You're In The Agora
Welcome to the Net's best new source for commentary on current events, culture, faith, science and much more.
|
|
« September 2006 | Main | November 2006 » October 31, 2006Today's Other HolidayIn addition to Halloween, October 31st also marks the celebration of Reformation Day. It was on this day in 1517 that Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the castle church in Wittenberg, Germany to protest the aggressive sale of indulgences, the granting of merit from the church to the individual, by Johann Tetzel. While Pope Leo X had authorized indulgences for anyone who gave alms to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, Luther regarded the practice as akin to selling salvation (which was how it was often received on the ground). Sadly, Luther's protest fell on deaf ears, as the pope demanded he recant 41 of the theses, and, when Luther refused to do so at the Diet of Worms in 1521, the Reformation was born. Meanwhile, the idea of taxing the people by scaring them with the fires of hell still exists in most denominations, usually under the title "Church Building Program" or "Capital Improvement Fund." I'm guessing most Lutheran and Reformed churches celebrated the minor festival this past Sunday by singing A Mighty Fortress and that's about it. However, it seems to me there are better ways to mark the occasion, such as heading to your nearest pub, ordering a pint of Einbecker, and raising a glass for Dr. Martin, Philipp Melanchthon, Martin Chemnitz, and, heck, even that fussy lawyer John Calvin. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we prohibit and abolish women? The sun, moon and the stars have been worshipped; shall we pluck them from the sky? See how much He has done thru me even though I just prayed and preached, the Word did it all. If I wanted to, I could have started a conflagration at Worms. But while I sat still and drank beer with Philip in Hahnsdorf, God dealt the papacy a mighty blow. Posted by David Darlington at 04:38 PM | Comments (1) A tedious tradition"Before Election Day has even arrived, Republicans in one New York state Senate district have started challenging the right of some registered voters to cast ballots." No, that's not a press release from the Democratic National Committee. That's the lead paragraph of an AP story about a dispute over discrepancies in voter registration records in New York state. Leaving aside the arguably biased introduction of the article, what is actually occurring is part of a pattern which occurs every election cycle--Republicans complaining about situations which could facilitate voter fraud, and Democrats complaining about possible voter intimidation or disenfranchisement. As Zach wrote last year, the values of the Left and the Right are very much at odds when it comes to ensuring fair elections. Liberals focus more on social justice and ensuring every eligible citizen has the opportunity to cast a ballot. Conservatives focus more on "law and order" and ensuring that no fraudulent votes are cast. It is easy to see, then, how Democrats can sincerely interpret Republicans' efforts as voter intimidation, and how--at the same time--Republicans can sincerely interpret Democrats' actions as promoting cheating. A solution that would address both groups' concerns would be a real breakthrough, but if it exists, I am unaware of it. Posted by Eric Seymour at 01:01 PM | Comments (16) Killer AppLogMeIn is not a new service, but it is one that I recently discovered. By installing a free program on one or more networked PCs and creating a free account on the LogMeIn web site, you can then control those computers from any computer in the world with web acess. You can open any file and run any application that is on the computer you are accessing. I tried this out last night, using my wireless laptop in the living room to control the wired desktop in the den. I was even able to make the desktop computer play my MP3 files, essentially turning my laptop into a remote control for my digital media center. In addition to accessing your own desktop computer while away from home, LogMeIn presents an extremely useful tool for experienced computer users who are often called upon to help their less-experienced friends and family members. With LogMeIn, they can grant you the ability to see their desktop, making it much easier to solve their problem without being at their computer. I highly recommend this software. Posted by Eric Seymour at 12:59 PM | Comments (4) U2 Goes to ChurchForget the megatron, the bouncing ball, and the praise band. A number of Episcopal churches have started a "U2Charist" in the place of the existing Rites of Holy Eucharist. While the substantive message of the program (stemming violence against children, hunger, AIDS) is one we should all hear, is this the best medium? Posted by Seth Zirkle at 10:03 AM | Comments (12) Happy Halloween
Here's a list of unacceptable treats:
Posted by Zach Wendling at 06:39 AM | Comments (5) Nothing in Government is Fantastic but the BudgetsNow that baseball season is over, those of you who are fans of tedious procedure with intermittent action might want to consider starting up a new fantasy league at . . . Fantasy Congress. This website allows you to pick a team of Congressman every weekend, who earn points by pushing legislation through the Federal sausage-maker. This seems to have a bias against small government types who would be averse to introducing more laws, or whose laws would propose shrinking government and therefore be less likely to progress. Here's a rundown of the top scorers in each house.
