This whole mammography thing has got me seething. The media strikes again, making this sound like the greatest controversy since the dawn of mankind. It paints women as “dithering” (Dick the “dick” Cheney’s word) and flustered and this change in recommendations. We are all having the vapors waiting to be told what to do next. Yeah, right, women are such simple creatures, unable to read, digest, ask. We await paternalistic advice.

Go read up on the literature, make an appointment with your doctor and together decide what’s best for you. End of story. Well not quite.

As might be expected the “they’re coming to take me away” crew in the Rethug party wasted no time in jumping on the bandwagon. “First step toward rationing care, ” they warn. The blasted health care reform will mean that women will die! Oh shaddup will ya. The usual braindeads are active again as in Michelle and various other not so smart women.

It seems that a Democrat, one Rep. Jerrold Nadler ( D-NY) introduced a bill requiring insurance companies to cover annual mammograms and other breast examination screenings. He had 79 co-sponsors of the bill. Guess what? Only one Republican is a co-sponsor. And none of course of our crazy ladies who are running around yelling that the sky is falling.

Just the usual politics of innuendo and lie. Such is our political world today.

***

I guess when you are thoroughly dishonest, it’s just really hard to know how to be honest. Last week Foxy Noise was caught with it’s pants down when it was discovered that Sean Hannity and his band of merry wackos had substituted film from another rally to enhance the numbers at the teaparty on Capital Hill on the eve of the House health care reform bill debate and vote.

Oops, they said. We are having meetins’ and meetin’ with everyone, and promisin’ that it was a mistake, an inadvertent oops factor. Trust us.

Except, that well, it seems to have happened again. Foxy was all shivery and giddy with orgasmic glee at the Sarah book tour in Grand Rapids, Michigan. They wanted to share with their moronic viewers the crowds that gathered to buy that great “policy” book offered by the Moosish One. But alas, the “crowds” weren’t very impressive, so Fox jazzed it up a bit by showing footage of the 2008 campaign, passing if off as the actual book buying crowd.

I guess it’s another oops. But trust them. They are fair. . . . and oh yeah, balanced.

***

I just ran into this site and so I make no promises as to whether its worthwhile or not, but it certainly looks promising.

Most of us bloggers, well some of us, well me, at least, dream of being published. Course, that does require actually writing a book, or at least trying to compile all these posts into something coherent.

Most of us are deterred from working very hard at said dream since we know that dang few folks are ever published unless you are a celebrity. Then apparently compiling  “Dick and Jane went down the road with Spot,” seems more than adequate to make any publisher all jiggly with greed.

This site promises to help you write, format and break into the publishing world. It’s free. It’s called Fast Pencil. As I said, I’ve not had time to examine this site, but I sure plan to go back and look it over and sign up and see if I can finally move this dream to some fruition. At least that’s my hope. If so inclined, take a look.

***

I seriously tried to avoid anything on Sarah today. I too get tired of the Moosalini and her warped mind. But this was just too funny.

It seems that the author stopped at a Border’s to sign books. All the fine folks of the town had been there for hours, standing in the rain, buying their books and getting their guarantees that Sarah would sign their books.

Well, Sarah got tired of signing, had better things to do, or otherwise had, as they say in the post, mavericky business to attend to. So she left.

Said citizenry were, how do I say this. . .IRATE. They called her “Quitter!” and vowed that their love affair was over with the diva from the North.

Given that anybody who supports Palin is not a bright light in the constellations of  the heavens anyway, it should not surprise us that their “support” turns out to be fickle as well. We just heard yesterday that a young lady was unaware that Ms. Palin had supported the bank bail-out back in the day of the campaign (remember when McCain had to suspend his campaign to rush back to Washington to save the country by pushing through that vote?). Well, now it seems to her, testing the winds of the uninformed and uneducated, that the bailout was bad, so Sarah no longer supports it. The poor supporter was clueless, but sure that “Sarah doesn’t support it now” and that would be correct. I guess the flip flopping is okay from Rethugs.

***

see more dog and puppy pictures

The next time you call your husband a Neanderthal, you might be accurate. Actually not. Just kidding. Genetic testing tends to suggest that in the human genome there is little if any trace of the Neanderthal in us. But that doesn’t negate that he was a close relative albeit now extinct.

Let me explain. Nova has been doing a three part series on what makes us human. It has been fascinating, as all such things are to me. Like any science, there are always questions unanswered, and competing theories around the edges. This is what drives science in general and frankly we cannot expect or want certainty. For then we admit there is nothing more to learn.

In the last several years, questions remain and have been looked at afresh about how we came to be us. Exactly how and why did we evolve away from our chimp and ape cousins? I have spoken on this before, but frankly it has always been something of a mystery what happened to the happless Neanderthal. At least now, we have some good theories.

The amazing thing in the area of paleontology, is that like many other disciplines, there is a lot of overlap. This seems obvious when you think about it, since the planetary development of Earth makes it an organic whole. It stands to reason and would be a serious problem should archaeology, geology, astronomy and so forth, not tend to support  each other in conclusions which touch them both.

And that is where real progress has been made. It seems that Neanderthal was part of that initial migration out of Africa. They settled mostly in the northern European lands and frankly soon were busy fighting the climate. Ice ages came and went, and Neanderthal became adept at living in this harsh environment.

From where came this homo sapien then? Well it seems that climate change in Africa, meant the reduction and almost total elimination of the rain forests. Our remaining ancestors, perhaps down to as few as 800 breeding individuals were forced from the in lands to the sea shores around the continent.

Here they learned new techniques. Their tool making became refined, they clearly turned to eating seafood. They adapted to new conditions. And it appears that genetic changes conducive to such adaptation, worked  to enlarge our brains, at least as to the cognitive parts.

An amazing thing can be done with bones these days. We are actually what we eat. It is exactly true. What we eat is translated into our bones in terms of chemical trails. We can now test Neanderthal bones and determine their diet. It was almost exclusively meat. Although their environment contained both eatable plants and berries, they eschewed such fare in favor of meat.

This may be because of all the food available, meat was by far the most numerous and most plentiful, given the harsh climate. Meat provided the fuel necessary to survive.

What happened when the omnivorous creature, Homo sapien entered the picture, having now decided to explore himself?  No doubt confrontations occurred between the two groups. In the past, theories abounded that Neanderthals were either killed off by superior weaponry or inbred with the sapiens, and thus disappeared.

Such seems not to be the case. No trace of Neanderthal DNA is apparent in the human genome as I said.

Most all the bones of Neanderthals found show multiple fractures. Life was harsh and dangerous for this group. Their weapons were spears and they they were not throwing spears. They got up close and personal with game, and no doubt suffered grievous injuries. Few lived beyond their 30’s.

It is now thought that Neanderthals were basically pushed out of the way, much as American Indians were pushed out of their lands by the white settlers in the US. Finally they were confined to the Rock of Gibraltar, and there they died out. They may have been forced to the extremes of their climate.

Much of this work has been done by the Max Planck Institute in Germany, a premier science institute in paleontology research. There, scientists are working multi-disciplinarily to uncover the rise of humanity.

It seems that the cell deteriorates at a fixed rate, and based on this, we can determine with some clarity when the two, Homo Sapien and Neanderthal had a common ancestor. That appears to be around 200,000 years ago.

Little by little, we are learning why we stood up, how our thumbs became specialized, how our brains grew, and how we adapted to various climate conditions. They are what drove us upward and onward. Near, at one point, to extinction ourselves, we held on, adapted to new conditions, and ultimately flourished. Perhaps we have kind of over did it now, as our very numbers now threaten the well-being of our planet.

But it is easy enough to sit back and look on in amazement. What has God wrought? Apparently quite a lot of humans!

Yes, I am aware that it is considered a cheap shot to kick a dead horse.

Still, it at some point must be admitted that this is just too good to pass up.

I can but imagine the nightmares that one John S. McCain has lived with, knowing that this moment must come–Sarah would write a book!

We cannot feel a bit sorry for the old codger. He asked for this, exactly this actually. He purposefully chose an incompetent but comely woman in the hopes of resurrecting a dying campaign. He, in his, sexist world, bet the house that women would be so thankful for any woman running for the almost presidency, that they would abandon all ideology in favor of pure girl power.

He bet wrong, because shocks of all shocks, he was dead wrong. And the consequences, as they say, can be a bitch. It is unalterably true that after the short bump, McCain’s fortunes began a steady downward fall as the public got to know his dream barbie. And with that, it was also unalterably true that said barbie would write a book throwing off the defeat at someone else’s feet. Certainly not her own.

So the weary warrior begged his campaign team to lay low, and most especially not to comment on the diva’s ghost written blame book. He begged them not to, because he was in a no-win situation. If he condemned his little Muppet sidekick, he risked the ugly truth that he had knowingly chosen an incompetent person at a critical time in history to be but a heartbeat from supreme power.  If he took the high-road and refused to condemn her, he allowed her condemnation of his team to go unanswered.

He decided that silence was the best response. Never explain. Yet the troops refused to comply as most of them figure they have lives yet to lead and jobs yet to get and there is no way they are going to go quietly into the night  or languish twisting in the wind.

And so the farce begins. Sarah has begun her “book” tour, and for the most part, is engaging in the same, half finished sentences, thoughts, jumbled up, stream of conscience drivel that we so have come to expect. And not only from the McCain VEEP team, but also from media, and worse yet from her own mouth, the lies are becoming apparent.

And outright lying is what it is all about. Republicans for reasons that are not at all clear, continue to believe that anything they say is immediately wiped from the tv, radio and print media archives. She now categorically claims she never said “she could see Russia from her house.” Technically, she didn’t, but she alleged that her state’s proximity to Russia gave her unique abilities of perception, and “did you know Charlie that there are land places in Alaska from which you can see Russia?” Indeed my demented little miss, but so what?

She tells Oprah or Barbara that there was no family vote on her taking of the VP offer, yet she tells Bill-O the Clown that there was a family vote and it was unanimous.

She categorically blames the entire loss on the economy tanking. Nothing to do with her at all. She claims its unfair to ask about her wacko ministers in Wasilla would are extracting demons from people, since she barely ever attends, and then suggests that the Rev. Wright was fair game in the campaign.

She admits her daddy was a science teacher, and then tries to please her right wing crazies by agreeing with creationism, all the while Rethug insiders say she was questioned carefully as part of the vetting, and they were satisfied she was at best an ID proponent, with little of any real understanding of what it even meant anyway.

She claims she learned that the campaign was leaving Michigan as a lost cost from a reporter, but footage of the event shows categorically that she told the reporter she had read the reports herself, and had heard of these intentions and didn’t agree.

Sarah is simply a liar, and doesn’t work any harder than most of the crazy right wing to hide it. She, like her compatriots at Foxy Noise have such a low opinion of their cultish followers, that they know these inconsistencies won’t come to them or won’t be granted any importance if they do. Illogical people are perfectly set to believe illogical arguments.

Mostly, Sarah just continues to embarrass me as a woman. Women have had to fight long and hard to be taken seriously in all areas of life beyond the home. We continue to labor and receive unfair wages for our efforts. We continue to have to be better than most men to get our toe in the door.

It is a shocking shame to most of us, that an air-brain dilettante like Sarah Palin has the unmitigated gall to “represent” us. It is as if some male gay porn star was elevated to be the spokesperson for gay marriage. With “friends” like this, who needs enemies.

Worse, it has divided women, and forced educated and thinking women to be embarrassed by all those women who have so little political acumen that someone “just like me” is what they consider viable as a candidate for President of the United States of America.

So Sarah, please, spare me. Go home with your  trigs and bristol meyers, and other oddly named progeny, and leave the discussion to adults. You are so far out of your league. We just got through apologizing to the world for our insufferable lack of paying attention in the elections of one George W. If you keep asking us to take you seriously, no doubt we will soon be swamped with the psychiatric bills of millions overseas who are ready to bunker down at the thought that you are looking Putin in the eye.

It goes without saying, that people blog for as many reasons as why they eat chicken. It’s best if I only speak to why I do so.

I have to laugh at times, as sometimes, a detractor or two, expresses his/her chagrin at my “rhetoric” and announces that somehow I’m not being “fair” to other points of view, or somehow enticing people here with gimmicks and them lambasting them with “liberalism.”

I laugh  since such people are apparently not very savvy when it comes to blogging. It is, after all, a personal place to speak, and thus the speaker controls perfectly the message.

I’m quick to admit that I have been obsessed in the past with “stats”.  I write a lot, I am passionate in my opinions regardless of how “factually” right I am. I have something to say, I want to be heard. I plead guilty. Others, who have no such need, don’t blog. I am thrilled when people comment, yet I’ve come to realize that some of my most ardent readers probably never comment. They have no desire to speak their opinion.

As many of you have noticed, I have a “flag counter” and from time to time, I go to the site to see exactly how things break down. It’s a shock to me that only 62% of my readers are from the US. Of course, other large groups come from Canada and Great Britain. However Germany far outstrips Australia to the tune of about 3 to 1. I’m read in India as well quite regularly. But more people in Turkey read me than in New Zealand.

I wonder at what all this means. I don’t see a lot of discussion by bloggers of their international audience. SiteMeter does give you an option to see your visitors plotted on a world map similar to the cluster maps also located on the side bar. I don’t know if my percentages are odd or normal frankly, but somehow I suspect they are somewhat odd.

Regular readers here certainly notice that I am quick to speak harshly about my country and my government when I feel it is appropriate. The only folks, (I like to think anyway) who are unabashedly flag waving “my country right or wrong” folks, seem to be those whose education stopped forevermore at the completion of a basic GED. Given that most of the history taught in most schools in the US consists of our “achievements” this is rather expected.

