MM: Carolers, Award, Recipes
Well, my first performance with Fireside Carolers went as well as I could’ve hoped. We did our free concert at the church that hosts our rehearsals, and I didn’t flub anything in a way that could’ve been noticed. The Fair Elaine snapped a picture of me singing, looking like I was maybe a wee bit tentative. Guilty. (She also posted some pictures from our Thanksgiving Weekend on her blog.)
Next weekend I get my first real Carolers experience, as I’ll be going out in an octet on Friday and Saturday. Today’s singing actually gave me a bit of a confidence boost.
Oh, and I think I looked pretty good in my tux. Is it weird that I have a tuxedo, but don’t own even so much as a sport jacket?
BTW, for anyone needing a budget tuxedo and living in or around Portland, head over to Mr. Formal Clearance Center on SE 7th in Portland.
--- - --- - --- - ---
So, it’s weird enough having readers of my blog whom I don’t personally know. (Like the time the other Seth Heasley’s mom dropped by.)
It’s even stranger when they like my writing enough to lob an award at me. Yes, it’s true. My Orthodox reader, DebD (of Deb on the Run), has awarded me with the Superior Scribbler award.
It’s both an award and a meme. I don’t do much meme-ing, because I’ve just gotta be meme…heh. But I’ll do my best here. First, the rules:
- Each Superior Scribbler must in turn pass The Award on to 5 most-deserving Bloggy Friends.
- Each Superior Scribbler must link to the author & the name of the blog from whom he/she has received The Award.
- Each Superior Scribbler must display The Award on his/her blog, and link to This Post, which explains The Award.
- Each Blogger who wins The Superior Scribbler Award must visit this post and add his/her name to the Mr. Linky List. That way, we'll be able to keep up-to-date on everyone who receives This Prestigious Honor!
- Each Superior Scribbler must post these rules on his/her blog.
I’m fine with all these steps except for the first one. Because I simply don’t have that many Bloggy Friends that I don’t know personally. And I’d feel funny linking them, like there was a conflict of interest. So I feel that I should choose from people I’ve found online and started following.
But I haven’t done all that much of that. I’m more of a window shopper, and I know it’s wrong and all, but I click through to a lot of book review posts from Semicolon Blog’s Saturday Book Reviews, and I haven’t managed to look back at many of the authors’ non-book-review work. Except for DebD’s, and that’s because she’s posted interesting comments on my Theology Thursday ramblings.
In short, I know I must mend my ways and be a better blog commenter/follower.
But I’ll attempt to fulfill at least the spirit of the meme. I’m not planning on notifying all these folks, because a couple of them are already Big Time, so why would they care what I think?
JonV at Into the Darkness. I’ve known him since he was just a pup (Read: when he was twelve and not yet taller than me. And when he called me Mr. Heasley). Now he’s doing engineering work for the Mennonite Central Committee in Mozambique, and writing extremely verbose posts about his life there. I know I’m not really entitled to be proud of him, but I was the worship leader for the youth program way back then… (Yes, I know him personally, but he’s in Africa!!!)
Apostrophe Abuse. I’ve written quite a bit about the signs of the Apostrolypse on this here blog. But Apostrophe Abuse has pages and pages of evidence. It’s serious, folks.
Keith Law at Meadow Party. Baseball writer, food critic, book reviewer. Good work if you can get it (though I think he mostly gets paid for the baseball stuff). He inspires me to read more, and I already feel like I read a lot.
Amos at The Amateur Entymologist and Outside the Camp. His musings on English, as a non-native speaker, are always interesting. And while I don’t agree with his Calvinism, I still enjoy his theology thoughts on Outside the Camp. (BTW, I initially found him while searching “A While vs. Awhile”.)
Michael Brooks at Aetherwatch. I very much enjoyed his book, Thirteen Things that Don’t Make Sense last year. On his blog, he posts other such weirdities and his general musings.
Hey, I managed five awards! Whee!
--- - --- - --- - ---
We had a great Thanksgiving feast, with actually a lot of vegetables. We had Marinated Vegetable Salad, which is a favorite of mine, and Roasted Carrots, Asparagus, and Brussels Sprouts.
Yes, Brussels Sprouts. Seriously. Actually, I’ve always liked them, but after reading about how much my niece and nephews enjoyed them, we had to try the recipe.
It’s a deep, dark, secret. Very complicated.
(Toss the veggies in olive oil and sprinkle liberally with salt and pepper. Bake at 400-ish until done. Half-hour or so. Longer for the carrots, shorter for the asparagus.)
Yes, I used the word Recipes up in my title, so I should give a couple more away.
My sister made this killer Sweet Potato and Apple Casserole at Christmas last year, so we had to try it. (Layer sliced sweet potatoes with thinly sliced Granny Smith Apples, sprinkle some pecans over it, add some butter, orange juice, and brown sugar, and dust with cinnamon. Bake at 400-ish and take it out before it burns. Yes, it was a close call but still delicious.)
