the promise that compassionate care can achieve. “Why,” they ask, “ are some so intent on seeing her death?”

To be sure, the legal battle centered on Terri is all about seeking her death. In siding with her husband, the court has affirmatively ordered the death of an innocent person, convicted of no crime. The civil court, where lawsuits about damages, contracts, injuries, and relationships are settled without people going to prison much less being executed – has become a forum for death warrants.

It seems amazing that an individual can, given a certain set of circumstances, ask for and receive societies permission to actively kill an innocent human being. Wesley J. Smith states “the hard truth is that patients with serious cognitive incapacities – the conscious as well as the unconscious – are now routinely dehydrated to death in all fifty states.”

The circumstances that give rise to the possibility of legally starving a person to death are the relative worth of people who suffer brain damage and the necessity to feed them and satisfy their body’s thirst through gastrointestinal tubes instead of by mouth. Smith provides background of how this has come about and concludes that the other big deal about Terri Schiavo is the matter of personhood.

The personhood issue is one with which America has had a long struggle. From race, gender, ability to now cognition, we have moved from the immutable to the conditional. The question has always been the same: “What kind of life can that type of person enjoy?” or more accurately “What value do they hold?”

Truly there must be some special value to the life of Terri Schiavo. Why else would so many resources be marshaled to end it? What does Death gain by achieving its end with Terri now?

The big deal should the death of Terri begin two days from now is that our freedoms will have been irreparably injured. The freedom to die as you wish is one thing but it is very different from the freedom of knowing that no one can legally deprive you of your life. The brave new world we enter into will be colored by the knowledge that, the minute your brain function dips below the malleable standard of some pro-death judge, your life can be taken from you.

This troubling insight reveals a dark and ominous blemish on the psyche of our nation.

I'm Not a Lawyer, But I Play One On TV

2005-03-12T11:56:00.000-05:00

This week has been one of the busiest of my career. I have been working hard on a project at work and doing a lot of education of people on the legal concept of habeas corpus, due process, and equal protection. While I have never been to law school, it seems that this area of exprtice comes easy to me. I can talk about the concepts and have a fairly firm grasp on the issues. Its pretty fun.
One of the most interesting things is having people assume I am an attorney. I think I can fool the majority of people because I use the language accurately and have a good grasp on some of the limits of the law, court procedure, etc. Often, I don't tell people I am not a lawyer unless they ask me.
So if your injured, pick up the phone...I'm here to represent YOU!

My Rant on the Religious Right

2005-03-09T22:11:00.000-05:00

OK. This has been building up for some time and now it's just got to blow. The folks who run the religous right are just awful! I have attempted to work w/ these people for a number of years. For a while I have been frustrated by the lack of professionalism, poor strategy and attitude, and just ineffectiveness. What happened today is a classic example.
One large organization put out a letter that is well intentioned but contains a significant factual error that directly contradicts what I am trying to achieve. I let them know in a tearsely worded email. The reply I got back said it all to me.
It was two paragraphs - 1) we work really hard trying to do good things. 2) You were rude in your email and have said negative things about our organization so, you should limit your engagement w/ our organization.
Excuse me but when did "We screwed up but won't say we are sorry" and "You shouldn't be rude because we have the right intentions" and "You called us on our mistake but you don't like us anyway" be appropriate responses? I don't get it.
If they knew I wasn't satisfied with their work and effectiveness, wouldn't you think they would say "Hey, how can we improve?" No. It's "You got a problem if you don't like what and how we do things."
BINGO!! - That is the attitude of the Religious Right and it makes me sick.
It is not only insular and short sighted but is a poor witness for Christ. People in my line of work bust their tails and the worst thing to do is to come in with an 'holier than thou' attitude and be a paper tiger.
There are some organizations that are very very good, but the ones that have the biggest empires got their because they are empire builders - not servants who give of their expertise and professionalism. When did this notion take hold in the Christian community that merit comes second to ideology?

It Writes Itself

2005-03-07T18:53:00.000-05:00

One of the things I would like to do w/ this blog is to collect story and movie ideas. Me and my buddy BC do this all the time and its a lot of fun. The rules for these stories is that they usually are full of cliches and typical characters and, after just a little plot/character development, they write themselves.