One has to read long and systematically both history and politics to learn that the US is no different than most others in the thinking and motivations of its leaders. We tend to look out for number one, and unfortunately that has meant that a whole lot of folks around the world have paid rather severe prices for our needs to be met. We reap and will continue to reap the consequences of those actions.

No one seriously doubts that much of the anger directed at the US in the form of terrorism today is the direct result of our rather callus treatment of those “less well developed” than ourselves over the centuries. We carried on the European, and indeed world domination scheme that has always been with us. We have done little if any better than most of them in ruling our dynasty.

I like to think that I am read by so many over seas because they know that I will call a spade a spade as they say. I will not whitewash nor glorify the US when she is wrong. If we are ever to solve the seemingly unsolvable social issues that divide us internationally, then honesty must be attempted.

I like to think that I am read because over time, some have concluded that I represent fairly a segment of the population that is sane, rational, and still thinking. One comes here and will not find bizarre fantasies of creationism, American exceptionalism, neo-conservative power ploys, Christian superiority and other such flap. I hope my international brothers and sisters see that America is full of folks like me, and that we are working hard to undo some of the damage done over the decades and especially over the last eight misery laden years.

I hope they see that America is generally still sane. I like to think they see that most in America greet the rest of the world as equals, as responsible humans trying to figure out how in the best Rodney King display, “we can all just get along.”

The greatest sadness to me is that blogging has not caught on around the globe the way it has here. I have spend long hours searching for similarly situated blogs around the world, and have had little success. I would welcome an international discussion of policy and issues. For the most part that has not happened. I’m not sure why exactly, but just as there are people who write letters to the editor and there are people who would never dream of doing such a thing, the same seems to be part of the blogging/commenting world.

It is still a bit daunting and awesome to me to think that in some sense people might think I reflect some American truth. Those who worry about what we will do next and how it will affect them, perhaps find reason to have some faith that a steady hand is taking the tiller. Certainly President Obama has done much to give such assurance.

If I can do some tiny part to help that along, then I am gratified. On the other hand, I may be touted worldwide as nothing but an example of the crazy American that all must guard against. It’s perhaps a toss up. Still, I ponder, and in my imagination, I like to think I make some difference. How’s that for arrogance?

Note to self: revisit the definition of humility.

Jeffrey A. Johnson’s latest book, Got Style: Personality Based Evangelism, couldn’t have come along at a better time. Some weeks ago, at a “Jubilee Ministries” meeting at my church, a number of us began discussing the issue of evangelism, and what we can do to attract those people who may be “spiritual” but unchurched. How do we get out the word that our church ought to be a place that seeking people need to take a look at?

As you know, I’ve expressed some reservations about evangelism in general, in the past. I mostly think of those people who camp on your doorstep and otherwise corner you and then tell you all about how Jesus died to save you, and if you don’t listen up you’ll surely go to hell.

I find such practices highly ineffectual at best, and downright invasive at worst. However, as we came to conclude in our new group, “Infectious Faith,” there are people out there who very much would be  a part of a believing community, if they only knew. If they only knew that some of their worst fears about church are not present, and more importantly, if they understood that they could live out their desire for serving their community through church based ministries.

So, it was with that inevitably serendipity that I received an e-mail from Kim Shimer, Marketing Director at Judson Press, asking me if I would like to participate in the “virtual book tour” of Johnson’s new book. I read the book eagerly, wondering if it would convince me that evangelism was something I could promote.

And indeed I can recommend this book. Mr. Johnson has all the credentials necessary to speak on this subject.  Long experience and education in the field have led him to some, at least for me, really new ideas on how to attract new people to the joy of faith.

Jeff Johnson is quite humble in stating that he has discovered nothing new, but has really added to work of others in the area. But indeed, his contribution is exceptional here. Instead of the usual “methodology” for approaching and engaging non-believers, leading to the same sorry statistics for success, Johnson brings a whole new idea forth.

The idea, is that we are all different personality types, and we are best in using our strengths as individuals when attempting to promote our faith to the world. We are called to evangelism clearly in the bible, yet most of us feel fairly uncomfortable in discussing our faith and certainly in trying to get others to join us in our churches.

Johnson shows us that we are naturally inclined to two basic types: word type evangelism and action type. The word types subdivide into assertive, storytelling, and analytical and the action types subdivide into relational, invitational, and incarnational. A handy test is available in the book so you can determine which type you are.

A church can use such information broadly speaking to determine the general strengths and weaknesses of its congregation, and then to help education and train people to use those methods that are most conducive to their personalities, and thus will prove most authentic and realistic to those who are approached.

Johnson’s work is backed up by reference throughout with biblical reference to those persons, apostles and disciples, and others who use these various types in their own work in history. Johnson is pastor of the Mount Vernon Baptist Church in Hurricane, West Virginia, but by no means should anyone get the idea that this evangelistic system is limited to any particular type of Christian group. In fact, it can be used in any congregation, whether it be one that considers itself liberal or conservative.

Each style of evangelism is presented, defined, and explained in terms of weaknesses and strengths. Examples in the bible are given for each. Any church, or individual can use this information to determine what types are most common to themselves, and how best to use that to their advantage in engaging those whom they identify as potential new members.

Quite frankly, it is hard to avoid the claim that evangelism is merely a means to an end to enlarge the coffers and increase the “numbers” power of any particular congregation. And no doubt, the naysayers will focus on this. But in reality, all churches are called to spread the “good news.” While arguably it can be asserted that all people are pretty much aware of Christianity, it is palpably clear that many have very odd and often wrong ideas about and proper evangelism can do much to correct these misunderstandings.

And no one would deny that most churches are engaged in very important ministries to help the less fortunate in our communities. New members are essential both to fund and to people the groups who work tirelessly to alleviate some of our most pressing social ills. Evangelism serves to improve and increase these ministries and there can be no doubt that this is both good and useful.

While I am no expert here, I found this book fascinating and one that I intend to bring to the attention to my group and my pastors. I think it worth a good look by all those who must allot a shrinking budget to growing social problems. Make this a topic of conversation at your next church meeting and consider this book as model for how to engage the issue. It is well worth the read.

***This is just a reminder that the book reviewed above was provided free of cost by the publisher. This blog was also listed and linked on the publisher’s site regarding this book, as participating in this book promotion. No discussion occurred whatsoever as to the content of this review. It remains my personal opinion.

Times have been busy as I’ve alluded to a number of times in the last few weeks. By and large, it’s been good. I’ve been reading my fool head off and am nearing my completion of study of Genesis. On to Exodus next of course. With a number of other calls on my time, I’ve found less and less time to devote to just relaxing online and reading blogs. I have missed a goodly number.

This has been a bit lessened in impact by the fact that I’m a daily visitor to FFacebook, and follow any number of links to several blogs a day anyway. I wish a few of my favorite bloggers would join the Facebook interface. I find it highly useful in both promoting my blog, and learning of others I’d not likely run into. I also get a nice bunch of links to good news stories.

As most of you know, my foray into renewing friendships with old classmates hasn’t fared as well. It turns out that my neighborhood turned out to be a hotbed of fundamentalist blubbery. Who could have known. Yet, I’ve had a few pleasant conversations with some who remained undamaged by this brainwashing.

On the other hand, I’ve met a number of friends of other bloggers and have been enriched by their wit, intelligence, and eye for the great news story. Their hearts are deeply in the right place, and I am delighted to find so many passionate and compassionate people.

In any event, I’m here today to alert you to a number of new blogs that I’ve run across. They are rather eclectic (what’s new?) this time. I hope you will stop by a few and see if any of them tickle your fancy.

In the non-believers category, see the following: Atheist Ethicist, and  Atheist Revolution. Both are well written and thoughtful. You don’t have to agree, but if you are to understand your faith, you should listen to other voices I believe.

In the category crafting,  look up Corner Paint. Vicki does have the most amazing eye for color and her blog is just enjoyable for the beauty she brings together. Eye candy all the way. The blog leans toward decorating ideas.

In the religious category, add, Ancient Hebrew Poetry, Biblia Hibraica, Experimental Theology, Father Jakes Stops the World, God’s Politics, NYT’s Religion and Belief,  and Paul of Tarsus. These run the gambit. Some are quite technical and designed for the more serious biblical student, the others are more general and often deal with issues of the day.

That’s it for now. Hope you link up along the side with a few of these and try them out. And I do hope that more of you will go over to Facebook. I think it’s a great way to stay in touch between bloggers, as well as other groups you are interested in.

And just a little tidbit. This traveled around the better circles on Facebook. Hope you like it. It certainly tickled me!

One thing you can surely count on these days, is that the great slavering beast that is the ultra right, will turn on a dime to attack the latest media subject favorite of the day. The dripping canines are all too happy to release their hold on health care reform rhetoric in favor of biting into the new kid on the block–Gitmo trials and Muslims in general!

We spoke about the ugly backlash against Muslim Americans and Muslims in general just a few days ago, and we’re sobered to report that the rhetoric of hate is alive and well. One Willie Kristol of Foxy Noise and the Weekly Standard, is  wont to argue that the Muslim psychiatrist charged in the murders at Fort Hood, hardly needs a trial.

“ They should just go ahead and convict him and put him to death.” Yes, we all know the outcome Kristol reasons, why waste the time and money over rights and trials and all that stuff? It’s oh so understandable why such people favor torture and other suspension of rights for those they deem unworthy, opines blogger Andrew Sullivan.

Get into the Gitmo uproar and as they say, let the games begin. The wingnuttery right is aghast and shocked at the idea that we are going to try some of those long incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay in courts in the USA. Yep, treat them like the criminals we believe them to be. Try them. What’s to be upset about?

Well, the wacko right is plenty upset. It even got on Sarah’s radar as she posted on Facebook. Course, she has little if any idea what it is all about, but some of her handlers told it was the side to be on. So she is suitably “appalled.”

Now, me, I’m the proverbial average person who wonders, “how can this be?” What is all the hoopla here? Why are we not wanting people charged with crimes tried in our civilian court system? Is there something wrong with it? If so, why aren’t these same patriots calling for the system to be shut down against all persons charged with criminal offenses?

No, you don’t hear that. You do hear that such trials pose a clear and present danger to the public. Can’t have shackled men shuffling from cell to courtroom and back again. The danger is palpable. So many wreak havoc under similar circumstances.

And prison! If they are convicted and end up in state or federal prison! Why how can we let that happen. I mean, everyone knows they are a sieve. How many times now has Charles Manson escaped his custody?

No the real issue here is stated quite freely by the brainless right. If they are tried in civil courts, why they will have “RIGHTS.” CIVIL RIGHTS. And whoa, that is wrong. Civil rights are those reserved for red blooded Americans, not unChristian foreigners. I think it actually says that in the Constitution doesn’t it? Reserved for citizens?

Everyone knows that all kinds of illegal crap was done at Gitmo. And in civilian court, Lord have mercy, such evidence will be suppressed. They won’t be able to use all those “confessions” obtained by waterboarding. To think of such a turn of events! UNFAIR! Cheating! Consequences to actions? How can you have that?

You see, we are always talking about exporting our wonderful system of democracy. We cherish our “freedoms” as “God given” and as “human” rights. But hey, terrorists, that’s another story entirely. They ain’t human apparently. We don’t share our freedoms even when a foreigner is tried in this country. Or at least we don’t want to.

Again, what do we claim when one of ours is caught in some country doing wrong? Do we validate their system of justice or not? Does it depend on whether their system upholds our “freedoms” and protections? Most certainly. Yet, when we flip the coin?

Oh, yeah, you Muslims are not entitled to them. Nope, not even if you have that piece of paper that proves that you too carry American citizenship. Doesn’t matter. Rights are reserved for. . . could it be CHRISTIANS? After all, they are God given, and as these a-wipes would have it, are reserved for the tried and true.

I mean this is not hard to discern. Plenty of the conservative GOP is more than willing to state that this is exactly the reason for not trying them on American soil. They will have rights and we can’t allow that.

If you are having trouble wrapping your perfectly normal brain around that, well, welcome to the club. While most of the noise about this comes from the conservative right, no doubt the evangelical right supports the argument.  None other than Sarah has already stated it is wrong. And nobody is more holier than thou than Sarah with her faith-healing, demon extracting Wasilla pastors by her side. Just another example of the perversion to which Christianity can be put by those who use it to serve their own agenda of protecting moi.

Pretty disgusting if you ask me. ( And the Contrarian says that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed could be best punished by subjecting him to a full body wax once a month. Now that would be torture indeed!)

Somebody has to stand up and speak up! And since I see no one coming to the fore, it falls to me, alas to carry the message that we, chefs of the land, are being abused and derided. We must speak up and demand the justice that we are entitled to, lest future generations think we laid down and gave up without a fight. Our very digestive evolution is at stake!

Well, now that you are properly awakened to the seriousness of this post, let me relax a bit and set the stage.

I was a baby of the 50’s and so forth. It was in those dark ages of the past that certain greedy business types yearned to make money off the backs of American labor by instituting what they called “helps,” for women mostly. This took the expression in the past of things like vacuum cleaners, iceboxes, electric stoves and motorized washing machines. All pretty heady stuff.

But they had to go to food. What do women want? Less time in the kitchen! Perhaps they should have stuck to things like microwaves and appliances, dish washers, and cleaning materials, but no, they had to address food itself.