Well, we had leftovers of that dish, so I made Leftover Sweet Potato Casserole Pancakes!!!!
I threw the leftovers in the food processor (probably one and a half cups total after pureeing), then mixed in about a cup and a half of flour, a couple of eggs, a cup or so of soymilk, a tablespoon of baking powder, a dash of salt, and some orange zest, and threw it on the griddle.
Awesome! BTW, my opinions of apple desserts are well known and acknowledged by all as wrong. (Weirdly, they’re recorded in that post Other Seth’s mom commented on.)
But the Sweet Potato and Apple Casserole is seriously good, and the pancakes were, as My Son the Breakfast Appetite would say, “ridiclius.” Unfortunately, it only made eleven small pancakes, which is just not enough for five people including the Breakfast Appetite.
(BTW, I’ve been thinking I need a nickname for the Offspring, and I think I have it. The Breakfast Appetite just fits so perfectly. Or maybe The One Whose Spiritual Gift is Breakfast Eating. Or just the Breakfast Eater. Or Ethan the Breakfast Eater. Or maybe a Dances with Wolves-style name like Eats Many Pancakes. Votes? Suggestions?)
We also made from-the-hip Turkey Soup, using the leftover giblet stock and pan drippings that I didn’t turn into the world’s greatest gravy in the world. Yes, it’s perfectly acceptable to be redundant when talking about gravy. Especially when you’re a semi-veg family.
(Oh, the Turkey Soup recipe. Some of the amounts are approximate.)
- Some Turkey, chopped.
- A few carrots, chopped.
- Some celery, chopped.
- Some potatoes, chopped.
- An onion, executed in a food processor until dead, then kept on bread and water for two weeks, then beaten roundly with sticks. Please, someone get my clumsy literary reference…
- Garlic, a truckload, to taste.
- Leftover green beans (yes, we had those, too), chopped
- Spices of various kinds. One or more of the bay/basil/marjoram/thyme category.
Sauté the veggies in olive oil until you stop. Then add liquids. Like stock. Or gravy. Or a partial box of Pacific Foods Chicken Broth. (Add leftover mashed potatoes if you somehow managed to run out of gravy before potatoes. It’ll thicken the soup nicely.)
Add fresh cracked pepper and consume with leftover Non-Hockey-Puck Rolls.
Fiction Friday Night: Brighty of the Grand Canyon
I just realized (just counted, actually) that I’ve included fifteen read-alouds on my reading list this year. There are actually quite a few others I read to Ethan that I didn’t count because of their failure to meet my fairly low standards of length/difficulty.
The latest one that counted was Brighty of the Grand Canyon, a 1953 book by Marguerite Henry, detailing the adventures/legend of a burro named Brighty (after Bright Angel Creek).
(Marguerite Henry wrote several books about a horse called Misty. You may be familiar with those titles. I think I was aware of them.)
The book was a gift from my mom, who visited the Grand Canyon just this year. As a description of the Canyon in its pre-National Park days, the book succeeds rather well. As an adventure, it’s a bit disjointed.
The book starts by introducing Brighty and Old Timer, an old prospector. Before long, Old Timer and Brighty meet a shady stranger who is unambiguously The Bad Guy. But Old Timer is too trusting and shares the secret of a terrific stake he’s just made (a rich copper deposit).
Then Old Timer is murdered, and there’s really no mystery about whodunnit, and Brighty is left to fend for himself. Which, of course, he does rather well, having never really depended on Old Timer for anything but some treats and a few back scratchings.
Soon thereafter we’re also introduced to Uncle Jimmy, a renowned mountain lion hunter, and also to the sheriff of the county, both of whom pledge to bring the killer to justice.
And then we don’t hear anything about the search for the murderer for about a hundred pages. Instead, the narrative focuses on Brighty’s activities in the years that follow the murder. We learn what Brighty does in the summer and what he does in the winter. We learn that he’s a tough customer, when he manages to fight off and kill a mountain lion. And we learn what he thought of the Other Side of the Canyon after a bridge was built across the Colorado River (Teddy Roosevelt makes a few appearances during this part).
Eventually the Bad Guy resurfaces, and there’s a bit of trouble and some scuffles and some difficulties, none of which I’ll divulge.
I won’t say Ethan and I didn’t enjoy it. It’s somewhat difficult to connect with a non-human character who doesn’t talk, and I totally blame animated movies for that! (BTW, as an aside, why was The Incredible Journey remade with talking animals? The old version had to be better, though I’ll admit I didn’t see the new one.)
But the fact that Brighty was a real character made it interesting, and as I mentioned, the history is fascinating. And the descriptions of the Canyon and its surrounds made me want to see it again. And maybe go on one of those trail hikes with donkeys.
Next up…I’m not certain, because two holds just came through at the Library, and the final Crichton book was on the Best-Sellers rack and I picked it up. We’ll see if I can focus on just one of them.
Fiction Friday: 2001
I’ve sometimes wondered if 2001: A Space Odyssey was a test to ferret out pretentious film geeks. Anyone claiming to understand it would be nailed.
