This addresses a number of posts I’ve made, most recently in The Chickens are Coming Home to Roost, and should, I think address Allen’s point in his comment on that post.

It boils down to this, when one removes the pillars or the glue that hold a particular society together, make sure that you replace it with something specific, otherwise a mess will ensue.

hat tip to: Roberto Rivera @ The Point

These punks are a direct result of a bunch of people who didn’t respect history or authority teaching them. Why are they surprised? The generation that is entering and leaving colleges now is filled with higher percentage of “entitlement” mentality people than probably has ever existed before at one time. They have the mentality of the old aristocracy, and all too often lack of responsibility.

I wish I could say that I’m surprised that those like Dan Barry are surprised, but I’m not. Nor am I, obviously, surprised at the behavior of these punks. People such as myself, Bible-believing Christians, are often ridiculed, even by our friends, for our concerns about trying (although we often—even usually—fail) to align with a Biblically based life. If people were honest, how could a Biblically (read: New Testament, and not forced conversion) be worse than this?

Yesterday, a blog post appeared on the Clampham Institute website discussing the detrimental links between artificial light and cancer (hattip to: The Point). Apparently, in the same article in the New Yorker that generated the Wired.com story (which is what caused me to post in August), David Owens (the author of the New Yorker article) references this potential link between artificial light and cancer.

If artificial light is adding to cancer, what else does it do?
]]> http://starlyth.info/20071219/215/feed 1 http://starlyth.info/20071219/216 http://starlyth.info/20071219/216#comments Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:10:04 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/20071219/216 I may be a right-wing fanatic Christian to some. I may be a clueless emotional liberal Christian to others. The truth is that Jesus Christ loves us, not because of who we are, or what we’ve done, but because of who He is (paraphrased, “I Surrender All”, Newsboys).

With the “traditional” family as the framework, I understand the situation of unwed mothers who made mistakes. While the error was significant, people’s obsession with it is damaging. I also completely understand to maintain the social norms and such. However, Jesus forgave those who came to Him and asked for forgiveness (out of honest repentance). Can we do any less?

People make mistakes. Christians make mistakes. Even Perfect Christians (see Wesley’s
A Plain Account of Christian Perfection) make mistakes (of course, within the context of this blog post we are talking about a sin, not a simple mistake).

A woman recently died in England. A few months before she did, the 50-year old body of a baby was found in a suitcase. She compounded one sin with a worse one. God will judge her, but my heart aches for her. To have carried that burden so long.

We in the Church must be concerned with sin, for that is why Christ came. However, we must not let that destroy compassion. I was in my Sunday School class this past Sunday, and we talked about how Mary was a failure to the society around her, and probably her family, too. Yet she truly did nothing wrong. From our perspective, Jesus was certainly conceived out of wedlock, but remember He was without sin, thus his conception was sinless as well.

While I know the woman in this case is not Mary, and I suspect by what is not said that was not only an act (or time period) of fornication, but also adultery, it does not change the fact that the pressures put upon this woman created a heart-wound that ended the life of the child.

Pro-lifers, and I am one, need to always keep our hearts open to people such as her.

May she rest in peace.

May her family and those affected by her death and the revealing of long kept secrets find peace as well

It’s an interesting direction for a movie about the impact of scientific advancement. So what is it saying about science and God? That scientific advances foolishly allow man to play God? Or that science is comparable to that fast car capable of good or evil, depending on the driver?

I like movies that make me ask questions, but the true point of a good movie is to make you think (or at least a factor in what I call a good movie). I don’t like it when movies give you all the answers (except for the fact that if they leave something open, people believe that there should be a sequel). What I find odd is that Mr. Hertz seems to knock the movie for not answering the questions, but then he has questions of the reader at the end of his review, that are not “right or wrong” questions, but questions that encourage thought and discussion.

Marriage Could Save Your Life
hattip to:The Point

Marriage is also good for the environment

However, there are a few downsides.

Mercifully, God has granted me a wonderful marriage to a wonderful wife, so I’m not concerned about the downsides personally. With all the upheaval and lances aimed at (traditional) marriage, society had better start paying attention.
]]> http://starlyth.info/20071205/211/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20071203/207 http://starlyth.info/20071203/207#comments Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:35:22 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/20071203/207 There have been articles, commentaries, blogs (of which I’m adding to, of course), podcasts, and what have you, about the imminent demise of the church.

Sorry, but it has been all said before.

Back when the first Bush was president he started the “downsizing” of “soft”-intelligence work. In other words, removing agents from the field. President Bill Clinton continued the policy, even more aggressively. This is part of the reason for 9/11, but only a small part.

People need people. As much as Second Life replicates people, there is much to be said for being able to have camaraderie in a real physical sense. As virtual reality becomes more like reality (especially in regards to the senses), perhaps then one can know a person through a computer, but who knows, everyone seems to be getting better about their masks (and the seeming need for them), so maybe we don’t really know any one at all.

For this article held few surprises, too bad that it seems to for so many others.

Politics have taken a very destructive turn in the United States. I was wondering if that means we are going to make a breakthrough of some sort towards some gilded age, or if everything is going to come crashing down around our ears (Oddly enough, there are probably even numbers on the blue and red sides saying the crash is coming. Oh, dear, they agree on something.)

It has gotten to a point that constructive dialog is almost impossible. We are no longer red, white, and blue, but red or blue, or at least people keep trying to shove everyone into the little cubbyholes. It is truly something to think that someone as polarizing as Newt Gingrich was as Speaker, can be the voice of moderation now. I just shake my head in disbelief.

This all brings me to a commentary by Nancy Morgan, My Mother is a Feminist ( archived copy ). This commentary is a snapshot of the discord and disconnect going on right now. While I can offer no advice to Nancy or her mother, I can ask of everyone, is this really what we want to be? Because this is where we are headed.

Thanksgiving Day in America – The Secret Riches of Thankfulness by Rev. Michael Bresciani ( archived copy )

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.

Nevermind…everyone should just see Gattaca.

Hat Tip to: NewsBusters.org

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

Hat Tip to: Slashdot

Apparently, some well-meaning (hmm, something about a road…) Christian psychologists are saying it’s okay to be angry. Well, I suppose that in some situations it might be okay.

Dr. Archibald Hart writes a critique of a new book added to the “it’s okay to be angry” list. I suspect the author of the book, Andrew D. Lester, was referring more to anger in a counseling session, but the problem that attitudes carry through into life.

I think I’ll add Anger Management to my netflix queue.

The thing that has always bothered me about Ayn Rand’s stuff was that it was too individualistic. Even in the building of the dream house (I can’t remember the main character’s name, the architect, nor do I care, frankly), individualism was revered despite the fact that it took a team to build the monstrosity.

Maggie Gallagher finally gets to the real flaw in Ayn Rand’s thinking (or at least her writing), love exists. It isn’t always rational. Get over it! The real kicker for me is this:

All too often we look at those around us who are in different circles and unconsciously dismiss them as not adding to our live.

An art exhibit in London exemplifies this. (archived copy)

We all have our expectations of a “productive” member of society. The problem is that art like this is only displayed under unique circumstances. If this is any indication of the art that will be on display, there are more than a few artists that do not need to be in shelters anymore.

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.

This could be funny…well, it is…sort of…in a very sick and twisted sort of way—in a big government, nanny-state sort of way.

If you peek through someone’s window at a couple that are making love, it’s against the law — you’d be thrown in jail as a pervert. And yet we peep through a screen of window called a movie screen, and then it becomes alright. It’s not alright!

I have to admit that I had never thought of it quite that way. Of course, where does one draw the line. Certain “classic” books have such “scenes” in them. The Bible is one, of course.

Not that I completely disagree with him, actually. He does cause me to think about what I put into my life. It really is too bad that far too much sex and violence is put into movies that actually doesn’t add to the plot. Hollywood, slowly, is starting to listen. Hollywood still doesn’t understand it. Hollywood does understand money, though.

There are actually a couple of problems. The first is the prevalent view is that sex is always good between consenting individuals, regardless of age. The second is that we “can’t” say that it is bad, or at least the UN can’t. So, they attack the easy target that hasn’t fallen into their line. The Roman Catholic Church believes that (1) sex should not occur outside of marriage, (2) life begins at conception, (3) that a condom is mankind’s attempt to prevent God’s will, (4) the admonition to be fruitful and multiply, and I’m sure others. Since the Roman Catholic Church has some values that predate the UN, they must be too old-fashioned and must be destroyed.

It’s the behavior that is increasing the quantity of A.I.D.S., it’s not whether or not the Roman Catholic Church’s directive on condoms. By the way, the people who are using condoms (violating the directive under attack) are violating another directive against pre- and extra-marital sex. Hmm, I don’t think they care about the Roman Catholic Church’s feelings about condoms.

Oh, wait, that was logical thinking. Something that doesn’t prevail at the UN. So, I guess that’s a bid ol’ nevermind.

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 3^RD 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.

The original article is at The Kansas City Star website ( archived copy ).
hattip to: The Becket Fund

Full Reprint Below

While I agree with Ron Paul’s sentiments regarding limited government, I would strongly urge anyone to think very carefully about not legislating morality. That’s what legislation is: enforced (or coerced) morality. Who pays what taxes, for example, is morality, hence so many arguments about estate taxes and marriage penalties. I am not saying the government has not overstepped its intended boundaries, but such hyperbole without thought has consequences. Questions such as income redistribution are a morality issue, as is marriage.

When he first gets booed in his speech is when he talks about how gold and silver should be the currency of the land, and I’ve had this discussion before. Here is what I came up with then:

U.S. paper currency, along with the Federal Reserve Bank was created during the Civil War (or The War Between the States) to allow for a better interaction between locals on a financial level. Paper currency existed before that, too (including Colonial times). Each bank (which could the one down the block, a different one at the edge of town, or the State (not Federal Bank) issued it’s OWN money, which was actually a certificate for gold or silver stored at the bank. However, one bank would often (especially if across governmental lines, whether city, county, and definitely state) not recognize the legitimacy of the certificate from the other bank.

This created roadblocks to prosperity, especially if one had to buy stuff from a non-local source. The Federal Reserve system created a consistent methodology to allow currency to change hands with greater ease. The Central Bank only printed and issued money to a bank for a maximum of 60% of its gold, establishing a baseline of both gold value, and paper currency value. This system of reserves (gold, but later, silver) was in place until the 1960′s.

