Jenny's Jesus Club

Now you can add general Feedback:

Jenny's Jesus Club: Mission Statement

Jenny's Jesus Club: Quarterly Report
Archived Materials

Jenny's Jesus Show: Episode 1 Transcript

How I cured My Own "Bipolar Disorder"
USMC

The Union of Single-Member Churches

Nice People That Link to Me

Unusual Churches and Cults

Church of the Buddy Christ

Reverend Billy

The Rational Radical

Jesus IS My Red Pill

Rose Ezell Productions

This blog has been moved. Click here to access current entries

October 27, 2005
Assorted religious news:
Faith-Based Opposition
It's safe to say that few epochs in world history posed a greater moral dilemma for people of faith than the Nazi Reich from 1933 to 1945. That both the Protestant and Catholic churches in Germany chose to accommodate Adolf Hitler -- despite widespread reports and firsthand knowledge by 1934 that Jews, gypsies and other "undesirables" were being deported and killed -- will continue to be a source of shame and pain as long as human history is recorded[...]Our present political impasse is, of course, not comparable to the Nazi epoch. Nonetheless, after watching Bonhoeffer, Martin Doblmeier's 2003 documentary film, and reading some of Bonhoeffer's letters from prison, one can't help but hear the echoes of his voice in our time. Where, for example, were America's leaders of faith during the run up to the war in Iraq? Did I imagine this, or were such men of the cloth as Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and James Dobson the loudest cheerleaders for a Middle East "crusade"? Was Ann Coulter really allowed to say that Muslims should be forcibly converted to Christianity or killed?[...]Few people can make the sacrifices that Bonhoeffer made. I know I couldn't; I'm as weak as yesterday's leftover coffee. Still, I do think the least that regular Christian churchgoers can do would be to ask their spiritual leaders to reflect on the war, the lies on which it was based, and the "Christian" cloak worn by the warmongers. The killing is still being done in our name, even if the popularity of war has waned.
Churches must adapt to culture without adopting it
The United Church of Christ says that scripture should be interpreted through the lens of the Gospel. Through that lens, they say, the message always bends toward inclusion. Certainly, God wants all people to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4). But truth can only be known through repentance of sin and faith in Christ. We must submit to his Word. We cannot make his Word subservient to us, or our cultural demands, and live in obedience at the same time. The United Church of Christ has rejected clear biblical teaching with regard to human sexuality and marriage. They have dismissed Old Testament law as being entirely irrelevant. Jesus affirmed the inspiration of the Old Testament scriptures (Matt. 5:17-18). He often quoted from the Old Testament with equal authority.
Dobson talks at Care Net banquet
Ryan Dobson, the son of Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family, said the core of his message to young and old around the nation is that the hunger for absolutes in life can only be satisfied with God[...]Ryan said his work with younger people and his own life experiences show that people want “solid answers for right and wrong” at a time when there is much relativism in society. “People, including kids, want a compass, a stable foundation to stand on,” Ryan said.
Yes, people do want that, and you can tell yourself you've found it in religion, but it isn't really there. There are no absolutes, there is no final answer, really there's just arrows pointing. These people are dumbing down theology just for the sake of dumbing it down- people want absolutes so someone offers them, and anyone who creates a convincing enough illusion of absoluteness will find themselves rewarded beyond their wildest dreams.
Ok, this is just sick:
Wal-Mart Chief Says Customers Need Increase in Minimum Wage
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. chief executive H. Lee Scott Jr. called on Congress to raise the country's minimum wage from $5.15 an hour, saying the company's customers are "struggling to get by"..."It's obviously time to raise the minimum wage. I'm a big advocate of it. I'm always looking for allies. I'm mindful that eventually even the Gingrich Congress got behind the last minimum wage," said Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute. "That said, there is some pretty serious posturing going on here. . . . One can't help but think if they want people to have more money, how about paying your workers more?" Scott emphasized that he was calling for the improvement in wages for workers who are his customers and said the company could not change its own wage structure because of tough competition.

October 25, 2005
This is the stuff I was going to post yesterday plus some more:
No conflict in Catholic schools over evolution
Historically, the Catholic Church has not interpreted Scripture literally. So the church can easily integrate scientific findings that update human knowledge of the world, said Sister Marie Pappas, associate secretary for religious education for the Archdiocese of New York. "If things came into being from a single cell, God would be responsible for that single cell," she said. "The science teacher will acknowledge that the single cell came from God. And the religion teacher will acknowledge the big-bang theory, evolution, and explain that they are theories." Things are far more cut and dried for the region's small cluster of evangelical schools, which teach an account of creation that is straight out of Genesis. At the Cornerstone Christian School in New City, for instance, an evangelical elementary school, students are taught that the world was created in one week. Principal Linda D'Amato said second-graders are told that dinosaurs lived around the same time as man, citing Genesis 1:24-31: "On the sixth day, God made the animals and mankind." "We do touch on evolution because it's out there in the world," D'Amato said. "They'll come across it in their trade books, literature. We teach it is the view of the world and is a theory. There is as much proof for creation as there is for evolution"...Elliot Spiegel, headmaster of the Solomon Schechter School of Westchester, with campuses in White Plains and Hartsdale, said Hebrew translates evolution as more of a fact than a theory...Genesis does not tell a scientific creation story, he said. "It is rather the story of God's place in the universe and a work that outlines what our covenant with God is all about," Spiegel said. "That's not science. Science is in biology lab." Ed Prince, Judaic studies principal at the Reuben Gittelman Hebrew Day School in New City, said that much of the Torah is not meant to be taken literally and that it could not reflect all that man has learned since Moses.
America Debates Evolution: Why Now?
The fact that the debate has returned with such force in 2005 may reflect a time of frightening cultural change when people "look for something that is absolute and certain," said Mark Sisk, the Episcopal bishop of New York. "I believe that a fair amount of this is an attempt to corner God. And when one does that it approaches idolatry," he added. The Biblical account of creation simply means that "God is the source of everything" and nothing in that conflicts with Darwin, he said.
Evolution is more than flawed theory
Fiction: ID can help us understand how complex characters (such as the clotting of blood) arose. In fact, ID represents intellectual surrender. It says about a complex character, "We can't explain its origin, I can't imagine anyone will ever explain its origin, therefore an intelligent being must have created it." This is called "argument by incredulity," one of the weakest forms of argument. That attitude led ancient Greeks to believe the god Apollo moves the sun across the sky. Such a "let's-give-up" attitude might appeal to some contributors to the editorial page (and others) who are not scientists, but it ignores the fact that scientific inquiry does not stand still. Scientists don't throw up their hands and give up. Instead they chip away at seemingly impossible problems, often with remarkable results.
Archdiocesan agency helps gays adopt children
The social services agency of the Archdiocese of Boston has allowed 13 foster children to be adopted by same-sex couples in the past two decades, despite Vatican teachings against homosexuality. Leaders of Catholic Charities of Boston said state regulations prohibit the agency from discriminating based on sexual orientation. "If we could design the system ourselves, we would not participate in adoptions to gay couples, but we can't," the Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, the agency's president, told The Boston Globe in Saturday's editions...The 13 adoptions- a small fraction of the 720 placed by Catholic Charities in that period- took place as part of a contract with the state Department of Social Services. The children placed with gay couples are among the most difficult to place, either because they are older or have physical or emotional problems. Hehir said if they excluded gay couples, they wouldn't be able to help the hundreds of foster children that went to heterosexual couples.
AFA grad: 'Religious war' under way in U.S.
Mikey Weinstein, the Air Force Academy alumnus who sued the Air Force to halt religious proselytizing in the military, said evangelical Christians have launched a "religious war" in the United States...Weinstein filed suit after the Air Force refused to disavow a June statement by the Air Force deputy chief of chaplains Brig. Gen. Cecil R. Richardson, who said "we will not proselytize, but we reserve the right to evangelize the unchurched." Weinstein, a lawyer who lives in Albuquerque, called the statement "a brutalization of the Constitution" and its guarantees of free religious expression. "What would America do if someone reserved the right to 'Islamize the unmosqued' or 'Judaize the unsynagogued?' " Weinstein asked. "They're bullies," said Weinstein of the evangelical Christians. "They're violating the Constitution, and it's time to stand up."
Stealth, secrecy are Reed's calling cards
Ralph Reed's clients wanted to promote a relaxed U.S. trade policy toward China. So, as he has often done since leaving the Christian Coalition to become a corporate and political consultant, Reed tapped into his vast network of conservative religious activists. Soon the Alliance of Christian Ministries in China was telling Congress that free trade would open doors for missionaries in a nation that is officially atheist.The alliance, however, was a facade. Reed arranged for its formation and used its evangelical goals to serve the interests of his paying clients, a coalition of businesses including Boeing Co., which had a more secular objective: to sell the Chinese government $120 billion worth of airplanes. Such stealth defines Reed's eight years as a corporate and campaign consultant, the work that bridged his career from Christian activist to Republican candidate for lieutenant governor of Georgia. By working through grass-roots groups, some of which he formed himself, Reed repeatedly has let conservative Christian groups make the case for causes that benefit his clients while obscuring the clients' identity and shielding them from controversy. These efforts, a close examination of his consulting work shows, often capitalize on Reed's connections in the evangelical Christian community even as they contradict positions he advocated as one of the nation's most prominent spokesmen for the religious right.
Bush reversal on religion assures some, enrages others
In selling Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers to the public, and to the 100 senators who will decide whether she joins the high court, the administration of the nation’s first MBA president is offering a case study in confused marketing, and religion is at the core of the botched effort. It’s not simply a case of mixed messages, but a 180-degree flip-flop from the not-so-distant days when the administration and its supporters argued that any consideration of a judicial nominee’s religious affiliation was out of bounds ...“It is both troubling and hypocritical for the supporters of Harriet Miers to promote her strong evangelical faith to garner support among religious conservatives,” said the Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition. “You cannot have it both ways. Groups and leaders cannot say religion is off-limits during the confirmation hearings for new Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ confirmation and then promote religion during the Miers confirmation for the sole purpose of political gain.”

October 24, 2005
Two things- I had a whole list of evolution links I was going to talk about tonight preformatted on my USB mass memory device, but that device is not in my purse. That means it could theoretically be anywhere in the library and I don't want to think about that. Although, I am pretty sure it is sticking out of the front of my office computer, now that I think about it. Whew. There's stuff on there that would be hard to explain, which isn't all that smart considering it belongs to the library. The other thing I have to get off my chest also concerns the library- tonight was my time capsules workshop. The average age at this event was 11 (also the youngest- my events are for grades 6 through 12, my oldest attendee tonight was 15). We had Mason Jars and archival pens and paper and teflon tape to seal the jars and I was making an insert for the front of my jar that said "Miss Jenny's Time Capsule". I was digging around in the paper punch box and I found the T Rex punch and I said "oh, I could use this one and tolly mess with the future people by like, making them think we had dinosaurs in 2005". Suddenly all anyone wanted to do was lie. Everyone suddenly had a pet dinosaur and was 150 years old and all kinds of other bullshit. I had the best of intentions. We were going to write out postcards and mail them to ourselves and include them in our time capsules as examples of snail mail, which will likely go extinct. This degenerated into a discussion of why I bought self-adhesive stamps instead of lick-and-stick and how licked stamps would yield DNA and whether we'd mind if someone cloned us. I pulled a piece of hair out of my head and declared that anyone who dared to clone me would get more than they bargained for. My one comfort is that none of them wanted to bury their time capsules. They all decided they would keep them around and just put it in their wills that it should be thrown into their coffins with them. Seriously. I am truly warping these children.

October 23, 2005
Today we watched the movie What the Bleep Do We Know?. The most interesting thing about that movie was the ice crystals
Masaru Emoto is a Japanese research scientist who had the idea of analyzing water through its ice crystals...moto then made the leap to expose the water to different kinds of music and words, both verbal and written. And this is what astounds anyone who looks at his ice crystal photos. When he exposed the water to the words "love and gratitude," the most wonderful crystals developed; when he exposed water to "you fool," no crystals would form — consistently!
Of course there are reams of material debunking this, but it was striking. Besides that I finished some paintings. I painted two elephant portaits to flank the window in our bedroom. The visual reference was this picture of a figurine (click images to enlarge):

I had to use that picture of a figurine instead of a picture of a real elephant to get that pose. It was important that the trunks be raised due to our feng shui. And here are two views of the paintings:

And here are two views of my art room:

Now I am going to bed.

October 21, 2005
Book about gay teen under fire in Kalamazoo
Protestors are denouncing a book whose main character is a teenage boy. Tonight, the author will be part of a discussion with teens in a downtown library in Kalamazoo...The group “Students for America” at Western Michigan University protests the event, saying it is promoting the “homosexual agenda.” They take issue with part of the book in which the character talks about knowing he was gay since kindergarten.
What I want to know is why the protestors have a problem with a character saying he had known he was gay since kindergarten. I am guessing this is not supposed to be possible since it is supposed to be a choice and not something you're born with? I don't know anyone who has known they were gay since kindergarten, but I know three people who claim to have known since first grade. I wonder if changing kindergarten to first grade would shut these people up!
The only debate on Intelligent Design that is worthy of its subject
Moderator: We're here today to debate the hot new topic, evolution versus Intelligent Des---
(Scientist pulls out baseball bat.)
Moderator: Hey, what are you doing?
(Scientist breaks Intelligent Design advocate's kneecap.)
Intelligent Design advocate: YEAAARRRRGGGHHHH! YOU BROKE MY KNEECAP!
Scientist: Perhaps it only appears that I broke your kneecap. Certainly, all the evidence points to the hypothesis I broke your kneecap. For example, your kneecap is broken; it appears to be a fresh wound; and I am holding a baseball bat, which is spattered with your blood. However, a mere preponderance of evidence doesn't mean anything. Perhaps your kneecap was designed that way.
Scientist (turning to audience): And so we see, ladies and gentlemen, when push comes to shove, advocates of Intelligent Design do not actually believe any of the arguments that they profess to believe. When it comes to matters that hit home, they prefer evidence, the scientific method, testable hypotheses, and naturalistic explanations. In fact, they strongly privilege naturalistic explanations over supernatural hocus-pocus or metaphysical wankery. It is only within the reality-distortion field of their ideological crusade that they give credence to the flimsy, ridiculous arguments which we so commonly see on display
Ok, that is way too mean to be on the Jesus site but they make a good point- most of these ID people would want the best science money could by if they had cancer or something, but when that same science rattles their religious cage they discredit it. Irresponsible.
Writer's Hypocrisy Angers Conservative
It is always interesting when those of you on the left are "offended" by a Christian or conservative viewpoint. You dismiss their opinion or attempt to stop them from expressing it. Those of you who claim to be the most open and accepting of alternate lifestyles, opinions and cultures are the most closed-minded and dismissive of a right-wing Christian, conservative opinion. Such hypocrisy.
Well, the problem is that you insist on casting matters of fact as matters of opinion. When you pretend a question is still open for debate when it isn't, and you make a statement that does not reflect the scientifically established facts nd get ridiculed for it- that's not intolerance of your opinion, that is intolerance of your ignorance.