And of course they did. Today, any trip to the grocery store finds that around the perimeter of said building one finds food, identifiable as such, and the rest of the place is filled with boxed and frozen things that purport to be food. Whether we are compromised health wise is a big question, but not one we are addressing today.

No, we are addressing the unconscionable practice of equating boxed food with “creating a meal.” And I’m not prepared to let them get away with it any longer. The manufacturers, abetted by the ad agencies, have conspired to give people the impression that serving boxed food at a table with silverware constitutes “meal preparation.”

NO! “I OBJECT.” Point of order Mr. Parliamentarian.

Recently, I’ve noticed a few examples of this lie. Just the other day, someone reported that in  a recent survey by some organization, that some 60% of households reported that “family” meals were eaten (not fast food) 4-5 times a week.  I say BULL!

If it’s anything like what I see on TV commercials about “family meals” than it is nothing more than opening boxes and heating, wetting, or otherwise mixing up prepackaged stuff and calling it food.

A commercial the other day is a case in point. One is taken to Italy, and shopping for the ripest most perfect tomatoes, the perfect onions. Said material is sauteed and stirred on the stoves for some hours and then poured over lovely pasta. Except that the point of the ad is that one can achieve the same perfection by opening up this frozen package, microwaving, draining and combining two separate packets. One then is getting the same as the home made Italian sauce.

WHO ARE YOU KIDDING? The way to eat wholesome homemade food is to buy it in a frozen box and heat it up? I don’t think so.

Another case in point. A frazzled family. Mom and Dad are busy and the kids are busy. They realize the need for family meals. They gather together in the kitchen and “cook” together. There is sharing and bonding. There is STOUFFER’S LASAGNA! Heat that up mom and see the squeals of delight at the “home cooked” meal you prepared!

Home cooked my eye. You can’t push this crap off on me as food.

Okay, okay, so it is food of a sort. And yes, I too have imbibed such fare from time to time. I don’t think it’s wrong to eat such fare from now and again, when time is negligible and we have to move along. But let’s not claim it’s home cooked food. I mean this separates from “fast food” exactly how?

I spend more time in the kitchen that is required to put a box in the oven. I create pasta sauce. I create salsa. I create heavenly biscuits from scratch, lovely brownies from real chocolate. I know the inside of a can of baking powder and have touched real flour. I want recognition for my efforts! I create home made food, and if you don’t then I am better than you!

Well, maybe we don’t need to go that far. I’m not necessarily better, but maybe a little? Actually the problem here is not being acknowledged by the hubby. When the commercials make it so dang “simple,” then my efforts are not rewarded. The Contrarian sees no need to offer to wash dishes so much, or take me out to eat, when he sees this “home made meal” so easy to concoct on the screen.

It’s hard slavish work this cooking and I want my kudos damn it! I’m working my little nubbins to the bone in that there kitchen and I have the mess to prove it. Don’t wipe out all my efforts by showing the career mother with seventeen kids and pets spinning off a four course delight hardly breaking a sweat! It makes me look bad. It makes my efforts look silly and prissy.

I want my recognition, and I want it now!

It’s funny to me how a church picks me. Yes, you read that correctly, a church picks me. I don’t believe I pick it. I simply come into it and wait, with patient hope. Is this the one?

Plenty have not been the one, and I have tarried a few weeks, seldom longer before moving on. Sometimes I know it at the first step inside the door. This is not my place. God doesn’t speak to me here. I listen. I act. There are plenty of places to wrangle about truth and comfort. I follow the Spirit on where to church myself.

Similarly, the attributes of a church are not always apparent early on. Much must often be worked through, experienced and digested before the finer points of a congregation and its structure can be realized for the precious pearl that it is. Such has been my experience anyway.

I could write volumes day after day of the joy I find in Christ Church. Most of it, I was unaware of until months had gone by. As I become more and more a part of this family, I learn new things that make my choice (the Spirit’s choice) to reside here among these people of faith, the right thing for me.

One thing I realized recently is that Christ Church is a radically open atmosphere in which faith is tenderly received and nurtured. For those of you unacquainted, an Episcopal church is often referred to as “Catholic light,” meaning that we look a lot like a Roman Catholic church in ritual. Dogmatically we are not so much alike.

That means there is a rather extensive list of physical actions that are available. There is genuflecting,  deep bowing or head bowing, curtsying, kneeling, sitting, standing, crossing. There is worship with heads and hands uplifted, or not. There are those who sing during communion and those who don’t.

All of these are practiced in my church. Everyone does “their thing” as it were. Most anything is acceptable, though I suspect anyone dancing down the aisle speaking in tongues and waving snakes might meet with some shocked looks and sharp intakes of breath. But you get my point. Rituals are broad, and people execute them as they see fit, more or less.

We in a word, tolerate, some significant differences in our congregation and the means by which they wish to worship. (We actually have two rites, one much more conservative than the other.) Yet we are one family, and we come to, I believe, rejoice in our differences. They cease to be matters of tolerance and become the beauty of the diversity that we are.

We are told each week, that Jesus calls us to the table, not the church. He calls us whether we have been “good” or not so good. The church provides the facility for God’s call and serves in the capacity of “hands” for God.

While this is all well and good as is, there is more to this type of openness I believe. By supporting and upholding us all in our varied personal ritualistic practices, the church draws us toward being more tolerate of each other’s theological differences.

Indeed we have theological differences. And some of them are deep and painful to us. Some of them you know for they are published by article and lawsuit. Yet, we have come to find in the faces of those with whom we disagree fundamentally on some issues, more places where we are able to agree.

I don’t want to make more of this than there is. The disagreements, as I said, run deep. Yet, we are able to still look upon each other as persons with sincere feelings and beliefs. We are not judging each other as evil or intentionally mean spirited. We see the humanity, the face of Jesus more clearly in the faces of those whom we have difficulty understanding.

I have concluded that the openness of our worship practices, the willingness not to be stultifying in our routines, stretches us in ways that pay off when we are called to work out the real issues that divide our faith tradition. It may not make the critical difference, but it helps.

It is another of the many reasons that I find myself so happy in Christ Church. Last Sunday, we were asked to group together in small numbers and discuss briefly why we are here, in this place, in this church. Joyously, I laughed as I turned and realized that my conversation would be with a couple of “visitors” from Minnesota. I was so happy to share my joy with them, and I could see from their faces that my words had an impact.

They are not contemplating driving from Minnesota every weekend of course, but I suspect they will take something home to their parish. Joy spreads, and the reasons for it become known. New ways of seeing and relating are explored. Opportunities become available. We must and should take advantage of each one in furthering the mission of Jesus.

Jesus was about compassion, forgiveness, and in including those who have so often been denied and turned away. We are a welcoming church. We welcome you, should you ever find yourself with nothing to do on a Sunday morning in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

The bible is a curious document. Some, for fairly self-serving reasons, suggest that it must be read with childlike wonder, allowing the Spirit to guide understanding. While this is certainly part of the process, there is no need to deny our rational mind when doing so.

Many suggest that treating the bible as an ancient document and analyzing it much as we do Herodotus’s Histories, or Plato’s various discourses is wrong. That this is in opposition to their belief that God provides all that is necessary for the average person to read and understand God’s “plans.”

For the past several weeks, I’ve been immersed in Genesis. I’ve been studying Jacob and the various stories about him. I am not unfamiliar with them in general and in specific instances, I know a fair amount. While doing graduate work some years ago, I wrote a 100 page paper on Rachel and Jacob and the issue of the household gods.

To recognize that so much of this material was of very ancient origin, and has been collected during the Solomonic period and later in the Davidic dynasty is instructive, since the fair hand of the redactor often speaks to concerns of those times in the theological reflections that can be drawn from the various patriarchal stories they construct.

Somehow, some believe, that such study some how sullies or reduces the impact and import of God’s “word,” in doing so. I disagree most vehemently on this point. It is through serious exegetical review that the true wonder, the true talent, and may I say, the “inspired” brilliance of their work is truly understood.

To be sure, the bible is one of those unique documents that allows of many layers of understanding. Thus, it is accurate to conclude that the casual lay reader can gain a certain aptitude by simply reading and reflecting on the common everyday understanding of the words in the text. However, there will be much that is badly distorted by this method, and some of it leads to rather dangerous conclusions that can last for generations.

The Patriarchs were flawed individuals, and no attempt is made in the writings generally to cover that up. Surely the Yahwist tends to gloss over the shortcomings of these Israelite stalwarts a bit more than the the Priestly tradition does with its no nonsense approach to “just the facts.” But in the end, we see Abraham, Isaac, and assuredly Jacob as very average, very sinful men. In some sense, we are shown that God’s plans prevail even over against his very servants working against his plans.

There is security in this. We can relate to such individuals. But I think something more is said here than meets the eye. Something that begs us once again to remember that there is something special at work here in this document, perhaps unlike most others. There is an absence of “agenda” in a true sense. What do I mean?

As we examine so many of the early stories in Genesis, we find that often we are given benefit of two different traditions which speak to the same general theme. There are two creation stories, there are two Noah stories, there are competing genealogies. There are contradictions in names and places, reasons for doing X or Y which differ, and so forth.

The compiler or collector who created the “finished” document known as Genesis, was not unaware of these things. He is not stupid. On the contrary, he/they was/were quite brilliant. They quite knowingly presented both traditions or perhaps more than both. Here and there, each created transitional material to tie one series of stories to another. They, of course, had a point of view, and they often stated it.

Yet, they did not remove the “difficult” passage or tradition to make their exposition more convincing. They honored the long history of different traditions by presenting them fairly to the reader. And in doing so, we conclude quite rightly, that the readers (the original ones at least) were not burdened by any sense of “literalism” and did not see these stories as factual accounts of history. They were understood as theological statements of various kinds. And they may well have been offered to explain the importance of places and things. Attaching them to Jacob’s history or Abraham’s becomes a convenience.

An example suffices. We all know that Abraham was first commanded to circumcise. Yet, we learn that such practices were known and practices throughout the realm, not just by the Hebrews. And we learn that such practices were not common to Abrahamic peoples, and were generally not tied to ritual purity or cultic practices initially as the text suggests.

Rather, after the exile, when these texts were finalized in writing, circumcision became important. We are returning to Jerusalem after 400 years in Babylon. Who is still an Israelite and who has succumbed to the Babylonian way of life? The writer urges that those who are for Jerusalem are those who will define themselves as Hebrew by circumcision. That is when the practice became part and parcel of what it meant to be an Israelite. It was “read back” to  the time of Abraham. Much of the “prophetic” nature of Genesis stories are just this, behavior and belief which is now part of who we are, and is read back into our history as being the place from whence it came.

Contrary to the idea that reading experts on the bible somehow secularizes the message and takes us away from God, the result is just the opposite. The faith exhibited by the collectors and redactors is such that they trusted by inspiration, that the reader could get the “proper” understanding by including everything, the ugly with the beautiful. And when we discern this truth, we are awed more deeply that this work is of deep theological import, than we could ever be by the rather pedestrian and trite understanding we might get by “literal” interpretation.

It is with some certain irony that President and Mrs. Obama travel to Texas today to participate in the memorial services for those slain at Fort Hood a few days ago.

For today, we, the nation of the USA are intent on our own killing. And we do it with a certain assurance that we are doing what is right and good.

It does not seem that way to me. I make no excuses or defense of my position. I am against the death penalty. I find it barbaric and inexcusable, occurring in a nation such as ours. We consider ourselves the definition of civilization at its highest. This practice hearkens to a time when civilization was a mere shadow of its self.

I state my feelings honestly. I abhor what these killers do. I do not make charges against the victim’s families for their desire to see “justice” done. I have not walked in their shoes. I can only hope and pray that should such utter evil befall my life, that I would find it in my heart to forgive and accept that there are no guarantees in this life of anything. We, as Christians, hope for what is yet unknown and unseen.

Plenty of non-believers are against the death penalty too. I would never suggest that this is a Christian or Buddhist or Jewish issue. It is not. It is a human issue, and morality is something that humans have developed over a long time. In it, we have been helped immeasurably by faith. Yet, we can also look to the extreme right and find that faith inexplicably can find its way to support this barbarism. We wonder what kind of Christian this is, yet we are clear that they argue for death with the same fervor we wail against it.

John Allen Muhammed is scheduled to die today in Virginia for the sniper killings that occurred some years ago. His accomplice, Lee Malvo, has avoided the death penalty by cooperating with authorities.

Mr. Muhammed dies today because we as a nation cannot spend the time and energy to come up with a better solution to our acted out aggression. It is far easier to kill it, bury it, and move on. It is so much more difficult to confront it, and us and how we have come to this state of existence. We don’t confront the issues that create malformed consciences capable of such horror. We don’t address mental health. Kill it, bury it, move on.

John Allen Muhammed was once a toddler, happy and curious about the world he was just coming into. He lived with all the promise and expectation of any child. He might face more than his share of obstacles in life, but there is no assurance that that is true. Something went terribly wrong somewhere at some time. The wrong blending of life experiences, family, genes, and things yet to be discovered produced a human who could not empathize with his fellow humans.

The same can be said of Osama bin Laden. He too once delighted mother and father with his laughter and antics. He once looked upon the world as a wondrous place to explore and enjoy. He too saw, perhaps, unwittingly, his life spiral into hatred and vengeance.

It was no different for Timothy McVeigh, who slaughtered so many in Oklahoma City, and suffered the fate of fatal injection.

The victims saw their lives, young or old, happy, sad, or however they had developed, cut short in violence. Most, perhaps, never knew what hit them. Others lingered long enough to wonder why and to lament however briefly what their death would mean to others. And in truth, we cannot minimize or trivialize in any way, what the victims and their families has suffered. They cannot be replaced.