The founder’s did have concerns, very great concerns, that multiple currencies would inhibit commerce (and it did), but were unable to convince the states to go along with a common system.

Now as to the value of gold versus paper, it’s a straw man to me. I don’t value gold as a currency. I see its value, these days, as being a great electrical conductor. What has made it valuable in the human psyche is that we can decorate ourselves with it. And that is what made it valuable in the past, and still. It is what you can do with it. ALL currency is a simplified barter system. If I think that my product is worth 1oz of gold, but you think its worth .5oz, that is no different than my thinking that its worth $500, and you thinking it’s worth $250.

It is all based upon perceived value.

Many that believe themselves in the same camp as Ron Paul state that the federal government has no say right to make money, while Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution says, in part:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow Money on the credit of the United States; To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures; To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States; To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Now all that being said, perhaps he meant returning to a gold/silver based backed system of paper and coins. Honestly, no matter what the currency is, no matter by what it is backed, it is all a matter of perceived value. The value of our currency is perception as well, hence his annoyance at the falling dollar. However, depending on the industry, that can be a good thing, except when you’ve outsourced everything, which is a another result of freedom.

Continuing past this, he makes valid (an in my opinion correct) point that there is a habit of looking to Washington,D.C. to fix the problem, and that habit has to be broken. However, the current batch of Republicans will not support that. How does he think they get elected?

He then attacks, rightly, the U.N., and for liberals (whether R’s or D’s) who look to the U.N. to justify (the U.S. gives too much money to actually look for real help from the U.N.) their more “progressive” desires. I also believe that there is validity to his implied point that we obey laws (or someone tries) that the U.N. has passed, without having any granted (by its members nations) power to it to do so.

However, we agreed to the WTO independently of the U.N., as a treaty I believe, obligating ourselves to it as a matter of trade. Now, Ron Paul could say let’s withdrawal from it, but the President (other than signing the bill) has no authority to do so. I am also not sure that the WTO has been effective, whether against or for the U.S., so this could just be another windmill to tilt at (please correct me if I’m wrong). I could probably be persuaded to get out of it purely on reducing government bureaucracy.

If he would stick to freedom (yes, I understand that he views the U.N. and the WTO as anathemas to freedom), where he shines, he would do much better. He is absolutely correct that far too many people rely more on the government than themselves. It will take at least 3 faithful and stalwart generations to break one generation’s failure (see Amit Shlaes abridged speech at Hillsdale)

He then goes on to the “Just War” theory, about which no one should speak, unless they speak of which “Just War” theory. The “Just War” theory has evolved from righteous war to no war at all. Depending on which version of the “Just War” theory you are using, and what you use as a rationale, any war could be just. It always boils down to which is a worse evil, the status quo, or a war (and its aftermath, which is the trust test anyways, not the war itself). As to WMDs (which he referred to as nonexistent), I believe we have a long way to go before we realize the (in)validity of multiple “intelligence” agencies (UK, French, German, Russian, and US all thought Iraq had them). However, I do think we rushed into that one. Maybe. Saddam was a very smart nut case (bad combo), and thus very unpredictable. Kim Il Sung, on the other hand, just throws a temper tantrum, gets his quiet money (or whatever vice he wants to fulfill), and goes and hides for a while, although perhaps the same “intelligence” that guided the Israeli Air Force to attack a site in Syria, and which guided the thoughts of WMDs in Iraq, made the same mistake again (although bureaucrats rarely take risks of repeating the same mistake, they prefer doing nothing) in regards to North Korean nuclear material in Syria.

Now his “declaring war” is kind of weird. Congress declared war by passing the resolution authorizing it. So his reasoning that we either wouldn’t be at war (so no troops lost), or we wouldn’t be arguing about it is off. Regardless of what our history books now say, we have declared war many times, and have still had plenty of protest anyways, especially in regards to continuing it. That is part of the process.

The last booing was at this point, and booing does not add to the discussion, nor do Ron Paul’s comments, frankly. The question before us is which is more evil, abandoning those in Iraq (the justification, or lack thereof, of the war is no longer relevant), or finishing the job (which, granted, still needs to be completely defined, which is part of the problem as well).

Now all THAT being said, I hope he stays in the race, in hopes that the Republican party will repent of their Democrat tendencies.

Sorry about going on so long. I think I’m done now.

Money is not so important. It’s more important to bring Jesus to someone. If the fundraising’s not coming from the bottom of your heart, if Jesus is not there, it’s empty. It’s just vanity.

You Americans enjoy life… All this wealth. This is not going to change the world. Jesus will change the world.

Today, the world is so divided. Many families are broken…There is poor and rich…We can’t bring them together as far as Christians, unless we’re willing to bring Jesus to them.

You can read the IRD article here. (archive copy )

When people are powerless, they are easily manipulated.
-Rashid Rehman, human rights lawyer
from the article “Pakistan”, National Geographic, September 2007

I hear about the powerlessness of certain people, and every time, it irritates me. I know that sounds strange, but the truth is, we are only as powerless as we allow ourselves to be. This too may sound strange from someone, like myself, who believes in an omnipotent God (a true discussion of that should occur, but it’s close enough to say, for the moment, that I am of the Arminian mindset).

If you perceive yourself as powerless, then you are. There has been a lot of outcry from the G.W. Bush hating segment of society (I am hesitant to call them “the left” as that, frankly, tars the left with a brush most don’t deserve) about how powerless they are to change things. However, if they would embrace the 2^nd amendment, and the freedom (and responsibility) it represents, then they might begin to understand that they are not powerless.

The strong majority of 2^nd amendment supporters (as in 99.99%), have no desire to overthrow the government. Frankly, they just want to be left alone. The people who say they want government out of people’s lives, do nothing to keep the government out, but increasingly pass and support laws that increase governmental intrusion (and, these people are on both sides of the political isle).

The whole 2^nd amendment thing is really a side issue, but a symbol of the situation. People feel powerless, and thus act like it. Wilberforce (as was Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and many others), was a great example of showing the power of a single voice. What was seemed useless against entrenched power and influence of slavers, eventually won. Wilberforce refused to see himself as powerless. There is so much more to this, but my major thought in regards to this is:

Powerlessness is perception.

There is also my belief that one minute of silence is ineffective for prayer or reflection. It takes me a least a minute, often longer, to settle myself to a “place” of silence, where I can even begin to prepare myself for prayer. Does a rational adult (“rational” somewhat tongue-in-cheek for all human beings) think that any child can calm and center themselves then pray effectively in a minute?

The organizations that are pushing these “moments of silence” are unanimously “Christian”, which clouds the “separation” issue further. I wish that they would focus on the students ability to form religious clubs and gather together for religion meetings on school grounds separate from school functions. That would be much more effective and useful. Also, the constitutional gray area disappears as it outside of school functions.

hattip to: OneNewsNow.com

What we have is a whole lot of voices on the extremes screaming their lungs out (or typing/writing their fingers out), and the more extreme, the more they’re heard. If you were at a farm, and heard (but couldn’t see) one cow lowing, what would be your assumption? That there is only one cow on the farm? That that one cow speaks for all the other cows? Or would you assume that all the other cows are busy chewing their cud, or whatever else cows do, without making a fuss?

Whomever is making this well-curve pronouncement is making the second assumption, that one cow is speaking for the others.

How do I know this? I don’t. However, when I, whom many would (wrongly) consider a right-wing extremist, start shoving against the right about which cubbyhole I belong in, and feel like they are trying to pull me to their extremes, I suspect that this whole becoming a well-curve society is overblown.

That being said, what is happening is that the screaming extremees are determining the starting point of dialog. If you start out screaming, nobody is going to have any interest in having a dialog with you. I also believe that a lot of people are going along with the screaming extremees just so that they will be quiet. Of course, they don’t start being quiet, they start to scream louder. Then those that are quiet just go along with it again, just so they’ll be quiet. Eventually the quiet ones end up beyond where they wanted or expected to be.

I would like to have a good dialog without all the emotional turmoil and screaming (my own included), but I’m not sure that is possible. And that is just sad. I found myself reacting to this screaming with less and less thought, getting pulled along. Reacting. I am not generally an impulsive person (why be impulsive when you can analyze something do death), but I find myself much more likely to impulsively react than I used to, and frankly, I don’t like it. Now, how I react is my problem, but if everyone is becoming (to some degree, more or less) the same, how can that be good for dialog, or for solving problems?

As John Sayles’ role in the movie Matewan suggests, big businesses have used clergy as cheerleaders before, but this news item from The Economist hints at something worse.

The article: Praying for Gain: A fad for piety infiltrates the realm of Mammon

I am completely at a loss for what this, “something worse”, that Mr. Volck refers to is. Is he worried that there are two companies that provide chaplain services? Is that his issue? If it is, then perhaps he is unaware of the restrictions that these to companies put upon those whose services they tender. These chaplains are to stay away from denominational arguments (whether for or against), and to provide purely for the spiritual needs of the employees. Is he worried that a company dares to make a profit on provide such services? Where is that particular line drawn?

Is he worried about the reason companies are doing this? Such as, increased worker productivity? Does that mean my company can no longer provide donuts every other Friday? Or company parties? There is nothing wrong with that.

The one thing that may concern him is the equating of the corporate chaplain to the village priest, which, frankly, was probably an ignorant and definitely stupid thing for the writer at the Economist to write. I would hazard a guess that the writer was trying to relate it to earlier times in history, but who has no real experience with a village priest.

The author does state (although I’m not sure the statement is an accurate reflection of reality) that these chaplains are providing spiritual support for people who are feeling cut off from their roots (if they had any). However, the “boom” according to the article has been since 9/11. That should give all people pause. 9/11 caused a lot of people to reflect on their lives. Most denominations saw a huge influx of attenders immediately after 9/11, but those numbers quickly fell. However, even in those churches who are otherwise experiencing negative growth, the post-9/11 increase in attendees has been noticeable.

Another thing that Mr. Volck could be concerned with is the possibility that people will equate their faith with the company, therefore become religiously zealous about their company. While, I suppose, that could be an issue, I suspect that it is not, especially when the chaplain is not a true employee of the company.