(via Fort Wayne Observed) Posted by Zach Wendling at 06:22 AM | Comments (1) October 30, 2006Stay the CourseEver since White House Press Secretary Tony Snow announced last week that the President would no longer be using his stock phrase, "stay the course," to describe U.S. strategy in Iraq, pundits have been wondering how the rhetoric about the war would change. Here we have an excerpt from a recent press conference that gives key insight into the new thinking in the Administration:
Posted by Zach Wendling at 06:28 AM | Comments (1) Webb of NonsenseSen. Allen's attacks on the novels written by his challenger, Jim Webb, are drawing fire from John Cole and Radley Balko, among others. More surprising, even the folks at the Corner are calling the tactic absurd and embarrassing. I think their anger is misdirected; if the attacks work, their antipathy is really a censure of democracy, not Allen, lying, desperate weasel that he is. Posted by Zach Wendling at 06:24 AM | Comments (9) October 27, 2006Single-sex education and the perplexing priorities of the ACLUSometimes, the ACLU comes off like the guy at homeowners' association meetings who is obsessed with the maximum allowed hedge height. He's convinced that the neighborhood will go to hell in a handbasket if people grow their hedges 4 feet tall instead of 3 feet. Such is the case now that the US Department of Education has announced new rules to expand the ability of school districts to implement single-sex education. In response, the ACLU and other civil rights and feminist groups are making noise about court challenges to the new regulations. Becks at Unfogged responds, "Dear ACLU, Why don't you go free some detainees or something instead? Thanks." Jane Galt writes, "I have to admit, more and more frequently, I find myself thinking 'Don't they have anything better to do?'" I admit, when I first heard of the notion of re-introducing single-sex education in public schools, I thought about "separate but equal." As the vice president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights said in the NYT article, "Segregation is totally unacceptable in the context of race... Why in the world in the context of gender would it be acceptable?" The primary difference, I think, is that there is no prejudicial motivation behind the move. Instead of a sharia-like attitude that men and women shouldn't mingle, the idea of single-sex education is motivated by the desire to improve both sexes' performance in the classroom. And some emerging research does suggest a benefit to students. This makes a lot of sense to me. Research seems to show differences in the way boys and girls learn, so single-sex classrooms could, in theory, be optimized to boys' and girls' learning styles. And once the kids hit puberty, the advantages of single-sex education become very obvious. Many of us who went to co-educational high schools can attest to the large portion of our attention during the school day that was focused on the opposite sex. Yes, it is possible that differences in educational quality could arise, but there should be ways to avoid that outcome. A limited number of trial runs with single-sex education seems to be in order, and that seems to be just what the new regulations are designed to implement. Posted by Eric Seymour at 04:52 PM | Comments (4) October 26, 2006Comfortable Republicans Holding BackMy latest column for the Howey Political Report is available. I've reposted it below as well. Indiana's congressional delegation has become an unlikely focal point for the Republican Party's potential loss of control in Congress in spite of its traditionally red history. U.S. Representatives Chris Chocola, Mike Sodrel and John Hostettler are among the nation's most vulnerable Republicans. The Democrats need only 15 seats to regain control of the U.S. House and so Indiana has become an obvious battleground. Unfortunately for Republicans, the Democrats' renewed optimism has helped empty their supporter's wallets and boost the Democrats' stash of campaign dollars. Although the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) once held a commanding fundraising lead, by the end of September the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) reported $36 million on hand, compared with $39 million for the NRCC. In the Senate races, things look even worse for the GOP. The Indiana's elder statesman Sen. Dick Lugar, for example, had $4,011,244 cash on hand as of the July 15th reporting deadline. Earlier this week the New York Times reported he had transferred a mere $75,000 from that. And even as he sits on millions of dollars, daily one can find his advertisements on television. But why would Sen. Lugar go to all of these lengths when he has no challenger? Lugar isn't alone in his unwillingness to help fellow Republicans in need. Republican Sens. Richard Shelby of Alabama and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas both have more than $9 million in their campaign accounts. Lugar may have no opponent, but Shelby isn't even up for re-election this year. In spite of this, and a campaign account of $11.6 million, he's only given $15,000 to the NRSC. With Mr. Shelby's chairmanship of the banking committee on the line, why is he holding back? Sen. Hutchison has roughly $9.5 million on hand and a commanding lead of 20 points in the polls, but she has given only $115,000 to the NRSC. That may sound like a lot, but it is little more than 1 percent of her campaign war chest. Five democrats have transferred $1 million or more to the DSCC, but only one has done the same for the NRSC. It helps explain why the DSCC has $23 million compared to the NRSC's $12 million. With the Senate up for grabs, the comfortable Republicans' behavior is baffling. If those like Sen. Lugar felt like the Senate races weren't in need of their help, one would at least think he would choose to help fellow Hoosier Republicans such as Sodrel, Chocola, and Hostettler. Perhaps these comfortable candidates are simply greedy. Or worse, perhaps this is an indication of their own distaste for the GOP's direction and apathy toward it losing control of Congress. Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 02:35 PM | Comments (11) Halloween IronyIt's always a bummer to arrive at a Halloween costume party and realize that someone also had your idea and is wearing the same costume. But what if the other person wearing your costume isn't really wearing a costume, but is in fact the person you're dressing up to be? This Halloween I plan to be Flavor Flav, a rap "artist" who has become more popular for his stints on VH1's reality TV programs. So I was bit surprised to read this afternoon that Flavor Flav will be stopping by my hometown this evening. Too bad I can't attend to show him up. Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 01:52 PM | Comments (2) Speaking of Marriage...The ancestral homeland opened the door to gay marriage yesterday, ruling that the state must grant the same rights to homosexual unions as heterosexual ones, and giving the state legislature 180 days to write the appropriate legislation. Though some gay rights groups are unhappy that the court refused to mandate gay marriage, they essential won the issue, as the court mandated equal rights for gay couples, but left it to the legislature whether to call gay unions "marriages" or "civil unions." Conservative groups are understandably unhappy. The Garden State is currently one of only five states that doesn't have a constitutional amendment or law on the books explicitly forbidding gay marriage, though one Republican state legislator hopes to change that by constitutional amendment in 2007. Vermont and Connecticut currently allow civil unions for homosexuals. Massachusetts is the only state so far that allows gay marriages. If the Garden State goes the gay marriage route, some experts expect a lot of gay couples to flock to the state to get married, as Massachusetts state law forbids marriages for nonresidents whose home states wouldn't recognize the union. Both Senate candidates, Democratic incumbent Bob Menendez and challenger Tom Kean Jr. say they oppose gay marriage, but only Kean has called for a constitutional ban. Menendez says he supports civil unions. The text of the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision can be found here. Posted by David Darlington at 09:13 AM | Comments (7) Milquetoast Martyr or Passionate Prophet?Interest in Dietrich Bonhoeffer, like C.S. Lewis, has surged during the past few years. His Ethics, written between 1940 and 1943, are considered by many to be the Martyr's most perspicacious work, and it continues to demand attention. In a discussion of Nazi Germany's Lebensunwertes Leben movement and the family, Bonhoeffer had this to say: Marriage involves acknowledgment of the right of life that is to come into being, a right which is not subject to the disposal of the married couple. Unless this right is acknowledged as a matter of principle, marriage ceases to be marriage and becomes a mere liaison. Acknowledgment of this right means making way for the free creative power of God which can cause new life to proceed from this marriage according to His will. Destruction of the embryo in the mother's womb is a violation of the right to live which God has bestowed upon this nascent life. To raise the question whether we are here concerned already with a human being or not is mere to confuse the issue. The simple fact is that God certainly intended to create a human being and that this nascent hum being has been deliberately deprived of his life. And that is nothing but murder. For a number of reasons, I think that Bonhoeffer's assessment establishes a foundation upon which Christians, both evangelical and Catholic, can frame their discussion of abortion and contraception. Like C.S. Lewis' Anglicanism, Bonhoeffer's Lutheranism affords an ecclesiology and presbyterate similar enough to that of Catholicism to clear the inevitable initial hurdle of "us vs. them." Oldline Protestants might be tempted to join the discussion, at least as Bonhoeffer's conception of social justice is broad enough to flirt with a Rauschenbuschonian social gospel. Further than establishing a via media among often-times disquieted moral theologies, Bonhoeffer here hints at two other gems, if only in passing: (1) Discussion on contraception within Christianity is not on temporary loan from the Vatican Museum, and (2) the contraceptive mentality is not a boogeyman conjured by Paul VI and John Paul, but is profoundly imbedded in the current discussion on abortion and must be acknowledged. (For Justice O'Connor's concurrence to this view, see Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 856-57 (1992). Posted by Seth Zirkle at 08:54 AM | Comments (2) October 25, 2006Wal-Mart's latest controversial moveThe nation's largest retailer has long been a target of liberal criticism, for reasons ranging from its labor practices to its 1999 decision not to sell the "morning-after pill" in Wal-Mart pharmacies.* Wal-Mart's latest move, however, is drawing heat from conservatives, since it has joined the Corporate Advisory Council of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. In joining the NGLCC, Wal-Mart pays $25,000 in annual dues to the organization which promotes the interests of homosexual-owned businesses, and also advocates on issues such as gay marriage and hate crimes legislation. The move is also designed to increase Wal-Mart's "supplier diversity"--though presumably Wal-Mart will not be making any special exceptions to its hard-nosed procurement practices. The American Family Association, as is their standard practice, has launched a petition drive and is suggesting shoppers take their business elsewhere. It is likely that a majority of Wal-Mart shoppers in rural areas do not support the work of the NGLCC. But will those customers spend the extra time and money to buy from other stores? It would seem that Wal-Mart does not expect that they will. *Wal-Mart reversed its decision on emergency contraception in March 2006, and now sells "Plan B" in its pharmacies. Posted by Eric Seymour at 12:56 PM | Comments (1) Hazing ModernityThe Christian Science Monitor recently ran a nice story about a wonderful little tradition, the freshman beanie, at my alma mater. The tradition was common at any number of colleges ninety years ago, but then again, so was the "Yale man," or the "Harvard man." Posted by Seth Zirkle at 09:58 AM | Comments (2) October 24, 2006The GOP Does DaisyThe Republicans' new campaign ad featuring Osama bin Laden is generating a lot of buzz. Evoking memories of the infamous "Daisy" ad designed by Bill Moyers for Lyndon Johnson's 1964 campaign, the new ad, which appeared on the RNC web site a few days ago and is scheduled to appear on cable news networks, tells us that "the stakes" in the upcoming election are possible terror strikes on American soil if one doesn't vote the right way. I'm not a fan of the ad because, like "Daisy," it's about as subtle as a kick in the groin, but will it succeed in getting out the vote? What does it say about the RNC's expectations for November if they have to run something so stark, and, some would say, fear-invoking? You can watch the ad by clicking below. Posted by David Darlington at 07:21 PM | Comments (8) On the Topic of Catholic DissentersJeremy Lott has reviewed Charles Curran's recent autobiography and gives considerable attention to the often-rumored theory that Curran stressed the procedural, versus the substantive, aspects of being prohibited from teaching at a Catholic university: "In 1967, Curran had been fired because of his loud support of artificial contraception. In his own words, he had attended a White House conference on population control, where he made the distinction 'between Catholic moral teaching and public policy issues in a pluralistic society.' And the Vatican, in turn, had pressured the CUA to make the distinction between a Catholic theologian and Teddy Kennedy." "[After protest on the campus] CUA caved, and Curran thought that had settled the issue. But in retrospect, he admits that by focusing narrowly on the procedural injustice he was delaying the inevitable. 