The problem is, that killing the killer cannot change a thing. I defy anyone to truly claim that somehow there has been “closure” with the state killing. It is all easy to say that one feels peace, but in fact, nothing changes.  If the loved one is in heaven, which so many of us fervently believe, it is hard to believe that they sanctioned or rooted for the death of the one who ushered in this new way of “living” to them.

It is doubly hard to believe that God nods with favor on such actions. For God too is as close as the next breath to Mr. Muhammed this day. He sits vigil with a human being so cruelly made aware of his last moments of being living flesh.

No doubt Mr. Muhammed has had much time to reflect on his life and its tragic turns. I have no idea whether he regrets his actions, or even is aware that what he did was wrong by his or anyone’s standards. It does not matter.

I am diminished by this act as surely as if I had pushed the plunger on the syringe. Or signed the documents, or denied the last appeal. I am a murderer this day. And I am deeply angered that this burden has been placed upon me. I resent that we are so foolish and immature as this. I am ashamed. As I recall, in Europe, in some countries, note is made of every execution that occurs in this bloody country. They wonder what is wrong with us.

So do I.

I mean, really. Joe does sort of make one feel that the world is upside down. Was it only less than a decade ago that we welcomed him as the Democratic candidate for VP? How can this be?

Either this man has turned as about faced as any one could, or we were duped badly. And that may well be the case, since one must allow that a few folks were duped into actually thinking Dubya had a brain, and we know he was the tin man. Or was that a heart? I can’t remember which.

Joe, clearly a person who thinks of himself as the patriarchal leader of his Connecticut flock rather than the spokesman for said flock, has claimed he will “not allow a public option health care reform bill on the floor of the Senate.” Goodness and mercy me, when did Joe become so powerful? He and he alone controls this power?

Doubly hard since Jon Stewart parodies him so well in that stuffed nose doggy style, making Joey sound like a pathetic minion more akin to the bumbling sidekick to any comedy team you can think of. Who the freakin’ f**k does this buffoon think he is after all? Hate monger and war touter who seems unconcerned with killing folks (long as he is safely at home), has the unmitigated gall to act in direct opposition to the majority of his constituency in making this claim that he will deride any health care bill that doesn’t pass Lieberman cheese muster. A pox on his house!

Okay, that seems to lead inexorably to this next story. Namely that there is a new movie out called as you may have guessed, “The Men who Stare at Goats. ” Note first that it says MEN who stare at goats. Women are just way smarter than men it seems.

Okay, so I figured, George Clooney, sexy George, oh yeah, I can watch this. Somehow it will be good. He’s a fine comedic type after all beyond his allure. Yeah, I can do this. Although how they can make anything rational out of such a concept would be hard. Hard. Right.

IT’S BASED ON A FREAKIN TRUE STORY! I know, I know, but now you see why it said “men” and not women. Some freakin’ brain dead military types actually smelled a bit too much of the gun powder and came up with this idea that you can and should try to think a goat to death. I have no idea why they picked goats. I have no idea why anyone with what appeared to be a loaded brain case would ever in their wildest imaginations consider this possible.

I live in a crazy country, and perhaps in a crazy world. That is my only explanation. This means that it really is true, that with God all things are indeed possible. Man has concluded that everything under the sun, moon, stars, nebula, black holes, quasars, pulsars, dark matter, can and might be true or can happen. End of story.

Come here. Just a little closer. . . . Can we talk? Me and you, Mr. TV producer type? We need to get something straight here.

I’m all aware of how you guys like to be lazy. I mean genre, genre right? A few ago it was reality shows, and now we are all pitching our sorta abnormal, sciencey fiction type stuff? Right? I get that.

But, it is unfair, not copacetic, not within the rules to start ‘em and then leave us hangin’, twisting in the wind as it were. Ya just can’t cancel shows without resolving them!

You create these mysteries and then, slam bam, you’re onto something new, and all the while I’m still left in the Everglades with some kinda pods that are erupting there. And there was another thing about some kinda monster along the west coast, swimming around. Never resolved that one either. You claim you will with LOST. Not sure what your intentions are regarding HEROES, but it’s seeming rather disjointed these days. You just kinda slobbered all over GALACTICA didn’t ya?

Time to shape up. And hey, while you are at it, lets put just a tad more thought into all this. You resurrected “V“. Now I understand that that was an old series (my point actually is that you’re being rather lazy doncha think?), and so it’s been clearly established that the Visitors are bad guys. So this just becomes another Law and Order in the old west, individual style? Not exactly inventive would you say?

Why are all aliens out and about to do us in? I mean isn’t this a rather old and pedantic and WORN OUT mantra? How’s about a thoughtful drama about what it means to really try to work with another civilization which is vastly superior? The frustrations and amusements of trying to have meaningful exchanges between what must be akin to chimps and humans? I mean that could cause some real interest couldn’t it? Rather than the old cowboys and Indians type sludge?

Inquiring minds want to know. I’m not holding out a lot of hope for “V” frankly. I mean they wasted zero time in making them enemies. So now its just a lot of spy infiltration, shooting, and killing, and the ending each week is 7 down, and 3,423,756 to go. Not very appealing.

Just sayin’.

I share with most people, the sadness of what transpired at Fort Hood in Texas. Sadness that so many were harmed and killed, grief that war continues to take its toll even off the battlefield.

What I most fervently prayed for, in those initial moments, is that no Muslim or Latino would be involved. Of course, that turned out not to be the case, as a Muslim army psychiatrist seems to be the person who wreaked such horror on the base.

I fear for the expected backlash, which always seems inevitable in this country. We are a country that proclaims it’s melting pot status on the one hand, and then goes out of its way to scapegoat most of its ills on “immigrants” and other “others.”

I cannot imagine the pain that ensued in Muslim quarters as the news came forth. I cannot imagine what plans and practices normal everyday Muslims must take to protect themselves against the slurs and actions of rabid “patriotic” nut cases. I almost desire to run up to every Muslim I can identify as such as offer my apologies.

I have already heard talk that “some” suggest that Muslims shouldn’t be serving in the armed forces, simply because our identifiable enemy is “Islam.” Of course it is not, for the vast vast majority of Muslims are law abiding, pious, quiet people, much like their Christian and Jewish brothers and sisters. It is only some demented fundamentalist types who pose a danger to all of us, Muslim, Jew,  and Christian alike.

Such an idea is absurd and unconscionable of course. It is akin to the racist nonsense we endured during WWII when we “interred” Japanese Americans, lest they secretly offer help to the Empire of Japan. We still are shamed by the film of those days as perfectly ordinary citizens are rounded up and incarcerated for no other reason that their heritage.

Such hatred and vitriol is not news these days. The right wing continues to ratchet up the rhetoric. Go to any of the tea bagger events and see the signs. President Obama is vilified as a “sambo” and referenced to Hitler. One knows that this powder keg will someday explode in some sort of ugly display. And of course the right wing pundits will all look left and right, and deny any complicity in the tragedy that has come upon us.

This is the quiet cloud of desperation that Muslims live under today. Never knowing. Keeping their eyes averted, and their mouths closed, they move among us. Knowing that anyone may be a potential nut case, ready to wreak patriotic retribution on supposed enemies of the state.

Latinos are not far behind in this. Regularly, otherwise innocuous “crimes” and unsavory activities are tied to “immigrants” and their “living off America” lives. We forget that they work harder and longer for less than most of us, and send a good portion to family members still trapped in even deeper poverty than here experienced.

Fostered no doubt by high schools that still teach that American is somehow the best and never much to blame for anything, we now live in a nation which always looks to some one else to be the cause of our unhappiness. It is always the fault of the socialist, the communist, the anarchist, the fundamentalist, the Asian, the Latino, the Muslim, the Jew, the Buddhist. As long as it is not “us,” that illusive and ever shrinking whitey. We are the somehow never to blame, perfect being.

I offer my meager support to Muslim brothers and sisters and those of all other minorities who seek the American dream in this morass of fickle humanity. We can slap them on the back and tell them, that, “hey, this was done to the Irish and the Italians as well. They made it. You will too. Just keep you head down and your nose clean. In a few decades, we will have found someone else.” It is hollow and trite and is inexcusable.

I am saddened that we as a nation cannot seem to learn any better. I am sorry that we don’t see this tragedy for what it is. A man, ill suited to the job he was in, increasingly makes it clear that he doesn’t belong in war. We ignore him, as we do all such men and women for the most part. Buck up there soldier! we say. You’ll survive, just as we did. It used to be okay to say, “it will make a man of you,” but it doesn’t sound as good saying it will make a woman of you.

War has many victims. More than we know. It has all of us as its victim if we would but see that. We all are reduced as human beings, we all suffer, we all are harmed in ways too deep to even see. We violate each other and then we return to base and eat a steak and sip a beer. A little touch football, and a good nights sleep, and tomorrow, well who knows, live, die, kill, wound, cry, laugh, it’s anybody’s guess. The insanity of such a life is clear isn’t it?

When will we learn that war is not an answer, but a stop gap for a people who have become too uncreative to come up with anything else?

Okay, so some of you know that I do book reviews here from time to time. In return, the publisher sends me the book free of charge.

So, I got to thinking. Yes, I think way too much, but that’s life. Anyhow, I figured, hey, this gig might work for other things as well. Since I am in need desirous, of various technological marvels, I figured that perhaps if I reviewed them, the manufacturer might send me one free of charge.

At least it seems a good idea. Now I realize that books are cheap by comparison, so I figured that maybe I should give them a free preview of what I can do. What follows is that, and I’ll be sending it off to Mr. Jobs directly. No doubt he will be appreciative and I do mean in a give away kinda way.

As you may know, the number of apps that now accompany an IPhone is something like 3,624,821. And that figure grows daily. Now, it is important that you are familiar with them so that you can make good choices, so unless you have 2.4 years of intense study time available in the next 2.4 years, read on.

I thought I’d give you a review of some of the more important and useful apps you can find on your IPhone. Believe me, I was pretty astounded at the range of usefulness available, and the diversity of areas in one’s life that can be touched.

      1. The Microwave app. This is just a super help to those of us so busy that we don’t always have time to get a hot lunch or dinner. Just pop the food you wish to cook into your car glove box, set the app to the desired heating time, push the delayed start button, drop the IPhone in the glove box and shut the door. A nice little ding will go off when your food is ready. Eat and watch the traffic!

        2. The Name Alerter. Do you have a phobia about a name? One that just makes you cringe and run for cover. One that makes you sweat and start praying? Well, we have the app for you. Just type in the name of the name you hate (Orville does it for me) and set the app to “on.” Then as you move down the streets or hallways, you will be alerted should an Orville come within ten meters of you. Time to avoid those embarrassing meetings. Use the headphones if you wish to be polite.

        3. The Animal Mover. If you ever get out in the country, you’ll find this app a must. Ever been on a old rock road when some critter popped out and just stood in the middle of the road? Well if you have, you know how silly a city slicker can be in trying to coax a deer, horse, or lazy sow off the road. This app matches the animal picture to the creature before you, and when activated, lets out a farmer’s call that will surely have your beast scooting back homeward in search of it’s dinner. Read SUUUUUUUUUUUEEEEEEEEEE!

          4. The Contest Enterer.  Are you one of those people who can’t stop entering sweepstakes games and contests? Well this app will make life so easy for you! Just set it on, enter your general name and address and other pertinent personal information, and the app will surf the Internet 24 hours a day, entering you in every one it meets. You will be surely rich in less than 6 months using this method. Of course, you will pay a hefty fee in app usage up front, but with a guarantee of such riches, how can you not sign up?

           5.  The Talking Points Blogger. Have a lot to do? Having trouble finding subjects to write about on your blog? Well, bloggers swear by this app, that allows you to lock into the liberal or conservative punditry machine. Each day you can sign in and get the talking points for the day for all the important subjects you so desire to complain about. You’ll be mouthing the same words as Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert, or if you wish, (ugh) a Shawn Hannity or Uncle BillO. Never be at a loss for something to say again!

          6. The Deprogramming Fundie App. You had to know I’d love this one. Just turn this app on and it will remind you every hour that dinosaurs did not walk with humans, God did not pen the bible, and Mark was written before Matthew. A lovely subliminal program is available to use at night while you sleep. If you have a relative mired in biblical literalism, don’t miss this opportunity to save them from an atrophied brain. As they say, it’s a terrible thing to waste!

            7. The Pet Thinker app. How many times have you asked your pet, “what do you want?” only to be met by a stare and continued wagging? How many meows have you misinterpreted? Well, with this app, just use the handy video recorder to tape the behavior of your pet, and then submit it for analysis. An answer will be soon forthcoming and you can answer your pets needs without all that angst. Your pet will thank you for being a better master, and you can think about applying for that “goat whisperer” job you saw in the want ads last week.

            8. The OCD app. Do you suffer from OCD? Turning on and off lights three dozen times. Checking to see that the door is locked eight times every evening? Worrying about whether you shut off the coffee at work? every night? Well, with your OCD app, you can serve the needs of your neurotic compulsions. Just set the app to “on” and the button will periodically call you to turn it off again. You can set it for periods of every five minutes, every ten, etc. You will get the satisfaction of knowing that indeed the button was on when you turn it off each time! Don’t miss this one folks!

             9. The Road Rage De compressor. Cut off in your lane of traffic by a rude driver? Don’t risk giving him the finger and finding a gun up your nose. This app pointed at the offending car, connects to the cell phone of the driver and locates his home phone. You can then call and leave a really really insulting message on his phone, one that will get all that anger off your chest without endangering your life. A must application for anyone who travels on a regular basis. All traveling sales people should have this one.