Perhaps the scary part for Mr. Volck is that is is corporations that recognize the value of religion and supporting it, while society and government as a whole (think the bureaucrats, not the politicians) has become somewhat hostile to religion.

I don’t know Mr. Volck, and I’m throwing all this out there because he didn’t make his concerns known. I hope that he will note his concerns at some point, but I can’t help but feel that his concern is the seeming melding of faith with “evil” corporations. However, if the chaplain is a true Christian, and serves the employees in true Christian love, I suspect that the Enrons and other horrible shenanigans will be greatly reduced, and the companies will cease being emotionless, profit-only, organizations, as a whole.

Perhaps I’m being optimistic, but I’m allowed to be every once in a while, just to get out of the rut.

One thing that did strike me, is this is going back to the holes we try to fill in our lives with things other than God. This of course brings me to my pet topic (“meme”) of Technological Enervation. Perhaps Technological Enervation is just another way of pointing to the same issue.

The primary scripture used to bar women from leadership positions in the church is in 1 Tim 2:11-15. When one looks through the scriptures, one does find women in leadership. I will say, however, as did some women on the ordination trail in the Church of the Nazarene (whom I had the pleasure to converse and learn with recently), that is NOT ideal (yes, even these women said, actually more forcefully than the men). The ideal is Godly men should be the leaders of the church, as they are supposed to be in families.

However, the issue is that men are drawn to other things, and increasingly so. Fr. Powell is most likely correct that the PLC system will exacerbate the issue. He is also correct that it is only by prayer will all the empty roles be filled.

What I find interesting in this is an underlying feeling of Technological Enervation. I know I’m not the only one that feels this, but I thought it would be those of a more spiritual nature. However, here is someone who is more of the technological bent (although, could be reasonably argued, philosophical as well) feeling the same way.

I don’t, nor should you, condemn him. He deserves love and prayer, not condemnation. I didn’t read any of the comments that other readers wrote, but I would guess that if falls into two camps, (1) You (faithless), jerk, how dare you attack (which I don’t find that it is) our faith (or our church), or (2) religion is evil (yada, yada, yada). Basically, scorn towards a person who is hurting, or scorn from people who scorn those with faith. Probably little love.

He latched onto the wrong thing, he should have latched onto what the nameless Roman Catholic friend said, “Keep your eyes on the person nailed to the cross, not the priests behind the altar,” but that’s hard to do. This physical, fallen, world is easier to get attached to, and be betrayed by.

But the real evil of the illusion is that it distracts us from other aspects of life.

Nicholas Carr is quoted saying that people are changing the way, and need, to remember things, because the majority of it is available on the internet. He also mentions that this means that “cultural baggage” (whether for good or bad), is being left behind as well. Of course, that also means long views and perspectives, something the Western World is already trying to leave behind at light speed.

Where ARE we going? Perhaps we ought to think about that. And that leads me to what I am finding out about myself. I love technology, but I’m really becoming confronted with what it is doing to me, my children, my country, everyone. At one point, Technological Enervation was going to be just a phrase, but now I’m changing it to a zeitgeist. This is the spirit of the age. Yay.

^footnoteIn case you’re wondering the reason for the title name, it is from Johnny Mnemonic (an okay Keanu Reeves movie), where a guy has rewired part of his brain to allow him to carry data. He says, “Hit me,” right before more information is uploaded into his brain than it is wired to tolerate (thus we get the whole, “I’m gonna die,” suspense for the movie). And I’m sure at least one other person out there saw this movie, it’s not just me (I hope). The really funny part, is that the plot of the movie is about information overload.

Each person who can make something with his hands prefers to make something small and concrete rather than uniting with others to change lives.

Vladmir Arkhipov
from:MAKE: Blog: Contemporary Russian folk artifacts

Now, if Mr. Arkhipov were correct, the Christian community in China wouldn’t be expanding at the rate it is. Perhaps those under the U.S.S.R. rule were different, I don’t know. I do know that in a true community of faith, that such a situation would not happen. Such a community would come together stronger, seeking to build each other up. To me, this throw away comment, says more about our materialism than anything else.

tech·no·log·i·cal en·er·va·tion [tek-nuh-loj-i-kuhl i-nur-vi-shuhn]

The process whereby human interaction is negatively affected by technology, creating disconnection, alienation, malaise, and depression, and attempts to create relationships damaged or non-existent due to technology using technology (vicious cycle)

I have no problem believing that there are artificial and manipulated “miracles,” any more than I have believing in genuine miracles and other supernatural phenomena. In the same way, I believe in the existence of fallen angels, demonization, and exorcism as much as I believe that there are some mental and psychological disorders that should be treated with medication and therapy. In other words, I believe in discernment. The mere existence of cubic zirconium in a jewelry store does not mean that genuine diamonds do not exist.

In his column, Hearing the ‘Music of the Spheres’, Steve Beard makes an eloquent point about discernment.

That is the word I was looking for in regards to politics (funny, I’ve been using the word a lot, reading it a lot, but it takes someone else putting it in writing for me to make a connection). That’s what we need. Not just from our politicians (oh, and honesty, straight-forwardness, and a lack of dissembling would also help), but from the media, and we the consumers of politics and media circuses.

If we could not rant and rave, not patronize the Micheal Moore’s and Ann Coulter’s of the world, and just think, we would be better off.

Take health-care for instance. Somebody has to pay for it. Remember, the government doesn’t, you do. You pay taxes, therefore you pay for it. The hated insurance companies? If we weren’t so risk averse, no insurance company would exist. The Democrats are correct, insurance companies and health care companies successfully lobby Republicans. The Republicans are correct that Government (“single payer”) health care is a monster in the wings. Think back to the media induced “scandal” of government procurement during the Reagan years. The infamous $10,000 hammer, for example. Or the bomber (i.e., a big huge flying thing that carries lots of other big things long distances) that did not have the payload capacity to carry the paperwork required to make it (and that is the paperwork for EACH plane built).

Have you ever looked at a hospital bill, only to find that you were charged $5 for two acetaminophen, when you could buy a bottle of 150 capsules at the corner drugstore? Imagine how much those will cost when the government issues them.

A few questions to think about. If single-payer health care is so great, why do Canadians (who can afford it) go the States to get surgery? If Cuba is such a great country, with great health care, and the state owns the media, why do people keep fleeing? Mr. Moore’s failure to think critically regarding the “quickness” of Cuban health care, to me, proved that he can create conflict, but doesn’t see how he is used. Of course, the Cuban health care system worked quickly, are you kidding? Psychological victory. Michael Moore was USED!

The reason why other countries have “cheap” pharmaceuticals? Because WE subsidize them. Since the pharmaceutical companies can’t recover their costs elsewhere, and because we in the States love lawsuits, our pharmaceuticals are obscenely priced. It is not price controls that are needed, it is everyone else’s price controls that need to be removed!

Speaking of lawsuits, imagine trying to sue the government for shoddy health care. Veterans have been having, to our shame, poor success in that area. Also, imagine trying to get unorthodox treatments approved through the government system. I’ve experienced the private system, and it is bad enough.

Privacy. All those privacy advocacy groups would be run out of business. Now the government will know everything. Yep, that’s good. Right? Forget those stupid cameras watching everything, forget the warrantless searches, the government WILL know your very DNA.

The short answer? There isn’t one. The easy answer? There isn’t one. If a politician, media hack (and they’re almost all hacks, at least the national ones), or political hack says there is one? Run away with your hand on your wallet.

In our Technological Enervation and secular arrogance, I believe people without faith are jealous of ones who do have it. We with faith have an anchor in life outside of ourselves. I believe that the reason that atheist books (including, “The Secret”) are successful is that they provide (dead) comfort to people who feel the emptiness in their souls for which they have no answer, and are afraid (or angry) that those with faith have an answer.

I am not saying that Muslim extremists (or Islamacists) necessarily have a deep faith either. I would almost suspect that it is an attempt to quell that very emptiness that the atheists have. I don’t know, and I won’t know until I can talk to God in Heaven. I know that my human conditioning often puts too many barriers to my understanding of God’s creation. Mercifully, He gave us his Word. Read it daily in love.

Daily Meditation (Henri Nouwen): A Father’s As Well As a Mother’s Love

The father in the story of the prodigal son is mother as well. His running out to welcome his son, his embrace and kisses; his offering of the best robe, the ring, and the sandals; and his throwing a party are not the typical behavior of a distant patriarch. They express so much tenderness, nurturing care, and self-effacing forgiveness that in them we see both motherly and fatherly love fully present.

The perfect love of our heavenly Father includes as well as transcends all the love that a father and mother can have for their children. We may think about the two hands of God embracing us as a mother’s hand and a father’s hand: one caressing, consoling, and comforting, the other supporting, encouraging, and empowering. We too are called to be father and mother to those who want to come home.

One of the problems with the Christian faith is the language of God the Father. Now, don’t misunderstand, the Bible says that, and so do I. However, the cultural baggage that goes with that can often provide an unconscious expectation of relationship with God. Henri Nouwen’s calling God’s arms separately in terms of human parental relations (still doesn’t cover God’s feelings for us adequately) helps balance that out somewhat.

I will not acquiesce to the current tendency in some circles to call God a her, or some other gender-neutral term, but I will acknowledge that failing to adequately address the (again, from a human perspective) “motherly” love of God for us, can turn many away.

In here, Mr. Garibaldi, you cannot hide from yourself. Everything out there has only one purpose, to distract us from ourselves, from what is truly important. There are no distractions in here. You can learn much from silence.

Have you ever heard, “We’re too busy”? Have you said it yourself? Through God’s creation, we have been blessed with many things. Satan (yes, I believe he exists) takes those wonderful things, and corrupts them, and that’s what this post is about.

The one thing I like about Science Fiction is the way questions can be asked without being threatening, but still be thought provoking. The quote above from Babylon 5 (Wikipedia entry), is one of those. Cellphones, wireless networks, Blackberrys, and now iPhones surround us. Constant noise. Think about casinos. They are engineered to be the noisy places they are: to distract.

As life has caught up with me, I no longer have the time I probably need for solitude. I might very well be less for it. With 3 kids, a cat, a dog, and way too much technology to play with, I’m at that point where I am afraid of solitude.