'The press,' he explains, 'asked a lot of questions about my teaching, expeically in the area of artificial contraception, but we tried to keep that issue from becoming the primary focus. We knew that on the narrow academic issue we could expect support from all corners of the campus.'" "After the CDF contacted Curran in 1979, he stalled and tried again to play the procedural card. The initial letter was accompanied by 16 pages documenting the "errors and ambiguities" in his writing and a request that he reply to them in the next month. When he did get around to responding, Curran again 'pointed out that serious flaws in the [CDF's] examination process,' claiming the the procedure violates the basic principles of justice." Sometimes crazy right-wing Catholic theories prove true. Curran is currently as snug as a bug in a rug at Southern Methodist. Posted by Seth Zirkle at 02:56 PM | Comments (0) Making Catholics Proud...MSNBC/Newsweek: "I think the issues that brought you into politics were the environment and also choice. [You had] five children in six years, a Catholic background...Was embracing choice an issue with your family"? Pelosi: "To me it isn't even a question. God has given us a free will. We're all responsible for out action. If you don't want an aborition, [then] don't have one. But don't tell somebody else what they can do in terms of honoring their responsibilities. My family is very pro-life. They're not fanatics and they're not activists. I think they'd like it if I were not so vocally pro-choice." ...Or maybe Catholic. You don't need the Book of Concord to regret, even if only for a moment, the trip across the Tiber. Posted by Seth Zirkle at 11:05 AM | Comments (51) October 23, 2006The YouTube candidateWhile YouTube played a part in dealing a serious blow to one politician's campaign, at least one other candidate is trying to use the popular website to boost his run for office. That candidate is former Apprentice contestant Raj Peter Bhakta, and he is the GOP candidate in my Congressional district. I've had mixed feelings about Raj since he won the (uncontested) GOP primary. At times his campaign has seemed to be trying to rely on his "celebrity" appeal rather than real substance, but at other times he seems to be the kind of independent, original thinker which we truly could use in Congress--even though his centrist stances don't fully align with my own. A couple weeks ago, I got recorded message on my voice mail from Donald Trump endorsing Raj. Today, I got a message with Raj speaking from the back of an elephant in the Rio Grande river with a mariachi band playing in the background. Yes, I'm serious. The message pointed me to this campaign video (part 8 of the "See Raj Run" series) which does, indeed, feature Raj riding an elephant in the Rio Grande (starting about 4 minutes in) to highlight the lack of border security. Ridiculous? Heck, yeah. But I can't help agreeing that it's not as ridiculous as people swimming across the Rio Grande right under the official border crossing bridge. Posted by Eric Seymour at 09:07 PM | Comments (3) Quick LinksHere are some pieces so interesting I'm at a loss for commentary:
Posted by Zach Wendling at 06:30 PM | Comments (0) Of Jewish ImportanceThe National Jewish Democratic Council Political Action Committee (NJDC) has released its Backwards Eighteen, a "list of the eighteen worst members of Congress on issues of importance to the American Jewish Community." On the list we find right-wing scoundrels Rick Santorum and George Allen, but oddly missing from the list is anything relating to the politicians' views on "Jewish" issues, or Judaism in general. Unless, of course, you agree with the NJDC that a 100 percent voting record with the National Right to Life Committee is "clearly inconsistent with the views of the Jewish community." Shame on you, Rep. Barbara Cubin. Of the eighteen folks mentioned, only two - our esteemed (and probably soon-to-be out of a job) Rep. Hostettler and Arizona Rep. Hayworth - are nixed on account of something relating to Judaism proper: Hostettler consistently votes against increasing aid to Israel, and Hayworth is chided for "supporting" Henry Ford's anti-Semitism. But two is a few less than eighteen. As more an indicator of who's pro-life and overtly Christian than a thinly-disguised anti-Semite, the list's impetus is poorly veiled. I'm not convinced it is the case that someone who believes life begins at conception avers an ethic antithetical to Judaism, or that "putting the government in charge of Terri Schiavo's medical condition" (Rep. Randy Kuhl, NY) is akin to caesaropapism. It would behoove NJDC to consider that the same religious right constituiency it patently paints as "anti-Jewish" is also the largest pro-Isreal voting bloc in the country. While these evangelicals might have their own questionable postmillenial axe to grind, their financial and social support to Israel (with all its attendant Judaism) is unquestionable. For an interesting take on how the NJDC's (and similar groups') hijacking is harmful to Judaism, consider David Klinghoffer's Why the Jews Rejected Jesus. Posted by Seth Zirkle at 10:43 AM | Comments (23) October 22, 2006I'm Unique, Just like Everyone ElseFor some reason, I think there are more than 29 people who have my name, but I can't prove that. I know that at least one of them is a prolific author. Posted by David Darlington at 08:55 PM | Comments (8) October 20, 2006Open-source theology?Theopedia ("An Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity") is an interesting project. Like a hybrid of Wikipedia and a Sunday school class, Theopedia unabashedly endorses a Reformed, evangelical Christian theology. As with all wikis, users are invited to edit articles (you must create a user account first), but in contrast to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, articles in Theopedia must be consistent with the Theopedia Statement of Faith. Nevertheless, there are relatively few points of doctrine on which Calvinists and Arminianists disagree, so Theopedia has the potential of becoming a fairly comprehensive reference of Protestant theology. Posted by Eric Seymour at 05:28 PM | Comments (4)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Positions of Belief | % of Professors |
I don’t believe in God. | 10.0% |
I don’t know whether there is a God and I don’t believe there is any way to find out. | 13.4% |
I don’t believe in a personal God, but I do believe in a Higher Power of some kind. | 19.6% |
I find myself believing in God some of the time, but not at others. | 4.4% |
While I have my doubts, I feel that I do believe in God. | 16.9% |
I know God really exists and I have no doubts about it. | 35.7% |
Here are the disciplines with the highest percentage of professors who "have no doubt that God exists":
- Accounting (63.0%)
- Elementary Education (56.8%)
- Finance (48.6%)
- Marketing (46.5%)
- Art (46.2%)
- Criminal Justice (46.2%)
Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 04:46 PM | Comments (6)
How much? No problem.
The culture of weddings has gotten out of control when women are willing to pawn off their children as collateral to get their dress of choice.
Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 04:26 PM | Comments (0)
Apples and Oranges
It's trendy to whine and complain about American consumption habits, and as the US population reaches the 300 million mark, journalists are redoubling their efforts to exploit this storyline. Britain's Indepedent carries a story today, trumpeted by Matt Drudge and others, which asks if our growth is sustainable. In particular our large consumption is questioned:
On a global scale the average US citizen uses far more than his or her fair share of the planet's resources - consuming more than four times the worldwide average of energy, almost three times as much water and producing more than twice the average amount of rubbish and five times the amount of carbon dioxide, a major contributor to global warming. The US - with five per cent of the world's population - uses 23 per cent of its energy, 15 per cent of its meat and 28 per cent of its paper. Additional population will mean more people seeking a share of those often-limited resources.But is our consumption so out of place? The US is the growth engine of the world economy and with such enormously high production, high consumption is needed as well.