The Fair Elaine and I watched it a few years ago and just kind of sat there in a very “Umm…what?” kind of way when the film ended.
But, assured (by my esteemed colleague in pavement pounding) that the novel, by Arthur C. Clarke, made more sense, I picked it up at the Library Used Book Sale.
And it certainly made a ton more sense than the movie. Due to, you know, actual words being used. From the opening scene with the ape-men, and even to the end with the Star Child, the book beats the ever-living snot out of the movie, in terms of sense-making.
One other reason I picked up this book was that, well, next year is 2010, and I felt I should maybe read that book. So I had to read the first volume first. Now I’m kind of regretting that I didn’t pick up the whole series when I had the chance (at the book sale).
(I also want to see the 2010 movie.)
I do have to admit that the ending of the book is still somewhat confusing, but it’s a far cry from the brain twister of the film.
If you’ve seen the film, you’ll probably enjoy the book more. I know, right? That never happens! If you haven’t seen it, I’d actually suggest reading the book first, then viewing the movie through its lens.
I’ve got another review queued up for later today, so check back if you’re interested in reading my impressions of Brighty of the Grand Canyon.
Theology Thursday Lite: The Prophetic Heads-Up
Still working through The List. This time, it’s a bit of meandering about Amos.
At some point I need to strictly define what constitutes Theology Thursday Lite. Because I’m pushing five hundred words here, and that’s only lite compared to some of my more brevity-challenged musings.
I don’t have really defined thoughts on my topic this week, and I’m hoping to get some discussion going. It would probably help if I had more readers, but I appreciate everybody who does read my stuff. So if you’re out there, lob me your thoughts on this.
First, our text:
Amos 3:5-7 (NLT, emphasis mine)
5 Does a bird ever get caught in a trap
that has no bait?
Does a trap spring shut
when there’s nothing to catch?
6 When the ram’s horn blows a warning,
shouldn’t the people be alarmed?
Does disaster come to a city
unless the Lord has planned it?
7 Indeed, the Sovereign Lord never does anything
until he reveals his plans to his servants the prophets.
So, to my discussion question. Does verse 7 indicate something that’s true for all time, or something that applied only to the particular audience of Amos’s prophecy?
If it’s true for all time, then it invites the question, “Where are the prophets today?”
Of course, there’s no shortage of charlatans (I originally wrote ‘morons’) on Christian TV who claim to be prophets. Even worse, there are those who, after a disaster, claim that it was God’s judgment, without providing any reason to take them at their word. (They’d get more benefit of the doubt if they’d perhaps uttered a prophecy about the event before it happened.)
So we’ve got two questions for discussion. Does God truly not act without revealing His will to prophets? And if so, where are these prophets?
A couple of thoughts from me, or at least what passes for thought around here:
First, about the question of Amos uttering a universally true statement. I’m not even sure he meant it as anything other than generally true. Because verse 7 is in a list of truisms which don’t have to be taken in a wooden, literal sense. After all, can’t a trap spring shut on its own? Can’t a bird get caught in a trap out of sheer bad luck (or good luck for the trapper)?
And maybe there’s something lost in translation.
And second, about the question of where the prophets are. There are those who would say that under the New Covenant there are no prophets. However, to those inclined to so opine, I would point out a certain Agabus, mentioned twice in Acts (Acts 11 and 21), in addition to Philip’s four daughters, who are described as at least having the gift of prophecy (Acts 21).
And perhaps that’s the question: Are there prophets today, or merely people with the gift of prophecy? (Oh, and to those inclined to say that the gift of prophecy has ceased, your position is not supportable. If you think it is, I’d welcome the explanation.)
I guess that was somewhat Lite.
(Oh, and Happy Thanksgiving!)
Wordful Wednesday: Christmas is Good
How does a person determine his favorite author? It seems to me that the most reasonable way would definitely fall into the qualitative side of things. But I’m an engineer, so I need data.
Quantitatively speaking, there’s no question that my favorite author is Dean Koontz. Since I started tracking my reading in 2003 (about halfway through that year), I’ve taken in nineteen Koontz titles.
Now, I’m not convinced Mr. Koontz is actually my favorite author, but a lawyer could probably prove he is. I just copped to the relevant evidence.
Suffice it to say that I enjoy Koontz’s work quite a bit. I like some of the predictable things he does, like focus a bit overmuch on architecture, particularly that of churches. A book club could have fun starting a betting pool for which page would first use the word “nave” in any of Koontz’s books. (To be fair, I haven’t read all his books, and I’m not convinced the word appears in all the ones I have read, but someone could always put down a coupla bucks on “No Nave.”)
One thing that’s stuck out from the very beginning is Mr. Koontz’s affection for dogs. And it wasn’t hard to figure out where that affection came from, because the Author Bio section on the back flap of his hardcover books usually mentioned both his wife, Gerda, and their beloved dog, Trixie.
