Adams' Daily Apple

Angry With Brett Favre?

2009-08-19T07:54:00.000-04:00

He's done, he's not. He's retired, he's un-retired. He's too old, he'll never be too old. The Vikings want him, nobody wants him. The Brett Favre roller coaster has taken the NFL nation for a ride this off season and fans are understandably annoyed. Tempers seem to have reached a tipping point though with Favre's "surprise" signing with the Vikings yesterday. From what I've seen from the talking heads on TV and fans on-line, people are pissed. Everyone's tired of being jerked around and tired of the old man hogging the spotlight. I understand, really I do. But here's the thing: Brett Favre just signed a contract for $25 MILLION DOLLARS to continue to PLAY FOOTBALL. In other words he's going to be making a ton of money to do the thing that he loves most. Would any one of us do differently? Can we really be angry with him? Not me.

Fixing an Inherent Flaw of Democracy

2009-06-09T13:04:00.002-04:00

Anyone who pays attention to the conservative-right is likely familiar with phrases such as “activist judges” or “legislating from the bench”. The basis for the terms lay in the claim that it is wrong for a judge or judicial body to release a legal decision or opinion that may be contrary to views held by the majority of the American public. The claim is that rulings that are out of line with the public consensus undermine democracy and threaten the Constitution. The misconception that these stances betray is the idea that democracy is somehow perfect. Put simply, these “activist judges” are a necessary component of a good democracy. They keep the majority in check.

I’m pro democracy, don’t get me wrong. Democracy is, without question, the most successful (in terms of human rights and freedoms) form of large scale government. But let’s not kid ourselves. Democracy has its own set of inherent flaws; the one most pertinent to this discussion being: the majority isn’t always right. Nobody doubts this. The majority of Salem, MA wasn’t right when it burned innocent men and women as witches in the late 1600’s. The white majority of the colonists weren’t right when owning black slaves during the founding of this nation. One day people will look back and know that the majority of American’s aren’t right to oppose equal rights for same-sex couples today.

The theory of our democracy is that we elect the best among up to represent us when governing this country. As we all know, these representatives spend the vast majority of their time pandering in order to stay elected. This pandering must involve pleasing the most constituents as possible (the majority). That’s how our democracy works. Politicians, more often than not, won’t do the right thing if it’s not the popular thing. So what’s the solution?

To help with this dilemma we have the appointed judicial; men and women who need not pander in order to maintain employment. This situation is specifically designed to fuel objectivity. The judicial minority can, and should when necessary, overrule the majority in order to right the wrongs of the mob. People as a whole are easily swayed. There are instances where a person or several persons can make a better decision as to how things should be. This isn’t some sort of oligarchial threat. It is a vital and integral part of our wonderful democracy.

Please remember this as we move into selection hearings for the next potential member of the US Supreme Court.

Thank you for reading.

Conservatives and Bestiality

2009-05-19T16:27:00.004-04:00

What is with conservatives and bestiality? Somebody needs to explain this phenomenon to me. You can't go onto even a reputable conservative blog site or "protect family" site (don't even get me started about how pissed I am that conservatives have managed to give the word "family" a negative connotation) without one article or another bringing up bestiality; the prevalent claim being something along the lines of "if you legalize same sex marriage, soon they'll want to legalize bestiality". I really don't get it. How do the two even come close to ending up in the same boat. Gay marriage is about the union of consenting adults who love one another. Bestiality is, well, not consensual on both sides for one. And it's having sex with animals for another!!! For god's sake! They're not even close! Come on people, even though there aren't really any good arguments against gay marriage, you're embarrassing yourselves. Conservatives, lay off the animal love!

Thanks for reading.

The Boy Who Cried Swine Flu?

2009-05-06T08:36:00.001-04:00

I saw this coming. After all the scare tactics, school closures, and hand washing, swine flu turns out to be no big deal. The government had to prepare for the worst and take all necessary precautions; after all, Mexicans were dropping right and left. And of course the media was going to jump all over this. 24-hour news kept the country up to date case by case, warning of impending doom as a nation of hypochondriacs clutched their hand sanitizer in anticipation of the next state to go red on CNN's infection map. None of this was surprising. Neither is it surprising that the swine flu ended up being no bigger deal than the "regular" flu. But what may be surprising are the long term consequences of crying wolf.