             10. Chocolate Range Finder. With this app in the on position, you will be alerted any time you are within 100 feet of chocolate. Never walk around in fear that you won’t be able to feed your chocolate needs. Sub-applications for this app include a sonic “key” that can be used to open closed places of business (assuming they have chocolate inside), and one that all the women are raving about, the “calorie destroyer” sub application. Just point it at the chocolate delight and watch those calories melt away.

So, how’s about it Mac? Can you get me one of those IPhones for free so that I might continue to “review” all these amazing apps? I’m more than sure your sales are already going up based on this one alone!

I may be somewhat unusual. Other’s could speak to that more clearly than I. But I think humans are benefited by periodic assessments of goals and means. I think that what works today may not tomorrow and innovation is key to our journey.

As winter approaches and thoughts turn to more indoor pursuits, it seemed a good time to reflect on what I am doing, what I want to be doing, and what I should be doing.

First, as you may already know, I function with some negatives. I’m lazy. No point in denying that. I’m also steeped in the concept of delayed gratification. This helps to get around the laziness by pairing what I don’t want to do with something I do want to do, and then denying the latter until the former is done.

I also function with a reasonable amount of guilt. Note I said reasonable, since I think a certain amount is useful in motivating thought and change. But when all is said and done, I don’t do as much as so many others, and I feel self-absorbed to a degree.

I have come to conclude after nearly six decades upon this whirling dervish of a planet, that we as sentient creatures need five needs addressed to be whole. They are, in no particular order, the needs of the body, the needs of the personality, the needs of the intellect, the spiritual, and lastly the creative impulse.

I think most of these needs require attention mostly every day, but at minimum, several times a week. So, for no other reason than I thought of it last night, I thought it was wise to assess how well I’m doing and make whatever adjustments are necessary or at least compelling.

The needs of body are obvious: food. Not just any old food, but good nutritious food. I’m fairly good at that, though many would conclude we eat a diet too high in both fat and sugar. No matter, we don’t eat out of boxes or freezer sections. I C O O K. I make biscuits, I don’t open a box of Bisquick or Jiffy or that tube stuff. I make salsa, I don’t unscrew jars containing manufactured “salsa.” I do it, because I enjoy cooking and frankly my digestive system appreciates it. I can bake a loaf of bread with work time down to about  10 minutes. I figure it counts that we don’t eat a lot of additives and preservatives.

I walk a mile a day, six days a week. I seldom miss. I use a treadmill if the weather is too nasty to walk outside. I don’t like it, but I admit that it makes me feel better than when I don’t.

Psychological needs are those things we need to feel loved and respected, valuable. Much has to do with relationships and building good ones that compliment one’s needs. A touchy feely person is not advised to try for an intimate relationship with a cold withdrawn type. You get the drift. We need validation, acceptance. We get them from friends and relatives. We feel satisfaction in finishing tasks. Any number of things throughout a day can be psychological pluses in our lives. We seek to cultivate them.

Intellectual needs are met by thinking hard on subjects that don’t always make themselves easy of understanding. We have to stretch, concentrate, push beyond our comfort zone. We need to learn every day, and things that matter to us and to the world. Reading can be the solution to this, but so can judicious use of the television and computer. I read a  lot during the day. I’m reading upwards of 4-5 books at the present for instance.

Spiritual needs are essential and must be met daily I think. This can mean any manner of traditional religious practice, but may involve no religion at all. Walking in nature and seeing the immensity of the world can point one to something larger than self. That is the point here. It is getting outside yourself and your petty needs and wants. It is engaging in the greater world. I can imagine sitting at the ocean’s edge, steeped in the tides, and sensing the enormity of the moon and it’s power on this planet. I can, religiously, see this in the context of a God who has created a series of laws that permit this evolution of the universe.

Lastly, we need to feel creative. And here we have many choices. This doesn’t have to relate solely to a hobby, but can be more mundane things. It can also be one’s life work. This would be most true of those who are artistic and make their living from art. But the rest of us can do it as well, through crafting and cooking, gardening, and so forth. We create beauty, serenity, life.

When we have balance between these various components, I believe we are in synchronicity with the world and with life itself. We are nurturing all those parts of ourselves that require attention.

Since we live in a world that tends to keep score, we may neglect one or more for long stretches. We may be forced to “schedule” fun time and intellectual time, and relationship time. If we needs to that, then we should, for neglecting any of these for long leads to imbalance and inauthentic living.  Our human experience is meant to be expressed and experienced in all it’s totality. To miss any aspect is to deny ourselves in a real way.

Think about where you are today. What is being neglected in your life. Do something about it today. Take charge of being human again.

Which all goes to establish why there isn’t much of a post today. We shop once a month. The Contrarian accompanies me, and makes it less miserable than it otherwise is. Trying to shop alone for a full month is just too much. With the two of us, it is manageable and standable.

The day’s reward is that I don’t cook on shopping day, and we bring home Chinese takeout. After the crap is all safely put away, we both collapse, and one of us quickly says, “I’m so glad that is done for another month!”

Actually, I’m rather disorganized again. It seems I am always behind these days. I need very much to update my blogroll here, and as haven’t so far. I guess there are about half a dozen or a bit more new blogs that I think you might enjoy taking a look at. When I get to it that is.

Things at Church are slowing down, as I’ve now finished my four weeks as facilitator of our adult bible study class. That means a bit more time I can devote to EFM class prep and reading. There always seems more to read.

Additionally, I have been contacted by yet another publisher about reviewing a book. This is more complicated and may involve a guest post by the author and some other promotional type things. Just as I set this up, I went to the mailbox last afternoon to find another book there. Again, from a publisher I’ve never heard of. So my book reviewing seems to be going along nicely, if still having no monetary value to me!

Yesterday, I can probably conclude that I did something you did not. I played herder to a stray calf that had come through the fence in pursuit of the grass (being always greener on the other side  as you well know). I called the Contrarian, who had taken the splitter to a friends and was splitting wood. He suggested I “herd” the dumb calf. And so I did, yelling and whooping it up until it crossed over and went over the hill.

At the time, I assumed it found mom and the rest of the herd and would be heard of no more. But such is not the truth. As I opened the door to let out the dogs, some hours later, said calf, (Henry I believe) as back at it, munching away. The dogs chased it off, and so far, we haven’t seen him back. We saw the rest of the herd as we returned from shopping. Hopefully he is regaling them with tales of the spooky lady and the slavering dogs who came within a hairs breath of ending his life.

In the fields and on the roads the land is awash with farmers and machinery, all doing as best they can to clear fields. Fields are soggy but stable for the most part. We are driving over ours now, to avoid the low spots and are muddy still. There is just no way to drain this water.

I seem to see eagles and hawks everywhere. They love this time of year when the fields are being cleared as the rodents are more obvious to them I assume. Deer find the time stressful, since much of there field cover is being mowed to the ground. I’ve so far met a couple on the road at night coming home from EFM or church related activities.

I’ve had no luck on the SAD issue. I am told that full spectrum bulbs aren’t the same and can’t be expected to work. To buy the lamps is “expensive” as these boxes are highly over priced. So I guess I’ll just sit in the sun when it is available!

All about is now that horrid brown of nothingness that is the later fall. The leaves seem to drop precipitously in just a few days, and well, its all bare now. My thoughts turn to yarn and sweaters and stuff like that. I so want to make a pair of socks, but am loath to think I can understand the instructions and these 4 needles.

I need to be back to my lists, so that I can at least have a stab at meeting all my commitments. Today is not a day where that is gonna happen. But then, at least we got that shopping done!

I confess to being confused now and again. Like the other day, when I was chastised by a creationist for leading off a blog with a story about McDonald’s and Iceland, and then switching over to discuss religious homeschooling. Somehow she found my blog style unfair.

I just barely mentioned to the dear brain-impaired one that blogging has no real rules. And the point of blogging is precisely to speak one’s own mind about any topic one deems discussable. I would have assumed that such a basic understanding of the genre would have been obvious, but I guess one learns not to use the term obvious when talking to a person who has long since given up the art of thinking.

I was called a “liberal” as if such a connotation would send me running for cover. I was told I had a thorn in my side. (With all due respect, I think it best not to make analogies to the great Saint Paul in criticizing me!) I am a liberal, and I might add, a fairly radical one. My husband, the Contrarian would be happy to tell you all about it. He is what I might term a fiscal conservative/libertarian, and a social liberal. He’d be the first to tell you that if it were announced that George W. Bush discovered a cure for cancer, I’d find a reason to find that an abomination. And perhaps I would.

I have no truck with what I consider insanity on the part of anyone who proports to have an opinion that I find wholly out of the ballpark of rationality. Dubya is an idiot, thus if it were declared he had cured cancer, I’d be highly dubious that the great stupid one could do that. By the same token, when one declares themselves to be a creationist, I know I’m not dealing with a person who has any sense left. It’s as rational as asking us all to believe that suddenly, 2+2=5. You can cite all the nonsense you wish, all the sites run by  the opportunists you wish, and 2+2 still will be equalling 4.

I am fairly open about my own shortcomings. I am often wrong. I invite reasoned discourse. I have often been convinced of the arguments of others. But again, if you are gonna try to explain how just maybe 2+2=5, we are wasting time. God created your mind too, and if you no longer trust the senses you were given, then well, we can’t communicate much can we? You live in a fantasy while I inhabit the real world.

Education is sacred to me. It doesn’t have to be formal, but a fine mind is worth going out of one’s way to sit at the feet of. I want to learn. I seek those who are more learned, not those who have boxed themselves into a world that promises salvation by denying what is clear to the rest of the rational world.

The Contrarian often told me that one of the smartest individuals he had ever known was a kid without a high school education. He couldn’t be bothered with the system. When he became interested in something he went to a  library and he read. For as long as it took. Until he knew what he wanted to know.

I harp on critical thinking, because frankly, it’s embarrassing to accept the proposition that so many Americans are stone cold ignorant. I’ve been amused at reading some of the entries in my high school Facebook group. You can spot the ones that never went beyond high school. And that is scary, because contrary to what they say, I didn’t learn much at high school. Nothing of real lasting value. I learned the basic curriculum which is designed to make one literate and a good citizen. Nothing much more.

I value curiosity. I think that in some ways, it is the defining characteristic of humans. Oh, no doubt chimps and elephants and other animal species show signs of curiosity (not to mention cats of course) but in the main, humans are the ones who are curious just because they want to know. And that indeed makes us special. Muffling that, by instilling doctrine into a mind, is both dangerous and heart breaking to me.

Curiosity demands that we follow the facts wherever they lead. We are not permitted to set the “end” and then see if we can amass evidence to support it. And curiosity is what is lacking in the stultified mind of the creationist and others of that ilk. They have opted for safety and a false sense of that to be sure. They have simplified life so that a book holds the answers to life for them. They cannot live with uncertainty. The sculpt the book so that it is certain, at least for them. It is not for anyone who has bothered to take any actual class in biblical studies or theology.

Not all fundamentalists are cut from the same cloth. There are those who don’t see the bible as history or science and thus don’t expect answers to those questions in it. But they tend to see the bible as a moral compass, and in that they are not too awfully far from the mark. It is at least the considered conclusion of a number of men of what morality should be.

At the other extreme is the creationist, YEC proponent. These are the extreme phobic minds that are desperate for a clear cut map for the future. They don’t want a God that is mysterious. They want a great white human type that they can understand that chastises and rewards, forgives and commands. Whose ways are inscrutable but to whom blind faith is required for the big pay off.

I make no apologies for railing against this latter group. The reason is simple. They can and often do get the notion that God requires them to push this belief system on a stubborn polity. And when they reach that conclusion, then violence is all too often a logical step. Like the enviro-fascists and PETA fanatic, at some point, to show your dedication to the “truth,” action is required. If someone gets hurt? Why so be it. Lots of people got hurt in the bible for not following God’s commands. Such twisted thinking to justify violence just doesn’t sit well with me.

And frankly, I suspect other motives. It seems curious that so called Christians are for torture, for wars of choice, for the death penalty, against health care reform, against redistribution of wealth, against gays, against women (for the most part), for Patriot Acts, but against hate crime legislation, and unbelievably against care for the environment. The list is endless. Just about the opposite of what you would expect of a Christian. But pretty much what you would expect of someone who doesn’t want what he/she has to be taxed away in an equatable distribution so that the poor can be cared for. So, fair or not, I don’t trust ‘em.

Just sayin’.

For a really good discussion on the present state of the religion versus evolutionary debate read Evolution and Creation at Religious Dispatches.

The trouble with saints, is that, well, they are just so darn saintly. Not exactly people that regular folks like myself can hope to emulate. I’m told actually, and I can confirm it based on some of my readings, that most if not all saints were actually not quite as saintly as we might think.

I don’t mean that they were not saintly as they are purported to be, but rather than being human, they too suffered from challenges and desires common to all of us. It is perhaps in the way they dealt with these difficulties that separates them from us.

And frankly, it shouldn’t. I recall, as a about to become Roman Catholic, being told that everyone should aspire to being a saint. This was not some egotistical adventure, but something that each and every one of us could accomplish.

The trouble is, that we tend to focus on the inspiring aspects of our saints, and that makes them a bit too untouchable, and us a bit too arrogant in wishing to be like them. Like I said, if we had a more balanced view of them, perhaps we wouldn’t find the task so daunting.