About the only time I get it is very early in the morning a couple of times a week. I can focus on silence and God. That time of solitude, though little, and relatively rare, I think keep me from completely snapping at times. As we become more distracted, we reach out in less tangible ways. I look at MySpace, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and other such sites (I’m guilty of this too, as you can see to the left) and see people aching to connect.

People say they are more connected now, but are they really? Kids are text messaging their parents into the poorhouse. They are text about inane things. Are they really connected to each other? Really?

My wife and I had one of those really deep discussions the other night, discussing friendship. We talked about people we know who have lots of friends. Neither of us do, but then, we need our friendships to be deep ones. Really deep.

Adults who aren’t living children’s lives say that kids these days have just as meaningful relationships as people did a generation or two ago. Hmmm, so if my “friends” keep updating me via Twitter on what they’re doing, that’s connected. I think that says more about the adults making the statement than the kids.

So what’s this about Satan, again? While the first liar has been perfecting his art for a long time. A very long time. We need these things, this (albeit very cool) electronic stuff, to keep in contact with each other. No, what we need is to take a deep breath and connect.

I’ve heard many folks saying that the “Old World” has it right. People spend hours in the café talking with each other. There is a lot of truth in that, however, there is a lot of sloth in the rest as well. There has to be a balance between the hyperactive (and thus shallow) interactions, and the long (slothful) interactions. Both have their place, but like all things, they can go too far.

I, as a Christian, believe I stand as a voice that tries to get this lost world to hear God, and to follow God’s ways. The question really is, how to get people to listen when they don’t want to. How do you get people to listen when what is said is the opposite of their desired behavior?

I don’t have an answer. Watching the news, political hacks, various “cause” websites, and everything that is spewed forth, I’m not sure that love can be heard, except in private personal conversation, and depending on the individuals involved, maybe not then either. We have a situation in this country with anger. I’m not talking about gangs, gun violence, moronic parents who take their children’s sports too seriously. Politics, and much that is important involves politics, is anger. If one person is more angry, than they get more coverage. In response, even people who would otherwise not be angry, have an automatic escalation in tension. Sadly, that tension gets connected to the issue, and then discussion of the issue no longer becomes a way to discuss (and hopefully solve) an issue, but a rant.

Some of the best discussions about certain issues are happening out of the limelight. Some serious solutions are coming out of those discussions, but they do not see the light of day because those who are truly trying to solve the issues aren’t angry about them.

How did I get here from the beginning of this post? Simple, the way things are going currently, I cannot discuss where I see something being wrong, without someone reacting as if attacked. The sad part is, I feel a need to help them. I am moved by love to help them. I certainly don’t hate those I seek to help, what would be the point. Are they my enemies? Not from my point of view, however, from their point of view, I am their enemy, as is my faith.

How do you share in love, when the only currency that is understood is anger?

The true goal is to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If a person has a living vital relationship with Jesus Christ, it is that relationship that will change them. It won’t be fancy arguments. It won’t be facts. It won’t be tirades. It won’t be the shallow love of a human being. It will be the gracious, faithful, living, and deep love of God, lived through Jesus Christ, felt and experienced through the Holy Spirit.

• Widipedia Entry
• The “Official” Website, though rather nauseatingly PC, at least for this year’s theme.

At the end of his online article regarding Iran’s proposed fixed-length marital contracts, John Moody writes:

…love will be served, even if only temporarily.

There is no doubt that this refers to sex, not love, although, it is through this contract that young people may actually have children (please read the article). Here, Mr. Moody falls into the trap that so many people are falling into, and thus confuse hormonally confused teenagers even further. Sex is not love, and that should be the end of it, but in this day and age, it isn’t, and more’s the pity.

I wish there was a phrase other than “making love”, that could really help. However, the English language is rather limited when it comes to the word love; we have to add adjectives to define what kind of love. Of course, the language of love (French) is even more limited, oddly enough (maybe someone will correct my French). “I like you,” and “I love you” are both Je t’aime, which is literally defined as, “I like you.” You can have love for someone, J’ai amour pour tu, but it doesn’t have the action like, “I love you.”

Anyways, here the “mainstream” culture as badly affected someone’s writing, because to confuse sex and love means that you don’t understand either.

Americans have a “melting-pot” mentality, which works in many ways towards the success of the country, but can often fail the individual. We are made for connections. I believe much of the popularity of facebook and myspace, and all the others, is a need for connection. Much of what used to bring us this connection is families (usually in rural or agricultural settings) were not separated by many physical miles. As transportation methods changed, families began to spread out. I think my generation is the last one that, on the whole, will not be too negatively affected by this spreading out.

The current generation, the “myspace/facebook” generation is another story, however. My family, despite the separation, at least had the emotional connection that provided a basic connection. However, as my generation has children, I’m not convinced that the connections strained during our parents generation, will survive my generation, and it is my belief that is why these websites are so popular, they are an attempt to create connections that they cannot build at home (and this has nothing to do with the parent-child relationship).

I believe that the ramification in regards to the traditional liturgical churched, is that people are flocking (bad pun, sorry) to these churches is that they provide a different needed connection, a link to the past. However, as far as the Christian church is concerned, I believe there is something else here.

Looking around (hey, even on my blog), the divisions that are blossoming among the denominations are based on basic beliefs that haven’t been in question until the 20th and 21st centuries. I wouldn’t be surprised, in fact I believe, that this is because the basics are no longer taught.

Also, as I experienced during my time in the ELCA (a Lutheran denomination), I experienced the mentality of “they do it, so we won’t”, not for any theological reason, but because the did it. Sadly, because many of the denominations don’t do something because the Roman Catholics do it, like one that I’ve been thinking about recently, kneeling while praying during communal prayer.

As disjointed as this whole post is, it all revolves around connections, connections with each other, and connections with our past. We need them, we need to deliberately plan them.

• Rod Dreher: Modernism In Religion posted at sacbee.com
  hat tip to:OrthodoxToday.org
• This one address perceptions and actions, and often why tradition is disposed of. Fr. Aris Metrakos: Fun is not a Four Letter Word, posted at OrthodoxyToday.org
• 
  The Mission of the Trinity, posted on Christianity Today.
]]> http://starlyth.info/20070608/107/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070607/106 http://starlyth.info/20070607/106#comments Fri, 08 Jun 2007 01:31:26 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/ethics-and-morals/the-aid-that-kills/ There are a couple of interesting pieces on Der Spiegle’s website about aid to Africa, and how it is not helping at all. In fact, the two pieces discuss how blind compassion is actually hurting, not helping, Africa. Even I, who some would (wrongly) call a right-wing wacko, took pause at what these articles suggest. How can we not help? However, if you take a step back, it truly brings this Chinese proverb to mind:


Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

The first piece is an interview with James Shikwati, a Kenyan economics expert.

The second piece is a more in depth review, which is, frankly, quite depressing.

So where does this leave us? As much as we want to, and we should want to, help others, this should give us pause in how we help others. I am not advocating abolishing compassionate assistance, but this is no different than welfare here in the States. I will have to say that much of the same criticism that has been leveled at welfare, should also be leveled here.

It is not whether we should help them, because that is not in question at all, but how they who are being helped may be best enabled to no longer need assistance. For by freeing them from that need, the chains will fall from their feet and arms, and they will be able to go forth with heads held high with hope

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070607/106/feed 1 http://starlyth.info/20070425/98 http://starlyth.info/20070425/98#comments Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:18:49 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/faith/what-is-forgiveness/ Brian Hollar asks this question, and he provides some very profound, yet simple answers. He has some especially deep words regarding blame and forgiveness. I wish I had the wisdom to add to this, but I don’t.
]]> http://starlyth.info/20070425/98/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070420/93 http://starlyth.info/20070420/93#comments Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:31:57 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/faith/christianity/while-impactful-still-missing-the-mark/ Cleaning Up La Oroya, an article online at Christianity Today, reports on the team activities of a La Oroya, Peru, based ministry, and an Ohio based ministry, and their pursuit of cleaning up the contamination originating from a local smelter. Members of the ministries mention how they put pressure on the government of Peru, which granted seems to have worked, somewhat. However, the article, and those that they linked to, did not mention any pressure other than on the government, and the local administration of the smelter.

That’s too bad. The smelter is owned by the Don Roe Company, which proudly states on their main web page:

Our commitment to producing these materials in a safe and environmentally responsible manner is demonstrated through pioneering techniques that make our international operations more innovative, efficient and environmentally sound.

The Don Roe Company purchased the smelter, thereby inheriting a pre-existing mess, from the Peru government run company. The Don Roe Company is based in the United States. The United States based ministry should have started locally. It is much easier to get leverage against a public traded company, as bad news (especially bad PR, such as this) lowers stock prices, but one can still put pressure on privately owned companies, such as the Don Roe Company, as well.

A public relations campaign pointing out the contradiction between their “commitment” and the reality in Peru could work wonders. As the press loves printing bad news, it wouldn’t take much to get a few flames started. Also, as La Oroya produces copper and zinc (which is, honestly, one of the nastiest things to produce. It always comes with lead), one can talk to their customers, whom I am sure all have “environmentally-friendly” statements, and point out that their supplier(s) are operating in a method contrary to their statements. By including their customers in a public relations campaign, one can create even further pressure.

I am an amateur in all of this. My primary purpose in writing this, granted no one will probably ever read it, is to show that being blinded by local versus global is a bad thing, as it can limit your impact.

I would also like to point out that the article only seems to hint at the improvements that the Don Roe company is making. The focus of the article was the impact the ministries can have (even crossing continental and national boundaries) when they work together. And while I will not spend the time check the veracity of this, please read the Don Roe Company’s statement about what they are doing to improve both the La Oroya operation, and the surrounding community.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070420/93/feed 1 http://starlyth.info/20070416/92 http://starlyth.info/20070416/92#comments Tue, 17 Apr 2007 03:59:15 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/faith/a-familial-truth-about-government/

I am a professor of human biology at Baruch College, City University of New York. I sometimes get involved in discussions with ‘gay’ students on issues of biology and homosexuality, but such discussions have always been respectful and educational. For example, a young ‘gay’ man told me he was opposed to all the hatred directed against ‘gay marriage’; why couldn’t the government recognize the equality of ‘gay’ unions? I asked him about the lifespan of nations, compared to the lifespan of individuals. He acknowledged that nations span many generations. I added that, in fact, one of the few real responsibilities of the national government is to ensure that there will be future generations of citizens. Therefore, I said, is it not really the responsibility of the federal government to provide special protection to the very institution that guarantees future generations of citizens, i.e., marriage between a man and a woman? His reply: ‘That sounds fair.’ And he walked out of class satisfied. We all know that youth tend to be possessed of idealism, which is these days so often confused with, and perverted into utopianism. But youthful idealism is really the love of truth, and nothing makes it shine like truth!