October 20, 2005
I was going to write something along the lines of "Fix selfishness and greed and the rest will take care of itself". That's my whole problem with these litmus-test Christians- they focus on symptoms and ignore the disease, and the disease is selfishness and greed. I was going to write about that. But then it occured to me that a question I would have for Jesus is why He didn't make ignorance a sin. That sparked a momentary existential crisis. I disagree with Jesus. Ignorance is right up there with money in the "root of all evil" category. In fact- that's what Diogenes Laertius said, way before Jesus. I couldn't handle the idea that I might disagree with Jesus, so I thought, "maybe that's just how we know the Bible's been sanitized". The Church would have suffered greatly if ignorance was a sin. Maybe Jesus did say it but it was in one of those gospels that got rejected. But for most people the Bible just has to be trustworthy. If it's not, then there is no final answer. This is why I think aetheists still get into heaven. God sympathizes. He sees how accepting the fact that there is no final answer could lead the fragile human mind to assume that there is no final authority, either. That's the logical conclusion to that kind of argument. And to still care about being a good person, without the promise of any eternal reward requires a much stronger character. But I digress. I turns out Jesus did say something:
"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

October 19, 2005
I am in kind of a dark mood today, but not dark in a down way- just in that I am going to Nine Inch Nails tonight and it's almost Hallowwen and I was immersed in sad seediness most of the day at Sharpstown area thrift and dollar stores.
World is a safer place despite people's fears
Widespread fears about a world in a perpetual state of war are unfounded, a study says today. It emphasises that the number of conflicts between nations, civil wars, battle deaths, coups and genocides has been falling steeply for more than a decade.
This doesn't make me feel any better because it doesn't factor in nuclear weapons. The decrease in incidents doesn't matter in light of the increase in the stakes. All it would take is one- and it looks like Israel might launch it at Iran pretty soon now, if I can believe my one hawkish friend. And then there's this:
QUIET DEPRAVITY
Ten years ago, when [Sarah] Silverman had recently moved to Los Angeles, she decided to try something conceptual in her standup routine. She took a pair of khaki pants, dabbed a tiny bit of red paint in the crotch, and wore them to a gig at a club called Largo. After telling jokes for five minutes, she started roaming around the stage, admonishing herself aloud for not using it to better advantage. She did a somersault, and heard a slight, mortified intake of breath. “I just thought it would be an experiment, interesting because the audience would think it was funny and also be dying for me,” Silverman says. “Then I went back and did five more minutes of jokes, to see how it changed the room, how it was this elephant in the room.” At the end of the set, she allowed herself to notice the stain, and said, wincing, “Did you guys—you, you must think that I have my period and you’re probably dying for me. Of course you did. Why wouldn’t you? No.” She paused and said, as if to reassure, “I had anal sex for the first time tonight.”[...]Backed up by a band she calls the Silvermen, she picks up a guitar and sings “A Love Song”: “I love you more than bears love honey / I love you more than Jews love money / I love you more than Asians are good at math . . .” Later, she says, as if to put an end to it, “I don’t care if you think I’m racist. I just want you to think I’m thin.”
I love Sarah, and I feel it is appropriate to offer this tribute here because her folm is called Jesus is Magic.

October 18, 2005
I started out to do an examination of my conscience for my post today, but as I was casting about for things I've done lately that I felt discomfort remembering, the incidents that occur to me are not really things I regret, just things that were uncomfortable. Mostly having to do with my job and how to deal with my sexuality there. It's a library so there are cerain ALA rules about discrimination, but it's a department of the city so I don't know if ALA guidelines trump city policy. And getting fired isn't even the point. It's just that when it comes time to either tell someone I'm gay or tell a lie, there's a rigidity that comes into the conversation, for me or from me or whatever, where suddenly the other person feels stupid and I feel like I'm shoving my personal life in their face, even though they're the ones asking if I'm married. There's just no getting away from that are you married question, and lying makes me feel sick, and telling the truth makes me feel guilty about making them uncomfortable.

October 8, 2005
Assorted religious-interest news:
Book Review: The Story of God
In his book Darwin's Cathedral, David Sloan Wilson, professor of biology and anthropology at Binghamton University in New York state, says that religiosity emerged as a "useful" genetic trait because it had the effect of making social groups more unified.
Cuz here's the deal, even if Yah-weh wasn't the one true God, we'd still believe in Him, those of us who were raised up on it from day one.
Unchecked altar egos in pulpit politics
Sunday, the Wall Street Journal's John Fund reported that 13 religious conservatives, pulpitpols such as Dobson, former presidential candidate Gary Bauer of American Values and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, had a conference call with two Texas judges on Oct. 3. That was the day Miers' nomination was announced. The two judges were longtime friends of Miers....So it has come to this: a conference call to make sure all the insiders know the fix is in. This isn't about religion. If it was, there would have been Catholic bishops and Jewish and Muslim leaders in that conference call. Look past the amen rhetoric and this is about a bunch of powerful men cross-pollinating politics and religion for their advantage. Half using religion to push their politics. The other half using politics to push their religion. God help us.
The Pro-Truth Team. Exposing the Relationship of Abortion to Health, Personal Freedom, Religion, and Politics
If we Told You "The Real Truth" About Sex, Money, Fame, Power, and the Anti-abortion War, You Wouldn't Believe US. So we won't. We'll let "The Evidence" speak for itself. The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that The only way to be pro-life is to be pro-choice.

October 16, 2005
There's an article in the NYT about the Rapture craze that has a few interesting quotes in it which I will now share:
Doomsday: The Latest Word if Not the Last
Combined with fears of a global pandemic of avian flu, the calamitous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina and last year's tsunami in Asia, the predictions of the end of the world are to be expected, religious historians said. After all, Christians have been predicting the end of history since the beginning of theirs. "The doomsday scenarios are fairly cyclical," said Randall Balmer, a professor of American religious history at Barnard College. "The theology they are based on is a very linear view of history. They believe we are now ramping up to the end of time."
What occurs to me here is that history most likely is cyclical, with no end and no beginning, and it's just human beings that are linear. We need to believe history is linear to increase our sense of our own significance.
Aided by books, television and the Internet, [the dispensationalists] have shaped a fascination in evangelical culture on the end of days, said Craig C. Hill, a professor of New Testament theology at Wesley Theological Seminar in Washington and the author of "In God's Time: the Bible and the Future," about biblical prophecy. Preaching on the end times is an obvious way to draw an audience, Mr. Hill said. "It's inherently interesting," he said. "If you have a sign out for the sermon, 'Our obligation to the poor,' you won't get anybody. If you have a sign out for, 'The Internet and the Antichrist,' you'll bring them in."
That's too bad.

October15, 2005
Sorry I blew Thursday off. It was the birthday of a very special friend and we got home too late for me to post anything. Updates on War and Culture War:
Thatcher reveals her doubts over basis for Iraq war
Although Lady Thatcher remains a strong supporter of the decision to topple Saddam by invading Iraq, it is the first time she has questioned the basis for the war. Yesterday's Washington Post reported that when asked whether she would have invaded Iraq given the intelligence at the time, Lady Thatcher replied: "I was a scientist before I was a politician. And as a scientist I know you need facts, evidence and proof - and then you check, recheck and check again." She added: "The fact was that there were no facts, there was no evidence, and there was no proof. As a politician the most serious decision you can take is to commit your armed services to war from which they may not return."
Did she mention this at the time? I can't go too deeply into it right now but I will go and search news for Thatcher statements from early 2003 and...nothing. But I did find this:
Operation Iraqi freedom Pax Americana?
It is Britain, in a sense, which has helped draw out the blueprint for the US’s crusade against "enemies", both imagined and real, when former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher penned an article, originally published in The Guardian (12-2-2002) under the heading, "Islamism is the new Bolshevism"; A virulent piece of war-mongering, the article by Mrs. Thatcher not only lauded the devastation of Afghanistan in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the US, but urged similar campaigns against "other centres of Islamic terror" in Africa, South-East Asia and elsewhere, as well as "rogue states" that supported terrorism and tried to acquire "weapons of mass destruction" (WMD). Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Sudan and North Korea, which she termed" as mad as ever", were short listed by the erstwhile iron lady as posing the greatest threat to "the Western world and its values"
3,663 Killed in Iraq in Past 6 Months
Saturday's vote on Iraq's new constitution takes place nearly six months after the country's first elected government took power, and during that period at least 3,663 Iraqis have been killed in war-related violence, according to an Associated Press count...As of Thursday, the AP count also showed that at least 395 members of the U.S. military have died in the same period. Since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, at least 1,970 members of the U.S. military have died, according to a separate AP count.
Are we still trying to "win the peace"? I was going to say something about how hard it is to convince people you're trying to help them when you're still killing them like it's still war, but I realize I have lost track of the current rhetoric. Are we still pretending the war is over and this is "growing pains" or somethin? I don't even know.
Now for the culture war...how's that working out?
Study: Same-Sex Parents Raise Well-Adjusted Kids
"There are a lot of children with at least one gay or lesbian parent," says Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. She revealed the findings at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference and Exhibition. Between 1 million and 6 million children in the U.S. are being reared by committed lesbian or gay couples, she says. Children being raised by same-sex parents were either born to a heterosexual couple, adopted, or conceived through artificial insemination. "The vast consensus of all the studies shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are heterosexual in every way," she tells WebMD. "In some ways children of same-sex parents actually may have advantages over other family structures."
Now, the fundamentalists would say you shouldn't believe this study because science can be manipulated. It only just now occurred to me how ridiculous it is for religion to say that about science when religion is even easier to manipulate. But you will always find people willing to believe it because of the other illusions it supports
Doctors denounce abstinence-only education
"Even though there is great enthusiasm in some circles for abstinence-only interventions, the evidence does not support abstinence-only interventions as the best way to keep young people from unintended pregnancy" said Dr. Jonathan Klein, chairman of the academy committee that wrote the new recommendations. Teaching abstinence but not birth control makes it more likely that once teenagers initiate sexual activity they will have unsafe sex and contract sexually transmitted diseases, said Dr. S. Paige Hertweck, a pediatric obstetrician-gynecologist at the University of Louisville who provided advice for the report...Citing 2003 government data, the academy's report says more than 45 percent of high school girls and 48 percent of boys have had sexual intercourse. While teen pregnancy rates have decreased in recent years, about 900,000 U.S. teens get pregnant each year. Moreover, U.S. teen birth rates are higher than in comparable industrialized countries, which may be partly due to greater access to contraception in some countries, the report said...The academy supports making morning-after pills available without a prescription, Klein said.
Once again, science refuses validate the illusions of the right. And this is just an article I thought was really cool:
The market in fear
Throughout history human beings have had to deal with the emotion of fear. But the way we fear and what we fear changes all the time. During the past 2,000 years we mainly feared supernatural forces. In medieval times volcanic eruptions and solar eclipses were a special focus of fear since they were interpreted as symptoms of divine retribution. In Victorian times many people's fears were focused on unemployment. Today, however, we appear to fear just about everything. One reason why we fear so much is because life is dominated by competing groups of fear entrepreneurs who promote their cause, stake their claims, or sell their products through fear. Politicians, the media, businesses, environmental organisations, public health officials and advocacy groups are continually warning us about something new to fear...The reason why the politics of fear has such a powerful resonance is because of the way that personhood has been redefined in mental health terms. Increasingly, people are presented as individuals who lack the emotional resources to cope with the challenges of life...The fear market thrives in an environment where society has internalised the belief that since people are too powerless to cope with the risks they face, we are continually confronted with the problem of survival. This mood of powerlessness has encouraged a market where different fears compete with one another in order to capture the public imagination...In contemporary times, fear migrates freely from one problem to the next without there being a necessity for causal or logical connection. When the Southern Baptist leader Reverend Jerry Vines in June 2002 declared that Mohammed was a 'demon-possessed paedophile' and that Allah leads Muslim to terrorism, he was simply taking advantage of the logical leaps permitted by the free-floating character of our fear narratives..The precondition for effectively countering the politics of fear is to challenge the association of personhood with the state of vulnerability. Anxieties about uncertainty become magnified and overwhelm us when we regard ourselves as essentially vulnerable...There is always an alternative. Whether or not we are aware of the choices confronting us depends upon whether we regard ourselves as defined by our vulnerability or by our capacity to be resilient.