No doubt some folks dismiss the idea of working toward sainthood, simply because they don’t want to “work” that hard at being good. It’s far easier to knowingly sin and then ask forgiveness. It just seems like being a saint is, well, too prissy and too boring. All the spice of life is sacrificed in pursuit of the goal. Most of us don’t want to lead grey bland lives.

So seeing our saints as human and thus subject to sin as we are, is helpful. One of my favorites has always been Augustine, bishop of Hippo, father of the church, and frankly, he came up with a fair amount of dogma that we could have better done without.

The reason I love Augustine so much, is that frankly, at least  at the beginning, he was most human. Born of a Christian mother, and pagan father, Augustine, for some years lived the life of a rhetorician, keeping a mistress and fathering a son.

His mother, Monica, prayed for her son daily so we are told, and finally, as Augustine recounts in his “Confessions”  he saw the truth of the scriptures and converted. Yet, even in his initial euphoria of faith, he was practical.

He asked God to take from him the desire for sexual pleasure, but he added, “but not just yet.” And in that, Augustine was oh so very human. One has to move slowly into this new kind of life, best not to go cold turkey with everything!

Stories like that make saints approachable. They remind us that we are potential saints as well. We can have serious shortcomings, but in time, we can overcome them. We can fight one or more over a lifetime, and still be accounted as holy. Indeed, Wisdom 3:1-9 from today’s liturgy, says that those accounted lost by the world, are safely with God and at peace. There, they work with God to effect God’s good pleasure for the world.

Today we celebrate All Saint’s Day. We remember 0ur favorite saints, and we remember all who have died. We cannot of ourselves determine who is saintly and who is not. That is up to God. But we can and must hope that our friends and relatives, those that precede us in death, have indeed found the peace of God in eternal comfort. We feel their presence, and we can feel their urging.

No doubt they felt in their lifetime unworthy of any such appellation. We account them saintly by their behaviors and their words, yet we can never be sure. Certainly they had no such expectations.

How do we become saintly? I would argue that it is not by deliberate design in creating a lifestyle that is “saintly,” whatever that might mean to anyone. I think, in the end, it is simply having faith that God calls us to love and to serve. Having that faith, and believing that it is worthwhile and in keeping with his desire for us, we act in a manner that upholds that love and service.

Perhaps the cutting edge of that life is to maintain that faith, and thus the love and service during those times in our lives when we don’t want to exert ourselves, and most especially when we feel too weak to stand before the world as witness. If we can find meaning in our suffering, if we can find God sharing that suffering with us, then we may find the strength to do as Job did, and as so many of the patriarchs and well known saints did. We will let it be, and we will continue to love.

We will stand alone, if need be, quietly speaking our faith, calmly walking the path, because we truly can see no other way. To others, we may appear foolish, but we trust in God’s intimate presence to us and we wish to share that joy with the world.

Saints, for all the hoopla, were ordinary people, who often through extraordinary circumstances, did things they might never have dreamed possible. Each of us can prepare ourselves for that. Don’t sell yourself short, you may be a saint in the making. God surely hopes so.

Most of you know that I am transported from time to time into other universes. This is never with my consent, but I’ve grown to accept it. My brain cannot process certain insanities on planet Earth, and so it probably is a good thing.

Last night, I awoke from dear slumber, realizing that for sure, the axis of the earth had tilted just a smidgen quite suddenly. The reason?

Why, McDonald’s has closed its doors in Iceland. Indeed, a near panic has ensued as frantic Icelandicers, or Icelandics? rush to get their last fix. So goes America’s best hope of supersizing  the rest of the world to it’s obesity level. It is a government plan put in play to prove what we all know already, America is exceptional, and fat drives it!

It seems impossible to conceive that McDonalds could suffer such a set back. I mean, let the banks close, let the hospitals overflow, let the fields run empty of potatoes, but good God,  how can humanity continue with any human not within ten minutes of a Ronald Mickey D? The sheer inhumanity of the thing is enough to make one choke with tears.

I figured that from that, everything else would go downhill. And it seemed to. The other day, I was reading the remarks of a creationist, who so happily and proudly proclaimed that she had used a particular creation site to extensive use during her homeschooling days. Does this mean that there are zero requirements for homeschooling to get that diploma?

I mean, do ya just call the state education department, and say, “send me one of dem diplomas. I’s ejucated nows?” Are there no standards of any kind? Or is this part of the great lie that creationist parents put their kids through? Here’s what you need to say to get the grade, but pssst, we don’t believe any of that is true. Is this not child abuse?

I can point to any number of people today who were told such lies as kids. Most all of them have since rejected their parents theology, in favor of none, sad to say. And they of course now know better about science as well. I find it sad, and it makes me mad. We are something like 31 in the world now in science and math, and we can thank in some part such intellectually bankrupt parents who have driven their kids into a scienceless world all in the name of feeling good emotionally. Shame on them. Believe what you want, but you’re kids–they are not property to be used as your emotional crutch.

I think this sums things up rather well.

Your children are not your children,

They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.

They come through you but not from you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts.

For they have their own thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls,

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,

which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.

you may strive to like them, but seek not to make them like you.

For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,

and He bends you with His might

that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;

For even as He loves the arrow that flies,

so He loves the bow that is stable.

                                       Kahil Gibran

I guess I come down on the side that parents have a duty to teach their kids morals and ethics, and how to use their minds with discriminating care. We need kids who can think critically and separate the chaff from the wheat. We don’t need to teach them what to think so much as how to think. Then we need to expose them to as varied a world as possible, and to as much varied thought as possible. It is up to them, in communion with their conscience and/or God to decide what to make of it all.

Humans are incredibly resilient. We, most of us that is, turn out okay, even against rather heavy odds against us. That doesn’t mean and shouldn’t mean that parenting is largely not important. It is. And we have become complacent to the fact that most of us turn out okay, and so nothing need watch over the parenting that goes on. But surely, we owe our kids more than to be raised as automatons of ideologically locked down humans. We owe them the true freedom of thought unhindered by psychologically driven mindsets essential to the parent, but not necessarily needed by the child.

Why we have never felt the need for parenting classes as the norm is beyond me. The wreckage of relationships is all around for the viewing. Can’t we do better than this? Are we going to live forever in the land where parent/child relationships are so sacrosanct as to be untouchable absent physical abuse? Do we not care that emotional and educational abuse are rampant in many of our homes? Is there not a better way?

Those of us who live in the country, are very conscious of our fashion. You may have guessed this already from plenty of pictures which show us in fine farmer garb–the one piece denim bib is a great example. Functional and oh so elegant. Just a bow tie clip-on for the t-shirt and you are ready for any dinner party.

The other day, I was fashionably clad in my rubber muddies, walkin’ through the watery muck of the lane, when my brother-in-law caught up to me on his backhoe. He had been hauling some hay to the cattle who did  not have have benefit of the corn silage, since the fields were still not done due to crap weather.

As he shut off the motor and opened the cab, I saw that he too was clad in rubber muddies and but for the size, no doubt, they were identical to mine.

I mused on this fine sense of  the fashionista shared by us both, when I realized upon heading back down the hill into the timber that the trees were indeed nearly bare of leaves. “Damn, it seems he was right again!” This to mean, the Contrarian, who but a few short weeks ago had predicted in Nostradamus fashion, “I think we are going to lose our leaves this year.”

Not to be all depressed and such, since last early spring, he confidently predicted that we would have leaves this year, and of course, that too transpired.  The Contrarian is proving himself to be quite good at this prognostication business. One is tempted to say the same of many things in the bible, until one learns that often, the book in question with its “prediction” was written well after the event in question happened. At least the Contrarian announces his predictions well in advance.

Anyway, such thoughts give rise to still more ideas and sneaky partially worked out theories. I’m always happy when I see that I’m not alone in devising such philosophical questions of the month. This morning, Charlie Gibson, late of GMA and now nearly late of the Nightly News, was interviewing John Irving, the writer. Gibson in one of his better moments, asked, “Do you think one can find real happiness in one’s own imagination?”

What prompted this jaw dropping, stop in the street kind of question, is anyone’s guess. Yet it seemed to me, worthy of some thought. I think that you can, and in fact some people do. Then again, some can’t and some don’t.

Do you construct day-dreaming scenarios of lives unlived? I mean do you have a dream house/job/spouse/hobby/you name it, that you construct delicately and with precision, making it all just perfect? Is it your place to escape the cares and turmoils of the day? Is it a place where Johnny Depp falls in love with you, forgetting that you are nearly though not quite old enough to be his mother? Does Halle Berry hang on your every word while sipping Dom Perignon?

I can see how such worlds could be happy. Truly I can. I rather suspect that liberals engage in such mind play more so than Republicans. Just a guess. No polling or scientific evidence. But there is evidence that liberals are more unhappy than Republicans. We tend to take on the woes of the world and grouse about them. We have guilt as to what we have, given that so many have almost nothing. We can’t compartmentalize as well it seems as Republicans apparently can.

We probably drink more and drug more and sex more, though that last may truly be wrong. Republicans with their public stance on morality and their dirty little minds creating all kinds of kinky plays which they all too often cannot help but attempt to act out, may in fact engage in more sexual naughtiness than liberals. I dunno.

But escapism is escapism as they say, and so I suspect more liberals have a fantasy get away that allows them to unwind from the mean little world that we inhabit every day. And perhaps there, we do find the happiness we are so prone to deny ourselves in reality.

Someone the other day suggested that liberals “talk a good game” but that somehow we don’t live it. Actually, I think its the conservatives who act rather differently than they talk. The evidence seems on our side. I have a ton of liberal friends (Facebook proved that) and a huge number of them are very actively engaged in regular service to their communities through food pantries, homeless shelters, health care clinics, and such. They aren’t paid, they just do it, because they have to do something to help. Our unhappiness at the state of affairs in the world forces us to engage and make a difference, no matter how small that might be.

I’m not suggesting that conservatives don’t do charity work, but I suspect they see it somewhat differently than liberals do. I could be wrong on that. I’m wrong on a lot of things. But I feel comfortable in saying it. I hear way too much about how we “have to have  the poor” as a means by which the rest of us can perfect our salvation, to think any differently. And then there is the failure of most conservatives to agree to anything that smacks of redistributing wealth in this country to make life reasonable for ALL. They start raising words like, lazy, and pulling oneself up by one’s boot straps. (I checked, and my muddies don’t have any boot straps by the way.)

Just so ya know, this is what you get when I’m sun deprived. It’s SAD isn’t it?

I could be wrong, but I rather suspect that kids love science. I mean ever see how kid’s eyes light up when some cool scientist mixes a brew of this and that, and it bubbles and volcanoes out of the beaker? Or turns an unearthly hue of green? I dare say no kid is bug-eyed over Silas Marner or the capital of Georgia the way they ooh and ahh over “magic” tricks in the science lab.

I confess that I respect with deep appreciation the scientific method and all that it has produced for mankind. I don’t worship it, as some of the right wing crazies would have it. That is just their inane  way of being defensive for their hypocrisy of loving the kind that makes their life comfortable and hating the kind that messes with their interpretation of life, the universe and everything.

And who can forget, all those long years ago one William Proxmire who used to make regular sport of science expenditures that went for what he thought were “frivolous” research. Who cares whether bed bugs breed in sunlight or only in the deep darkness of night? Why are tree frogs never more than three feet from a tree in the rain forest?

What Proxmire, who claimed he was trying to protect the American taxpayer against being gouged for waste of time pet projects, didn’t realize, is that many of these what sound like absurd research projects often, down the road, produce information that is most useful to humankind. Yep, and the beauty of it from the scientists point of view is that there is really no good way of knowing what might be important in thirty, eighty, or two hundred and forty years.

And there is such a thing as obtaining information for its own sake and fleshing out the story of human existence to the greatest degree possible.

But I confess, that sometimes, even I wonder about the efficacy of this study or that. And sometimes the results, touted as “stop the presses” seem rather shall we say obvious? to me?

Such is the case with a story from Science Digest today.  The study, was of some importance to me, a home cleaner, pusher of dirt around. Where in the heck does all that dust come from? I mean we live a full 1/2 mile from the road. I recall, living in suburbia in my childhood, albeit on a rock road, the wafts of dusty air billowed off the road with each passing car, and in summer, directly in the front door. That made sense. But how does this dust collect when I am deep within the wooded splendor of the meadow?

The scientists report that, hold on to your hats kids, most dust, about 60% originates from OUTSIDE!!!!! Yes, you heard that right. Outside. I mean who would have guessed. The choices were, inside, and outside. It was a safe bet that outside is where more dirt is than inside right? I mean I can see it tracked in by dogs every day. Muddy little paw prints, and the cats patter in and out the kitchen door soon making a trail of tiny little prints. I can read tea leaves. I can figure this out.

But scientists were surprised. So they say. It would appear likely that most scientists, (those studying dust at least) don’t dust. So I guess it must come as a shock. I dunno. It seems like a waste of time and money to tell me the obvious. And I’m being polite, remembering the company. I’m not telling you what the dust consists of!

Okay, I will. It’s dirt, from OUTSIDE. Oh and some of it is human skin. Yech…now that does turn a tummy or two doesn’t it? Who wants to think about that? Nobody, except those that get off on showing microscopic “pictures” of counter tops with (shudder) fecal material.

It makes me want to run right out and throw away the butter that the cat licked yesterday. I mean really!

The Contrarian claims that the kids of the people who came to cart away dead horses and pigs and cows were the healthiest of all. Ya gotta eat a peck of dirt before ya die, said the Contrarian’s grandmother, and one likes to take solace in that. I’m not dirty, lazy, and so forth, I’m merely being healthy. We follow the ten second rule like everyone else. If you pick it up off the floor within ten seconds, nothing had time to latch on. It’s still clean!