Like the towns people in Aesop's fable, will the public believe the Shepard-boy government and media the next time a potential pandemic rolls around? What about the time after that? Pandemics, real honest-to-god, 1/3 of Europe, knit your own death shroud pandemic have happened and will happen again. With the NASCAR pace of microbial evolution, antibiotic resistance, and the continued dependence on industrial animal operations, the next real-deal pandemic might very well look a lot like swine flu. The concern is that each time we go through one of these false alarms, people will become less wary and more complacent.

So how do we solve this problem? I'm not sure. The government has to be careful and the media has to be sensational (apparently). It's up to the public to take common sense precautionary measures and stay alert.

Thanks for reading.

Miss California’s Right to Wrong

2009-04-24T17:42:00.001-04:00

I didn’t watch the Miss USA or Miss America or Damn Aren’t I Pretty Pageant or whatever it was. I didn’t see what happened. In fact, I had to search the web to find out what the Christian/Conservative radio stations were so up in arms over. Turns out Miss California lost what by all accounts was her crown to win by answering that she doesn’t believe in gay marriage. The Conservative Right is furious, saying that she had every right to express her beliefs. For once, I agree.

At Colorado State University, where I went to school, there is a common area next to the student center. Sitting to one side of these commons is an old wooden tree stump that unless you knew better, might look out of place. This is a famous stump; the free speech stump. Stand on this stump and you can say whatever you think needs to be said to your fellow students. Be it silly, motivational, controversial, or flat out wrong, you can’t be interfered with while you’re on the stump; it’s a school rule (for more about the CSU stump, visit http://www.today.colostate.edu/story.aspx?id=703 ). This stump is a material extension of the first amendment. The truth of the matter is that as much as I love that stump, there shouldn’t have to be a stump to stand on in order to assure free speech. I should be able to speak my mind, as should you, as should Miss California.

Of course in sharing her views on gay marriage, Miss California proved herself a bigot. I’m not a fan of these pageants, but I think it goes without saying that openly racist, sexist, or bigoted contestants probably shouldn’t go home with the title. Just because you have the right to free speech doesn’t mean that you won’t then be judged for what you say, especially when you’re standing in front of a panel of judges.

Thanks for reading.

Good Friday to a Non-Christian

2009-04-11T08:18:00.004-04:00

I tend to be a little cynical about some religious holidays. If you're a Christian who thinks Christmas has become shallow and commercial, try it as a non-Christian. So you may wonder how a non-believer feels about Good Friday. If you don't believe in Jesus, it's no big deal, right? First off, not believing in Jesus is like not believing in Columbus or Alexander the Great. Jesus was a historical figure, just like you or I will some day be (we'll probably be slightly less well known). I just don't believe he was the son of God. So is Good Friday meaningless to me? To answer that, let's look at who Jesus really was. From everything I've read, Jesus was a good man who said some good things that did some real good in the world. Good Friday marks the unjust execution of this good man. As such, I mark Good Friday as a solemn day of remembrance for a good man.

Easter is a different story.

3 of 50

2009-04-03T16:28:00.002-04:00

Iowa became the thirst state in the nation (after Massachusetts and Connecticut) to allow same sex marriage after the Iowa supreme court today struck down a law that previously banned it, citing the law as unconstitutional. I can only applaud the Iowa courts and note that this is another step in the right direction. I sincerely hope that justice prevails and the decision is upheld long term. Three down, forty-seven to go!

The Constitutiaonality of God

2009-03-28T08:05:00.003-04:00

"I believe that the Constitution was written by the hand of God". That was the statement that caught my attention when flipping through the AM conservative talk radio channels yesterday. The same individual then went on to say that the reason the United States was in such trouble was that we have moved away from the Constitution, and therefore moved away from God. I have no doubt this same person believes the Bible was authored by God. Based on the two documents, this person either has to drastically change his views of God or admit the two have very different authors.