A letter to the editor of the Patriot Post (The Brief, Patriot Post Vol. 07 No. 16 | 16 April 2007)

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070416/92/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070411/91 http://starlyth.info/20070411/91#comments Thu, 12 Apr 2007 01:16:54 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/faith/christianity/ignore-him-and-he-will-fade-away-maybe-not/ Imus has always been a jerk.  The last few days haven’t changed my opinion.  However, heaping all the publicity on him is doing him GOOD!

Father Jonathan, who blogs at FoxNews.com, has an excellent post discussing the darkest lining (I am talking neither race nor Imus) of this debacle.  This whole situation just goes to bolster my post discussing Pope Benedict’s admonition of the media.

Granted, despite, my post’s title, I know that Imus will not go away, but as Father Jonathan pointed out the worst that will happen is that Imus will get a vacation, and everything will be as it was prior to this.

To the Rutgers team, Ladies, congrats on your title.  You earned it.  Imus cannot take away the success, the trophy, or anything else, unless you let him.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070411/91/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070402/88 http://starlyth.info/20070402/88#comments Tue, 03 Apr 2007 02:29:57 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/faith/who-is-the-fourth-beast/

As for the fourth beast, there shall be a fourth kingdom on earth that shall be different from all the other kingdoms; it shall devour the whole earth, and trample it down, and break it into pieces.


Daniel 7:23

I was reading Daniel 7:19-27, and it struck me that the United States of America may very well be the fourth beast. The first response of some will be that the USA is not a beast, of course their opposites on the political spectrum will say that it is. The Book of Daniel is very much a prophetical and vision based. It is not literal.

“…shall be different from all the other kingdoms…”. The United States of America is different from any other country.

“It will devour the whole earth…” From a political standpoint, and sadly much in a cultural viewpoint, this is reality as well.

As much as I love my country, the current divide between the lovers and loathers (American Citizens all), tells me that the USA is on its way out. It won’t go down easily, or soon. What ten kingdoms, then will it devolve to?

We call the USA a “Christian” nation. It was. It is no longer, and hasn’t been for a great many decades (which decade in the 20^th century is up for debate). As sad as this makes me feel, the kingdom to which is owed my greatest loyalty is not of this earth, and that kingdom shall not pass away.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070402/88/feed 1 http://starlyth.info/20070328/86 http://starlyth.info/20070328/86#comments Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:24:23 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/faith/raising-awareness-one-million-people-at-a-time/ MillionSoulsAware.org is a project that seeks to raise awareness one global issue at a time. Their mission statement says:

millionsoulsaware.org is a not for profit project started in march 2007 that has the mission to raise awareness by featuring an article on an important topic that needs attention. Millionsoulsaware.org doesn’t ask for donations, but asks you to spread the word. The millionsoulsaware.org goal is to get one million souls aware on the current subject. This goal is measured by the project counter on the mainpage. Our goal will be reached by asking people on the internet to spread the awareness by promoting millionsoulsaware.org. We believe the internet is the perfect way to reach a wide audience worldwide. Awareness is the starting point for a better world!

The current issue is refugee camps, and while there will probably be some disagreements on the cause, effect, and resolution of the issue that MillionSoulsAware.org will bring up. At this point, I’m not going to argue that at least their first issue is definitely worth learning about.

Also, please note that I have added a text box at the top of the left-most column, as I want more people to learn about these issues.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070328/86/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070313/78 http://starlyth.info/20070313/78#comments Wed, 14 Mar 2007 04:42:31 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/unclassified/the-rental-cello-an-israeli-story/ As Treppenwitz says, this is a story to be shared.
]]> http://starlyth.info/20070313/78/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070310/77 http://starlyth.info/20070310/77#comments Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:30:28 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/society/the-dark-side-of-capitalism/ Yesterday, Pope Benedict convicted those in charge of the media, saying:

I appeal again to the leaders of the media industry to advise producers to safeguard the common good, to uphold the truth, to protect individual human dignity and promote respect for the needs of the family.

What I find interesting is to whom he is speaking. The leaders of the Mainstream Media go after Halliburton, Enron, Exxon, etcetera, however, they are just as guilty (perhaps more so as they are so quick to, and viciously, attack others) of pure corporate greed, as they don’t care what is sent out, by whom it is consumed, and the effect upon society.

Almost, that makes me think that we need the government and the FCC. Almost.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070310/77/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070310/73 http://starlyth.info/20070310/73#comments Sat, 10 Mar 2007 16:51:10 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/faith/misunderstanding-capitalism-and-business/ I read this this morning (read the entire article):

There’s a stereotypical assumption among Christians in the nonprofit world that capitalism means greed or selfishness, and “therefore has got to be bad,” says Nash, founder and managing partner of Piper Cove Asset Management LLC. Using goals to measure progress—standard practice in the business world—is seen as “cold-blooded and materialistic.”

I can’t say I’m particularly shocked. It does seem to many people outside of business that this is the case. Especially with high profile failures in morals, ethics, and leadership, of a number of “leaders” (leaders used generously) in the business community. The sensationalist treatment by the media certainly doesn’t help.

It’s too bad, really. Business, in the form of truly free capitalism, provides a good grounding for a successful and free society. The company I work for is a great example. They care for their employees, understanding that they are the reason the company is successful, and even in business. Of course we have metrics, and honestly, it is a good thing. As long as the leadership of an organization isn’t the browbeating time, learning where one falls short and where one excels helps the employee and the company.

The funny part is that Christians are lumped together with “evil” capitalistic Republicans, and yet, if this description of Christians in non-profits is true, many Christians actually belong in the “left” because of their view of business.

Without a doubt, a business exists to make money. That is its purpose. The purpose of a Christian non-profit is to fulfill its mission. By swapping money for mission, a business becomes a non-profit. And yes, it is as simple as that.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070310/73/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070303/63 http://starlyth.info/20070303/63#comments Sun, 04 Mar 2007 02:08:37 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=63 The pro-abortion crowd often brings up abortion as the only alternative to unplanned pregnancies. Not to be too blunt, but as my grandma once said, “that is no accident.”

Chuck Colson, in one of his daily Breakpoint Commentaries, talked about a woman who decided against aborting the child of an unplanned pregnancy.

Through sharing her own story of coming to terms with unexpected pregnancy, Fields gives hope to women who often feel their only choice is abortion. She shows how God can redeem even the most difficult of circumstances and give a mother love for the surprise child who seems, at first, more like a curse than a blessing.

Please read the transcript of this commentary, for I believe that women such Leslie Fields need the support of family, friends, and churches to make the choice of loving God’s greatest surprises, children.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070303/63/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070303/61 http://starlyth.info/20070303/61#comments Sun, 04 Mar 2007 01:53:06 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=61 I was reading an article entitled Exit Interviews at Christianity Today’s website, and I have to admit I was depressed. I know we all behave in an unchristian due to often unknown or unrecognized attitudes.

I don’t feel that it is fair that so much pressure is put onto the “first” person of a particular gender, skin color, or ethnicity. Oddly enough, I believe more pressure is put upon such people with our “multicultural” empasized society, than would have been a generation ago. Maybe I’m wrong. I’ll be honest, it wasn’t until college that I truly became aware of the whole situation. This is where I met truly angry people, who were angry at the opposite gender (usually female angry at male), or at another race (usually black angry at white). They, who did not know me, took out their anger and frustration upon me.

I experienced institutionalized attitudes. “Institutionalized attitudes”, you ask. “It is the inherent white male good ol’ boys club that is institutions we fight,” they say. Except the only problem is, especially in the world of educatioin, that is a burned-to-ash straw man. The educational establishment has bent over backwards, sideways, anyways, to not be that white man’s world. It’s done a pretty good job. Too good, in fact. It is in the process of alienating and destroying the very educational environment it was seeking to create.

I wish that people would get over the race issue, myself included, but we now expend more effort upon it, therefore emphasizing it more. The only way to get over it is through the power of Jesus Christ:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Galatians 3:28

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070303/61/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070303/58 http://starlyth.info/20070303/58#comments Sun, 04 Mar 2007 01:18:46 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=58 “Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi criticized the world financial system as a dictatorship based on fear…”

Disconcerting as it is, I am almost in agreement with Gaddafi.  The stock and futures markets are based on rumors and fear.

As much as everyone wanted to blame the oil companies for the high price of gas, it was the fears of the futures traders that was truly, and remains, the real reason behind the oil prices remaining at their high level.  Oil production remains at high levels, but oil prices continue to rise (and fall).

I’m not sure that I agree with him in the entirety that the entire global financial “market” is based on fear.  However, the World Bank and the IMF certainly have plenty of critics on their basis for loaning money.

While Gaddafi is correct that fear in many ways rules finances, it also rules most other things in life.  Most people operate on some basis of fear.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070303/58/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070228/54 http://starlyth.info/20070228/54#comments Thu, 01 Mar 2007 02:35:56 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=54 Granted, there hasn’t been much traffic to my blog, but in case there ever is, I figure I ought to put this out there, not so much as a disclaimer (although I supposed it is, is some way), but an explanation of perspective.

A number of my posts in the past, and I’m sure many more in the future, will revolve around the church and homosexuality. I’m not deliberately picking on homosexuality, or homosexuals, but on the current political, social, and religious focus of the time, which just so happens to be homosexuality. Homosexuality, for better, or worse, has become a major issue. For better, because I don’t want people to live in fear, for worse, because I still don’t agree with the behavior, and I have grave concerns regarding a greater acceptance, and even encouragement of the behavior.