In recent years, the bio has changed to include his wife and “the enduring spirit” of Trixie.
It turns out that Trixie, while not being as prolific as her “Dad,” has also written a couple of books. The latest is Christmas is Good: Trixie’s Guide to a Happy Holiday. (She points out in the introduction that having written one book was enough since it was one more than Lassie ever wrote.)
I’m not counting this book on my yearly list, because it doesn’t meet the loose criteria I have for inclusion (generally, I look for fairly normal-sized print and a hundred pages or so, depending on genre). But I did enjoy it.
And of course, the book has been loosely translated from Dogese into English, with this kind of result:
Sometimes seems people forget wonder of Christmas. Dog like me could help people see wonder again. Dogs see wonder in everything. Tennis balls! Old shoe! Stupid rope tug toy! Dust ball! Hey, look, grass!!!!! Roll, roll, wriggle, eat, roll, wriggle, eat, spit up! That’s just grass! Christmas has lots more better wonder stuff than grass!
It’s not all silliness, of course. Trixie gives some good advice for things dogs should do at Christmas. Such as:
Say prayers. Don’t forget part about sausages.
She also mentions sausages at least five times in her Christmas wish list. Meatballs are also feature heavily.
And then there’s this kind of mixture of seriousness and doggish humor:
People think Christmas is about gifts. Is not about gifts. Is about Jesus, love, hope and dog treats.
But by far my favorite tidbit was under Trixie’s recommendations for Fun Stuff to Do for Dogs and their People. Dad, this one’s for you:
Play Frisbee in snow. If don’t have snow, play Frisbee anyway. If don’t have Frisbee, throw cat.
I almost feel bad about getting this book from the Library, because the proceeds go to Canine Companions for Independence, who gave Trixie to the Koontzes in thanks for their generous support.
(I just read on Wikipedia that the Koontzes have adopted a new dog, another golden retriever who’s a grandniece of Trixie. That’s cool.)
I had to do this book review, because I seem to have gotten stuck in one of those “I’ll never finish another book” ruts. I know, you were wondering what was going on, because it’s been more than a week since I finished one. Totally. But hopefully I’ll finish my current one in time to get a Fiction Friday post up about it.
(Hint on the title: The sequel to this book is next year. Any guesses?)
Theology Thursday: No Mouth, Must Scream
(edit: I was informed I originally misspelled a name in this post, so that's been corrected.)
Odd title today, isn’t it? It’s based on a Harlan Ellison short story I read fairly recently, titled I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream.
In the story, an intelligent super-computer has wiped out nearly all of humanity, keeping just five humans alive. Not for breeding or repopulating the earth or anything like that. And not for company, though the computer, named AM, has figured out how to make them effectively immortal.
No, he keeps them around to torture them. He wounds them, then heals them. He torments them physically and mentally. And he’s done it for over one hundred years, with no end in sight.
The story is told from the perspective of one of the survivors, who eventually figures out how to kill the others in order to spare them further torture. He is left standing, however, and AM takes his revenge by turning him into a shapeless blob (heh…I just noticed I wrote “blog” on my first pass) of sorts. In this form, he does not possess a mouth. Hence the title of the story, because the torture continues, and he cannot scream.
How is this a Theology Thursday topic? Well, I thought I’d share AM’s very memorable expression of his feelings for humanity:
“Hate. Let me tell you how much I've come to hate you since I began to live. There are 387.44 million miles of printed circuits in wafer thin layers that fill my complex. If the word 'hate' was engraved on each nano-angstrom of those hundreds of miles it would not equal one one-billionth of the hate I feel for humans at this micro-instant for you. Hate. Hate.”
Again, you may ask how this amounts to a Theology post. Well, check this other quote out:
“…he will crush you under his feet without mercy; he'll crush out your blood, and make it fly, and it shall be sprinkled on his garments, so as to stain all his raiment. He will not only hate you, but he will have you in the utmost contempt; no place shall be thought fit for you, but under his feet, to be trodden down as the mire of the streets.”
This is an excerpt from Jonathan Edwards’s famous sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. Edwards is describing the way God feels about the damned.
It just struck me that if we are to believe AM in the Ellison story was evil, what should we think about the God in Edwards’s conception?
I’m reminded of one of George Carlin’s famous bits:
…”Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!”
“But He loves you.”
I’ve posted in the past that my investigations of Christian Theology have begun to affect the way I view the doctrine of Hell (also here and here). I’m no longer certain the Traditional View, so famously propounded by Jonathan Edwards, is the correct one.
(Admittedly, most people who hold the Traditional View would probably feel that God regretted punishing anyone for all eternity but loved them enough to honor their choice.)
Of course, I can’t be ruled by emotion here. But I do have a hard time believing that the God who has “no pleasure in the death of the wicked” could really be the God of Eternal Conscious Torment.
it’s good to keep in mind the fact that the Edwards style of preaching is completely at odds with the sermons recorded in Acts. In messages from Paul, Peter, and Stephen, there was nary a mention of awful eternal destinies. Instead, they called for repentance and recognition of the King. (And baptism, but let’s not get into that one.)