October 11, 2005
You might wonder why I continue to care what the televangelists are doing when everyome who reads this is quite aware that they are insane and I am preaching to the converted when I rant about them. This is why:
[Pat Robertson]...in an interview that appeared on CNN's "Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer," said that the U.S. one day might be facing the threat of nuclear weapons from Venezuela. The charge coincided with a report in Bueos Aires newspaper Clarin last weekend that Venezuela was seeking a nuclear reactor from Argentina.
He's on major media outlets, that's why. The media encourage him in a very cynical way, and this has very real effects on my day-to-day life in that his ravings are lent legitimacy by his visibility and people who don't know any better take him seriously and then literally come after people like me.

October 10, 2005
Dobson Spiritual Empire Wields Political Clout
Last year, Focus on the Family and its politically oriented affiliate, Focus on the Family Action, worked to register voters nationwide. The effort included a mailing to 1.3 million supporters of the ministry who were not registered, a get-out-the-vote mailing to 13,000 Hispanic churches, and a mailing of 5 million letters, e-mails, and postcards just before the election. In eight battleground states, 150,000 supporters received letters about senators from their states who had blocked a vote on a constitutional amendment against gay marriage. The letters said that the senators, who were seeking reelection, had ''planned to vote against the idea that every child ought to have a mom and a dad."
There it is again! How does denying marriage rights to gays change anyone's custody arrangements? Do they think that not being able to get married stops anyone from having kids? I guess I really need to look into, like, the policies of every adoption agency in the world and see if being allowed to get married moves gays to the front of the white baby line. That's still the only babies that I can se being in any "danger".
Max Blumenthal: What If Dobson Is Lying?
We need to consider the possibility that Rove revealed nothing to Dobson about Miers, and that Dobson is being disingenuous to obscure an even darker secret than anything Rove could have entrusted him with: his real motives for backing a lame horse. Here are a few theories about Dobson's motives: After pressuring Bush into declaring support for a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in 2004, Dobson endorsed him for president. That means Dobson told millions of supporters on the over 3000 radio stations that broadcast his show that Bush would deliver the goods: a ban on abortion, gay marriage, etc. During the presidential campaign, Dobson's newly-formed 501 c-4, Focus on the Family Action, used the threat of Kerry victory as fodder to raise $8.8 million dollars in 5 months...By condemning Miers, however, Dobson would be treading into nettlesome territory. Any denunciation would sound like a concession of defeat, thus betraying the confidence Dobson inspired in his donors. It would also damage his cozy relationship with the White House, which he will depend on for the next three years, no matter what happens. So Dobson has taken a cue from Rove and declared victory in the midst of defeat. In supporting Miers, Dobson has essentially donned a flight-suit and declared "Mission Accomplished"...Of course, Dobson could always divulge the secret information about Miers which Rove provided him. That would put all my wild and crazy theories to rest. Until then, we must assume that Dobson has violated the commandment against bearing false witness. And as Dobson knows, lies make Baby Jesus cry.
I don't want to sound like I would love to see Dobson fall. It's just that he needs to so badly.

October 9, 2005
Lots of odds and ends today:
Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true. The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible. “We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” they say in The Gift of Scripture.
I have been saying this for a while. The Bible is inerrant in its spiritual instruction, and since it is a spiritual book that equals inerrancy. Finding errors in scientific or historical portions of the Bible does not invalidate its inerrancy in the area that defines it.
Gay men can be Catholic priests if celibate
The Vatican will allow gay men into the priesthood if they can show they have been celibate for at least three years, leading Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reported on Friday. But it said the Vatican will ban men who "publicly manifest their homosexuality" or show an "overwhelming attraction" to homosexual culture "even if it is only intellectually."
Ok, last I heard they were going on a tour of U.S. seminaries to sniff out and eradictae homosexuality. I guess they realized how many priests they would actually be losing if they did that. One more thing- celibacy is stupid.
Synagogues ponder place of Lev. 18:22
Like many gay Jews, Yossi Barkley of Rancho Mirage stopped going to synagogue when he came out 26 years ago because, he said, he couldn't justify staying in a religion that he saw as the root of modern homophobia. The verses of Leviticus condemning homosexuality - "thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is an abomination" - are not only part of the Torah, they are read in many synagogues around the world every year as part of the services for Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar...At Temple Isaiah in Palm Springs - which has Reform, Conservative and Orthodox members - the controversial verses will be replaced for the first time this year with an alternate reading. But, said Arny Shapiro, chairman of the temple's ritual committee, "It's no big deal. "The Conservative prayer book offers an alternative reading, Leviticus 19," said Shapiro, who is gay. "I discussed (it) with the rabbi, and he has no trouble with switching. We will be doing 19." Leviticus 19 contains broader ethical commandments, such as honoring parents, not stealing and keeping the Sabbath. Rabbi Jordan S. Ofseyer of Temple Isaiah did not return calls seeking comment...The idea of an alternate reading originated with Reform Judaism, which stopped reading Leviticus 18 more than 100 years ago, said Rabbi Richard Levy, director of rabbinical studies at Hebrew Union College in Los Angeles. "That passage has not been in the Reform liturgy ever, not in the United States," he said. "(Rather than) concentrate totally on sexual issues, we would rather look at a text that looks at a whole realm of ethical commandments."
Good job, Jews.
Evolution versus Bible
That God can be "proven," either by science or the Bible, is an argument Christians should carefully avoid making -- in the classroom or in the pulpit. Why? Because even if they win they lose. Few people have ever really been convinced of the existence of God by what has been written in a book, whether it is a science book or the Bible. Arguing for God and Jesus on the basis of the Bible being scientifically or historically accurate is not a good idea because it easily is disproved, thereby casting doubt on the whole Christian enterprise. Trying to use science as proof is even worse because both arguments miss the real point. The Bible is not and never was intended to be an accurate textbook for science (the author of Genesis didn't even know the world was round) or history (the gospels are full of direct contradictions with respect to the "facts" of Jesus' life). Attempting to prove God and Jesus by trying to turn the Bible into a textbook for science or history not only misconstrues science and history, it distorts and diminishes Christianity as well. Everyone loses. At the rate we are going, it won't be long -- 50 to 100 years -- until Christianity will have lost most of its persuasion in our culture, much like Western Europe, that will be a great loss indeed! The causes for this are many and complex, however, the assumption if not insistence by many well-publicized and outspoken Christians that the Bible is true in a literal sense portrays God and Christianity in a way that is unhelpful and ultimately unbelievable for people who are well-educated and well-traveled. Reliance on the so-called "inerrancy" of the Bible really is bibliolatry -- the worshiping of the book itself -- rather than the spiritual truths the Bible alludes to through stories. Do the spiritual truths really rely on the accuracy of the stories?
I think that's what I said a few paragraphs up.

October 8, 2005
Remember what I said a few weeks ago about the Religious Right falling in love with March of the Penguins and how I had no problem with that? Actually I do have a little problem, well, no actually I guess it is their problem:
They're in love. They're gay. They're penguins... And they're not alone
Wendell and Cass, two penguins at the New York Aquarium in Coney Island, Brooklyn, live in a soap opera world of seduction and intrigue. Among the 22 male and 10 female African black-footed penguins in the aquarium's exhibit, tales of love, lust and betrayal are the norm...Wendell and Cass, however, take no part in these cunning schemes. They have been completely devoted to each other for the last eight years. In fact, neither one of them has ever been with anyone else, says their keeper, Stephanie Mitchell. But the partnership of Wendell and Cass adds drama in another way. They're both male. That is to say, they're gay penguins. This is not unusual. "There are a lot of animals that have same-sex relations, it's just that people don't know about it," Mitchell said. "I mean, Joe Schmoe on the street is not someone who's read all sorts of biology books." One particular book is helpful in this case. Bruce Bagemihl's "Biological Exuberance," published in 1999, documents homosexual behavior in more than 450 animal species. The list includes grizzly bears, gorillas, flamingos, owls and even several species of salmon.
I am guessing the movie didn't mention this.

October 5, 2005
Another opinion about Intelligent Design:
Manfred Davidmann on Evolution and 'Intelligent Design' (Creationism) Debate in U.S. Court
Genesis can now be understood as it was intended to be understood, following the publication of "The Meaning of Genesis: Creation, Evolution and the Origin of Evil," by Manfred Davidmann. There is no conflict or contradiction between what is recorded in Genesis and what we know about evolution of human beings. Genesis states clearly how Hominoids, then Homo erectus, then Homo sapiens evolved, and their corresponding changes of behaviour, feeling and thinking. For example, the allegory telling about Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden describes the evolution of Homo sapiens (human beings, ourselves) from Homo erectus in a way which could be understood at the time it was written. Genesis records that childbirth became more difficult as a result of the increased brain size (evolution of neocortex) which enabled Homo sapiens to know the difference between good and evil and to choose between them. Also stated is the necessary division of work between the male and the female, as equals in different roles, in protecting and bringing up their children, and much more. Genesis' main concern is religious, is to define good and evil and point to the root of evil.
That is what I have been trying to say. Genesis documents the history of humans' relationship to God, not the history of humans. If you let it be just what it is there is no contradiction. It's when you insist on making a spiritual history into a physical histiry that you end up with contradictions and have to make up stuff about the existence of fossils and the distance of stars. Also her is a logic review:Bad Moves, by Julian Baggini

October 3, 2005
Sometimes I think it will never end:
25,000 Churchgoers Sign On To Mass. Anti-Gay Amendment
"The marriage petition is not against gays but for children," he said. "We believe that a loving family with a mother and a father is the best environment for children to be brought up in."
Once again I ask- which children are they referring to? The children being raised by gay couples will continue to be raised by gay couples regardless of the legality of their relationship. Are they referring to hypothetical children these couples, once married, will now adopt? There's way more kids needing homes than there are couples to offer them, unless you are only counting white infants. So this is about protecting orphaned white infants from being adopted by gays, and only that. I know I have said this before, and probably recently, but I think it bears repeating- they oppose gay marriage only because of the threat it poses to orphaned white infants. Adoption is not even in the bill. Shouldn't it have to be there in the text of the bill for that argument to be relevant? Sigh. It's like we're always going to be in their gunsights, because the Bible will never change what it says and we are powerless to stop existing. We will always try to get our happiness and they will always try to stop us. I get depressed and I remember that we just started this fifty years ago. Before that we were afraid to admit our existence:
Mattachine Society
The Mattachine Society was perhaps one of the earliest and influential American gay movement groups. Formed in Los Angeles in 1950 by a leading gay activist and a former Communist party member along with 7 other gay men it rapidly began to influence gay society and politics. The Mattachine founders attempted to use their personal experience as gay men to redefine the meaning of gay people and their culture in the United States and set goals for cultural and political liberation. In 1951 the Society adopted a Statement of Missions and Purpose and this statement stands out today in the history of the gay liberation movement by identifying two important themes. (1) it called for a grassroots movement of gay people to challenge anti gay discrimination and (2) it recognized the importance of building a gay community.The society also began sponsoring discussion groups in 1951 which provided Lesbian, and gay men an ability to openly share feelings and experiences. For many, this was the first opportunity to do so and such meetings where often highly emotional affairs.
We have made great strides in fifty years- where once outing often meant death we now have a television network. Someday we'll get those orphaned white infants, I just know it.

October 2, 2005
Compare and contrast:
Reed Fought Ban On Betting
Ralph Reed, who has condemned gambling as a "cancer on the American body politic," quietly worked five years ago to kill a proposed ban on Internet wagering — on behalf of a company in the online gambling industry...Even with Abramoff and other lobbyists arguing against the measure, and Reed generating grass-roots opposition to it, a solid majority of House members voted for the measure in July 2000. But that wasn't enough. House rules required a two-thirds majority for expedited passage, so the legislation died. In addition to hiring Abramoff's firm to lobby for the measure's defeat, eLottery paid $25,000 toward a golfing trip to Scotland that Abramoff arranged for Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) — then the House majority whip, later the majority leader — several weeks before the gambling measure came up for a vote, according to the Post. Another $25,000 for the trip came from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, an Abramoff client with casino interests, the Post reported. The trip, which is under review by the House Ethics Committee, was not related to DeLay's indictment on a conspiracy charge last week. The campaign against the Internet gambling ban was one of several successful enterprises in which Abramoff and Reed worked together. The Choctaws paid for Reed's work in 1999 and 2000 to defeat a lottery and video poker legislation in Alabama. In 2001 and 2002, another Abramoff client that operates a casino, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, put up the money for Reed's efforts in Louisiana and Texas to eliminate competition from other tribes. Reed was paid about $4 million for that work.
Shower of Stoles
Project Director Martha G. Juillerat, of Minneapolis, a former Presbyterian minister, discussed the stoles at a Sept. 25 meeting of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship...Juillerat and her partner, Tammy, came out in 1993, when the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) called for a three-year period of dialogue on the issue of human sexuality. “In the blink of an eye” her years of ministry were over, she said. In 1995, she voluntarily set aside her ordination to devote herself to speaking out for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered (GLBT) people of faith who have been active in the the church. To help in her mission, Juillerat asked her GLBT friends and colleagues to send their stoles. She received 80 “almost overnight.” Today, the Shower of Stoles Project has grown to more than 1,000 stoles representing 25 denominations and seven countries. They tell the stories of GLBT people active in their faith who have suffered discrimination, even death.