The last two significant issues that were prominent in all three spheres (politics, society, religion) were divorce and gender equality, which are both topics I will leave for other times. If I were living in those times, and the internet were in existence then, I would be blogging about that.

I know people, whom I do call friends, that are homosexual. Do I love them as I love my fellow man? Of course. Do I agree with that love-challenged church in wherever that “God Hates F***”? Absolutely NOT!

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

John 3:16

What part of “loved the world” do folks like those not understand? Does that mean I seek to give homosexuality a pass? I would much rather just love and accept homosexuals as they are. It certainly would be easier. However, I don’t have that luxury. For, you see, a behavior that is unacceptable does not suddenly become okay if you love and “accept” a person. I love my children very much, but throwing things in the house is not a positive behavior, and as much as I love and accept my children, I will not accept their behavior. I will forgive, however.

That is how I see God looking at us. We are his creation, his children. That is not to say we are perfect. By giving us free will, God freed us to make mistakes. REALLY BIG ONES. I could start with Original Sin, but that is for others to speak more intelligently on. What I can speak on, only somewhat intelligently, is everyday sin–the things we’ve done and left undone (as the Lutheran confession states).

In an article publish in Christian Week (26 August 1997), John H. Redekop (in a piece titled “Revisitng Homosexuality”) states:

…when Christians respond to homosexuals that Jesus modeled such responses for us, we must be extremely careful not to compromise the clear biblical condemnation of such behavior. … The real point is that all of us are born into sin with strong proclivities to sin. Some, it seems, have a strong and innate desire to steal, some to lie, some to cheat, some to indulge in adultery, some to overeat, some to intoxicate themselves, perhaps some to practice homosexuality, and some to practice pedophilia. The fact that these tendencies may appear to be innate does not make them acceptable.

Redekop discusses two other salient points. The first is that Christians, if anyone, should understand people surrendering to innate desires. We ALL sin. The second is that Christians should respond to everyone with love.

What’s funny, or actually not so funny, is that an easy Commandment to understand (“Love your neighbor as yourself”) is very hard for a fallen, sinful humanity, to implement, even for we Christians, who truly understand just how fallen and sinful we are.

The most frustrating part of the whole shoutfest (why bother calling it a dialogue) is the redefining of the vocabulary. In the english language, tolerance is not a synonym for acceptance. For example, when one of my children throws a temper tantrum before bed, the major contributing factor is exhaustian. I will tolerate the tantrum (not letting it get out of hand, but not trying to stop it quickly either). However, if we are at the store, and one of them throws a tantrum, I will not accept that behavior, and put a stop to it quickly.

The truth is “hate the sin, love the sinner” has to be the modus operandi. If I truly love someone, and I believe that their behavior will cause them to be literally hellbound, why would I not try to help them sin no more. What is love? Is it allowing someone to self-destruct (yes, I understand that sometimes that is the only human course), or should I do what I can to guide them (not force them) onto the path where I can spend eternity with them in the loving grace and presence of God?

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070228/54/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070124/52 http://starlyth.info/20070124/52#comments Thu, 25 Jan 2007 01:25:33 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=52 If you look around at the stories that are there, you will see an increase in depression, an increase in suicide. As technology integrates further into our lives, I wonder how much more will happen.

As much as the mainstream media and those of the ideoloigical left and extreme right like to malign religion, I truly believe that faith, especially faith in Jesus Christ,  will continue to be the ballwark defending the human psyche from the madness of its own creations.

The Catholic Church of Scotland has begun stating its concerns, and I hope churches around the world start paying attention to something I feel will be a major concern very soon.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070124/52/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070121/50 http://starlyth.info/20070121/50#comments Mon, 22 Jan 2007 01:53:39 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=50 I’ve decided that I needed to come up with a new phrase to describe the issues I see with technology and its effect upon people, and by default, society. I’m not sure how to even define it, yet.

I’ve gone back and tagged/categorized older articles, in addition to newer articles as they come up.

In a way, this is a zeitgeist, that seeks to gather together the peculiar afflictions of technology, from my point of view.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070121/50/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20070121/49 http://starlyth.info/20070121/49#comments Sun, 21 Jan 2007 23:42:09 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=49 This caught my eye. People such as myself have been framed as opponents of stem cell research, which is false. My opposition has been to embryonic stem cell research that KILLS (i.e., destroys embryos). However, with some recent clarification, it apparently is possible to do embryonic stem cell research without killing the embryo. I would not oppose embryonic stem cell research, if the process developed by Dr. Robert Lanza and his colleagues is viable, AND is used in ALL embryonic stem cell research.

I do have to point out that this article in the New York Times continues to reinforce the false view that those of us who oppose embryonic stem cell research oppose all stem cell research. That is shoddy journalism.

Please note that after extracting the single cell, a lot of the embryos were still killed. NOT acceptable. This report also brought up another train of thought, is in vitro fertilization (IVF) a good thing? I could never minimize the pain and anguish of not being able to have children. Knowing how much joy and love (and frustration, but we’ll skip that for now) my children bring into my life, I could not imagine what it would be like without them, nor what it would be like to not be able to have them. Embryonic stem cell research would not be possible without IVF. An excellent argument by proponents of embryonic stem cell research, is that there are millions of embryos from IVF that are in freezers just “sitting” there. Most of them will never be implanted. To me that is almost as bad as killing them to extract stem cells, but at least there is still a chance of them becoming the people they are already are.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20070121/49/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20061121/46 http://starlyth.info/20061121/46#comments Wed, 22 Nov 2006 05:47:33 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=46 A survey sponsored by MTV provides some very interesting tidbits regarding the endangered psyche of a technology-savy generation. Even though I found the comment on religion interesting, it just seemed to be tossed in there, and didn’t add to the main thrust of the story.

On top of that, an article in Christianity Today discusses a survey, “Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two Decades”, from the American Sociological Review which describes the increasing loneliness of Americans.

Today, a friend sent a link to an article from Psychology Today which discusses depression, anxiety, self-esteem, and parenting.

Last of all, a link to Der Spiegel (in English), reporting on European towns removing traffic signs, and its effects on people’s behavior.

What on earth do these all have to do with each other? It’s very simple, yet not. All of the articles revolve around balance. At an increasing pace, we are removing ourselves from the very interactions that make us human.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20061121/46/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20061026/41 http://starlyth.info/20061026/41#comments Fri, 27 Oct 2006 02:47:59 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=41 When I first heard of the Michael J. Fox political commercial, I immediately wrote an entry about it, however, I then learned about all the controversy about Rush Limbaugh et al (amazingly I hadn’t heard about that), and decided to mark my post “private” so that I would not add flames to a horribly partisan flame war.

However, I will add my $.02 to the stem cell debate itself.

First and foremost, the troubling part about many of those that are using stem cell research as a political flaming arrow (whether for political office, or for some proposition), is that they always say that so-and-so opposes stem cell research, but the truth is that so-and-so (usually) opposes the “destruction” (euphemism for KILLING) of embryos for the harvesting of embryonic stem cells. The person (or people in the case of propositions) don’t oppose stem cell research per se, but the source of the stem cells.

What is particularly appalling, is the “pie-in-the-sky” cures that are being placed at the alter of stem cell research, especially embryonic stem cell research. John Edwards during his and John Kerry’s presidential campaign, fell deeply into that trap, saying that Christopher Reeve would walk again, and other, well frankly, absurd claims. I am not saying that stem cell research will not allow paralyzed people to walk, or cure Alzheimer’s, or cure Parkinson’s, but in certainly won’t happen soon, REGARDLESS of the source of stem cells.

Also, those that are using stem cell research as part of their political arsenal, either refuse to acknowledge or are deliberately not speaking of (because it interferes with their TRUE political aims, whatever they might be) adult stem cell research. There have been a number of publicized stem cell treatment studies, which only when read in their entirety, mention that ADULT stem cells are what are being used.

From what I understand, at this point, embryonic stem cells are only producing tumors. If that is the case, why is it being pushed? Because of its “potential”? If that is the reason, then these same folk should be trumpeting adult stem cell research (especially in light of its currently greater successes), pushing for the same federal and state funding they are trying to direct towards embryonic stem cell research.

They say pharmaceutical and bio-engineering companies don’t have the money to fund embryonic stem cell research. Yet these same companies have the money to fund adult stem cell research, and are close, supposedly, to a couple of successful treatments. It is disingenuous to say that companies are afraid of the political backlash on supposedly moral and ethical grounds, while, on the other hand, accusing the SAME companies of gouging the American public for medicinal treatments (i.e., unethical and immoral behavior).

The other part of this that I have an issue with is, is the hypocrisy. People who are out agitating for the killing of embryos (or destruction of same, if you wish), and genetic therapies on humans, oppose animal research, including genetic research, and also oppose genetically engineered tomatoes (for longer staying power in the stores) or fish (can’t remember the rationale for this one) or grain (to increase yield, especially for countries with FAMINE and STARVING children). Why is it okay to mess with the incredibly complex and still quite unknown (we’ve mapped the human genome, but do we REALLY know what it means) of human beings, but we can’t mess with fish, tomatoes, or grain?

Just so it is understood, I am against artificial genetic engineering (farmers have been naturally genetic engineering since the beginning of agriculture), whether it be fish, tomato (granted, tomatoes are yucky anyways), or human. Part of lure of genetic engineering is the thought that, for example, my child will be “perfect”, which completely fails to take into account the entirety of the human condition, of which genetics is only a part. The world in the movie Gattaca is a world where genetic perfection is normal (this was also touched upon in the book Red Genesis by S.C. Sykes), but Gattaca also demonstrates the true power of the human spirit, and how it, if the individual is willing, is the true individual, not their genetics.

Back to the topic at hand. What is the motivator for all the emphasis on embryonic stem cell research? I read a report (Stem Cell Research and Applications) sponsored by the AAAS (despite their attempt to appear unbiased, their sponsored papers and seminars show otherwise), and it is quite clear that there is NO evidence that embryonic stem cell research will produce good “fruit”, and they say as such. Yet the paper says that we must continue it. Why? Especially, as it appears, that there are successful treatments using another stem cell source. What is going on?