I’m still on the journey here. I’m emotionally drawn to the Christian Universalist position, but I’m almost completely ignorant of its scriptural support. So I’m planning to read a good presentation of the view. It’s in my Amazon cart. I just need to order it.
It’s worth mentioning that the alternate views (Conditional Immortality and Christian Universalism) don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Both views are consistent with some kind of just punishment. Hell can still be a reality without believing it’s a place people spend eternity.
Wordful Wednesday Night: Letter to a Christian Nation
Sam Harris’s Letter to a Christian Nation can hardly be described as anything but a rant. Well, a screed might be a more accurate label for it. He’s very angry/depressed/just generally emo about the whole problem that lots of people believe in God. And since he’s so much smarter than all us poor theistic souls, he’s written us a letter.
From the “Advance Praise” section on the back cover, I expected something a bit more hard-hitting. Instead it’s the same old, tired, atheistic claptrap we’ve seen since, well, ever.
I’m not saying that there aren’t logical and intelligent objections to Christianity. This book just doesn’t contain many of them. I don’t say it doesn’t contain any, just not many.
I’m sure there’s a point-by-point response out there somewhere (I don’t say “rebuttal,” because in spite of his best efforts, Mr. Harris actually makes some sense in a couple of places). I won’t even attempt to do a detailed response. Rather, I’ll just point out a few of his more blatant missteps, and emphasize a couple of things I agreed with.
(Oh, and J.P. Holding of Tektonics.org has provided that point-by-point response I mentioned.)
The tone of the book is that of a pointed letter, addressed to The Christian, referred to throughout as “you.” So it feels personal. In fact, the first sentence goes like this:
You believe that the Bible is the word of God, that Jesus is the Son of Go, and that only those who place their faith in Jesus will find salvation after death.
I guess he’s not looking for the Christian Universalist crowd here. In fact, he acknowledges that he’s writing to the most conservative/fundamentalist types of Christians. I’m not really one of those, but I press on. I also don’t seem to fit his definition of “moderate,” so I guess he’s unaware of any nuance to Christian beliefs beyond the broadest categories.
But Mr. Harris doesn’t really apply much in the way of logic even when discussing issues that should be easy to clarify. For instance, in his discussion of Eternal Destines, he writes this:
If the basic tenets of Christianity are true, then there are some very grim surprises in store for nonbelievers like myself. You understand this. At least half of the American population understands this. So let us be honest with ourselves: in the fullness of time, one side is really going to win this argument, and the other side is really going to lose.
I’m not sure what, exactly, he feels Christians have to lose here. I’m sure he must, as a learned man of philosophy, be familiar with Pascal’s Wager (Nutshell: it’s a no-lose-proposition to serve God, even if He doesn’t exist). What do I really stand to lose? Some years of life I couldn’t keep anyway? Money? Some other fleeting carnal frivolity?
He moves on from this initial “clarification” to discuss how morally bankrupt Scripture is, focusing largely on the Old Testament Law, then pointing out the famous (famously used by lazy atheists) quote from Jesus about how the Law will never pass away. He neglects to analyze the key “until all is accomplished” clause. Shocker.
And of course he wrenches passages from context, painting them in the worst possible light. And of course, parts of the Law seem pretty brutal by today’s standards. But he fails to demonstrate that Jesus fully approved the Law. I’m not sure what he’d say about the fact that David wasn’t stoned for his adultery and murder, or how Jesus got around stoning the woman taken in adultery.
Of course, the Church’s morality can be rightly questioned, especially given its scarred past of persecutions and power-mongering. Nobody really disputes this, least of all modern Christians. Most of us are fairly embarrassed by it.
In general, I don’t believe Mr. Harris can really be expected to intelligently discuss Biblical issues, since he’s apparently almost entirely ignorant of it. As evidenced by his ridiculous insistence that the Bible Condones Slavery!!!
Sigh. It doesn’t take more than a cursory read of the regulations for dealing with servants under the Old Covenant to realize that what is termed “slavery” there is nothing other than indentured servitude. Not the same as what we saw in America and Europe and Africa. I won’t go into depth here about this, because the link to the Tektonics article should suffice for anyone curious.
What I really admired about Mr. Harris’s understanding of morality was his attempt to prove that there could be objective standards of morality apart from Scripture. While I don’t necessarily disagree with him on the point, he used absolutely subjective reasoning in his attempt to prove it.
But, again in spite of his best efforts, he manages to make a point I agree with, and that is that Christians tend to spend an awful lot of time worrying more about what people do with their clothes off than actually attempting to relieve human suffering. We do need to do better on this.
Of course, no discussion of morality would be complete without a little bit of “Christians are immoral for opposing stem-cell research.” Of course, the whole argument presupposes that embryonic-stem-cell research is actually promising. (This is a side issue, but if it was so promising, it would get funding from the private sector. The mere fact that this research is so desperate for federal funding is eloquent proof of its lack of promise.)