One of the Federal Reserve big whigs put it this way: "What we add in new economic activity in a given year exceeds the entire output of all but 15 other countries. Every year, we create the economic equivalent of a Sweden - or two Irelands or three Argentinas. In dollar terms, a growth rate of 3.5 percent in the U.S. is equivalent to surges of 16 percent in Germany, 20 percent in the U.K., 26 percent in China and 70 percent in India."
Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:29 AM | Comments (10)
October 10, 2006
Circling the Wagons
Move:
In an unusual move, the Republican National Committee is investing heavily in television advertising in Senate races in Ohio, Tennessee and Missouri in what officials describe as a firewall strategy designed to limit Democratic gains in the Nov. 7 elections and maintain the GOP majority.Seems to me like a slap-in-the-face to Elizabeth Dole, who has had a lackuster run as chairwoman of the NRSC. I doubt she'll remain in that position after the elections.. . . They said the decision has caused friction with officials at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which historically has been the only party entity to run commercials on behalf of its candidates.
The move also raises questions about the priority assigned by the RNC to races in other states where Republicans are in jeopardy _ Pennsylvania, Montana and Rhode Island among them . . .
While Stephens and Schmitt stressed the cooperation between the two committees, neither had a ready explanation when asked why the RNC had decided to step out on its own when it could simply have transferred funds directly to the senatorial committee.
Nor was it clear why the RNC had decided to scrap the division of responsibilities in use as recently as this summer's Rhode Island GOP senatorial primary.
Posted by Zach Wendling at 06:40 AM | Comments (5)
October 08, 2006
More Fun with Despair
Thanks to despair.com's parody motivator generator, you can now create motivational posters like those Star Trek ones I posted a couple weeks ago. Here are a few I just cooked up:
Thanks to Ben Kepple for the inspiration.
Posted by David Darlington at 05:37 PM | Comments (1)
Politically Correct Feasts?
Yesterday marked the 435th anniversary of the Battle of Lepanto. Fought in 1571, it marked the last naval battle fought between rowing vessels and was the first time in more than 100 years that the Ottomans had been defeated. While it stopped the Ottomans' advance through the Mediterranean, Muslim forces eventually captured Cyprus two years later.
On the eve of the battle, Pope St. Pius V asked that every soldier pray the Rosary and ask the Blessed Mother's intercession for a victory. In the wake of the Christian victory, Pius declared October 7th to be the Feast of Our Lady, Queen of the Holy Rosary. Next to the Feast of the Immaculate Conception (Dec. 8; promulgated by Pius IX in 1854), this is one of the most recent feasts to be added to the Roman Calendar.
The Feast has always been popular in the southern parts of Italy, due in part to what the Calabrians and Sicilians had to loose, and it is not unusual to hear a pontiff or cardinal offer some rhetoric on the Feast. But it seems to me that the Feast's origins may not be the best thing for the Church or Benedict to address given the Pontiff's recent fopah with Islam. Perhaps, as a measure of conciliatory good will, the Church could suppress the Feast (like it did with so many others during the liturgical "renewal" of Vatican II) and let the world know that the historical record need not ruin the day. Next on the list: Return the Ottoman standards captured by Prince Sobieski at the Battle of Vienna (1683) which currently hang in the beautiful Santa Maria della vittoria.
Posted by Seth Zirkle at 02:26 PM | Comments (8)
October 07, 2006
Catastrophe!
A warehouse fire earlier this week in Yakima, Washington, destroyed 4 percent of the United States' supply of hops, a key ingredient in making beer. The fire destroyed or ruined about 10,000 bales, each weighing about 200 pounds. An industry official put the estimated loss at between $3.5 and $4 million. ATF investigators ruled that the fire was accidental, saying a bale of hops in the southeast corner of the S.S. Steiner Warehouse spontaneously combusted.
I'd pour a Cold One out in remembrance, but that's probably not a good idea until we know how the market responds.
Posted by David Darlington at 05:03 PM | Comments (2)
October 06, 2006
"I Guess I'll Go"
Boy began to sigh, looked up at the sky, told the moon his little tale of woe . . .
Posted by Zach Wendling at 10:18 PM | Comments (0)
Quick Links
Interesting tidbits:
- Scientists are working on vaccines to cure behavioral problems like addiction and obesity.
- The locations of polling places (schools, churches, etc) can subconsciously affect how voters vote.
- A rundown of the Best Time to Buy Everything. Clothing? "Thursday evenings, six to eight weeks after an item arrives in stores."
- How do we warn humans 100 centuries into the future not to poke around our underground nuclear waste dump?
- There's a new book on Nazi-era humor.
Posted by Zach Wendling at 12:12 PM | Comments (0)
Free Exercise of Smoking
I have been told Alaska is an interesting place. This, coming from the one Alaskaonian I met while at Wabash. There has been some controversy surrounding Alaska's Constitution and the use of marijuana. Earlier this year, in the case of Frederick v. Morse, the Ninth Circuit ruled that a student could display a sign reading "bong hits for Jesus" as the Olympic torch made its way through his town. In addition to arguing that the speech was "off campus," and thus his suspension from school was unconsitutional, Frederick stated that the on-going debate over the legality of marijuana made the sign innocuous.
Not to be outdone, an Alaska couple arrested for the use of marijuana have asserted a free exercise defense under the Alaska Constitution, stating that the use of marijuana is part of their religious practice. The smokey duo are "ordained ministers" of the Universal Life Church. For all who have ever aspired to become a minister but want to avoid actual theological engagement at the seminary, ULC is for you. For a small fee, ordination is at your fingertips.
The lower court ruled that the state has a compelling interest in outlawing the use of marijuana. The appellate court has remanded, instructing the lower court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the couple's religious beliefs are "sincere."
Posted by Seth Zirkle at 10:27 AM | Comments (0)
October 05, 2006
The Means Migration
The name Richard Florida should be familiar to ITA readers. Our former colleague Paul Musgrave wrote a review of Florida's work on the "creative class" in the early days of this site.