October 1, 2005
Hypocrisy and miscellaneous:
CONSUMER GROUP CALLS BUSH A “LAWSUIT HYPOCRITE”
The Center for Justice & Democracy (CJ&D) today called the Bush Administration “the worst kind of hypocrite” for, on the one hand, denouncing injured consumers who file lawsuits, while at the same time filing its own case for civil damages against a manufacturer whose defective product endangered the President. It was revealed this week that the secret service purchased for use by high level officials, including President and Laura Bush, defective bullet-proof vests from a company called Second Chance Body Armor. In July, the Department of Justice filed a civil case to collect compensation against the manufacturer and the maker of the defective fiber used in the vest. The Bush Administration has made weakening the civil justice system a cornerstone of its domestic agenda. The President campaigned on the issue and has strongly supported laws limiting compensation to injured citizens and providing immunity to negligent corporations, while denouncing those who use the courts.
It makes perfect sense for billionaires to openly flaunt limits they would see others obey, but the President is supposed to...blah, blah, blah. Now here are two examples of a mini-trend worth keeping an eye on:
Anatomy of a Photograph
An analysis of a single seemingly innocuous photograph, and the pervasive media bias it reveals.
And:
War protesters linked to radical left-wing groups
The groups gathering in Washington this weekend to protest President Bush and the war in Iraq have ties to radical left-wing groups and communist organizations and have enjoyed the support of the left's biggest financial supporter, George Soros
Marginalizing the protesters is getting harder- we have to invole McCarthy now.
Rudolph's mother: Son not a 'monster'
In April, Rudolph revealed his motives for the first time, blaming his attacks on the legalization of abortion and "aberrant sexual behavior"...And while [his mother] said she shares her son's distrust of government power -- "I think the government that rules the least is the best" -- she insisted she never condoned his use of violence in an attempt to further his anti-government aims.
So, the government makes itself smaller by getting out of the people's personal lives and the anti-government guy has a problem?

By raising the fines that would be levied against offending broadcasters some fifteenfold, to a fee of about $500,000 per crudity broadcast, and by threatening to revoke the licenses of repeat polluters, the Senate seeks to return to the public square the gentler tenor of yesteryear, when seldom were heard any scurrilous words, and famous guys were not foul mouthed all day. Yet researchers who study the evolution of language and the psychology of swearing say that they have no idea what mystic model of linguistic gentility the critics might have in mind. Cursing, they say, is a human universal. Every language, dialect or patois ever studied, living or dead, spoken by millions or by a small tribe, turns out to have its share of forbidden speech...the earliest writings, which date from 5,000 years ago, include their share of off-color descriptions of the human form and its ever-colorful functions. And the written record is merely a reflection of an oral tradition that Dr. Deutscher and many other psychologists and evolutionary linguists suspect dates from the rise of the human larynx, if not before.
I just think debates over language are the most ridiculous waste of the public's attention when it's a totally made-up problem. And, finally, I have mentioned this before, but it goes into effect today:
Shhot First Law
The new Florida Shoot First law eliminates the duty to retreat and allows a person not engaged in unlawful activity who is attacked in a public place to "stand his or her ground" and use deadly force if "he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." Thus, even if the shooter could have safely avoided the threat by walking away or seeking refuge elsewhere, the Shoot First law permits him to shoot the assailant and gives him immunity from criminal prosecution and civil suit if he does so.
I cannot see any advantage in this law at all.

September 29, 2005
Ok, this illustrates the opposite side of my argument against God in the classroom from the other day:
Melatonin, Our Internal Clock
The functions of melatonin were until recently a mystery. This was due to the fact that the gland which secretes melatonin, the pineal body, was thought to be as irrelevant to human physiology as the appendix. Many scientists believed that this structure, located deep within the brain, was merely the remnant of a primitive sensory system. Recent research, however, has discovered that the pineal gland, through its secretion of melatonin, is the "master gland" that helps control circadian rhythms (biological cycles that recur over 24 hour intervals).
It seems to me like if the pineal turned out to have a purpose it is possible that the appendix might, too, and the arrogance of believing we now know all there is to know about the appendix is only possible without God in the picture. So, hmm.

September 27, 2005
Here is the deal with Intelligent Design- we go to school to learn and we can't do that with God in the room. We take science in school so we can learn about the scientific method. The scientific method, if followed to the letter, will bring you as close as it is possible for humans to get to objective truth. It is very important for humans to be able to get that close on their own. That space that is left between the closest we can get to the truth and the actual truth is where God lives. Everyone knows this. They do. Scientists know this better than any preacher. When you bring God into that you get people taking shortcuts or giving up when they should try harder. For an illustration here is a multiple choice: Why do people get colds? a) going outside in the cold with wet hair, b) viruses, or c) God makes them sick. Yes, "c" is true. But "b" is how He does it, and we didn't learn that from the Bible. We learned it from science. We knew "c" was true way before we ever knew that "b" was true, but many of us wouldn't have survived childhood if we had let "c" be the end of the discussion. It's the same with Intelligent Design. Another example would be asking why are there all of these wiggly red lines under the words I am typing. You could say that is how Microsoft Word let's you know you've made a spelling mistake, or you could say because Bill Gates wants them there. Both are true- but I knowing it was Bill's idea doesn't fix my problem. Your brain's not there just to tempt you. God didn't give it to you hoping you wouldn't use it. Introducing God into the classroom is nothing against God- it's just that we can't be trusted. God helps those who help themselves. God created this universe and gave us the means to understand at the most a small sliver of it. We can never know most of the truth, but we were given a shot at a little bit, and I think God expects us to meet Him at least halfway.

September 26, 2005
I just spent three hours going through a whole week of Linkfilter. Here are the items of interest to the Jesus Club:
Mickey Z, Cool Observer: Global warming & hurricanes
Of course, some will cite studies that downplay the human role in climate change. That leaves us, I’m afraid, with a basic question: Why not err on the side of caution? The answer, my friends, is indeed blowing in the wind. Common sense and prudence dictates we play it safe and reduce fossil fuel emissions with or without “proof” this will help. However, while we can’t be 100% sure such a move would slow global warming...we can be 1000% certain it will expedite corporate cooling.
Like I have mentioned, not doing anything about global warming is taking a colossal gamble. Average Joes and Jennies have nothing to gain and everything to lose.
New Vatican Rule Said to Bar Gays as New Priests
Although practices vary, most American seminaries in recent years have not uniformly rejected candidates with a homosexual orientation, seminary officials say. Instead, they try to ascertain case by case whether the candidate is capable of living in a chaste and celibate manner, often rejecting candidates who have been sexually active in the years before deciding to join the priesthood...On the general issue of homosexuality, official Catholic teaching, as explained in the catechism, says that while some people appear to have a predilection toward same-sex attraction, homosexual acts are impermissible and that homosexuals should remain chaste. But the church has also counseled understanding, and in 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed then by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, denounced the "unfounded and demeaning assumption" that homosexuals could not control their sexual behavior.
This is interesting because I am officially Catholic, and the reason I converted- besides the fact that my girlfriend was Catholic and I had already been going to mass for a year- was that the Catholic catechism passage mentioned above was so much more compassionate than the Southern Baptist doctrine (I converted from Southern Baptist). The passage goes on to state that homosexuals should never be persecuted or discriminated against. The feeling I got was that the church's problem wasn't with homosexuality at all, but non-procreative sex in general. So, oral sex is wrong because it's non-procreative sex, but you aren't bad just for liking oral sex, only for doing it. I guess this new rule means we're regressing.
Integrative Spirituality: Your Personal Spirituality and the Personal Spirituality Movement
Active creation of one’s personal spirituality (integrative personal spirituality as we call it,) by using all of the spiritual wisdom humanity has acquired as a rejuvenating spiritual movement has been significantly re-invigorated and broadened over the past 20 years...Once wisdom and truth has been recognized the innermost part of us does not want to let that wisdom or truth go or not make that wisdom or truth a necessary part of our lives. Today’s more authoritarian religious organizations are having little success in slowing or stopping this powerful, natural evolutionary trend toward the integration of all spiritual wisdom. The power of evolutionary spiritual progress cannot be thwarted. Today as it should be, members of religions all over the world are becoming more independent and being more active in creating their own personal spirituality --- in essence creating their own personalized religion within whatever religious tradition they were born in or currently find themselves in.
I started this project (this website and the cablecast that spawned it) as a prototype for the movement I was trying to start called Single-Member Churches. Seems like I was just a small part of something already occurring. Kewl.
Bush Waives Saudi Trafficking Sanctions
President Bush decided Wednesday to waive any financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia, Washington's closest Arab ally in the war on terrorism, for failing to do enough to stop the modern-day slave trade in prostitutes, child sex workers and forced laborers...In addition to Saudi Arabia, Ecuador and Kuwait- another U.S. ally in the Middle East- were given a complete pass on any sanctions...That left Myanmar, Cuba and North Korea as the only nations in the list of 14 barred completely from receiving certain kinds of foreign aid. The act does not include cutting off trade assistance or humanitarian aid, Jordan said. The White House statement offered no explanation of why countries were regarded differently.
He never should have said Jesus Christ was his favorite philosopher. Then I wouldn't have to pick on him like this. Insert double-standards-and-rank-hypocrisy rant here.
Praise, Anger at Pro-War Rally in D.C.
Support for U.S. troops fighting abroad mixed with anger toward anti-war demonstrators at home as hundreds of people, far fewer than organizers had expected, rallied Sunday on the National Mall just a day after a massive protest against the war in Iraq...About 400 people gathered near a stage on an eastern segment of the mall, a large photo of an American flag serving as a backdrop. Amid banners and signs proclaiming support for U.S. troops, several speakers hailed the effort to bring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan and denounced those who protest it. Many demonstrators focused their ire at Cindy Sheehan, the California woman whose protest near President Bush's Texas home last summer galvanized the anti-war movement. Sheehan was among the speakers at Saturday's rally near the Washington Monument on the western part of the mall, an event that attracted an estimated 100,000 people.
400 people for and 100k against. Sweet. This next story may contain individual statements that should be taken with a grain of salt, but the larger issues involved are factual...
Armed and dangerous - Flipper the firing dolphin let loose by Katrina
Armed dolphins, trained by the US military to shoot terrorists and pinpoint spies underwater, may be missing in the Gulf of Mexico. Experts who have studied the US navy's cetacean training exercises claim the 36 mammals could be carrying 'toxic dart' guns. Divers and surfers risk attack, they claim, from a species considered to be among the planet's smartest. The US navy admits it has been training dolphins for military purposes, but has refused to confirm that any are missing. Dolphins have been trained in attack-and-kill missions since the Cold War. The US Atlantic bottlenose dolphins have apparently been taught to shoot terrorists attacking military vessels. Their coastal compound was breached during the storm, sweeping them out to sea
Arming animals is a horrible idea. Ethics aside, they're animals- they're not as intelligent as we are and they have entirely different agendas in life. The article notes that dolphins are one of the smartest animals on the planet, but it seems to me this would be even more reason to not arm them. I'm sure it's perfectly safe if they are under our control at all times and never get loose, but (duh) sometimes there are hurricanes. And didn't the mine-sniffing dolphins in Iraq go AWOL? That's the answer to my question about how anyone ever thought this would be a good idea- they were arrogant enough to believe they would never lose control. Why can't we realize that just because we're (ostensibly) the most intelligent species on the planet doesn't rule out the possibility that we might still be total imbeciles?
New Orleans Times-Picayune: Rumors of deaths greatly exaggerated
After five days managing near-riots, medical horrors and unspeakable living conditions inside the Superdome, Louisiana National Guard Col. Thomas Beron prepared to hand over the dead to representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Following days of internationally reported killings, rapes and gang violence inside the Dome, the doctor from FEMA - Beron doesn't remember his name - came prepared for a grisly scene: He brought a refrigerated 18-wheeler and three doctors to process bodies. "I've got a report of 200 bodies in the Dome," Beron recalls the doctor saying. The real total was six, Beron said. Of those, four died of natural causes, one overdosed and another jumped to his death in an apparent suicide, said Beron...At the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, just four bodies were recovered, despites reports of corpses piled inside the building. Only one of the dead appeared to have been slain
This just illustrates to me how afraid we are of poor people. We just assumed there had to be gang-killings and rapes when that many poor people were herded together in those conditions. I guess it makes us feel better about leaving them there in the first place if we can think of them as subhuman. I also guess the media don't much care if a story is true as long as it's shocking.

September 25, 2005
I'm back from Hurricane Rita. I have been in hunkered down mode since Tuesday. That was the term of the week- "hunkered down". By Thursday it was a drinking game: every time an anchor or reporter or meteorologist or government official said "hunker down" you had to drink. We kept forgetting, though. When my sister called and I told her about that she said "you're having a hurricane party, aren't you?" I guess we were- two close friends came to stay with us so we had five adults, four dogs, and two cats hunkered down (drink!) with many cases of beer for three days. I am just now getting back online- my computer has been locked up in a closet in the middle of the house for days. I learned a few things from this experience. One of them was a lesson in how powerful the media are- blanket coverage of Katrina had us so scared that as soon as the call came to evacuate the coast the entire city of Houston flooded the freeways and promptly got stuck and some even died. There's also a lesson to be learned in the power of speaking out- the government response to Rita was everything the response to Katrina should have been. So that means the outrage we all expressed had some effect. The evacuation clusterfuck was also interesting to me because there had been some blaming of the victims after Katrina, "they knew it was coming and they should have gotten out", etc. and the mess Houstonians got into when we tried to do what we accused New Orleans of not doing is a karmic lesson for the whole country. I learned some things about myself, too. We kept watching the news all day and night Tuesday through Thursday and it was the same thing over and over again and I realized the only reason to keep it on was to find out if our zip code needed to evacuate, and as soon as I realized that I dreaded hearing that and that the reason I dreaded it was because if they said that I would either be in the position of having to talk the rest of the household into disobeying the order or stay by myself, I discovered that I never had any intention of leaving. I had thought I was open to the idea but as soon as I imagined what would happen if the order was given I learned that about myself. I was not leaving no matter what the authorities said. It was kind of a trip to realize that- I learned that I am very attached to my real estate and also that I am more afraid of other people than Mother Nature. Another encouraging thing I learned about myself is that, as much as I was too attached to my house to leave it I had actually emotionally let go of the floors and the roof. The next day after we learned it had missed us I went upstairs to my bathroom and noticed the sun shining on the daisy-painted floor of my art room and felt a sudden happiness that I got to keep that floor. The floor seemed like a gift in that moment and I realized that I had already subconsciously started to deal with the idea of serious damage to the house and make peace with that. That is all about Rita. I noticed on Linkfilter this morning that the global warming debate is really just a debate between people who want to consider the fact that we might have made a few mistakes and the people that refuse to admit any mistakes. I was watching "Gangs of New York" last night. I was noticing how the characters in that movie are really violent and corrupt and desperate and thinking how we've never really left that behind- that is still a big part of our underpinnings as a species. We refuse to recognize it, though, and in our denial have built for ourselves the tools and weapons of gods. Monkeys can't be trusted with atomic weapons, but we refuse to believe we are monkeys and so create a disaster. Until we get some humility we are doomed. My faith has to be in an outbreak of humility that will halt progress as we know it in its tracks and take just a small moment to reflect on what we are doing with what we already have before we go any further. That is why I am so hard on organized religion- religion is the only institution that calls humility a virtue. Humility was one of Christ's major themes and it's getting pushed out of the picture by fights over having the Ten Commandments in courtrooms and having nativity scenes in front of city halls and getting books with sex in them removed from libraries. And the root of each of these campaigns is pride. Pride is the belief that your way is the only way- and we are sinking everything we have into forcing the world to recognize that while we let it die from neglect.