They claim that there are bad things in the air, like lead and arsenic, and these land on objects. Not so good for items you lick. Dogs lick a lot of things, including themselves, but I always was told that dog mouths are much cleaner than our own. So I figure the dog is taking the chance in giving me a licky kiss.

So, I don’t know what to do at this point. Maybe we need to rethink where we build our showers. Perhaps they need be outside, on the porch. Then we can track less of the “dust” in. Kinda not such fun in the winter, but nobody will object much in the summer months. In fact the dirty old man down the street, hey he just might take to walking by your house a lot more often if you are singing in the shower on the porch.

It left me scratching my head, and wondering what to do. If you have any answers that don’t involve any more housework, I’d like to hear ‘em. I don’t like housework. Didn’t I tell ya that?

The GOP has been using some version of “just say no” for some time now. One is tempted to ask, “how’s that workin’ for ya?”

From Pumas on, they’ve been banking on the “nope, no way” constituency to materialize into a real force. So far, it’s been a wash. The Pumas as you recall, were all those women who were Hillary supporters who were supposed to flock to the GOP once McCain chose that woman for all seasons, Sarah Palin as his running liar.

The Pumas of course never materialized, and Sarah soon grew wearisome to a thinking public.

Since the election last year, it has been the unmitigated decision of the Rethug leadership to simply oppose everything. And it seems, like Nancy Reagan’s anti drug program, not to be making much difference, other than to make them look clearly what they are: crybabies and bad sports who trade public welfare for being contrary.

They oppose the extension of hate crimes legislation,  although we have had it for decades now without the world coming to an end. Some Rethugs found themselves opposing legislation proposed by Franken which would eliminate a contractual prohibition to sue rapists who worked for the company. I mean do you really want to be publicly on the wrong side of that one? “NO, I think Haliburton should be able to keep women from suing Haliburton employees who rape them. After all, profits must prevail!”

Similarly, when you look at net neutrality legislation, what do you find? Yep, you guessed it, the Rethugs are against it. As someone said, all you need do is look who subsidizes the Republican by way of contributions to know whose side he or she is on. I mean who doesn’t want the Internet free of priority speeds for certain companies?

And then there is my favorite of all, posts on Facebook. One of our less than stellar brains posted a report on how many wars and deaths had occurred since the United Nations had been instituted. The lead headline for the piece was something like “How’s that peace doing for ya?” Well, first of all, dumbed down, the UN has not started any wars and has not aggressively set out to kill anyone. They try to STOP wars and aggression. Not exactly their fault that they are not internationally supported by the member nations in peacekeeping. I mean, seriously, are you not for peace? I thought that was kinda a Christian thing as well as a mature human thing. Maybe I’m wrong.

Then we have the utter slimy behavior of the right wing pundits. I mean, the rank and file, the middle of the road, read SANE Republicans can’t even complain about the insulting load of bull that is barfed out upon the great illiterate uneducated tiny tots of the electorate. Lindsay Graham, who admittedly seldom comes up for air by pulling his head out of McCain’s backside, tried to complain about Beck, only to be booed off the floor at the next town hall meeting he attended. The crazy minority, most of which are holding up their bibles as pitchforks, won’t allow any criticism of the idiot brigade.

So, of course they feed them the swill they wish and damned be the facts. This has been demonstrated again and again with Hannity. He cuts comments and re-pastes them to say what he wants, even though the speaker clearly meant otherwise and said so DIRECTLY. Now we have Rush, quoting from a “paper” allegedly written by Barack Obama in college. The paper was critical of the constitution and was leaning toward socialism. Of course Rush was near orgasmic in his outrage. When a sycophant whispered in his ear that the paper was a hoax, he refused to apologize, but merely said, “well, we know he really believes this stuff anyway.” And the folks who listen to Rush, not being educated or even mentally average, lap it up in their unknowing bewildered world.

Finally we were watching Jon Stewart last night, hands down the best actual pundit in the business these days. He had on Susie Essman, of Curb your Enthusiasm. Susie suggested, and I had said the same, that Sarah Palin and folks like her, who continue to insist that dinosaurs and man walked hand in hand in our not so distant past, against ALL the evidence, should be prevented from using technology.

I agree wholeheartedly. Now I know that the illogical nut case can’t understand the hypocrisy of being okay with some science and vilifying other science, sometimes even when they overlap, as in medicine (which they like) and evolutionary biology (which they don’t) but the rest of us can. You can’t pick science as “good” when it transports you across town, allows you to call other countries, lets you surf the net, and cook dinner in minutes instead of hours, but then claim that science is some monstrous behemoth of atheistic mumbo jumbo designed to hate God and his Word. We know you are being disingenuous, but at least we do admit, you don’t get it, because you don’t have the smarts to get it.

All this being said, it’s not really a complaint. It’s really a  big thank you Republicans. You continue to satisfy your extraordinarily weird collection of misfit followers, but you totally turn off the middle and the left. Having five percent of the electorate in your pocket doesn’t win elections. So keep up the usual swill. I hear Bachmann and King and others of the “crazier than any loon” brigade has introduced legislation to commend and honor all those who marched against taxes. Good luck. Those two are good for another ten votes every time they open their mouths.

And so it goes. Just sayin.’

Image shamelessly stolen from MadPriest at "...I could be wrong"

I love going to church every Sunday. I seem to always find peace and a certain enlightenment there week to week. I deeply appreciate the congregation I am a part of. So many dedicated and hard working people.

I admit I am blessed to be in it. And yesterday’s liturgy had powerful teaching for us all.

The other day, I focused on Job, one of my favorite books of the bible. Today, I wish to revisit Mark’s treatment of the story of Bartimaeus, in chapter ten.

Mark is an interesting gospel. Written perhaps around 70 CE, and perhaps from the environs around a just fallen Jerusalem, his audience must have lived in some fear. The Romans were overrunning everywhere, and a small band of Jesus followers threatened no doubt that Empire even more than the traditional Jews with their strange practices.

Mark prepares his audience for further sacrifice, in fact making it clear that their lot in life may well be harsh and dangerous. They may only get their reward in death. Here we find the suffering servant at it’s best. Some suggest that Mark is the most reliable gospel we have, arriving first and before other gospel writers started to tailor their writings to reflect the emergent church and taking into account the realities of the day.

I tend to think that might be true, and that makes the story of Bartimaeus somehow more urgent, more real to us. Poor Bartimaeus, a man apparently not born blind, but certainly now so, begging for his food and shelter, unwanted, unclean, marginalized in a society built on class. Bartimaeus was the bottom of the barrel, just the kind of person Jesus tended to seek out.

He is helped or manages to find his way to the roadside where he has heard presumably that the faith healer Jesus will soon pass along. He hears the crowd approaching, and when he is sure that it is indeed him, he shouts out–”Jesus, Son of David, have pity on me.”

The  crowd jostles him, and urges him to be quiet. We must assume that at least some of these are followers. Some indeed are disciples. We are close to Jerusalem,  close to the end, and these disciples have been with Jesus nearly three years at this point. No voice is heard in opposition to the stern words to Bartimaeus. Until Jesus, hearing, calls him forth. Then the crowd turns on a dime and also calls encouragement to the blind man.

This is the focus of the periscope. There have been a number of stories about blindness in Mark, both literal and figurative. Jesus has been telling his disciples of his coming passion and death. He has tried to explain to them that the they must serve–that is their greatness. They don’t get it. They never get it, not until the end. They remain on this road to Jericho, blind too.

They are insiders, privileged to be with the Master all this time, learning and watching, listening and one would hope, meditating on the wonders they behold, from this man/God. Yet, they raise no voice against the crowd “quieters.” They are serious, about the business of travel. They wish no slow down by some beggar along the way.

Until Jesus, once again radicalizes the scene. He stops, he calls, he heals, and then he moves on again toward his destiny.

Bartimaeus, asks to be made whole. Don’t we wish we were? Why are we ready to deny wholeness to another because it is inconvenient, time consuming, bothersome. We are asked to get our hands dirty. The poor don’t dress well, don’t smell very good, they are often unattractive.

Did Bartimaeus become blind because of sin? Certainly most in his society believed that he must have. Perhaps the disciples still did as well. But Jesus knew better. He asked Bartimaeus no questions of “qualification.” He didn’t call Bartimaeus to meet some standard of worthiness. One can argue, no doubt, that Jesus knew the answers, but that but begs the question. If Jesus has nothing to tell us about our humanity, then his teachings are worthless, mere platitudes to mere humans.

So we must conclude that such things did not matter to Jesus. What mattered to Jesus was one thing: do we have faith? If we do, then we deserve our healing. And perhaps, even when we don’t. There were other healings, many in fact, wherein no question was posed about faith. No all the healed were conscience at the time. But even when they were, Jesus never stated faith as a prerequisite. It merely made his job easier. Perhaps in reality, Jesus sought sincerity.

As Church, as people, we must ask the question of ourselves. Are we as insiders putting up stumbling blocks to the outsider who comes in need? Do we establish standards of entitlement? Are we turning away Bartimaeus on a regular basis because we have concluded he is unworthy of our charity? Do we have the right to ask at all? Is this not up to our God to fathom–the one who has known us in the womb, and knows our every thought? Who are we to judge?

Jesus radically turned upside down nearly everything he touched. He gave us a new way of looking at the world and relating to it and to each other. That is and should always be our focus. I am told that yesterday ONE BILLION people went to sleep without adequate nutrition. We grow enough for everyone, but ONE SIXTH of our population is hungry.

How many Bartimaeus’s out there are we turning away and denying? How many are you?

It seems to me, that if you are going to call someone a “hater of God’s word” then you have some obligation to know a tiny bit of what you propose to talk about.

At least that’s as I see it, and I have fairly loose requirements for giving opinions on most things. But a bit of actual knowledge seems appropriate lest you end up looking foolish as one person does.

The other day, I went to Facebook and was reading down my “friends” links. Friends is a broad term here, including a few high school classmates that I have come to see as fairly wrong headed in their thinking. Name that fundamentalist, creationist, YEC’er, birther, hater of all things Obama, and anti any government program which purports to assist the poor through taxes, something they don’t want apparently to contribute to.

In any case, the link was to an article about Cass Sustein, regulatory czar, who said that the government would be better off getting out of the marriage business and restricting unions to state civil contracts. Marriage should be something exclusive to religious institutions and other private groups.

Now one would think that the great uneducated wingnut right might agree. After all, they are mostly opposed to anything that involves government oversight–be it health care, business regulation, hate crime legislation. They are agin it all. So they should be for this. But think again. Logic has never played a part in the mind of a fundie.

Instead we are told that such persons who favor this are “hateful of God’s word.” Such a remark shows a complete and utter lack of any knowledge about the institution or the bible. No where as far as I can recall is there anything that purports to be a marriage that is conducted as a religious ceremony. Even the “marriage at Cana” seems bereft of any suggestion of religious involvement.

And surely this is the true when we look at history. What we find is that marriage was from the beginning a contract between the parties. Neither Greek nor Roman governments intervened in the marriage contract. Both marriage and divorce were by mutual agreement.

In the early Christian era, marriage also had nothing to do with the church.  In the 6th century in Europe, marriages were often polygamist in orientation and this was true of those who were baptised. Marriages were often considered political at the upper ranks. This mutual agreement system worked up until the 14th century as the common practice among all people.

I am told that people asked for and were ultimately granted a “blessing” that was conducted on the front of the church steps, but never inside the church proper. Finally, the church began registering these civil unions, but were in no manner required to do so. The state took no interest at all in such arrangements.

The Council of Trent, acting to counter the Reformation decreed that all marriages hence forth must be conducted by a priest to be “sacramental,” meaning recognized by the church as legal. The Anglican church permitted the normative “civil union” as late at 1753, when a formal church ceremony was required.

Although there are references within the Hebrew Scriptures that under certain circumstances, a brother might be required to “marry” a brother’s widow, such were not ceremonies involving the rabbi it seems, but rather mutual statements by the parties of intent to be “husband and wife.”

So any suggestion that someone who argues that we should return to a system whereby the state gets out of the “marriage” business, is on very firm historical ground. This is true for both Christians and non-Christians. It is also true that such a person is on firm ground as it relates to scripture. There is simply no provision for the church or synagogue to be enmeshed in the contractual obligations until a few hundred years ago.

It is simply the case that all “marriages” by mutual agreement were considered as “sanctified” in some sense by God. And the early and middle Christian communities never saw reason to involve the church in the process at all, for centuries thereafter. It seems rather that it was the wishes of the couples themselves which pushed for “blessing” and the church followed in some manner to fight the Reformation. Calvin did call for both state and church involvement, but that was in the 18th century.

Those that wish to vilify such a move today, have no basis for claiming that such a person or persons are “hateful of God’s Word” as it were. The Contrarian, who has long espoused such a belief, demands apology, though no doubt he will wait a long time to get one from the wonkettes who serve up every kind of untruth in order to express their hatred of all things Obama.

When God insists, I acquiesce. Either that, or God hounds me until I do. So it makes a lot of sense to give in immediately.

Such happened this morning as I prepared for my facilitating of the last of Job and Mark in the lectionary for tomorrow.

In reading a homiletical treatment of Job, I discovered something I had not realized: namely that Job became something of a radical after his transforming experience with God.

For those of you who don’t recall, I refer you to chapter 42:13-15. God has given all back to Job and more, blessing him with sons and daughters. The daughters are uncharacteristically named and in verse 15, they are given inheritance rights “like their brothers.”