I have heard is postulated that those that are advocating embryonic stem cell research are advocating that particular branch of research, because abortion can be “dovetailed” into it as a source of such stem cells. I hope that that postulate is wrong. VERY wrong. However, I fear it is true. As far as I can tell, those who advocate embryonic stem cell research (and also disregarding adult stem cell research), and are agitating for it politically, are also pro-”choice”, thus seeming to bolster the “need” to continue to have “choice”. I find it hard to believe that ANYONE could be so detached from their own humanity to think that way. So again, I hope that that postulate is wrong.

The true conflict is between worldviews, and not incomprehension of science as many claim. The questions that seem to apply purely to this topic, and have differing worldviews, are as follows:

• Where does life begin?
• When is it okay to alter genetics?
• What is the value of a human life?

The first question is the hardest, mostly, and is the source of the conflict. For me, it is at conception, which of course causes a conflict with hormonal birth control, and I recognize the inconsistency, and struggle to conform them. Before I go further, I heard someone say yesterday that no one has funerals for miscarriages, while that is not universally true, on the other hand, when my wife miscarried we both mourned. That lost life was valued by us. Those that support embryonic stem cell research usually seem to be pro-choice, which seems to have the view that life begins whenever the pregnant woman says it does. If she calls it a fetus, it is abortable. If she calls is a baby, everything must be done to preserve the child. This is regardless of the child’s (which is what I call it) gestational age. THAT is inconsistent.

The genetics question was discussed above, but the abbreviated answers are: for me, never artificially; for supporters of embryonic stem cell research, the answer seems to be, on humans, when ever we want to, for animals or plants, never. Which segues into the next question.

This, now that I think about it, might actually be harder than I thought. For people such as Peter Singer (a professor of “ethics” at Princeton), the value of human life is whenever that life is valuable to him, or of value to whomever the question is asked. For him, by way of clarification, those that are a burden (such those with Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, Autism, you name it) should be “removed” so that they do not use up valuable resources. For me, human life is always valuable, however, sometimes (not for convenience’s sake) human life must be taken, but I believe that an unborn child deserves a whole lot more protection than they are getting now.

Those that support or oppose embryonic stem cell research both deserve to be listened to, but by painting embryonic stem cell research as all but the entirety of stem cell research, cannot even lead to possible discussion, but its premise is based on falsehood.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20061026/41/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20061024/40 http://starlyth.info/20061024/40#comments Wed, 25 Oct 2006 03:15:40 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=40 There has been mention of a study that found that those that identify themselves politically to the left are not having children at the replacement rate, versus those that identify themselves politically to the right are exceeding the replacement rate.  Here is a woman’s observations of Harvard, which helps to further illustrate this.

Feeling Sexy At Harvard

]]> http://starlyth.info/20061024/40/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20061019/36 http://starlyth.info/20061019/36#comments Fri, 20 Oct 2006 02:07:05 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=36 A more historical view of the Just War Theory, which leads me to ask, “unjust (or just) war according to whom?”
]]> http://starlyth.info/20061019/36/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20061019/35 http://starlyth.info/20061019/35#comments Fri, 20 Oct 2006 01:45:24 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=35 An interesting take on Just War, while I generally think the ARI is pigheaded and wrong, and when I do agree with them, it is because the ARI and I got to the same point going different directions.
Read the article by Yaron Brook and Alex Epstein in full at The Ayn Rand Institute:

Observe the inversion of justice here. Benevolent, individualistic, life-loving Americans, and death-worshipping, collectivist, nihilistic Arabs—such as the dancing Arabs who celebrated 9/11—are regarded as equally worthy of protection by the American military. The exception is if the American is a soldier and the Arab is a civilian, in which case the Arab’s life is of greater value.

To the extent that Just War Theory is practiced, it leads to unnecessary fear, suffering, and death visited on innocent nations—and to the rise of evil movements and regimes—all while it claims to be virtuous and practical.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20061019/35/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20061019/33 http://starlyth.info/20061019/33#comments Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:06:02 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=33 This is in regards to this article:

Op Eds Now More Central in War than Bullets
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun [NY Sun title: The West Must Learn The Public Relations of War]
October 17, 2006

Regardless of what you think of Mr. Pipes otherwise, his analysis regarding this aspect is correct. I believe it is what Republicans, and President Bush’s administration in particular (are you listening Karl Rove?), don’t get. I think those who oppose the war get it somewhat, but haven’t learned the self-restraint required.

However, I think Mr. Pipes also has it somewhat wrong as well. Regardless of what those in their towers (whether it be the ivory tower of academia, the gray tower of politics, or the black tower of the press) think of the rest of us, we are quite capable of reading between the lines. Granted, however, that also requires ALL the facts, which politicians and mainstream media (including FoxNews) try spoonfeed us only a few of, be available.

Regarding the facts in question, you can provide factual information, but still lie. A lie by omission is still a lie.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20061019/33/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20060529/26 http://starlyth.info/20060529/26#comments Tue, 30 May 2006 04:37:11 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=26 As there always is, there have been a lot of Chicken Little”s running around, on both the right and the left, hollering and moaning about how bad things are. Some things could be better, but so much could be worse. Despite some people”s attempt to portray the world, with the U.S.A. leading the way, as increasing in conflict, the opposite is true. A sign of that is the recent referendum on independence in Montenegro (an article in the Scotsman). A little country like that will usually look to security before prosperity, especially when the history of Montenegro in the 20th century is taken into account. However, it looks as if a majority of citizens feel secure enough, that economic growth can be first on the agenda of the future, rather than a distant second.

I keep reading reports on how bad it is that the United States of America has no counterbalance militarily in the world. I may not be that old, but my memory isn”t that short. See if these ring a bell: Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Somalia, Honduras, Nicaragua, Columbia, Cuba, Etriea, Grenada, and so many others. What do these places have in common? They were the political war zones between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.). Both sides gave monetary and military aide to those that were most aligned with their basic political ideologies, or just opposed to the other country”s allies. The conflicts were bloody and horrible, and far too many people are still reaping the benefits of two world powers. Except for a few die hards (who were given more economic and social benefits than they would have been had they already been there), people didn”t try to escape to the Soviet Bloc. First, they didn”t have to escape. In places like Berlin, it wasn”t the U.S.A., or its allies, who build walls to keep people in. However, innumerable people tried to escape TO the West, and even today, people are still trying to escape from the last Soviet Bloc country, Cuba. The West must be soooooo bad. The number of democracies in the world is increasing. The dictators are getting more heavy-handed, precisely because democracy is growing beyond the boundaries of the West. Democracy is flourishing because there is only one superpower. How does this relate to Montenegro?

Montenegro was one of those Soviet Bloc states that was crushed under a Soviet ally”s heel. Now after a horrible, awful, war, they have taken a step towards a future that will break that last of those ties to the old Soviet Bloc. For those of you who don”t understand, or should I say those who understand less than I, this region has had centuries of conflict. Tiny kingdom fought tiny kingdom, throw in religion for way too much spice, add a dash of totalitarianism, and you have the potential for a large mess. With democracy as the base, rather than aristocracy or shared animosities, this region may be stepping forward into its next great age.

*I had to add this note about China, who may be the single military counterbalance to the United State of America. I am very concerned about their military build-up, yet I believe their build-up is based more on, for the United States of America at least, discouraging the flexing of opposition military muscle, especially in their perceived sphere of influence. Countries in their sphere of influence, however, have a legitimate concern. Taiwan would be target one, then, either Korea or Japan, more based on history than tactical importance. However, in the cases of Korea and Japan, I have a feeling that China would be dealing with a long-lasting guerrilla war. Any conflict between the United State of America and China would be bad, regardless of whether they are like the conflicts between the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., or a full conflict. One country is the single largest economy in the world, the other is a huge trading country on its own, and one of the largest trading partners of the U.S.A.. At this point, in the very long term, I would expect there to be a SinoAmerican joining, similar to the pre-history of Josten A. Wheelen”s “Serenity”. However, who truly knows.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20060529/26/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20060514/25 http://starlyth.info/20060514/25#comments Mon, 15 May 2006 04:54:32 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=25 I am very happy that Haiti seems, for the moment, to be back on the road to democracy. My only concern is that the seemingly typical reaction of very poor countries to nationalize everything to “care for the poor”. It always works in the short term, but rarely (if ever) works in the long time. It”s always easy, however.

I can”t say why this strikes me as so important, at least to me. For whatever reason, I”ve paid some attention to Haiti, and have been concerned many times. As much as it pains me, the USA government”s meddling probably contributed to making the situation worse. The problem is patience.

Whether in Haiti, Iraq, or even here in the States, patience seems to be in very short supply. Everyone want everything fixed now. Forming a consensus is a good thing. Granted, however, there is not always the time for it. I hope the new president of Haiti has a consensus to work with.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20060514/25/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20031108/22 http://starlyth.info/20031108/22#comments Sun, 09 Nov 2003 01:30:10 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=22 I’m sure you’re familiar with the current hullabaloo surrounding the nomination and subsequent installation of Gene Robinson as a “Bishop” in the Episcopal Church, USA. This is my perspective on the matter.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:1

As a supposedly “confessing” church, the ECUSA (and the EC-Canada) is supposed to confess that the Bible is the Word of God. A lot of the “redefining” of the bible that has been going around has been arguing that it is all about cultural and historical context. John 1:1 disagrees. Before cultural and historical context, before humanity, before the animals, before the earth, before the sun or the moon, before anything was the Word. That is pretty profound when you really sit down and think about it. In fact, a lot of arguments surround the bible and it not fitting into the modern world don’t matter when you look at them through the lense of John 1:1.

Part of the problem, I think, is that a lot of those people in the clerical world have a very similar problem to the secular academic world. A kind of Ivory Tower Syndrom, if you will. There are a few, and sadly I believe that Gene Robinson is one of them, that will redefine anything so that they don’t have to confront the real issue. The real issue was first shown in Genesis. Sin. Thinking through the harshness of Levitical law (which the Gentiles are, mercifully, free of), I wonder if its harshness was because, we, fallen humanity, fail to recognize (through conscious or unconscious avoidance) just how truly sinful we are.