September 20, 2005
Advocates seek to revive proposed gay-bias ban
The battle over a proposal to ban discrimination against gays in the workplace and housing market in Marion County is quietly heating up, nearly five months after local officials voted against the idea...The debate is familiar to most Americans: One side says homosexuality tears at the foundation of American families and shouldn't become a special legal class equivalent to race or gender. The other says gays and lesbians deserve equal protection and freedom from persecution over their sexual orientation.
So basically we're saying "you don't have to like us, just at least make it illegal for people to hurt us" and the Christians are saying "it will be the end of the world if we have to give up our right to hurt you!" The verses in the Bible that supposedly condemn gay behavior do not give anyone permission to hurt us. But it's ok if you call it "protecting the family"- "If I don't have the right to kick you out of your house it will destroy my family". All the energy that's been expended against me could have ended this war long ago. Case in point:
Local woman gathers signatures to ban same-sex marriage
Cara Richardson's husband was recently deployed to Kuwait to work for one cause, and while he's away, Richardson is working on a cause of her own. Richardson, 26, is working with United Families of Arizona to get an amendment added to the Arizona Constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
I have got to get over this someday. This has been going on longer than I have been alive. But it's not one of those "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" type of deals. It's not like the army, where you know going in that you might have to go to war and you decide to go in anyway. So I'm sorry I keep coming back to this but it's like a forest fire- the minute I turn my back on it it will be in my backyard. Or like a hurricane, to be more precise. I am sitting in Rita's path as we speak- we are evacuating Katrina's evacuees already. Ok, here's something I just found that is a good start:
Church wants apology for Iraq war
Church of England Bishops are calling on Christian leaders to consider ways in which to apologise for the war in Iraq. They want a "clear public recognition" of the way that the West has contributed to the present situation in Iraq. And they suggest that a public gathering of Christian and Muslim religious leaders could be a way of doing this. In a new report by a working group of the Church of England's House of Bishops, the church investigates its role in combating the threat of terrorism. The report recognises the "complex relationship between religion and violence " and the churches' "tradition of self examination and penitence". It states: "We believe that the churches have an important role to play, not simply in urging the importance and applicability of Christian principles, but in a proper awareness of the role of religion, for good as well as ill, and initiatives it might take towards reconciliation between adversaries." The bishops, who opposed the war in Iraq and describe military action as "gravely mistaken", recognise that to pull out now would be irresponisible. They are also aware that the government is not likely to apologise for the war, but suggest there is a role for the churches in making a "public act of institutional repentance".

September 18, 2005
I might be taking the day off today. Right now I am getting ready for the impending migration to Jenny's Jesus Club 3.0. On the other hand, maybe I do have one thing to share:
How the penguin's life story inspired the US religious right
As happened with Mel Gibson's Christian blockbuster, churches have block-booked cinemas and organised visits for their members. The 153 House Churches Network in Sidney, Ohio, runs a March of the Penguins Leadership Workshop after screenings of the film. Its website, www.lionsofgod.com, provides a form that can be downloaded and taken to the cinema. It advises: 'Please use the notebook, flashlight and pen provided to write down what God speaks to you.' Ben Hunt, a minister at the network, said of the penguins' struggle for survival: 'Some of the circumstances they experienced seemed to parallel those of Christians. The penguin is falling behind, like some Christians are falling behind. The path changes every year, yet they find their way, like the Holy Spirit.' A contributor to the Christian Science Monitor wrote: 'The penguins' way of life has illustrated to me some aspects of how God is parenting us.' On WorldNetDaily.com, a conservative website, an opponent of abortion wrote that the film 'verified the beauty of life and the rightness of protecting it'. Rich Lowry, editor of National Review, told a conference of young Republicans: 'Penguins are the really ideal example of monogamy. The dedication of these birds is amazing.'
I have no problem with that.

September 16, 2005
I am reading a book called Selling Sickness
Here is a review:
Science and medicine writers Moynihan and Cassels conjecture that most Americans believe, based on information gleaned from a deluge of pharmaceutical-company advertisements, that conditions such as hypertension, high cholesterol, menopause, and chronic constipation are bona fide diseases. They quote reputable medical experts, however, who refute such understandings. What's more, they suggest that billions of precious and diminishing health-care dollars are squandered treating those nondiseases of healthy, wealthy Americans and would be better spent treating the legitimately sick poor and fighting the international AIDS epidemic.
Here are some resources mentioned in the book:
The Art of Branding a Condition
Healthcare marketers are taking the concept of "branding a condition" to new levels of sophistication, author Vince Parry reports. Done appropriately, this type of branding helps keep brand managers and the clinical community focused on a single story with a problem/solution structure.
Basically what they are saying is they create a narrative structure in which a disease results from a single cause that can be treated with a specific drug, which guarantees that any time heart attack is mentioned, high cholesterol is blamed, and Crestor saves the day. This creates a story in which Crestor will save you from heart attacks. That is only good from a marketing standpoint. Here's some watchdogs and crusaders:
Healthy Skepticism: Countering misleading drug promotion
Healthy Skepticism (previously MaLAM, the Medical Lobby for Appropriate Marketing) was established in 1983. Healthy Skepticism is an independent, international, not for profit organisation for people with an interest in improving health. Most members are doctors or pharmacists, but the membership includes other health professionals and people from the broader community...Misleading drug promotion harms health and wastes money. Misleading drug promotion often leads to the use of more expensive drugs that are no more effective and at times more harmful than less costly drugs. This harms people both directly and indirectly by diverting resources away from other areas of health, including hospital and community health care. We believe the long term solution will involve changing the relationships between the health professions, the pharmaceutical industry, governments (regulatory and payment systems) and the community.
No Free Lunch: Just Say No to Drug Company Reps
We are health care providers -- physicians, pharmacists, nurses, dentists, among others -- who believe that pharmaceutical promotion should not guide clinical practice, and that over-zealous promotional practices can lead to bad patient care. It is our goal to encourage health care practitioners to provide high quality care based on unbiased evidence rather than on biased pharmaceutical promotion...We believe that there is ample evidence in the literature--contrary to the beliefs of most heath care providers-- that drug companies, by means of samples, gifts, and food, exert significant influence on provider behavior. There is also ample evidence in the literature that promotional materials and presentations are often biased and non-informative. We believe that health care professionals, precisely because they are professionals ,should notallow themselves to be bought by the pharmaceutical industry: It is time to Just say no to drug reps and their pens, pads, calendars, coffee mugs, and of course, lunch (not to mention dinners, basketball games, and ski vacations).
Social Audit: Medicines out of Control
This website began as an investigation of problems with antidepressant drugs – not only their adverse effects on many users, but also what the problem signalled about the conduct of the competent authorities, and the adequacy of their institutions and process. As the problem unfolded, notably between 1997 and 2003, it revealed a glimpse of pharmageddon - a world of sickness created and sustained by exploitation of the fear of disease, indifference to real health needs, dependence on authority, and misplaced trust in the triumph of drug benefits over harm.
I am particularly interested in information this book has about depression and antidepressants, due to my experience as a psychiatric patient. I have taken many types of antidepressants, and they all caused side effects that were in themselves so depressing as to nullify any benefit. I think a whole lot of us are being subjected to those side effects solely for the drug companies' profit. And I say this as someone whose treatment was actually legitmate as far as it went. Another alarming thing about this book has to do with ADD. This disease is way overdiagnosed, and the treatment for it is legal speed. Speed improves performance in anyone at any task. So you're setting up a situation where getting yourself labeled as "sick" can get you ahead, and the parents of healthy children now left in the dust take their kid to be checked for ADD, where you learn that they will likely grow up to have adult ADD...see what I mean?

September 15, 2005
Whistling in the dark...
Anti-war protesters act like self-indulgent kids
Those who disagree with the war in Iraq absolutely have the right to speak out and protest and even say bad things about our President and our national policy in Iraq. But having that right does not make it the right thing to do....Anti-war protests in the U.S. give aid and comfort to the enemy striving to kill America’s sons and daughters. Those of us who fought in Vietnam remember the anti-war protests that encouraged our enemy, and gave rise to their slogan, “We will win this war on the streets of New York.” They did just that. Insurgents learned an invaluable lesson in Vietnam. The target of their action is not the opposing force they shoot at and bomb. Their target is you, the American public, through TV cameras. By staging violence and casualties for our cable channels to feed to us 24-7, our enemy can erode public support for U.S. war policy. The public protest occurring at the Crawford, Texas, ranch is exactly what our enemy hopes for...Personally, I was against this war from the start. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t dream of helping our enemy accomplish their goals by participating in public protest, and I wouldn’t use the absurd argument I am protesting on behalf of the troops. Whatever my sentiments about the war, I owe the troops my complete support while they are doing the nation’s dirty work. That doesn’t make me particularly virtuous, I’m just trying to act like a responsible adult.
This would make sense if the enemy's "staging violence and casualties for our cable channels to feed to us 24-7" was what caused public support for the war effort to erode, but there were huge global protests before this war even started, caused by nothing more than the idea of attacking Iraq. This has always been a war of opportunity. People of conscience questioning that out the outset are not in league with the enemy just because we both oppose the war. The enemy does not even enter into my opposition to the war- I would oppose any war of opportunity. It's just sick to send innocent kids to die to protect "American interests". They signed on to protect American lives. They have already admitted Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. There is a difference between showing weakness and showing humanity. At this point I think anything we do is going to make things worse over there. The decent thing to do would be to say "hey, 9/11 freaked us out, we thought you guys did it, we found out we were wrong, we're going to leave now- if you want help cleaning up just invite us back after you vote on it or something". We might as well make a grand gesture out of admitting our mistake and get a jump-start on the PR campaign. But we're not all that into saving a situation before it's too late:
New Report Warns of Rising Threat to U.S. Insurers due to Climate Change
Companies, governments, and the public will suffer major financial losses unless insurers and their regulators take steps to address the escalating impacts of climate change, according to a new report by the Ceres investor coalition. The report, authored by three industry experts, documents the precipitous rise in insured and uninsured weather-related losses in the U.S. and how climate change will likely magnify these losses in the years ahead, whether in homeowner losses due to hurricanes, crop losses due to drought or business interruptions due to lightning strikes. The report cites a 15-fold increase in insured losses from catastrophic weather events (those with over $1 billion of damages) in the past three decades -- losses that have far out-stripped premium increases, inflation and population growth over the same time period. If climate change trends and insurance trends continue, the report warns, availability and affordability of insurance will be at even greater risk for homeowners and businesses. State and federal governments can also expect more financial liability as they increasingly become "insurers of last resort" in response to private insurers further restricting coverage and withdrawing from more markets. "Insurance as we know it is threatened by a perfect storm of rising weather losses, rising global temperatures and more Americans than ever living in harm's way," said Mindy S. Lubber, president of Ceres, which commissioned the study.
I may have posted this link before, but I can't be bothered to look for it right now. This is significant because the insurance industry will cancel their own grandma's policy if her payment is a single second late, so I don't think you can really call them tree-hugging hippie liberals. If the insurance industry belives in global warming, everyone else should, too. Or maybe we do beieve in it now...
Global Warming: Adapt or Prevent?; NCPA Study Shows Living With Climate Change is Less Costly, More Beneficial
Trying to stop global warming imposes huge costs and provides very few benefits, according to a study authored by a Bush Administration analyst and released today by the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA). "Living with global warming costs a fraction of what it would take to stop it," said Indur Goklany, author of the NCPA study. "The costs of trying to prevent global warming far exceed any benefits of doing so for the foreseeable future."
Ooooo-kay...I guess when he said "Get used to it" he wasn't kidding. So we have gone from debating whether or not it is even happenning to resignation? We skipped right over the "what can we do about this" part? We'll do anything to avoid inconveniencing Exxon-Mobil, won't we?

