Shocking! (sarcasm)

Surveys: U.S. Religious Activists Have ‘Widely Divergent’ Views

As much as I like some of the content on ChristianPost.com, today we have another article (see this post for another) which is too vague to be useful, other than to draw gross conclusions that can only be divisive, rather than edifying. I really hate it when news organizations (the mainstream/conservative/liberal/everyone press) don’t reference the actual questions. The phrasing of the questions is crucial!

For example, “Nearly half of conservatives (48 percent) believe scripture to be the literal word of God”. What was the question? Did they use “inerrant” or “literal” or some other word in the question? Did they ask the polled individual what they meant by that word?

In my denomination, The Church of the Nazarene, inerrancy is only applied to salvation1. So, if I answered, “the bible is inerrant in regards to salvation alone,” would that be a yes or no? Then it would be up to the poller to decide.

In regards to abortion, what are “most cases”? What kind of cases are people thinking about when they hear the question? I almost wrote that I was one of the 54%, because I read “some”. Imagine if “some” had heard “some” rather than “most”.

I guess I’m not a “conservative”. I think there needs be a lot of separation between state and church. I do not believe that because my faith helps me make decisions, that I should be banned from stating such. Nor do I think most people, if they truly thought about it, would want to squelch such (yes, there are a bunch of loud, obnoxious ones who would disagree with me).

I will say that this article notes the imbalance within the Christian community. Yes, helping your fellow man is a vital part of the Christian ethos and scripture. However, coercion by one’s government is not part of the deal. The Roman Catholic tradition has a great balance between what has become two sides, but Roman Catholics as a practical matter are having just the same issues.

The tradition, even in the Protestant Church (such as John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, and the “grandparent” of my denomination), is there. It is the rhetoric, and the American desire for a “simple”, “black-and-white” answer that is creating this insanity, along with the quick response medium of the internet (to which, of course, I’m contributing).

It is also the church, as a whole, that is at fault in the responses to this poll. What is the church teaching? Is it teaching? Is it helping its people wrestle with the faith? It IS okay to wrestle with the faith! That’s what the church fathers did!

This also does bring back to mind this article at the (evil) FoxNews: Has Christian America Come to an End?


1We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, by which we understand the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments,given by divine inspiration, inerrantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation, so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith. (see Article IV in our Manual)

hattip: Douglas Karr

March 4, 2008 · Technological Enervation, business, faith, life hack, love, society, technology · Comments Off

A great blog post by brought these three articles to my attention:

  1. Less Television and Computer Gaming May Keep Children Slimmer. Granted, this is kind of a “duh,” however, the reason may not be what you think.
  2. An Email Free Day
  3. I Need a Virtual Break, No, Really.

What I find interesting in the last article is the term “secular sabbath”. Despite being, from my point of view, a contradiction in terms, the concept is valid. In fact, I am pondering avoiding my computer all Sunday. I might even avoid television and gaming (okay, granted I don’t do much gaming).

This somewhat flies in the face of popular “wisdom” that the up-and-coming generation is “wired” for multi-tasking. Just something else to ponder.

hattip to:The Point

December 19, 2007 · business, economics, politics · Comments Off

Some day, the lawmakers may figure out an efficient way to fix the A.M.T. permanently and make up for the billions in revenue it brings in. That will not happen this year, but Wednesday afternoon’s vote was still good news for millions.

How about the Flat Tax?

A quick aside: whether it’s “mine” or the “government’s”, it is still God’s.

November 14, 2007 · business, economics, education, history, politics · Comments Off

In Me and Ron Paul and The Dollar is Falling! The Dollar is Falling!, I discussed central banking and the currency base.

However, in 800 Dollar Gold in Plain English ( archived copy ), Jerry Bowyer adds a little more to the discussion. His primary point is that the theories being pushed in support of returning to a gold (or silver or whatever) are not nearly as robust as they seem, especially in light of recent history. Some of his comments echo mine in Me and Ron Paul, but mine were more gut feel than anything else.

Of course, the problem with Jerry Bowyer’s commentary is that begs the question, what to do? Who knows? However, I think the major point is that we cannot blindly assume that what seems to have worked in the past actually did, and that it will work for the future.

That all being said, the U.S. trade deficit is definitely an issue. We can’t keep sending money out (whether to China for our manufactured goods, or Mexico, Venezuela, or the Middle East for our oil). A lot of countries have been putting money back into the U.S., because we have historically had a stable currency. That is not the case now.

On the other hand, maybe this is a good thing for domestic manufacturing, especially with all the toy recalls recently. Perhaps companies will finally look at the U.S. as a valid source. The U.S. must continue to excel in changing things for the better. As long as we do, it will all work out in the end.

In Me and Ron Paul, I knocked some of the historical basis for the assault on the Federal Banking System. While I still believe that a central system does need to exist, Thomas Breton’s article, Chickens Are Returning to the Roost, may cause me to modify my perspective somewhat. While I still believe that basing one’s currency on gold (or silver, or something else “precious”, Golem not withstanding) is silly because gold is only as valuable as one perceives it, Mr. Breton brought to my attention that the benefit of a gold (or whatever) standard is that supply is limited (I guess we shouldn’t have a “hot air” standard, eh, D.C.?). Therefore limits (if rules of ratios are followed, but we know rules and politicians) on currency production and lending becomes naturally integrated into the system (hmm, banking and credit issues, anyone?).