So here is the first one that was actually proposed by my wife and is based on news stories that sea creatures and animals had a sense that the tsunami in Indonesia was coming before it hit and moved out to sea or upland...

Scientists begin to discover that the largest of the animals - those who have no predators - are developing different markings and or behaviors to camoflauge them selves. Whales develop shadows on their bodies in the shape of schools of fish, lions begin digging burrows in the ground, gorillas start constructing crude shelters in which they "hide." It seems that they are working to shelter themselves or avoid detection...but from what? The scientists are stumped until they determine to contact the Vatican's elite group of Jesuit scholars that are used to validate or deny reported miracles. Based on this group of theologian/scientists the conclusion is reached that, indeed, the tops of the food chains are changing ... even man... because they fear ....judgement day...

Kind of a bio-science theological thriller. Add to the story or cast the characters...

I am Santini! The Great Santini!!

2005-03-06T12:32:00.000-05:00

So last night I re-watched one of my favorite movies of all time, The Great Santini, with Robert Duvall, Michael O'Keefe and Blythe Danner. The movie is about the inability of a Marine fighter pilot to demonstrate love and relationship to his family. If you have family issues - particularly military family issues - this movie has so much in it that and it really speaks to me.
What I noticed last night was that the Father, Bull Meechum, really does demonstrate love to his family, particularly his son Ben. He celebrates Ben and shows his love for Ben in some dysfunctional, but also some very tender ways. One is waking Ben at 0400 to recall his birth 18 years previous and giving him his first fighter jacket as a birthday present. Ben and his father are able to express love for one another that is recognized and accepted by each - even if those methods of accptance are peculiar and dysfuntional. (God, how long it has taken me to even recognize these behaviors as dysfunctional!)
Well, last night I received a phone call from my father - my own Great Santini. The memories of him bouncing the basket ball off of my head or calling me a little girl cause the hair on my neck to raise. Dad was calling to tell me he attended a Navy ceremony with the top guy in the Navy. Now about a year ago, my Dad was visiting where I work where a reception was occurring w/ all the top brass of the Navy. It was being held in my very building, so I joined Dad. He introduced me to the top guy who said he recognized me from somewhere. Wouldn't you know he and I attend the same church. Well, yesterday Dad said that the top guy brought me up in conversation and asked how I was doing and if he could help me in any way. Dad was very impressed that the top guy brought me up on his own and that he would offer to help me. Dad also asked if he could do anything to advance my career - he would even call Sen. John McCain. (eyes rolling smile).
I recognize that my Dad was affirming me in his own way. Praise the Lord!

My Free Day at the Bike Store

2005-03-05T13:27:00.000-05:00

As an old married guy, its not often that I get a weekend just to myself. So today, the wife flew out to Chicago and I have the weekend to myself.
The hard thing is making sure I make the most of my time. Checking out this whole blog thing has been a good use of time.
I changed the windshield wipers on the minivan and drove my son to his job. THEN...I went to the bike shop to ask about refurbishing my '89 Greg LaMond full Campy road bike - which needed a new rear hub and wheel, drivetrain...Ugh! Now, the estimiates were about $1000 to get things together. The service magician at Spokes etc. in Vienna cut that in half and I am going to be riding on Saturday!!
When I used to race, there was a lot of ego. Today at the shop, while the current crew of screaming fast racers did their winter in shop workout, I honestly told the service guy - Paul - that I don't want to race - I don't have an ego for it anymore.
Now I'm going to Best Buy w/ my daughter and buy the Garden State soundtrack.

Breaking the Addiction of Spider Solitaire

2005-03-04T20:55:00.000-05:00

Hi. Welcome to my blog. My friend Randy suggested that I start my own blog. He thinks highly of me and thought that I might have some thoughts and wisdom to share with you via the bloggosphere.

Thanks for that Randy. I'll give it a try. Why not? Its better than playing Spider Solitaire.

I like playing Spider Solitaire but the wife and kids think its a bit of an addiction. They're probably right. So why don't I use the time and energy to make contact with you.

I hope that this blog will be fun, interactive and thought provoking. I will try to make my entries to the point but full of good stuff.

To kick things off, maybe you can comment on this: Have you ever done anything that saved someone's life?

PW