September 13, 2005
I am not going to apologize for bashing Bush any more. Jesus allowed himself to bash the religious leaders of His time and I thinks it's justifiable to consider Bush a religious leader.
Now They Tell Us
Edmund L. Andrews writes in the New York Times: "Republican leaders in Congress and some White House officials see opportunities in Hurricane Katrina to advance longstanding conservative goals like giving students vouchers to pay for private schools, paying churches to help with temporary housing and scaling back business regulation." Jonathan Weisman and Amy Goldstein write in The Washington Post: "After the political tidal wave of 1994 swept conservatives into control of Congress, Republicans doggedly tried -- and repeatedly failed -- to repeal a Depression-era law that requires federal contractors to pay workers the prevailing wages in their communities. Eleven days after the deluge of Hurricane Katrina, President Bush banished the requirement, at least temporarily, with the stroke of his pen. . . ."In another gain for the administration, a $51.8 billion relief bill that Congress passed on Thursday included a significant change to federal contracting regulations. Holders of government-issued credit cards will be allowed to spend up to $250,000 on Katrina-related contracts and purchases, without requiring them to seek competitive bids or to patronize small businesses or companies owned by minorities and women. Before Thursday, only purchases of up to $2,500 in normal circumstances or $15,000 in emergencies were exempt." Yochi J. Dreazen writes in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required): "The Bush administration is importing many of the contracting practices blamed for spending abuses in Iraq as it begins the largest and costliest rebuilding effort in U.S. history. "The first large-scale contracts related to Hurricane Katrina, as in Iraq, were awarded without competitive bidding, and using so-called cost-plus provisions that guarantee contractors a certain profit regardless of how much they spend."
So, the Bush administration's paybacks to the religious right are conservative judges, the FMA, and federal funding for their charities. They got the last one for sure, the first one half-ass, and the FMA not at all, so far. And apparently those things were worth signing off on wage cuts and free pass for contactors to be wasteful and prejudiced. Here is some more stuff to watch out for:
Russia warns U.S. against new nuclear doctrine
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov warned the United States on Tuesday against any change of its defense doctrine to allow pre-emptive use of atomic weapons, saying it would prompt others to seek nuclear arms. A draft revision of the U.S. Defense Department's nuclear operations doctrine was made available at the weekend, outlining the use of nuclear weapons to pre-empt an enemy's attack with weapons of mass destruction. The draft "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations," dated March 15, revised the "discussion of nuclear weapons use across the range of military operations." According to the document, combatant commanders could request approval from the president to use nuclear weapons under a variety of scenarios, such as to pre-empt an enemy's use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States, multinational or alliance forces or civilian populations. A Defense Department spokesman said at the weekend the document had not yet been given to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It is due to be signed within the next few weeks by the director of the Joint Staff, the spokesman said
And here is what conspiracy theorists make of it all:
New Orleans: Dress rehearsal for lockdown od America
While the ruling elite are not willing to publicly admit the reality of global warming, they are fully aware of it, just as they are well-informed on the reality of Peak Oil. They know as well as progressives do that the juxtaposition of these two ecological phenomena guarantees both economic collapse and a plethora of natural disasters...One of the harshest realities of Peak Oil, but as old as the infanticide practiced by ancient civilizations is "demand destruction," also known as population control. In a recent article, Mike Ruppert explained its integral role in a global energy crisis: "Demand destruction" has become a priority not only to mitigate Peak Oil but also to mitigate global warming. The United States, with 5% of the world's people, consumes (wastes) 25% of the world's energy. How do you destroy demand? You collapse the economy. Homeless, unemployed "refugees" (what a cold, depersonalizing term) don't buy gas, take trips, fly on airplanes or buy consumer goods (made with energy and requiring energy to operate).
Wow. Like I was saying last week- the only people who can afford to gamble with climate change are the people who stand to make such astronomical sums of money that they will be able to protect themselves from the consequences. And the religious Right is signing off on this, too.

September 12, 2005
I think Jon Stewart could have spent a whole hour with his guest tonight instead of the usual five minutes. He could have but he can't, if you know what I mean, so I just wanted to reiterate the most important thing I think he said- that with science getting as politicized as it is the best source for science you can trust is the National Academy of Sciences:
As mandated in its Act of Incorporation, the NAS has, since 1863, served to "investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art" whenever called upon to do so by any department of the government.
This is especially important because President Bush has been involving himself in science lately
(Although he said that curriculum decisions should be made by school districts rather than the federal government, Bush told Texas newspaper reporters in a group interview at the White House on Monday that he believes that intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution as competing theories.[Washington Post])
...and since he is the President one might think he spoke for the government, but the governmentally-endorsed research contradicts him
(While the mechanisms of evolution are still under investigation, scientists universally accept that the cosmos, our planet, and life evolved and continue to evolve. Yet the teaching of evolution to schoolchildren is still a contentious issue. In Science and Creationism, the NAS states unequivocally that creationism has no place in any science curriculum at any level.)
So we can be fairly certain he's speaking for his business associates if the topic is global warming or pet special interest groups like the one Christianity has made of itself if the topic is intelligent design. I am still waiting for someone to explain to my why evolution and intelligent design have to compete with each other. It seems like each side leaves enough unanswered questions for the other side to drive a truck through with either one knowing the difference.

September 11, 2005
A tribute:
September 11, 2001: Gay Victims & Heroes
Mark Bingham, 31, a Gay passenger on United Airlines Flight 93 that crashed in Pennsylvania, helped to thwart the plane's hijackers. September 16 is officially designated Mark Bingham Day in San Francisco.
Melissa has this covered for us:

Tuesday Morning
Up and down this road I go
Skippin' and dodgin'
From a 44

10:03 on a Tuesday morning
In the fall of an American dream
A man is doing what he knows is right
On flight 93
He loved his mom and he loved his dad
He loved his home and he loved his man
But on that bloody Tuesday morning
He died an American

Now you cannot change this
You can't erase this
You can't pretend this is not the truth

Even though he could not marry
Or teach your children in our schools
Because who he wants to love
Is breaking your Gods' rules
He stood up on a Tuesday morning
In the terror he was brave
And he made his choice
And without a doubt
A hundred lives he must have saved

And the things you might take for granted
Your inalienable rights
Some might chose to deny him
Even though he gave his life
Can you live with yourself in the land of the free
And make him less of a hero than the other three
Well it might begin to change ya
In a field in Pennsylvania

Stand up America
Hear the bell now as it tolls
Wake up America
It's Tuesday morning
Come on let's roll

September 10, 2005
Just wanted to share a thought I had yesterday about why I am such a knee-jerk liberal- it's because I always get suspicious of anyone defending the status quo. To me it just always looks like there is a 50% chance that person is just lazy. Maintaining the status quo involves no challenge- identifying a problem and figuring out what to do and putting that plan into motion is hard work. Thinking of reasons to keep things exactly like they are is easy- and it's an easy sell, too, because everyone else is just as lazy. That is why you have people willing to go along with the idea that the jury is still out on global warming and that the victims in New Orleans did it to themselves. Come back later for my 9/11 entry.

September 10, 2005
Ok, our local furniture hero, Mattress Mac, opened his store to evacuees and is now hiring them. We sent our brother who is from Pascagoula and now living with us to go apply. They told him he had to be willing to work 16-17 hours a day whenever they wanted him for 8 dollars an hour. He said the place was full of black men from New Orleans. I know I shouldn't feel like the man is trying to bring back slavery, but the terms he is setting just really seem exploitative to me. I know those jobs will be a miracle to most of the guys there, and I am sure many of them need to work every hour they can and they would have been asking for extra hours, but that is a whole different thing. What a person is willing to give and what another person is demanding of them do not cancel each other out, even when it's a perfect match. Maybe he is just rying to spread the work around as much as he can without massive shift changes in the middle of each day. Like, if he was working each man two long days a week. But, if they're working five days, he's taking advantage, even if they're willing. I guess I am going to assume they're working two days. I should call them and settle it once and for all, but I can't right now because brother might think I doubt his decision to decline Mac's kind offer. Ok, now I am sitting here feeling bad for criticizing Mattress Mac's efforts to help. So I will admit that I feel that, but I think I will still post this because this isn't the first time I've been unimpressed by him. He did a signing at my bookstore and was rude, those credit guys on his sales floor are vultures, plus, the credit programs he runs take advantage of people, too, and I know that from professional experience in the furniture and credit businesses. You know that saying about how there's good, fast, and cheap and you can only get two at a time? WIth Mac you only get fast- either one of the other two is an illusion. You know who should hire all these people instead? James Avery. He can open up a whole new factory and staff it entirely with the displaced. Then he can expand out of the south. And I think he deserves to expand out of the south based on the quality of his work and my lifelong experience with his company. His work is not cheap but it's exceptionally good and fast is a given in retail, so he's following the rule. And it seems to me that this two out of three rule can also apply to jobs, only instead of "good, fast, or cheap" it/s "satisfying, stressful, or well-compensated". If you are going to ask workers to do something unfulfilling in a high-stress environment you need to pay them well. And that makes me thin of teachers- they do something fulfilling in a high-stress environment for low pay. We have to pay them more or cut the class sizes in four and give them each an assistant. By this standard, my job is good- I do something fun in a low-strss environment for low pay. That's fair. If it had high pay I guess I would have to be over the moon. That's all for today. If anyone can provide any more information about these jobs Mac's offerring, please do so.

September 8, 2005
Teen Librarian update: my first event went great. Seven teens with a lot of enthusiasm and, apparently, a lot of talent, too. Sweet. I found this on Linkfilter today:
Study: Daily Routine Helps Bipolar Disorder
Patients suffering from bipolar disorder who underwent therapy to help them maintain a regular daily routine and cope with stress were able to avoid relapses over a two-year period, a study has found. The study, published in September's Archives of General Psychiatry, examined a therapy developed by researchers at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. Using what researchers dubbed interpersonal and social rhythm therapy, patients were taught how to keep to normal sleeping, eating and other daily routines. They also were shown how to anticipate and cope with stress just as a diabetic who would be taught, for example, how to cook and eat differently.
That is interesting because it reminds me a lot of my own treatment that I made up myself and which you can see posted on the left side of this screen. I called my treatment "the Oprah Log System" in honor of David Letterman and the notebook he was keeping about trying to get on Oprah's show because she recommended journaling to meet your goals. The Oprah Log System is basically a list that you make every day of everything you have to do that day. It sounds simple, but the way I decided what I should do each day was I took everything I ever beat myself up over not doing or not doing right and decided what would shut me up about it. Like, what could I do in this area that would take away my excuse to beat myself up. I decided I needed to spend a regular amount of time each week on my art, I needed to spend a regular amount of time with my family each month, I needed to break down my household chores into daily and weekly routines so I never felt out of control about that, I needed to raise my credit score high enough to buy a house, I needed to get health insurance and do something about my retirement, and I needed to go back to school or something to get out of the boring soul-killing field I was working in. It sounds like a lot but I was just sick enough of beating myself up all the time to feel like it was worth it, and I broke everything up into tiny tiny pieces and spread it out as much as I needed to. That is the other special thing about the Oprah Log system- you are only required to make the list every day. You are not require to complete it. You just have to keep it under control. The things you don't get to you mark "pp" for "postpone" and copy them onto the next day's list. You can spend hours on the list each morning if you can't make yourself move, and then just see if you can make yourself do the easiest things and see if you feel like doing more. But you are always organized and when you check things off you build momentum and I always get way more done than I expect. And I don't beat myself up because I have everything on paper where I can keep an eye on it. I started this 2001. I have achieved all of my goals and more. I have had at least one episode since then that I remember and I am guessing one or two more that I don't but over the course of four years that is excellent for me. And now there is science to validate it.

September 6, 2005
Have I ever mentioned what kind of librarian I am now? I am a Teen Librarian. This is a job that asked for at least one year's professional experience in a library setting with teens and/or children. I got it with one year of volunteer experience and by saying "while volunteering I helped a lot of teens with science and history fair projects and found it really fulfilling". I am kind of in over my head. The biggest part of my job is coming up with "programs", which is a fancy name for like activities or events that promote reading, although "promote reading" seems to be interchangeable with "promote the library", "promote libraries in general", and\or "promote nothing in particular just get some people to show up". Tomorrow is my first one. I am nervous and I have been cooking all evening. It's really the food and whether the kids like each other that determines if they come back or not, unless they are getting credit from like Girl Scouts or Honor Society or Church or something. So to recap, I'm in over my head and tomorrow's my first big test. In other news, we were watching Oprah's on location special and the New Orleans Police Chief was crying about this stuff thet the Guardian says may not have happened:
Murder and rape - fact or fiction?
In a week filled with dreadful scenes of desperation and anger from New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina some stories stood out. But as time goes on many remain unsubstantiated and may yet prove to be apocryphal. New Orleans police have been unable to confirm the tale of the raped child, or indeed any of the reports of rapes, in the Superdome and convention centre.
This is very confusing to me. I have heard the Guardian accused of liberal bias. Or anti-U.S. bias or something. I don't see how they could know more from the UK than Oprah knows from the ground about the situation. But, many books which have influenced me strongly quote extensively from the Guardian. Yet, I fact-checked Amy Goodman's whole book and purposely left out the Guardian. Furthermore, I think I confimed like 80% of my list of "most shocking things I didn't know" from that book. And this is a good metaphor for global warming- for me the story arc that justifies my continued faith in Noam Chomsky who quotes extensively from the Guardian is that I could 80% fact-check Amy Goodman without using the Guardian and Amy Goodman quotes extensively from Noam Chomsky. So, even though there is this hole in the fabric where the Guasrdian gets it wrong, the story picks up the same thread on the other side. The story arc on global warming is exactly the same, but we have millionaires on TV magnifying the holes beyond all proportion and focusing our attention on sacrifice. But, hey- it could turn out later on that the Guardian is right. Then there is no hole in my little Noam Chomsky story arc. I'll have to remember to keep an eye on this.