The US Constitution is a living, fluid document. The original draft wasn't perfect: times change, people change, ideas change. Thankfully the Constitution can be amended to repair any inequalities (the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery or the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote come to mind). If God is perfect, shouldn't it have been perfect the first time?

The Bible, in regards to amendablity, is the polar opposite. The Bible is a stale tome, unchanged for hundreds if not thousands of years. Interpretations have changed because they have been forced to change (stances on the morality of owning slaves, the place of women in society, and the "creation" of life come to mind). The basic reason most Christians believe they should strive to follow the teachings of the Bible is because they have been taught that it is the word of God. Since God is perfect, the Bible has to be perfect; it cannot be amended.

So, either God is perfect and he didn't write the amendable US Constitution or he did write the Constitution and God is imperfect (and therefore the Bible's teachings are questionable).

The constitution is a good document written by good men with good intentions. Personally, I think the same of the Bible.

Thanks for reading.

An Outdated Symbol

2009-03-23T20:35:00.002-04:00

I understand regional pride. I'm from Colorado, home of the "Native" bumper sticker. We're proud of our state and we're always ready to tell anyone who'll listen about how beautiful it is or how great the Rocky Mountains are (and to laugh at anyone from east of the Mississippi who talks about "mountains" in their home state). So I get being proud of where you come from. That's why I don't fault people who are proud of their southern heritage. What I have a problem with, and I know I'm not alone in this, is the southern flag as a symbol of this pride. The southern flag is well known as a controversial symbol with its dual meanings as both a piece of the south's history and as a symbol of slavery and oppression adopted by such groups as the KKK. I now live in the south (although Florida is hardly southern) and I've heard the arguments, "I know it might represent slavery to some people but that's not what it means to me so it should be OK." Sorry, that's not how this works. The swastika wasn't always a Nazi symbol. It dates back to the neolithic period and has been used in buddism and hinduism. A group took that symbol and corrupted it. As sad as it is, we all know what the swastika means to the world today. The southern flag is no different. The south needs a new symbol. I refuse to believe that there's not something else the people of this region can't stand behind. Is the south that devoid of the iconic? We need to decide on a new symbol and leave the southern flag to history.

Papal Hypocrisy and Ignorance

2009-03-20T19:52:00.002-04:00

The hypocrisy and ignorance of the Catholic Church reached new levels this week when on a tour of Africa, Pope Benedict XVI said that condoms "increase the problem" of the spread AIDs. With more than 7,400 new infections of H.I.V. in Africa daily, this blatantly ignorant announcement has given yet another black eye to the Catholic church, an organization supposedly devoted to the sanctity of human life. As the United Nations AIDs agency said, “condoms are an essential part of combination prevention,” adding that the condom is “the single, most efficient, available technology to reduce the sexual transmission of H.I.V. and other sexually transmitted infections.” In stressing abstinence to as they key to combating AIDS, the pope steadfastly clings to the obsolete dogma that has kept the Church stagnant for so long while at the same time proving yet again how out of touch he is with the world today.

Cancer Ethics

2009-03-13T16:54:00.001-04:00

While listening to a report on NPR about one of the recent major mergers involving pharmaceutical companies and bioresearch firms I heard a term that struck me: "Very profitable cancer drugs". It was a casual remark given as a reason one company might want to merge with another. It upset me. Perhaps it was how casually it was said that got to me, I'm not sure. What I am sure about is how morally sketchy it is for a company or an industry to profit from something as horrible as cancer (all of a sudden it sounds like I'm talking about the tobacco industry but that's a whole different can of worms).

Unfortunately there are precious few people, if any at all, whose lives haven't been scarred by cancer. Personally, I've lost several family members and friends to the disease. If you've never dealt with it, it's horrible. I'm not going to get into why it's so terrible (I'm pretty sure everyone already knows).