I’ve never caught this before. That Job became radicalized by his encounter, giving to his daughters what was not common in those days, perhaps mostly unheard of, the right to inherit like the boys. They are raised from their lowly status as female and given a certain equality.

For those who think that the closing epilogue of Job serves to resurrect the cause and effect of retributive justice again, you are most certainly wrong. God upholds in fact Job’s protest against it both to his friends and God himself. Job is transformed by his personal encounter, realizing that this God of whom he once had  learned,  he now sees directly as participating at least in his misery.

And Job sees, perhaps as a shocking aha moment, that it is humans who must do the work of justice, rather than leave it to God. And so he does so in his new life after sorrow.

One of the dumbest most absurd explanations I have ever heard is from a bible thumping woman who claimed that global warming was a hoax perpetuated by “money and power” interests. We shall ignore the stupidity of failing to see that the oil cartel and various other industries who pollute with abandon, also are money and power interests who have a vested interest in not changing laws that would cut into their profit margin. They are the main perpetrators of the “nothing wrong here boss” idea of climate change.

But the biblicist announced that after the Flood, when God said that he would never destroy the earth again, well that means that nothing CAN destroy the earth, including silly notions of man-made behavior that destroys the ecosystem, making the planet uninhabitable for humans and most other life.

This refers to Gen 8:22, wherein God says: As long as the earth endures: seed-time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease. (We’ll skip too the relative nature of this statement. Winters of no freezing and summers of drought and 90’s is a season, it just may not be a nice one.) What is essential to read here is that this is preceded by God stating that never again will HE act to destroy. He makes no mention of others acting or failing to act to protect the earth.

Additionally and most importantly, it is clear throughout Genesis that God places man as his steward upon the land to care for it and all it contains. We are to act as God’s regents in the world. Time and time again, God reminds us of this. If God’s creation is good as he announced, than our stewardship must include protecting it against harm, especially harm caused by our own actions in “subduing” and bringing under our authority the earth itself.

A friend of mine has a “green” bible, wherein the text is in green whenever there is mention of environmentally favorable wording. Job seems full of such greening. God again and again speaks lovingly of his creation.

It is the height of stupidity and worse yet arrogance, to stand by and “let God” take care of it. God has made it clear that we, as his regents, have responsibilities too. We are not as it were “potted plants” to sit and consume and abuse the world, confident that daddy will clean up after us. That is sheer absurdity and mocks the very God we praise.

I had often thought of the Hebrew Scriptures as the history of a people’s walk with their God. As such, it is instructive on many levels, yet I never thought of it as a particularly radicalized document. No doubt, as we learn from Job’s “friends” it is not. They were assured that old and well-worn beliefs in retributive justice were at work. They continued to prod Job about his “sins.” They were echoing the beliefs of their time and of their history.

Yet, if we look closely, we can see, that even then, the amazing encounters between creature and Creator often led to  new radicalized views of the world and how life is to be conducted. Who would not argue for instance that Lamech’s overkill (no pun intended) at a small slight was significantly changed by the eye for eye doctrine, bringing retribution at least into some sort of equality with the gravity of the offense?

This of course, all would come as a great shock to the sola scriptura folks who never read ALL the bible in equality, but pick and choose in the most ugly cafeteria style, those verses that support their own particular needed worldview and reject or “forget” all the verses that speak to a new way of seeing and a new way of relating.

Don’t get me started on Mark’s treatment of Bartimaeus in the New Testament. Perhaps I’ll chew on that tomorrow. It calls to shame the bible thumpers who consistently find reasons why we don’t need to address social needs of the poor on a national scale. Jesus was the most radical of all, and yet they seem to have hardly known him. They are more like disciples than they realize.

I didn’t know what to make of this at first. Studies show that men who voted for McCain saw their testosterone levels fall when they found out he lost.

I feel, as you might expect, some responsibility for this. After all, I spent several months last year dragging out all the dirt on this dishonorable human being, assuring all that he was the worst possible candidate for president. And that woman (God how I hate that Sarah is of my sex), only added to the bonfire of reasons to vote for Obama.

It seems that my blogging rhetoric has worked to sissify, feminize, or otherwise reduce the beer swilling, rump scratching tendencies of some American males. I literally turned them into wusses when they realized that a sane and articulate human being was headed for the White House.

Of course, I don’t take all the credit. I’ll give some to Daily Kos, Huff Po, and all the other liberal bloggers, as well as due credit to Keith Olbermann, and that woman of the day, Rachel Maddow. But I do take some.

Okay, so my impact was statistically minuscule, less than the diameter of an atom. But still, I am in the company of those that did? Com’ on–please validate me!

Which makes it all the more remarkable that McCain still has a public forum at all. And he does, even though, as is pointed out, he really is a cipher these days. He holds no important committee chairmanships, has no legislation of note, has very little in the way of any constituency at all, and he is still pretty much hated by the loud-mouth swill that purports to speak for the Rethugs these days.

That public forum is the Sunday news shows, where McCain is called upon time and time again to give his two cents worth on various topics of which he is ill-prepared to pontificate upon. In other words, he was a dud and continues to be one when it comes to intellectual prowess on any subject except perhaps himself and his glorious history with the Vietnamese.

***

This next head scratcher comes from the Vatican. It seems that Karl Marx has been quoted by the Vatican as having some rather good criticisms of capitalism on balance. He is being re-appraised as are people like Galileo, Charles Darwin and others. All, initially slammed as too frightening in their approach, and thus anti-biblical, are now being embraced as the Church enters into a more mature understanding of itself, God and the Church.

Course Catholics see this as nothing more than not throwing out the baby with the bath water, something all intelligent beings do.

Here, the Vatican, like many other groups, are trying to reconcile the normal defense of capitalism with the alienation and strong income disparity that has resulted worldwide between the titans of industry and the vast majority of the rest of the world’s people.

Still these reassessments are coming fast. Only last year Galileo was resurrected as being accurate in his claims about the earth revolving around the sun, and only last February did the Vatican categorically declare that Darwin and ensuing evolutionary theory are not in the least incompatible with faith.

None of this will sit well, (the matters relating to Marx at least) with the extreme right wing of the Roman Church, which steadfastly has little or no interest in social concerns for the masses, seeing  government solutions as “socialistic” in orientation.  They prefer, like many on the extreme right to let “private” charity make its usual small dent in the problem, and at least salve the consciences of the faithful in their efforts to do the “good works” demanded for personal salvation.

***

Which takes us to the bible. You missed the connection? Well, no matter, travel forward. Madpriest has an excellent little rant on the far right and it’s penchant for dissembling into fantasy as it clings to what it wants to believe in the face of objective reality staring it in the face. Yes folks, I’m not the only one who finds the biblicist illogic maddening in the extreme and exceptionally self-serving and blinders created.

He says in part:

“People who believe that the Bible is totally the word of God. . . are deluding themselves and, as members of many minorities over the centuries will testify, this can lead to injustice and the infliction of pain on others (the exact opposite of what we are called to do in the teaching of Jesus Christ).”

That is the message here. It’s not that anybody cares what bilge anyone wants to believe, it what they do with that information that makes the difference. And the biblicists do work to harm society at large in their quest to protect their personal needs theology. It causes really harm and pain, and exactly the opposite of what God and Jesus intend.

***

Segueing perfectly this time, The furthest and youngest galaxy cluster has been announced as found by NASA. It is some 10.2 billion light years away, meaning the light we see now, originated from the system 10.2 billion years ago. Bad news for the YEC’ers.

Scientists don’t expect to find more, since this about stretches the limit time wise when sufficient time exists to pull these clusters together. If more are found, then scientists will be back at the drawing board rethinking things no doubt.

Observatories from around the world joined together in making this discovery and confirming it.

***

Which leads to food. Well of course it does. Science means thinking and thinking makes me hungry. This should be obvious.

I know, I know, you’ve read all the bilge above just to get to the good stuff, and here it is.

What are the 10 worst dining trends of the 21st century to date?

Oh you must have your own list, but in case you don’t–not being part of the intellectual effete arrogancy of the left,  so much maligned by the intellectual effete of the right, then do read on. Sure to be the topic of choice at the next cocktail party. And appletinis are SOOOO not in this year folks.

First on the list of has beens and never should have beens:

10: The bloomin’ onion  (aww shucks there goes the Super Bowl fare)

   9: Molecular gastronomy (your guess is as good as mine.)

   8: The $40 entree (I thought Applebee’s “two for twenty” was just about right)

   7:  The communal table (thought this happened only at church)

    6:  Proudly obnoxious fast food (read really really calorie and fat laden)

    5:  Knee jerk online reviews (sounds like a lot of whining to me)

    4:  Foam (did somebody forget to wash the soap off the pans?)

    3:  The menu as book (too much information makes us squeamish)

    2:  The chef as media whore (If you are talkin’ you ain’t cookin’)

     1:  Deconstruction (separating your peas from your taters)

Feel free to add your own ideas. I personally think that the chef at the Chinese Wok at the grocery store should use better containers to house the entrees. They leak all over the paper bag and are a mess when I am spooning them into the containers for reheating for dinner.  Just my number one peeve. I don’t mind the deconstruction of my rice from my entree however. I like to mix them myself.

If you are a Christian, you already know this. We are a bunch of rather schizophrenic folk. Yes admit it, we are. The chart at the right only barely glosses over the real tragedy locked within the pretty bands of green and blue.

We can’t agree on what we believe. Never have really, though at times, one faction or another was powerful enough to subdue the others and put them out of business. Not so much today. We add something like three hundred brand spankin’ new “We got the truth” sects per year and no end seems to be in sight.

I’m not sure whether such a state exists in other faith traditions, but I doubt any can meet our level of splintering. I’m not just talking bout the self-styled, “spiritual but not religious” types. I’m not talking about the “I am a spirit driven determiner of what God wants” type, though I have met one of those deluded nuts. Forms churches in her home and sends them out to do as she defines is right. She has no need of church herself, being a true prophet, just sent to explain the bible to the rest of us.

No, I’m talking about our penchant in Christendom to set up strong hierarchies of correctness and then jealously clinging to our dogmas as if only we could possibly get it right. It turns out that Anglicans are trying to pave the way for depressed Roman Catholics to find a home with them. And it turns out that Roman Catholics are now making it easier than ever for depressed Anglican/Episcopalians to find a home with them. Read group inclusion here.

The radicalized bible thumpers point at the Romans and yell, “whore of Babylon,” and five minutes later, inquire whether those same Romans will be at the “anti-abortion” rally tonight. The once properly outraged Catholic, retorts with “crazy Catholic-hater” and then makes a date for the next anti-Obama town meeting with their evangelical counterpart.

Christendom makes, as they say, strange bedfellows. Worse, Christendom and politics make dangerous bedfellows. Finding it odd that ultra conservative evangelicals (biblicists) join ranks with ultra conservative Protestants and Catholics to oppose health care reform, death penalty reform, wars, and climate change? So do we, but then, listen up.

The truth of the matter is that most of these “conservative” social “Christians” are just flat out conservatives who don’t want taxes, and don’t want to personally pay for the eradication of social ills. They prefer to live their “good life” and dabble in personal “charity.” That’s not so bad of course, if you will call it what it is. Jesus, doncha know said the poor would always be with us, and that some don’t deserve our help. They tell me he said that, though I can’t find it anywhere.

Unfortunately, they don’t stop there. They pick and choose the scriptures they sola scriptura their way through to defend their racist, selfish agenda, claiming they in some fit of righteousness, are actually doing God’s work. And worse, they have the temerity to point their finger at the social liberals of the world, many of whom are deeply religious, and call us captured of Satan.

No honesty is being promoted on either side, or among anyone. We are spiraling into the same morass as the country is with increasingly belligerent “sides”. No fairness is being upheld. No reference to the abiding love and compassion of our God and our savior Jesus is being promoted or even acknowledged.

We are poaching each other’s congregations, and at the same time, sniping away at anyone who thinks differently. We have the temerity to “speak for God.” Worse, we have the awful tendency, some of us at least, of demanding that God personally be responsible for that which God deliberately placed in our hands–the stewardship of both planet and each other.

Instead, we are holding shut out pocketbooks, claiming God will take care of it. Perhaps he will, but perhaps not in the way you expect. Perhaps, just perhaps he expects something more on our part than merely pointing a finger, and chastising each other for unfaithfulness to scripture and to God herself.

This is not a game of who has the most signed up on whose side. This is not a game of theological right or wrong, more right, more wrong. This is life, and we are here for a finite time and we have work to do.

Yesterday, as I exchanged pleasantries with dozens of people less fortunate than myself, I was forced to see that if the least among us can find reason to smile and share a laugh, to find common bond in simply being human, that perhaps the rest of us should take note.

Who are we that we pick and choose the verses that support the result we desire? We all do it dont’ we? Who are we to limit a God to a series of pages in a book, a book brilliant in it’s entirety, but convoluted and confusing, doubled back on itself in places, contradictory often and for good reason–it was written by human beings, with faulty information and sometimes faulty memories.

As Dr. McGrath says in his post day, what does it matter if Jesus thought that the “kingdom” would descend in its completeness within the lifetimes of many of his hearers? What is so wrong with Jesus showing us his human limitations? Whose agenda are we pushing here? Jesus or our own?

Have we become so invested in our rightness that we no longer even hear? How can we pollute the land and think that this doesn’t violate our responsibilities as stewards? How can we let any person lack for health care or food because they have violated one of our precepts of entitlement? How dare we? Indeed.

Just sayin’.