September 5, 2005
More stuff on global warming and Katrina:
Jackson says conditions now are partly man-made disaster
Jesse Jackson says the current upheaval from Hurricane Katrina is, in part, a man-made disaster. Jackson tells CNN that leaders have ignored signs of global warming and problems in the ozone layer. In addition, he says that the US hasn't enough invested in infrastructure. The civil rights leader is in Baton Rouge, taking stock of evacuation plans and relief efforts. He says so far, evacuations have focused on simply getting storm victims out, and he believes that has pushed evacuees to far-flung locations which are only temporary solutions. Instead Jackson wants the government to use current and former military bases. He suggests creating tent cities that would keep families together and closer to home.
Way to make sense, Rev. Jackson. The whole world blames us for this mess:
Times of Malta: Warning on damage from climate change
MALTA'S Ambassador for Environmental Affairs, Michael Zammit Cutajar, has called for an innovative system of global long-term climate change commitments and responsibilities, anchored in existing international agreements. The call was made during an informal ministerial meeting on climate change organised two weeks ago by the Danish government in Greenland. "Flights over the fast melting Arctic ice sheet and interaction with Greenlanders brought home the message to participants," he said. "New environmental awareness in China was clear. In contrast, there is tension between the urgent need for action, and the prospects in the coming decades perceived by the US and Russia for new oil and gas exploration possibilities and year-round ice-free navigation in the circumpolar regions. " The Danish government's discussion paper for dialogue participants warned that "if adequate action is not taken within the next decades, the window of opportunity for avoiding large global climate change could effectively close. The protection of the climate system requires substantial further action as soon as possible, and beyond 2012, if risks for what is considered to be 'dangerous' change should be avoided. The next five to 15 years are crucial". The paper added that climate change damage "will fall disproportionately on developing countries"...In July, the G8 summit in Scotland adopted a climate change action programme brokered by its chair, Prime Minister Tony Blair, which tried to get around the US refusal to cut emissions or accept the broad scientific consensus on the human role in present climate change
The whole world thinks their children and grandchildren are going to be sacrificed to "the US refusal to cut emissions or accept the broad scientific consensus on the human role in present climate change". Here is our reply:
Vacaville, CA Reporter: Letters to the Editor- Explaining just what it means to 'get used to it'
Of global warming, President Bush said, "Get used to it." He's right, of course. Even if we Americans give up our sport utility vehicles and become "green" like most of Europe, even if China and India also become green, it will take centuries to reverse the global warming that is already locked in. So as President Bush knows, we have little recourse but to get used to it. It would be helpful, however, if the president explained to Americans just what getting "used to it" will entail. Hurricane Katrina should be a wake-up call. As ocean temperatures continue to rise, the southeastern United States will experience stronger and more frequent hurricanes. Because New Orleans is below sea level and sea levels will rise throughout this century, perhaps dramatically, stronger, more frequent hurricanes will make New Orleans indefensible. Rather than rebuild New Orleans, it should be abandoned. To "get used to it" will require huge capital investment. Buildings in Florida and along the Gulf Coast will have to withstand 150 mph winds. Low-lying regions will be inundated periodically and buildings there will need to be on stilts to survive. And that's just the Southeast.
I mostly quoted this letter because I never knew Bush said "get used to it". When did he say that shit? I will see if I can find out....ok, this is actually worse than it sounded- that wasn't just another one of Bush's dumbass remarks- when they attribute that quote to Bush thjey actually mean Bush's version of the EPA:
Democrats.com Archive: Bush FINALLY Acknowledges Global Warming, But Says 'Get Used To It' 02-Jun-02
For 20 years, Republicans have adamantly denied the existence of global warming - because the primary culprit is the burning of oil, gas and coal, the industries that own the GOP. But suddenly, Bush admits that global warming is taking place. "But while the report says the US will be substantially changed in the next few decades - 'very likely' seeing the disruption of snow-fed water supplies, more stifling heat waves and the permanent disappearance of Rocky Mountain meadows and coastal marshes, for example - it does not propose any major shift in the administration's policy on greenhouse gases. It recommends ADAPTING TO INEVITABLE CHANGES.
So, I guess Europe is giving us a little too much credit. They can't blame our refusal to cut emissions on our refusal to accept the science. We accept it but we just don't care. I would rather be seen as stubbornly ignorant than just plain callous, but I you go to your environmental doom with the President you have, I guess.

September 4, 2005
I guess it's time to start looking at the Supreme Court again, since Justice Rehnquist just died. So here is some stuff from an editorial concerning Roberts:
Intellectual Capital: Michael McGough / Roberts and Robertson
...in criticizing Roberts, the liberal groups don't stop at objecting to his views. They also argue against him based on his support from religious conservatives...Let's face it: Pat Robertson was a tempting target for liberals long before he suggested that the United States off the president of Venezuela...But is it fair to yoke Roberts and Robertson? Is it politically smart? No and no. Invoking the specter of Pat Robertson and similar figures to oppose John Roberts is not quite guilt by association; it's more like guilt by approbation. If Robertson, Dobson et al. like Roberts, the argument goes, he must be bad news for separation of church and state and for abortion rights...This argument takes at face value the insistence by the religious right that Roberts is their man, and that they are perfectly happy that Bush chose him instead of a harder-edged conservative like Judge William Pryor of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, who famously called Roe v. Wade an "abomination." Lost in the analysis is that the religious right has a vested interest in claiming Roberts as their own (and overlooking dismaying details like the help he provided to a colleague in the preparation of a gay-rights argument). To acknowledge that Bush hadn't given them what they asked for would be to admit to being bit players in the Supreme Court selection process
This is what I have been saying all along. The Religious Right think they have political power but what they really have is political value. I understand the frustration that led them to believe they had to play this game, but I will never understand the shortsightedness that led them to believe they could do it without getting very, very splattered with the worst kinds of dirt. Politics is about compromise, almost every facet of life is about compromise, except for faith. Faith is about ideals. Trying to legislate their ideals can only lead to compromising those ideals, and they will find when they leave the field that nothing they brought with them has retained its original integrity. Of course, since they cannot admit they didn't get exactly what they wanted they can't stop themselves from jumping right back into the game:
Prayer Vigils to Continue in Light of Rehnquist Death
The National Clergy Council and the Christian Defense Coalition will continue in their plans to hold daily prayer services this week for the future of the United States Supreme Court. The two groups had earlier announced their four-times daily vigils would focus on the confirmation process for Judge John Roberts. The Rehnquist family and the President's choice of a second nominee and of the next chief justice will now be added to the daily agenda. "The death of the Chief Justice makes the selection of new members to the Court that much more critical," said the Reverend Rob Schenck, president of the National Clergy Council and a board member of the Evangelical Church Alliance. "While we mourn Justice Rehnquist's passing and pray for his family, we urge the President to choose a successor in Justice Rehnquist's tradition of upholding traditional moral values. The choice of the next justice and chief justice will be the absolutely decisive factor in turning the direction of a previously divided court.
So, how do they feel about this?
Bush picks Roberts to replace Rehnquist

September 3, 2005
I'm back! I haven't posted since Tuesday. I have a couple of excuses:
a. Yesterday was our five year anniversary. There have been many preperations for and celebrations of that milestone.
b. Rose's entire family is in Pascagoula. There are still a few of them we haven't gotten through to. We know for sure they have lost at least one house. So, in honor of Katrina, I think we should talk about global warming again today. I did an altavista search on ["Hurricane Katrina" AND "global warming"] and got 993,000 results. I also got this last week on a Yahoo news alert:
Global warming: A lot of hot air
Global warming is doubtful and is in the future, not the near future, but 50 or 100 years from now. People barely believe weather forecasts for next week and don’t for next month. Why would they believe climate forecasts for the next hundred years? Even if they believed it, would they sacrifice the good life and prospects for a better one to prepare for a specter that someone says is beyond the horizon? Why would they choose the unknown?[...]There are many facets to the global warming dispute, but there is a real shortage of answers. The most important question is: Even if the world is warming, did humans cause it? If humans didn’t cause it, or even if we did, how are we going to fix it? Nobody talks about the results of the proposed fix, of what good the Kyoto Protocol and like proposals will do. If, as Kyoto requires, greenhouse gas production is cut back to 5.2 percent below 1990 levels, what effect will it have? Three separate analyses showed that this reduction would cut the projected increase in temperature by only 0.13 to 0.15 degrees Celsius (0.23 to 0.27 degrees F.) in the year 2100. In other words, even if the world is warming and even if greenhouse gases are the cause, Kyoto restrictions make no difference. Does it make any difference how much humans slow down the production of carbon dioxide? Fossil fuel will be used as long as it is the cheapest source of energy. Whether this century’s allotment is used in the next 100 or 500 years, will the temperature increase 2.1 degrees or only 1.9 degrees? It’s imperative that this nation understand beforehand what, if anything, there is to gain in return for a given amount of cutbacks. Anyone trying to sell you an answer to these questions now is selling you a load of hot air.
Okay, here is how this guy's argument sounds to me:
"Well, we don't know for sure that this is happening, and if it is happening we don't know it's not normal, and if it's not normal we don't know for sure it's totally caused by fossil fuels; so since there are those few off-chances that what is glaringly obvious might not be technically correct, it would be as great a tragedy to ask the whole world to use public transpportation and sacrifice giant oil profits as it would if they all just burned up"
to which I say:,br>"Yes, there are holes in the story. Holes can always be found, but the story arc picks up again on the other side for those who care to look or don't own stock, and we know if our behavior was painting you this kind of picture it wouldn't matter how many holes we found in your story. If the off-chance proves correct and we panicked over a natural climate event that was part of the cycle all along, we'll have made sacrifices for nothing. We will have sacrificed our conveniences and a lot of money, but that can be done without loss of life. Those are the consequences if we overreact to global warming. What are the consequences if it turns out it is as bad as some scientists say and we underreact? Mass extinction. Loss of convenience and profits versus mass extinction is the question here, that is a wholly unacceptable risk."
I'm serious. From my not-totally-systematic-but-still-considerably-broad exposure to the literature and science out there on global warming, it looks like the chances for and against climate catastophe are about 80/20. That 20% chance of making unnecessary inconvenient sacrifices can only be worth gambling on if you have enough money to thoroughly shield yourself if things don't go your way. This is only true for about one percent of the global population. Our interests lie in the opposite direction, but we are actively disouraged from realizing that. Vast sums of money and energy are being expended on behalf of those who stand to profit enough from the status quo to make that risk much, much, much more acceptable.

August 30, 2005
See, this is what I was talking about on Sunday-
National Catholic Reporter Editorial: Robertson's sideshow He and others of his ilk draw crowds because they say what people want to hear and claim, without the least doubt, that what they say comes directly from God. “The power of the Christian right,” wrote Bill McKibbon in a recent issue of Harper’s, “rests largely in the fact that they boldly claim religious authority, and by their very boldness convince the rest of us that they must know what they’re talking about. They’re like the guy who gives you directions with such loud confidence that you drive on even though the road appears to be turning into a faint, rutted track.” Their theology appeals, McKibbon continued, because “it coincides with what we want to believe. How nice it would be if Jesus had declared that our income was ours to keep, instead of insisting that we had to share. How satisfying it would be if we were supposed to hate our enemies. Religious conservatives will always have a comparatively easy sell"...It is time for Catholic leaders, those who invited Robertson to meet John Paul II during the pope’s 1995 visit to the United States and for those who signed onto his politics and accepted his organization’s political screeds in their sanctuaries, to condemn his words. It is time for the Republicans who gave him center stage during the party’s 1988 national convention and who allowed Robertson and his minions from the Christian Coalition to infiltrate and deliver the party to extremists, to condemn his call for assassination and to marginalize him in party proceedings.
And here's another tasty Robertson quote:
"When the poor rise up it’s because there’s an upper-class reformer somewhere stirring them up"
Um....well...o...kay? Tonight we were watching the hurricane coverage and they were showing local churches that had made themselves into shelters. Rose said "see, now that's what churches should do" to which I said "actually, that could be all they ever did and they'd still never get all of it done- that's what makes it inexcusable for them to waste any time on us at all, no matter what the Bible says about our private lives":
Crosswalk.com: A Christian Case for Gay Marriage?
The basic worldview that now undergirds the argument for normalizing homosexuality is based in the assumption that homosexual behavior, in itself, is not sinful. Accepting the bizarre claims of revisionist Bible scholars, proponents claim that the crucial biblical texts condemning homosexuality actually condemn something other than "committed" same-sex relationships. The fact that a plain and direct reading of the scriptures would leave no room for same-sex marriage is dismissed as rooted in nothing more than the limited understanding of the biblical authors and the presumed "homophobia" of ancient cultures.
(I ran across that accidentally while checking out Crosswalk's piece on Cindy Sheehan), which came to me as a Yahoo News Alert:
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan writes that "Camp Casey has given me back my joy for life, and a renewed sense of hope for my future and my country's future" ...In a letter Sheehan is sending to U.S. congressional representatives, she mentions that she has "been sitting outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford since August 6th in a roadside ditch we named Camp Casey, seeking a meeting and a dialogue about an illegal and immoral war"...It appears that the only answers acceptable to Sheehan are based on the premise that the war should never have happened.
Ooooh, Christian snark. Makes me a little nauseous actually. Must be time for bed.