Florida has an article in the latest issue of Atlantic Monthly that's worth a read (PDF). In it, he tracks the geographic distribution of the educated workforce (those possessing college degress and above) across the nation. Florida shows that the college-educated are increasingly clustered in small urban pockets, particularly in the Bos-Wash corridor, California coast, and the Denver and Phoenix metro areas, compared to 1970, where the geographic distribution was more uniform. Florida sees this migratory shift as significant as the farm to city shift of the industrial era, the African American migration northward, or the postwar suburban boom.
A component of this "means migration" is that lower- and middle-class Americans are being priced out of these boomlet eras as the credentialed class moves in. Highly-educated people tend to have high incomes, and, unsurprisingly, the cities they're flocking to are pretty much the same ones who've had housing booms in the past 15 years. The highly-educated with their earning potential and willingness to risk move in and drive those with somewhat limited means out (however, ironically, this same elite will need a truly servile class -- domestics, day laborers, etc -- to do the daily stuff while they're making their money, so it's really just the middle- and blue-collar types who need to get on; the servants can stay in far-flung exurbs). Furthermore, it is reasonable to expect greater class difference between boomtown dwellers and those who live elsewhere in the coming years, as the highly-educated and successful tend to stay that way. These educated elite, Florida writes, thrive off of each other and the dynamism of being around people with similar education, ambition, and earning potential. In fact, he says, "the most talented and ambitions people need to live in a means metro in order to realize their full economic value." (emphasis in original)
Is this segregation of the educated into urban pockets a good thing? In part, Florida's story is nothing new: the bright, young man (or woman) heads off to the big city to make his or her fortune. But, as Florida shows, there were always enough college-educated folks who stayed behind in Gopher Prairie to make sure things ran properly. This is apparently no longer the case. Young people flock to means metros, where they stay until the make it or are priced right back to where they came from. The brain drain faced by many second cities is a real, measurable crisis.
Posted by David Darlington at 10:50 PM | Comments (3)
Vatter Luther, You Are Not Alone...
Leo's bull Esxurge Domine is a classic treat for school children learning ecclesiastical Latin. It represents, in many ways, everything right and wrong about the Medici curia (right: written while Leo was hunting wild boar; wrong: written while Leo was hunting wild boar).
Since Vatican II, excommunication has dropped from Catholic parlance (and, for that matter, certain Protestant bodies - I have been told on a number of occasions that the LC-MS and WELS have formal guides for excommunication). I think that this can be explained in two media: (1.) Since Vatican II a sizeable section of the Church has been wishy-washy on doctrine (Commonweal, anyone?), and (2.) the "new" 1983 Code of Cannon Law is a pansy.
Some believe the practice has picked up gusto - but in a good way. Removing from Communion those members of the Church who attempt to ordain or consecrate sine mandato makes it clear that public unilateral acts will not be tolerated as representative of the Church. If only Leo had the same perspicuity with regards towards Albrecht...
Posted by Seth Zirkle at 09:58 AM | Comments (4)
October 04, 2006
Limbering Limbo
"Pope tries to win hearts and minds by saving souls of unbaptised babies"
In perhaps one of the best headlines of the year, the UK Times announced to its readers what has been circulating in clandestine Catholic circles for some time: The traditional teaching of limbo will be officially declared dead by Bene later this month. Some have speculated that this announcement comes all-too-quickly on the heels of the Pontiff's recent "Islam is a religion of peace" flop, but whisper of this development reached even me in the modest Archdiocese of Indianapolis earlier this year.
As the International Theological Commission noted earlier this week, the Church's teaching on limbo (as well as Eastern Rite Catholics') is a matter de fide, and has never been dogmatically defined by the ordinary or extraordinary magisterium.
While I believe that St. Augustine made the first case for something similar to limbo, it was not until the time of the Angelic Doctor that limbo took a more definite form. Yet, interestingly, both Augustine and Aquinas held that anything like the limbo we think we know is dangerous theologically: Augustine was battling the Pelagian view that there was some "intermediate" station for unbaptized "good" folk, and persuaded the Council of Carthage (418) that without baptism the Beatific Vision is impossible (John 3:5). Aquinas departed from an Augustinian conception of original sin rooted in concupiscence, emphasizing just punishment. Thus, for Aquinas (and Anselm), "limbo" is a state of enternal happiness, but not the full Beatific Vision of heaven.
Popular piety has a way of developing into a theology of its own, sometime to the detriment of Faith. Sometimes we get a little Dante and Milton along the way.
Posted by Seth Zirkle at 11:17 PM | Comments (6)
ExFoleyation
"No, no, no, you're supposed to kill them and then leave the bodies where the bumbling DC Metro PD will never find them, like in a large urban park."
I think the Mark Foley scandal has been over-analyzed. It boils down to two simple things.
First, he is super-creepy. This supersedes all of the hair-splitting over whether his behavior was illegal or harmful, at least in the minds of the public. I dare say this would be true even if circumstances were more favourable. Let's imagine that he had first approached the father of a female page, assured him of his honorable intentions, and then proceeded to court the page with the most punctilious of Victorian manners. I'd wager that the vast majority of Americans would still think he was some sort of pervert. Add in his semi-closeted homosexuality, his astonishing behaviour, and those cringe-inducing instant messages, well, what else will the public conclude but that he is a predatory lecher?
Actually, Foley has managed to one-up himself: by falling back on incredible claims of alcoholism and child-abuse, he's also proven to be a buffoon.