(Oh, and read more here if you like.)
The Talented Mr. Harris concluded his “thoughts” on this subject with a paragraph I noted was “just crapola” in the margin of the book. To be fair, I’ll print his own words (warning: you may suffer loss of intelligence by reading it). He’s arguing against the common statement that a fertilized egg is a potential human being, which really cannot be challenged in any meaningful way. But he keeps flapping his gums with this gem:
But almost every cell in your body is a potential human being, given our recent advances in genetic engineering. Every time you scratch your nose, you have committed a Holocaust of potential human beings. This is a fact. The argument from a cell’s potential gets you absolutely nowhere.
(A sentence was removed here because my mom doesn’t approve of bathroom humor, and she might read this. And I already used the word “crapola.”)
And did he really claim to be spewing “fact” there? It’s seriously one of the stupidest things I’ve ever read. And I read Ladies and Gentlemen: The Bible! just this year! Are we really going to equate the potentials of genetic engineering to the potential of the natural development of human beings?
I realize I’m beginning to ramble. But I have to point out one more thing. Mr. Harris actually expressed that he’d be more likely to accept the Truth of the Bible if it contained more Math. Seriously. Or Science. If the Bible commented more on Physics or Chemistry or Calculus, he’d give it a chance. I don’t really know what to say about this. I am sitting here beside myself. (Yes, that was a modified movie quote. I need the humor.)
I realize I set out to present a couple of things I agreed with, but I’ve changed my mind. I just don’t have it in me right now. Flipping back through this sea of fail in order to pull out a couple of places where the stopped-clock that is Mr. Harris’s writing was right just isn’t going to happen.
As a way of familiarizing oneself with the current state of anti-Theist rhetoric, this book has some value. As a serious critique of Christianity, it’s rather lacking. In fact, I guess I’ve just realized that the book isn’t so much objecting to Christianity as it’s objecting to Christians.
And I found it fairly objectionable.
I’m sure Mr. Harris wouldn’t be impressed with my opinions. But as the feeling is mutual, I’m okay with that.
Wordful Wednesday: Health Care
Like most people, I’m concerned about Health Care. Not for myself, though, or for my family, because I’m covered through my employer with a fantastic health plan (High-Deductible, Health Savings Account).
But I am concerned about the move toward nationalized health care, and concerned that the current system doesn’t do everything it can to help those who really need coverage.
So I agree that reform is needed, but I can’t imagine any rational person believing that a government-sponsored plan would be anything but bad coverage at a worse price.
The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care: A Citizen's Guide, by Sally Pipes, is a great discussion of much of the misinformation politicians fob off on us. The book succeeds quite well just on the basis of the myth-busting. But where it really excels is in the concluding chapter, making recommendations for improving the current system without making it a government takeover.
I suppose it’d be helpful to list the myths:
Myth #1: Government Health Care is More Efficient
I’m not sure who exactly believes this, because we’ve got the examples of Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA to beat the snot out of this myth.
Myth #2: We’re Spending Too Much on Health Care
This one’s interesting, because it has a grain of truth in it. We do spend more, as a percentage of GDP, on Health Care these days. But the author points out that we also receive more value for our spending.
Myth #3: Forty-Six Million Americans Can’t Get Health Care
This is probably the most-quoted myth in the bunch. And it’s true there are a bunch of truly needy folks out there, but it isn’t anything like forty million. Lots of people either don’t want coverage or don’t avail themselves of coverage that’s provided for them.
Myth #4: High Drug Prices Drive Up Health Care Costs
Another interesting one, since drug prices have been steadily dropping (free market and all that). But we use more drugs now than we ever have before, mostly due to the greater availability of them, thanks to the market-driven system that makes new drugs possible.
Myth #5: Importing Drugs Would Reduce Health Care Costs
Just wrong on so many levels. It’s possible, even now, to buy drugs from Canada. The result of this kind of thing? Higher prices for the rest of us. Because Canada puts price controls on drugs, so the pharmaceutical companies can’t make any money selling to them. The Research and Development budgets of such companies are enormous, and they have to cover that overhead. So prices go up in the U.S.
If we expand importation of drugs, we’ll see both higher prices and limited innovation (read: fewer products). Which is pretty much what always happens when you take the free market away. Duh!
Myth #6: Universal Coverage Can Be Achieved by Forcing Everyone to Buy Insurance
It’s been tried at the state level (Massachusetts, for instance). Hasn’t worked.
Myth #7: Government Prevention Programs Reduce Health Care Costs
Sounds good, but wrong. Costs go up, because more people use the system when they might not need to. I’m not suggesting, and neither is the author, that prevention is a bad idea. It’s a good idea. Just don’t think it’s going to drive costs down.
Myth #8: We Need More Government to Insure Poor Americans
Problem is, we already have programs that just aren’t being used. And people game the systems that are already there (think Medicare-fraud). Doctors don’t like working with patients with this care, because they lose money on the treatment. Sounds like a recipe for success, right?