August 29, 2005
I don't have time for much today, I spent all evening watching "Tipping the Velvet", and it has thrown off my whole bedtime schedule. Watching "Tipping the Velevet", however, inspired me to go off looking for stuff on lesbian and gay history which I will now share:
An Essay On the Role of Women Loving Women In Herstory
that the concept of being a woman loving woman is also relatively new. Before (and even now), the idea was that lesbians wanted to be men simply so that they could be with women in a sexual manner. There was no concept of a woman actually enjoying being a woman loving woman. So, it was assumed that if a woman liked women romantically that she must want to become a physical man, as intercourse between a man and a woman was seen as the only "real" and "fulfilling" kind of sex. As such, lesbians in particular were often described in very masculine terms, often with a strong sense of hatred or even pity that she would forever be unable to attain "manhood". Likewise, more traditionally feminine women loving women were often not seen at all as it was assumed that women-identified lesbians didn't exist.
A History of Gay Marriage, Rictor Norton
In the 1720s there were about 40 "molly houses" in central London, disorderly pubs or coffee houses where gay men (called "mollies") socialized, singing bawdy songs and dancing country dances while someone played the fiddle. Many of these gay clubs had a "Marrying Room" or "Chapel", where, according to witnesses, "They would go out by couples into another room on the same floor, to be married, as they called it, and when they came back they would tell what they had been doing" ...Molly marriages didn't have the blessing of any church until the 1810s, when Rev John Church officiated as the "Chaplain" at male gay marriages at The Swan in Vere Street. Some of the members of this gay brothel were Miss Selina, a police constable; Black-Eyed Leonora, a Drummer of the Guards; and Miss Sweet Lips, a country grocer. Rev Church, a Baptist, also presided at gay funerals, for example the burial of Richard Oakden, hanged for sodomy on November 15, 1809. Church himself was sent to prison for two years in 1817

August 28, 2005
This is something I wish we saw more of in our religios leaders:
Islamic scholar bans suicide attacks
A London-based Islamic scholar has issued a fatwa, or religious edict, banning Al Qaida-style suicide operations, a Saudi newspaper reported on Saturday. "These operations are closer to suicide than to martyrdom-seeking, and they are taboo and not permissible," Abdul Menem Mustafa Halimeh reportedly wrote on his website. Saudi newspaper Asharq Al Awsat described the Syrian-born scholar, also known as Abu Baseer Al Tartussi, as a top ideologue for Islamist militants. Tartussi reportedly said that one of the reasons for his stance was that suicide operations often entail "wrongfully killing innocent and sacred souls, be they Muslim or otherwise." Al Awsat said that some Muslims consider the edict a letdown for Al Qaida followers, and has provoked angry comments on several Islamist websites.
I say "I wish we saw more" of this in light of Pat Robertson's recent remarks. As "The Daily Show" pointed out, when other religious conservatices were asked to comment on the remarks they downplayed the whole situation by claiming that no one listens to Pat Robertson. They don't support him, but it would be against professional courtesy to denounce him, so they just minimized the whole thing. However, as one of them pointed out, he owns the network that broadcasted those remarks, in fact he has an entire empire. He reaches I million households. Maybe nobody "important" takes him seriously, but a large part of the flock for whom these other ministers share responsibility with Mr. Robertson does take him seriously, and these other ministers should be deeply concerned about the damage he's doing to their teachings. When religious leaders go crazy, no one can stop them except other religious leaders. No secular authority is going to have any effect on dangerous religious rhetoric as their credibility is automatically rejected because they're secular. The Religious Right is grossly perverting the message of Christ and no one can stop them except other pastors. Jim Wallis can't do this all by himself, and his credibility would be suspect with these people, anyway. It's all the mild-mannered middle of the road guys who wince inside at this and yet say nothing- remember what Christ did in this situation:
But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves
Those are the only harsh words Christ speaks. The only people Christ actually goes on the offensive against throughout the Gospels are the religious authorities of the time. He attacks no sinners. He attacks no non-believers. He attacks no politicians. He only attacks the hypocrites that are polluting His faith.

August 25, 2005
This is an interesting story for many reasons:
Playing a Real Platinum Album
So I used to be in this band called the Ws. I don’t think we started out intending to be a “Christian” band, but we ended up being one. Damn. Well, anyways, we had a single that was quite popular with our Christian brethren and it sold us many records. It even landed on a compilation record of all the year’s greatest Christian singles; Wow 1999. This compilation was a double-CD set and ended up selling over 250,000 copies. Since it was a double-CD set, the R.I.A.A. (Recording Industry Association of America… or something like that) counts it as selling over 500,000 records. This gets you a Platinum Record in the industry.* It doesn't actually, my mistake. Now, as an aside, there is something you should know about the Christian-Industry. Record sales are sometimes inflated beyond actual sales. This is because of Soundscan’s efforts to make up for a lack of Soundscan record keeping in certain areas. Since some Christian bookstores don’t scan sales in the Soundscan database, it was thought that numbers were under-reported. To make up for this, some Christian bookstores in certain areas had their numbers adjusted to make up for lost records at non-reporting bookstores.
This is interesting to me because I just read in the Library Journal that libraries don't purchase a lot of Christian fiction because collection develpment policies dictate all books added must be reviewed and Christian fiction rarely is. This guy gives no reason why Soundscan doesn't scan the Christian bookstores, and I am sure the Christian explanation is their persecution, but Library Journal said reviewers just don't read Christian fiction because it's "Formulaic and Heavyhanded". In other news, I am a little confused by the language in this new American Legion resolution:American Legion Declares War on Protestors -- Media Next?
"It would be tragic if the freedoms our veterans fought so valiantly to protect would be used against their successors today as they battle terrorists bent on our destruction.”
It just doesn't seem like freedom when we can only use it in convenient periods. And here is a random thought I had in the bathtub:
Conservatives claim correctly that liberalism tends to increase the higher you go up the educational ladder. To me this seems like a sign that being liberal is a good idea. To conservatives, it's a sign that avoiding education is a good idea.

August 23, 2005
I thought I was going to talk about Pat Robertson again, but there's really nothing else to say- y'all don't need me to point out how incredibly inappropriate that was. I am going to talk about this instead:
ihatepatrobertson.com
You go back to the various laws that took away the difficulty of getting a divorce, and the people leading the charge were homosexuals, way back in the ’70s. So we have no-fault divorce. Who are leading the charge for abortions? So often, you’ll find people who are lesbians leading the fight for the destruction of human life. Now they want to destroy marriage.
Ok, that's my problem with homophobia. I totally get the whole not-being-able-to-get-past-what-the-Bible-says-because-the-Bible-can't-be-wrong-or-I'll-just-die thing. Most of these people will never meet us and expecting them to throw their entire world-view completely out of whack is just unreasonable. But blaming us for abortion and divorce, or for pedophilia, or for the deterioration of the culture is just idiotic. I will say it as many times as I have to- there are just not enough of us to do that kind of damage. Especially in a capitalist society. That filth on television is there because you want it there. You have to get more than percent of a focus group to like something before anyone's going to put any money up- gay people can't swing that. There is one of us to every nine of you- there is only so much damage we can do, especially when our only weapon is our love for each other. That's my problem with homophobia- fine, don't approve of me, but it's really ugly to attack me when I am already disadvantaged and to blame me for problems that no one could have caused but yourselves. It doesn't matter what the Bible says about me- that is between me and God and you need to just sit over there and be glad you're not faced with this quandary. The sinfulness of it is a personal issue and there are not enough of us for it to make any difference to you therefore it is really tacky to discuss it at all even if we do insist on writing ourselves into all of the movies and tv shows.

August 21, 2005
I am excited about this:
In globalization twist, unions target Wal-Mart worldwide
A global coalition of unions is launching an unprecedented campaign to organize workers around the world at US retail giant Wal-Mart, seeking to bring a new level of globalization to the labor movement. The Wal-Mart campaign was set to be officially launched at a meeting in Chicago Monday of Union Network International (UNI), a group that includes 900 unions in some 140 countries...According to a statement from UFCW, Wal-Mart "pays poverty wages, ships jobs to countries where sweatshops are prevalent and, in the US, shifts enormous health care costs onto taxpayers." Additionally, the union said that because of its size, Wal-Mart is able to drive down wages and benefits, which "has become the new global economic model" followed by many other firms.
This is relevant to a Jesus Club because in this case, the unions are coming far closer to honoring Christ's legacy than the most visible face of the church (I have decided the term "most visible face of the church" is more accurate than "the church", at least for now). The most visible face of the church is probobly denouncing the unions for this. Why don't I go and see...Ok, ok, I couldn't find Jerry Falwell or James DObson on the record anywhere denouncing the unions, and I promise to think about what it means that I am so disappointed by that, but I did find something else, and I also promise to think about how gleeful I felt when I found it:
Pat Robertson Criticized For Promoting Diet Drink On Air
An evangelical media watchdog group claims Pat Robertson is abusing his nonprofit status to market an "age-defying" diet drink. For years, Robertson has been touting the shake on his Christian Broadcasting Network and giving away the recipe for free. Now he's teamed up with the health food chain GNC to sell it nationally...The head of the watchdog group, the Trinity Foundation, said the drink got big because it was promoted on donor-funded airtime. But Robertson said he's just exercising his right to start a business. There may also be a legal fight. A bodybuilder who used the shake to help lose 200 pounds said Robertson's people led him to believe he would be its national spokesman. Robertson's attorney called the man's allegations "bizarre and completely untrue."
I just can't help it. My life is a lot harder than it needs to be because of people like him. In this case I'm just a big karma fan.

August 19, 2005
There was a lively discussion at my house this morning about my objection to a lyric in a contemporary Christian song to which Rose is editing a video. The artist is Carman and I cannot find the lyric online but here is the sentence in question:
"Atheism is the wedge
under the foundation of our faith,
trying to topple our relationship with Christ.
When the fool said in his heart,
"There is no God"
he rejects the truth God painted
on the canvas of the night"
I do not like the song because of that lyric. I think the song could have been really great without that line. I like the rest of the song. I like that it talks a lot about science and it implies that people of faith can use science to do great things and seems to support the idea of synergy between faith and science. I like that message. I like that science is not painted as an evil. I just wish he had stopped there. I wish he had not cast unbelievers as the problem. This sets up an "us against them" mentality that is the opposite of Christ's message. Congratulating ourselves on our superiority and gloating down at others from our high position of salvation does not help us learn to turn the other cheek and it does not do anything to address the real enemy of our faith. We are the enemy of our faith. Corruption in ourselves and among those in positions of authority within our faith are the enemies. Jesus went after the church authorities, not the unbelievers. And I really don't like the use of the word "fool". Jesus would not have called unbelievers ugly names, He would have had dinner with them. There should be no name-calling and finger-pointing in our relationship with the lost. Our job is to seek them out and love them into faith. This is why I am not touched by that song.

August 8, 2005
Ok, I said I was going to get back to the Goldsmith and Jesus parallels. But I am starting to realize that it's not so much any specific parallel teachings so mach as parallel principles: humility, restraint, nonattachment, discipline, restraint, self-control- these are all bound up in those doctrines I harp on as the hardest and thus of the utmost priority "Do not resist an evil person" and "sell everything you have". The muscles used to master those doctrines would be the same muscles we would have to use to bring our existence into harmony with gaia. It is all about self-control. And anyone who has ever struggled with issues of control and lived to tell the take will tell you that in the end you win by learning that all you can ever control is yourself, but in controlling yourself you control a lot, and what's more- nothing can control you, either, there's just not enough room.Another thought I am having about the Bible today: maybe the great misunderstanding which plagues us rises from our insistence upon projecting our view of ourselves onto the universe. The Bible is the story of our relationship with God, not the story of God. We can't know the story of God, we can only know our history with God, and since it is ours it cannot be perfect.

August 16, 2005
A sad example of a history footnote that is always worth mentioning:
Shrinking Detroit has 12,000 abandoned homes
There are more than 12,000 abandoned homes in the Detroit area, a byproduct of decades of layoffs at the city's auto plants and white flight to the suburbs. And despite scores of attempts by government and civic leaders to set the city straight, the automobile capitol of the world seems trapped in a vicious cycle of urban decay. Detroit has lost more than half its population since its heyday in the 1950's. The people who remain are mostly black -- 83 percent -- and mostly working class, with 30 percent of the population living below the poverty line
How did we get so far away from this?:
...to prevent kingdom-like accumulations of wealth that could, as Jefferson noted, "threaten the state" itself, corporations in the first hundred or so years of this nation couldn't exist longer than 40 years, and then had to be dissolved. Their first purpose had to be to serve the public, and their second purpose to make money
I soooo wish they would have carved that in stone right under the Capitol rotunda. I was going to stop there, but I can't get onto tripod to post this so I had time to run across this, which is cool for two reasons:
The Proverbial Truth About George W. Bush and Cindy Sheehan
I direct our president, who likes to play Christian, to the book of Proverbs 6: 16-19, where God tells us the six things which he hates: 1) Haughty eyes, 2) A lying tongue, 3) Hands that shed innocent blood[...]
The first reason this is cool is obvious- it's right up this website's alley. The second reason is because it quotes a scripture that is also also used in the title song of the very first Indigo Girls album, Strange Fire:
mercenaries of the shrine
now who are you to speak for god
with haughty eyes and lying tongues
and hands that shed innocent blood
now who delivered you the power
to interpret calvary
you gamble away our freedom
to gain your own authority

August 15, 2005
I am still cramping. This is all that's caught my attention today:
What Makes People Gay?
Proving people are born gay would give them wider social acceptance and better protection against discrimination, many gay rights advocates argue. In the last decade, as this "biological" argument has gained momentum, polls find Americans - especially young adults - increasingly tolerant of gays and lesbians. And that's exactly what has groups opposed to homosexuality so concerned. The Family Research Council, a conservative Christian think tank in Washington, D.C., argues in its book Getting It Straight that finding people are born gay "would advance the idea that sexual orientation is an innate characteristic, like race; that homosexuals, like African-Americans, should be legally protected against 'discrimination;' and that disapproval of homosexuality should be as socially stigmatized as racism. However, it is not true." Some advocates of gay marriage argue that proving sexual orientation is inborn would make it easier to frame the debate as simply a matter of civil rights. That could be true, but then again, freedom of religion enjoyed federal protection long before inborn traits like race and sex.
It just seems to me like freedom of religion ought to work in favor of tolerance, since there are religions- even official denominations of the dominant religion that are tolerant. So how is insisting on legislating from one group of sects's narrow interpretation not in itself a violation of religious freedom? Of course, that just brings us to a stalemate.

Nice People That Link to Me

Cool People That Don't Link to Me Yet