There are a lot of people who are stuck on Gene Robinson’s sexual orientation. There are those that are stuck on the fact that he abandoned his marriage vows (and thus his wife and children). To me it’s bigger than that. Gene Robinson and his election to the bishopry are a natural step for the ECUSA (and soon, I’m sure, EC-Canada). It is a failure by the leadership, those that are to watch and care for Jesus’s sheep, to confront sin, and ALL of the discomfort that that confrontation would cause.

A lot of this is about choosing to no longer believe that the bible is the Word of God. However, it is also, frankly, the malaise of a modern society that wants to so desperatly avoid confrontation, that the action of not confronting evolves into an act of tolerating, then acception, then celebrating, then encouraging behavior that is condemned by the bible.

[24 October 2006: This was, originally, going to be a single post, but with the fallout continuing, it will be connected to at least one other entry, but probably more. See also: Ignoring the Sin Won't Lessen the Pain]

]]> http://starlyth.info/20031108/22/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20030608/21 http://starlyth.info/20030608/21#comments Mon, 09 Jun 2003 05:51:53 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=21



---

June 8, 2003




Why America Outpaces Europe (Clue: The God Factor)

By NIALL FERGUSON


XFORD, England — It was almost a century ago that the German sociologist Max Weber published his influential essay “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.” In it, Weber argued that modern capitalism was “born from the spirit of Christian asceticism” in its specifically Protestant form — in other words, there was a link between the self-denying ethos of the Protestant sects and the behavior patterns associated with capitalism, above all hard work.

Many scholars have built careers out of criticizing Weber’s thesis. Yet the experience of Western Europe in the past quarter-century offers an unexpected confirmation of it. To put it bluntly, we are witnessing the decline and fall of the Protestant work ethic in Europe. This represents the stunning triumph of secularization in Western Europe — the simultaneous decline of both Protestantism and its unique work ethic.

Just as Weber’s 1904 visit to the United States convinced him that his thesis was right, anyone visiting New York today would have a similar experience. For in the pious, industrious United States, the Protestant work ethic is alive and well. Its death is a peculiarly European phenomenon — and has grim implications for the future of the European Union on the eve of its eastward expansion, perhaps most economically disastrous for the “new” Europe.

Many economists have missed this vindication of Weber because they are focused on measures of productivity, like output per hour worked. On that basis, the Western European economies have spent most of the past half-century spectacularly catching up with the United States.

But what the productivity numbers don’t reveal is the dramatic divergence over two decades between the amount of time Americans work and the amount of time Western Europeans work. By American standards, Western Europeans are astonishingly idle.

According to a recent study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the average working American spends 1,976 hours a year on the job. The average German works just 1,535 — 22 percent less. The Dutch and Norwegians put in even fewer hours. Even the British do 10 percent less work than their trans-Atlantic cousins. Between 1979 and 1999, the average American working year lengthened by 50 hours, or nearly 3 percent. But the average German working year shrank by 12 percent.

Yet even these figures understate the extent of European idleness, because a larger proportion of Americans work. Between 1973 and 1998 the percentage of the American population in employment rose from 41 percent to 49 percent. But in Germany and France the percentage fell, ending up at 44 and 39 percent. Unemployment rates in most Northern European countries are also markedly higher than in the United States.

Then there are the strikes. Between 1992 and 2001, the Spanish economy lost, on average, 271 days per 1,000 employees as a result of strikes. For Denmark, Italy, Finland, Ireland and France, the figures range between 80 and 120 days, compared with fewer than 50 for the United States.

All this is the real reason that the American economy has surged ahead of its European competitors in the past two decades. It is not about efficiency. It is simply that Americans work more. Europeans take longer holidays and retire earlier; and many more European workers are either unemployed or on strike.

How to explain this sharp divergence? Why have West Europeans opted for shorter working days, weeks, months, years and lives? This is where Weber’s thesis comes up trumps: the countries where the least work is done in Europe turn out to be those that were once predominantly Protestant. While the overwhelmingly Catholic French and Italians work about 15 to 20 percent fewer hours a year than Americans, the more Protestant Germans and Dutch and the wholly Protestant Norwegians work 25 to 30 percent less.

What clinches the Weber thesis is that Northern Europe’s declines in working hours coincide almost exactly with steep declines in religious observance. In the Netherlands, Britain, Germany, Sweden and Denmark, less than 10 percent of the population now attend church at least once a month, a dramatic decline since the 1960′s. (Only in Catholic Italy and Ireland do more than a third of the population go to church on a monthly basis.) In the recent Gallup Millennium Survey of religious attitudes, 49 percent of Danes, 52 percent of Norwegians and 55 percent of Swedes said God did not matter to them. In North America, by comparison, 82 percent of respondents said God was “very important.”

So the decline of work in Northern Europe has occurred more or less simultaneously with the decline of Protestantism. Quod erat demonstrandum indeed!

Weber’s vindication has profound implications for the next year’s enlargement of the European Union, when the Baltic States, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia and the Czech and Slovak Republics will become full European Union members.

A crucial feature of this enlargement, compared with those of the 1970′s and 1980′s, is that the material gap between old and new members is far wider this time. In 1974, the richest old member (Luxembourg) was twice as rich as the poorest new member (Ireland) in terms of per capita gross domestic product. Today, the average Luxembourgeois is more than five times richer than the poorest new member (Lithuania).

The impact of adopting the European Union’s economic and social rules is bound to be far greater for this generation of new Europeans. They should remember what happened in the 1990′s to the East Germans, who initially celebrated their accession to the vastly richer West German Federal Republic, only to discover it meant unemployment for roughly a third of the work force.

This is where productivity statistics matter. Even after more than a decade of free-market reforms, productivity levels in the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary are as low as one third of the French level. What this means is that unless wages in those countries are set at around a third of French levels, their workers will not be able to compete.

East Europeans are currently able to compensate for their low productivity by working longer hours. The average Czech worker does more than 2,000 hours of work a year — a figure steadily rising since the collapse of Communism, even as working hours in Western Europe were declining. Unfortunately, European Union labor legislation will reverse this, to prevent what the West Europeans disingenuously call “social dumping” — the competition from low-wage economies. Czechs will be obliged to work less by a combination of legal entitlements to a shorter working week, longer holidays, higher minimum wages and generous unemployment benefits when their employers go bust because of all this.

The question is how much the Czechs will care about the ensuing enforced leisure. Like nearly all the 10 new members of the European Union, the Czech Republic is a predominantly Catholic country. (The exceptions are Protestant Estonia and Latvia.) But one striking consequence of 40-plus years of socialist rule in Eastern Europe has been a decline of religious belief almost as marked as that in Northern Europe.

According to Gallup, 48 percent of Western Europeans almost never go to church, but the figure for Eastern Europe is just a bit less, at 44 percent. Meanwhile, 64 percent of Czechs regard God as not mattering at all — a higher rate than even in Sweden. In this respect the difference between “old” and “new” Europe may turn out to be less than many Americans now believe. Enlargement of the European Union may simply confirm the eastward spread of the leisure preference in an increasingly work-shy and Godless European continent.

The loser will be the European economy, which will continue to fall behind the United States in terms of its absolute annual output. The winner will be the spirit of secularized sloth, which has finally slain the Protestant work ethic in Europe — and Max Weber, whose famous thesis celebrates its centenary by attaining the status of verity.

Niall Ferguson is a professor of financial history at the Stern School of Business, New York University, and a senior research fellow of Jesus College, Oxford. He is the author of “Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power.”



Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company |
Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top

]]> http://starlyth.info/20030608/21/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20030530/15 http://starlyth.info/20030530/15#comments Sat, 31 May 2003 04:26:42 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=15 The United States of America though young by historical standards, is still one of the oldest democracies (an aside: in truth, we are actually a representative democracy. Read that “Republic”) in the world. I won’t say absolutely the oldest, but it’s close. As a country with such a standing in the annals of history, it is my belief that it is the duty of every citizen of the United States of America to participate in this great republic.

However, participation only goes so far. This country was founded on freedom. This freedom was based upon the fact that freedom is a gift of GOD, not the government. Sadly, in the years since the founding, the citizens’ view of freedom has changed. Once the view was that the government existed to preserve the “unalienable” rights of man (the general term applies here), and the citizens granted certain powers to the government to protect those freedoms. No longer. Now the predominant view seems to be that it is the governement’s perogative to grants freedom to the people. The emphasis has dangerously changed.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20030530/15/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20010627/9 http://starlyth.info/20010627/9#comments Wed, 27 Jun 2001 21:59:36 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=9 “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union.”

–Abraham Lincoln in 1862 on his justification for the Northern War of Aggression against the constitutional secession of the South.

For a different perspective on Abraham Lincoln and the cause of the Civil War, take a minute and read this commentary by economist Walter Williams.

]]> http://starlyth.info/20010627/9/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20010203/8 http://starlyth.info/20010203/8#comments Sat, 03 Feb 2001 22:16:07 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=8 From the “Not Quite Ready for Prime Time” files, here is this week’s “Pierre Salinger Non Compos Mentis” Award for stupid media questions: “Are police worried about vigilantism?” –CBS reporter, Randy Golson, questioning Chattanooga, Tennessee’s police spokesman after a victim of that city’s 45th recent home invasion robbery shot and killed one of the two perpetrators. The police spokesman replied, appropriately, “Protecting your home is not vigilantism. Check the definition.” (And we couldn’t leave this out…. When asked how he felt about shooting the perpetrator, the homeowner responded, “I feel bad. I should have gotten the other one too!”)

Editor’s Note: For some reason, the home invasions in that city came to an abrupt halt….

In other home invasion news, South Carolina Attorney General Charlie Condon released the following statement last week: “As Chief Prosecutor of South Carolina, I am today declaring open season on home invaders. That season is year-round,” Condon said. “Citizens protecting their homes who use force, even deadly force, will be fully safeguarded under the law of this State and subject to no arrest, charge or prosecution. In South Carolina, would-be intruders should now hear this: invade a home and invite a bullet.”

from The Federalist Dated: 02 Feb 2001

]]> http://starlyth.info/20010203/8/feed 0 http://starlyth.info/20010131/7 http://starlyth.info/20010131/7#comments Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:01:25 +0000 Starlyth http://starlyth.info/?p=7 The Amen Corner: Secular fundamentalists howl about Bush’s faith-based initiative.
]]> http://starlyth.info/20010131/7/feed 0