Private insurers could do the job if the government would remove some of the mandates from insurance coverage. Less expensive, less expansive coverage could work if the government would allow it. Instead, insurers have to cover Breast Reduction Surgery and Acupuncture, and the prices stay high.
Myth #9: Health Information Technology is a Silver Bullet for Reducing Costs
Again, sounds good. But what about the huge expenditures required to move to HIT? What about small practices? Require expensive IT conversions, and you drive some practices out of business.
Myth #10: Government-Run Health Care Systems in Other Countries are Better and Cheaper than America’s.
Unfortunately, this myth is generally based on inaccurate and problematic factors like life expectancy and infant mortality rates.
Life expectancy includes non-medical things like traffic fatalities and murder rates. Problems in themselves, but hardly a measure of America’s Faulty Health Care System.
Infant mortality is reported differently by different countries. For instance, the U.S. goes with the WHO’s standard for a live birth, which means the baby came out of its mom and showed some sign of life. In France, a baby born at 26 weeks or earlier is automatically listed as dead. One wonders what their infant resurrection rate is with standards like that.
Apart from those issues, those other “great” health care systems suffer from rationing and loooong waits for treatment. Let’s not emulate them.
One thing I learned while reading this book was that the Free Market can work in medicine. For instance, consider the case of Lasik eye surgery. Know why it’s decreased in cost dramatically over the last decade or so? It’s because it’s not covered by most insurance, so people have to actually pay for it. If it was covered, more people would get it and would be able to easily afford it, so the price would go up.
As I mentioned, the final chapter discussed ways to reform the current system. Some of them included these:
Change the Tax Code
This one boils down to making it fair for self-employed folks, who can’t currently purchase insurance with pre-tax dollars the way corporations can.
Reduce Costly Government Mandates
Mandated minimum coverage is just a horrible idea, even though it sounds good. If insurers could offer cheaper, no-frills coverage (say, with a high deductible for Major Medical), they would. But the government forces insurers to cover some ridiculous stuff (hair-transplant, anyone?), driving costs up.
Allow Purchase of Insurance Across State Lines
This one goes back to competition. If a plan in Nevada is cheaper and better, why shouldn’t folks in Wyoming be able to buy it?
Expand Health Savings Accounts
I can attest this one personally. I love that I get to set aside funds for our major medical. If we use it, fine. If not, we keep it! I used to spend thousands per year on my low-deductible plan for services we didn’t really use. Now we spend less and get better coverage.
Support Retail Health Clinics
This is something I hadn’t really though about much. It’s a non-hospital hospital. You come in, get treatment, and pay (with or without insurance). No long waits, because it’s basically a store, and stores can’t afford to keep people waiting.
Tort Reform
At this point, I think every reasonable person who isn’t a lawyer wants tort reform. Reduce the need for costly malpractice insurance, and doctors don’t need to charge so much for treatment.
Health Care Vouchers
I’m for school vouchers, but Health Care Vouchers are a great idea. This would allow the truly needy to purchase coverage.
I loved the quote at the end of the final chapter, from P.J. O’Rourke. “If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it’s free.”
I imagine some well-meaning but overly convoluted plan will get passed before too long. I also expect to pay more for it than I do now. And I expect the quality of care in the U.S. to go down as a result of the more-expensive coverage. Yes, I’m a bit pessimistic about this. I just hope I’m wrong.
(Book Review Etiquette question here: Is it wrong to read a book for the sole purpose of relieving it of its viscera in a book review? Because I’ve got one that seems to be made to be eviscerated.)
Next up, perhaps tonight, is Sam Harris’s woeful Letter to a Christian Nation. Speaking of gutless books…
MM: Birthday, Size
If my math is correct, I turn 37 today. Hard to believe, really. Especially with the amount of tree-climbing I did as a kid. In trees taller than the power lines. Through the branches of which the power lines passed. Around which power lines I climbed to get to the top.
(We were really bummed when the power company finally came along and cut the top off that tree. We could see everything from up there!)
Somehow I’ve managed to never do a birthday post before. Oh, I’ve posted on other topics on my birthday, but never one about my birthday. Strange. So I thought I’d share some deep thoughts. Or just ramble. My blog, my birthday, my rules.
Warning: this will be quite random.
I remember when I had my birthday in Kindergarten that we had a piñata. I wonder if they still allow five-year-olds (well, six in my case) to swing long wooden poles in class? Kinda doubtful, considering that most schools don’t even let you bring cupcakes anymore.
(I had this wicked-cool Star Trek jumpsuit I remember wearing on my birthday. Oh, yeah!)
Is it a sign of getting old when there are long periods of my life in which my only substantial memory is watching The Empire Strikes Back over and over? Well, there was some The Last Starfighter mixed in there, too. (BTW: First line of Starfighter: “Mmm…gonna be a sparklin’ day. Sparklin’!”)