Mr. Breton’s point that banks would have to have tangible (read gold or whatever standard) assets to exchange for paper currency, means that banks would be less likely to loan money to any one (including me). Of course, such a path, would send the tax and spend politicians (please note that this is regardless of party affiliation) into a tizzy. Also, companies such as MasterCard, Visa, Sears, BancAmerica, and so on would no longer be quite so willing to give credit cards to pets or dead people.

This is sounding better and better.

And I’m quite serious about it.

An interesting article at the New York Times discusses the rising specter of racism and prejudice based on genetics. The writer points out some blog postings and comments that are disturbing. That being said, there is something to be said about self-imposed homogeneity, especially in business…failure. I don’t want to see organizations forced to accept those with whom they (with or without basis) do not wish to associate with, nor do I want to see a stratified society based on genetics.

Nevermind…everyone should just see Gattaca.

November 10, 2007 · business, economics, environment, society, technology · Comments Off

A professor at MIT has come out with a design for a individual/public-transit concept, with cars for rent on every corner. Frankly, sounds like one of the many sci-fi books I’ve read over the years, but as a victim of mass transit, I can certainly understand this concept as a better than nothing situation.

The article: MIT reinvents the wheel with foldable, stackable car ( archived copy )

Hat Tip to: Slashdot

November 2, 2007 · business, society, technology · Comments Off

Despite what you might think from reading my blog, I don’t want the mainstream media to fade away. I think the MSM thinks of itself as the “fourth branch of government,” thus, like many bureaucracies, is unable to change quickly. That is a major problem in the internet age, where 1 year is a very long time. The mainstream media has a perception issue, well, actually two. Their first issue it their perception of themselves as the bulwark of freedom and information. Sorry, folks, not any more, I would question if ever. Their second issue is their audience, who view them as biased (and this refers to them all, including FoxNews), and rightly so.

The first time I heard this was in 2004. In fact, I emailed this article to myself, and have kept in my email since then (packrat that I am). Al Neuharth, founder of USAToday wrote back on 11 Nov 2004 (archived copy) that the MSM bias is its trouble, along with its intent to bury us in ads.

Ron Rosenbaum just wrote an article, Shocking Inside DC Scandal Rumor: A Media Ethics, that isn’t nearly as surprising as he thinks. This happens all the time.

However, where the real damage occurs is locally. The Spokesman-Review is “downsizing” (archived copy). Their ad revenues have fallen. Go back to the man who had the foresight to add color to the newspaper (Al Neuharth).

The recent debacle at the New Republic regarding their less than stellar vetting of an “on the ground” soldier in Iraq, doesn’t help the situation. The MSM’s only hope is quicker and thorough vetting (Yes, that seems to be an oxymoron, but a way must be found.). Also, content that is more neutral and fact-based. This cannot be done be cutting back staff. This cannot be done by more ad revenue (Ads turn people away, remember?).

Do I have an answer? I wish. I just know that, “that’s the way we’ve always done it,” will kill off the MSM.

October 23, 2007 · business, society, technology · Comments Off

This is not a rhetorical or philosophical question, but an internet question. One of the greatest things about the internet is its basic anonymity. The greatest weakness of the internet is its basic anonymity. Don’t misunderstand me, the internet is not even closely anonymous as many perceive it to be.

I recently received an email from Naymz, a place to “claim” your names on the internet, regarding the services of Trufina. Trufina is a website/service that seeks to be your identity clearinghouse. They seek to gather all your personae and provide 3RD party “authentication” so people are assured that it is you. You can even have them run a criminal background check on you so that you can present a clean record to an employer.

Immediately, some people are going to scream, “invasion of privacy!” Since you are the one giving up the information, it isn’t an invasion. “Don’t trust the man!” Frankly, since I would be the one providing the information, I trust them slightly more than the government (granted, that isn’t saying much). The government gathers a lot of information about me I wish they wouldn’t, and I don’t even know what information they actually have about me. I don’t know what is false, what is true, or what isn’t their business to know about me.

The advantage that a private corporate clearinghouse has is that as I would be the one providing the information, is that I know what they have. I, according to their website and privacy policy, can choose with whom to share based upon preset profiles. Companies that partner with Trufina would tell Trufina exactly what information they require for a transaction.

Trufina is not the only clearinghouse. There is OpenID. There is one being pushed by Sun. There was the (failed) Microsoft Passport, which is now primarily a Microsoft identity clearinghouse. For once, in Microsoft‘s case, they were actually thinking ahead, but too far ahead.

This will be needed in the future. For the internet to sooner become what it will become eventually, some sort of identity system (or multiple systems) will need to be in play. As larger and larger transactions are processed over the internet, identity verification will become crucial. The only way we will determine what form that takes is by participating in it, rather than moaning about it.

As to Trufina, I like what they offer. Their pricing is decent, but never provides a time line what your money buys for how long. Their About Us page leaves a lot to be desired. As you go digging you find more, but the key is to not make people dig to find basic information, like why I should trust them.

I’m going to wait a bit, yet. I know this is coming, hence my Naymz profile. There are a number of networking/social sites that verify based on connections, which in many ways is better. For one-time transactions or employment applications, I think Trufina and those that follow and preceded it will be the wave of the future.