Second, the Republican leadership deserve all the heat they are getting over this. I do think it is important to pin down who knew what and when, but more important is the fact that claims of a cover-up are so believable. Rich Lowery shows some clear thinking on this:
The fundamental problem congressional Republicans are experiencing now is that they have almost no moral capital left after the last two years. Again and again, when given the choice to reform their practices or do little or nothing, they always picked the latter. On travel, on Abramoff, on earmarking -- you name it. The impression they always gave was that the integrity of the institution and the public interest had to take a back-seat to their own convenience. They wanted to squeak by this year on gerrymandering, negative ads, and money, and just might have succeeded -- had nothing more gone wrong. Well, now it has and people feel confirmed in what they always suspected about this Congress -- that it is unable to police its own practices and is full of people who don't follow the same rules as the rest of us.Even if the leadership were unaware of incriminating evidence, their thirst for power is more than enough to have dissuaded them from asking the right questions when troublesome information came to their attention. Everyone apologizing for poor, dopey old Hastert or, worse, trying to deflect attention to Democrats is seriously missing the point.
Posted by Zach Wendling at 08:23 PM | Comments (15)
Cashing in on Conspiracies
Over at Cafe Hayek, Don Boudreaux reprints a letter to the editor he wrote in response to those who believe President Bush is artificially lowering gas prices in the run-up to the elections. He doubts they sincerely believe what they claim:
Alleging that today's falling gasoline prices result from a fiendish plot to keep the GOP in power, Kenneth Jones is certain that "gasoline prices will go right back up to $2.75-plus after the [November] election" (Letters, October 2).Heh.If Mr. Jones is correct, he can make a financial killing. All he need do is to invest all of his assets going long in gasoline futures (which are today about 30 percent lower than they were in late July). Indeed, he ought even to cash out all the equity in his house, max out on his credit cards, and borrow heavily from his brother-in-law so that he can invest as much as possible in these futures.
He can then contribute his post-election financial bounty to the Democratic National Committee.
Posted by Zach Wendling at 07:26 PM | Comments (1)
October 03, 2006
Pay No Attention to that Man Behind the Oil Rig
Being out of power does weird things to the politically minded. In the 1990s, we had conservatives believing Bill Clinton had Vince Foster killed. Today there are 9/11 conspiracists, and there is this: 42 percent of Americans, two-thirds of them Democrats, believe that President Bush and big oil are deliberately lowering the price of gasoline in advance of the November elections.
There are myriad reasons why people become attached to conspiracy theories. They are often shortcuts used in place of longer, correct explanations. They can help rationalize one's powerlessness against a foe, while maintaining one's sense of moral superiority. They can be used as defense mechanisms against difficult truths. For whatever reason, a significant chunk of the American electorate is now so cynical of the Bush Administration to believe that they could (and would) conspire to force down gas prices over $.50 a gallon the past month just to save their political hides. He ain't that powerful, folks.
Or, let's look at this another way. Let's assume that President Bush is dropping gas prices to save his party. What then was his rational for raising them to $3.50 per gallon earlier this year? Was he deliberately trying to tank his approval rating, turn the public against the war in Iraq and social security reform, crash the housing bubble, give credence to peak oil theorists, and force interest rates up? If he was, it worked like a charm.
Posted by David Darlington at 08:38 PM | Comments (25)
A cause worthy of support
The Fifth Annual Blogger Boobie-Thon is now under way, and will continue through Saturday, October 7. If you've never heard of it, the boobie-thon was started four years ago as a fundraiser for the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. Last year, over $9200 was raised, for a remarkable total of over $26,000 since 2002!
John Ashcroft might not approve of this use of the Internet, but I think it's an ingenius (mostly PG-13-rated) way to support a great cause. FYI, the boobie-thon home page always remains work-safe.
P.S. Event founder Robyn of Shutterblog is a staunch liberal, so I am renewing my pledge from last year that if anyone manages to submit a picture that incorporates GOP campaign material (or other Republican or conservative items), I will personally donate $49 to the boobie-thon this year. (Leave a comment to let me know.)
...I now return you to your regularly-scheduled high-minded political and philosophical discussions.
Posted by Eric Seymour at 08:07 AM | Comments (0)
October 02, 2006
Churchill, terrorism, and water-boarding
Niall Ferguson writes about Winston Churchill and torture in a LATimes op-ed today: (h/t: Andrew Sullivan)
As Winston Churchill insisted throughout the war, treating POWs well is wise, if only to increase the chances that your own men will be well treated if they too are captured. Even in World War II, there was in fact a high degree of reciprocity. The British treated Germans POWs well and were well treated by the Germans in return; the Germans treated Russian POWs abysmally and got their bloody deserts when the tables were turned.
This is a weak argument against the aggressive interrogation of terrorists. First, most WWII soldiers were conscripts, and few captured soldiers possessed any strategic knowledge that would be useful to the enemy. They had no choice but to participate in the war, and the harsh treatment they received was typically not aimed at obtaining intelligence--it was either brutality for brutality's sake, or slave labor. By contrast, al-Qaeda members have not been conscripted into jihad. Nor are they volunteering to defend their homeland. Every terrorist has personally embraced an evil ideology that condones the murdering of civilians in the service of a twisted vision of Islam.
More importantly, there is very little reason to believe that our treatment of Islamic terrorists will have any impact whatsoever on how captured U.S. soldiers will be treated. These people committed the grisly murder of journalist Daniel Pearl long before the abuses of Abu Ghraib occurred. The occasional reference to Abu Ghraib or Gitmo in extremist missives seem to be entirely post-hoc rationalizations for tactics already deemed appropriate for use against infidels.
This does not in any way justify harsh treatment of captured terrorists as a form of retribution. Any aggressive interrogation methods must be effective at obtaining accurate information that will help prevent attacks and capture more terrorists--otherwise even the slightest discomfort caused to a prisoner must be considered immoral.
Dean Barnett, writing on Hugh Hewitt's blog, says that disorientation and discomfort are much more productive than pain for obtaining accurate information. Barnett writes that "the undeniable consensus is that water-boarding is an extremely productive interrogation tool." Without a doubt, water-boarding walks the very gray line between "coercive interrogation" and torture. (That line is so gray that activities which some people consider torture, other people would be willing to endure on national television in an attempt to win moderate amounts of money.) Nevertheless, I'd consider it an acceptable "method of last resort" for interrogating high-ranking terrorists who have information about planned attacks on civilians.