I quote movies, therefore I am. When I read the lovely list of positive attributes The Fair Elaine wrote about me, my initial thought was “Who’s scruffy lookin’?” Anybody care to provide the movie for that quote? Or explain why it popped into my head? Because she didn’t call me half-witted or a Nerfherder. (D’oh! I gave it away, didn’t I?)
(By the way, I’m sure she wanted to do a full list, including negatives, but couldn’t think of any. Right, honey?)
As I’ve aged, I’ve found I’m an increasingly gifted sleeper. Oh, I’ve got some years to go and some skilz to develop before I’m my Dad’s equal, but has he ever fallen asleep while riding a bike? So let’s just say I have the potential to surpass him. (Bike-sleeping: Caused by morning paper route.)
And maybe the sleeping thing is just to make up for all the hours of lost sleep from college. I once fell asleep in an apartment full of people. It was my apartment. I’d been up for forty hours or so. The sacrifices one makes for an engineering degree.
I often wonder why I didn’t discover my love for reading and writing before I declared my major. Maybe it was God’s way of making sure I’d get a good job. Plus, maybe I wouldn’t love writing if I did it for a paycheck. And I’m glad I have my job.
(I had inklings about both reading and writing before I graduated, partly evidenced by the amount of extracurricular reading I was doing when I probably should’ve been paying attention in Thermodynamics.)
One thing I definitely know, with my acquired wisdom: When you’re lighting firecrackers and then throwing them, sometimes you get a Quick Fuse. And you have to get rid of it quickly. And sometimes it lands on the guy-next-to-you’s head. I was the guy-next-to-you, and I can’t remember who you were. So email me if you remember the incident. My lawyer will be contacting you. (Okay, I don’t have a lawyer.)
You know, a lot of my memories involve head injury. Like the time my wet swimming clothes caught in my spokes and sent me end-over-end. In twelfth gear, full-tilt-boogie. I held on to the handlebars admirably. In hindsight, choosing to land on my hands might’ve redirected the point of impact a bit.
And yet again, a head-injury lesson: When hurrying over to render aid to a small plane that’s just crashed on a sandbar, don’t crash your boat. Sometimes the kid at the back of the boat becomes an Undignified Flying Object and ends up with a nasty gash through his eyebrow.
(The folks in the plane were fine, BTW. And it’s not like I needed that part of my left eyebrow, anyway. It actually evened them up since the previously mentioned bike crash involved the grating off of part of my right one.)
Finally, my favorite birthday wish so far. (Apart from hugs and kisses from my wife and son, of course.) Jay McKenney instructed me to learn the baritone part to “Happy Birthday” and sing it to myself.
--- - --- - --- - ---
Okay, from Birthday ramblings to actual fun linkage!
You’ve probably seen those cool graphics that show how small the Earth is relative to a bunch of other planets and stars, right? No? Well, check one out:
Of course, size isn’t everything. What about how small small stuff is?
The University of Utah has a cool demonstration of the relative sizes of really small stuff. Unfortunately, I can’t embed it, so you’ll have to just go check it out for yourself.
Theology Thursday: Why Did Jesus Die?
Before I get started this week, I’d like to share an insight I had in church this past Sunday. The speaker was talking about the reality of Satan and how to resist his influence, and a though occurred to me:
One never hears anyone object to calling Satan “He.”
I just found that interesting.
Anyway, I’ve been thinking a bit lately about what salvation means. Ask a hundred people and you’ll probably get a lot of different answers, but many folks would probably say it has something to do with getting to Heaven. But isn’t there more to it than that?
As Christians, we believe Christ’s death resulted in our salvation. But what, exactly, did his death accomplish?
Well, I found a hint in TITUS!!! Yes, that Titus which, until now, I’ve not blogged about. So now I get to cross it off the List!
Titus 2:11-14 (NLT, emphasis mine):
11 For the grace of God has been revealed, bringing salvation to all people.12 And we are instructed to turn from godless living and sinful pleasures. We should live in this evil world with wisdom, righteousness, and devotion to God, 13 while we look forward with hope to that wonderful day when the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be revealed. 14 He gave his life to free us from every kind of sin, to cleanse us, and to make us his very own people, totally committed to doing good deeds.
(An aside here, but verse 13 is a good Divinity of Christ reference.)
Verse 14 is the key one for the salvation question, obviously. And this is what, I’d submit, Salvation means to us today, while we live. In the end, of course, it means we’ll live on in Eternity. And Paul even makes a mention of this later in Titus.
Titus 3:4-7 (NLT)
4 But "When God our Savior revealed his kindness and love,5 he saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He washed away our sins, giving us a new birth and new life through the Holy Spirit. 6 He generously poured out the Spirit upon us through Jesus Christ our Savior. 7 Because of his grace he declared us righteous and gave us confidence that we will inherit eternal life."
I guess it turns out I didn’t need the first passage, because this one contains both points. Right now, we have new life, and ultimately we’ll inherit eternal life. Actually, it basically means we’re already living that eternal life.
So how should we live now? As His People, totally committed to doing good deeds.