As Barnett writes, moral compromises are made in war. I would not condone aggressive interrogation of POWs in a conventional war. Such techniques are not justified to prevent attacks on military targets. But if harsh-but-not-injurious interrogation methods on terrorists can yield information that would save the lives of hundreds, thousands, or even more civilians, those actions are justified.
Posted by Eric Seymour at 06:29 PM | Comments (13)
The Engine of the Economy III
In previous posts, I've looked at a Democratic strategy paper by Kim, Solomon, and Kessler that purports to fashion a reconnection between the Democratic party and the middle class. They suggest that the party would do well to exploit their key insight into economics by proposing policies that steer wealth away from the rich and toward the middle class, the real engine of the economy.
One such policy promises to be fruitful for both the party and the nation: funding the college educations of middle class students. Indeed, conventional wisdom strongly holds that investing in higher education, specifically expanding the number of workers who hold degrees, is a no-brainer. A concerted effort by the Democratic Party to focus the energies of the state on this goal would be unassailable.
Unless the conventional wisdom about higher education is wrong.
A recent report by George C. Leef (PDF) comes to the conclusion that higher education is oversold. Like Arnold Kling, I find it hard to excerpt the long survey, but the gist is that we are not moving into an economy where a vast proportion of the populace must have a college degree in order to function. The benefits are exaggerated while government programs artificially lower the cost to consumers (students), resulting in overselling.
There are numerous secondary effects, including degree inflation and the lowering of academic standards in order to accommodate students ill-suited to academic life. In this way, promoting mass education may be counter-productive, as those students who truly need higher education in order to fulfill their productive capacities are deprived of an atmosphere in which they can mature. One might also consider the deadweight loss of taking a large segment of the labor force out of the talent pool for four unproductive years. Or, especially for the purposes of examining Kim et al's claim, where those tuition dollars could be put to better use.
Dr. Leef's sober analysis states that we are barking up the wrong tree when we look to mass college education to lead us to economic prosperity. I believe that our efforts to prepare for the 21st-Century economy will depend much more on other forms of post-secondary education, many of which have been unfortunately stigmatized. (Further thoughts on the nature and purpose of higher education can be found here and here.)
Despite this voice in the wilderness, that very stigmatization will sustain demand among the middle class for university education. Probably much more than useful training, a college degree is a status symbol, a signal that one is middle class. And so the electoral strategy would likely still be successful, but it would do nothing to support the claims of Kim et al that the middle class is the engine of the economy.
Posted by Zach Wendling at 12:26 PM | Comments (4)
Re-writing history
Think you know the famous words first spoken on the moon? Think again. Many have charged that Neil Armstrong's first words - "That's one small step for man; one giant leap for mankind" - failed to include "a" before man, and made the phrase somewhat meaningless. But as the Houston Chronicle recently reported, Armstrong may not have goofed:
High-tech detective work apparently has found the missing "a" in one of the most famous phrases ever spoken.(Hat tip to Andy at World Wide Rant.)Astronaut Neil Armstrong's first words from the surface of the moon on July 20, 1969, now can be confidently recast, according to the research, as, "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
It is the more dramatic and grammatically correct phrasing that Armstrong, now 76, has often said was the version he transmitted to NASA's Mission Control for broadcast to worldwide television.
Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:44 AM | Comments (6)
Good fences make good neighbors?
To my suprise, there wasn't much fanfare in the media or press about a bill passed Friday by the US Senate - called the Secure Fence Act of 2006 - authorizing the construction of a 700-mile fence along the US-Mexico border. President Bush is expected to sign the bill into law and one wonders what effect it will really have on illegal substances and immigrants crossing the border. Since the fence's funding will come in a separate bill, perhaps we can expect a more high profile debate when that makes its way through Washington.
Of course no bill would be perfect without funding another government study, and one provided for in this bill aims to determine whether the government should also construct a fence along the Canadian border.
Posted by Joshua Claybourn at 09:22 AM | Comments (5)
October 01, 2006
Purusing Purcell
I can think of no more enjoyable a way to spend one's Sunday afternoon than a concert of Purcell - on period instruments. This afternoon marked the first public concert of the year for the Indiana University School of Music's Baroque Orchestra, one of the few orchestras in the nation devoted solely to the baroque genre.
During the past twenty years period recordings and performances have come into something of a hayday. Ensembles like the Academy of St. Martin in the Fields and the Hilliard Ensemble have brought a much-needed resurrection of Bach, Purcell, Blow, and Teleman, just to name a few. While the classics like Hans Hotter and Fischer Dieskau will never wither, the purity and originalism of period performances breath life, missing for a few centuries, into the music.
This afternoon's concert was devoted to Henry Purcell (1659-95), and more particularly his masques, or semi-operas. The instrumentation included varied viols, lutes, harpsicord, and varied recorders. The performance was a treat for the ear and the imagination. Brava, Scarlett.
I posit that Purcell's musical genius (not to mention Bach's) is reason enough for allowing music to simmer for a half century before declaring it brilliant. Although Purcell's music was esteemed during his life (he served as organist of the Chapel-Royal and Westminster), within thrity years of his death his music had fallen out of favor. Perhaps it was the nature of the Hanoverian Court, perhaps it is the nature of society's demand for the "latest" in music. That Purcell was the darling of London during the gilded decade following the Glorious Revolution is no surprise - that his music would be on a Bloomington stage 300 years later strains credulity. Purcell's restoration took some 250 years; some claim it was complete in the opening measures of Peter Townshend's "Pinball Wizard."
Posted by Seth Zirkle at 11:31 PM | Comments (1)
|
------ ADVERTISEMENTS ------
|