What I want to discuss is profiting from treating cancer. Of course you want companies to come up with new treatments. And should they discover a new beneficial drug, should they not profit from it? I don't see why not. But how much should they profit? Should any cancer drug be "Very" profitable? Cancer effects so many people all over the world and it's such a horrible condition, shouldn't a drug be sold at minimum profitability in order to make sure it reaches the most people it can? Off the top of my head I want to say yes. Perhaps there should be a cap that is put on pharmaceuticals to regulate how much net profit can be derived from them. It sounds like a possible ethical course to set but there are problems. Why should a pharmaceutical company invest in bettering a cancer drug if there's no chance they can improve the profitability over an existing one? I would like to think money isn't such a driving factor in that kind of research but I think we all know it plays a large role. So perhaps a cap isn't the way to go.

Frankly, I don't know if there is a good answer. I do know it's something we should all consider.

Thank you for reading.

My Online Will

2009-02-19T14:54:00.000-05:00

Today I was thinking about death. I took a few minutes and looked at a few random websites for funeral costs. It sure costs a lot to die. Even if you just want to be cremated, like me. Actually I’d like to give my body to science but I haven’t gotten that arranged yet. The following is for my wife. I think she knows all of it but just in case, now it’s on the internet for posterity sake:

When it happens (death that is), please go with the cheapest services available, especially for the urn. If they’ll let you put me in a shoebox or coffee can, please do that instead. If you’re worried a coffee can isn’t meaningful enough, spray paint it orange and blue and slap a Broncos logo on it. Please don’t put me in a cemetery. I’m not sure if I want a marker anywhere or not so I’ll leave that up to you. If you choose to use a marker, please make it small and inexpensive. Make sure they spell my name right. I would like my ashes spread places that I liked. Potential sites include:
· Bishop Harbor
· Hanging Lake
· The Day Stretch of the Salmon River
· Pawnee National Grasslands
· Mile High Stadium
· The Parent’s House
· Old Town Fort Collins
Pick a few, or all, or some others, and throw a handful of me here and there. If you feel you need to have a memorial service, please don’t have it at a cemetery. Have it at the house. Barbeque chicken and have corn on the cob and coleslaw and beer and banana/wafer pudding. Put out pictures of me and have good music on. Be sure to play that one song. It doesn’t have to be a party but it shouldn’t be a funeral either. You know damn well that’s not what I would have wanted. Give my stuff to charity unless anything has meaning for you or the family (or you think you can get some money for it). Keep my writing and show it to our kids or your kids some day. If I have a book or two finished but not published, take a little time (not too much) and try to get it published. Get married again. If there is an afterlife I will be super-pissed off if you join me there too soon just because you miss me. Stay and live. Be happy. Nothing matters more to me, in this live or the next, than your happiness. As long as you know that, I’m good, wherever I am.

Tennis Question

2009-02-10T17:43:00.002-05:00

I don't know how many of you out there play tennis but for those of you who do, I have a question.

Here's the scenario: let's say for the sake of this exercise that you're Andy Roddick. Or I suppose you can be Serena Williams if you're a woman...or even if you're not, I'm not here to judge anyone...plus she's got a better serve that half the guys on the circuit. Anyway, you're a famous pro-tennis player who's known for having a wallop of a serve. You're playing on hard court and you're in the "serving zone". Your first serve percentage is about 80%, aces are coming right and left, and the camera guys are having a hard time focusing in on the ball it's moving so fast. Your opponent, fearing for his or her life and/or professional career, is about 6 feet behind the baseline. My question is why, every once in a while, don't you take about 100 mph off your serve and drop a lame duck that barely makes it over the net? In other words, why doesn't tennis have a change-up?

Some of the best pitchers in baseball (Pedro Martinez comes to mind) make a career out of the combination of an accurate fastball and a wicked dirty change-up. So why doesn't tennis have one? It sure as hell has a curve ball. I've played tennis with a few people way better than me (actually just about everyone I've ever played is way better than me) and I've been juked out of my shorts by serves that start out looking like their coming to my right only to curve back and hit to my left.

I think it's machismo. Tennis players don't throw in the occasional change-up for fear of looking cheap. It's much more macho to keep pounding the ball as hard as you can. Plus, the average tennis player grew up as a skinny little rich kid who's mom didn't want them to play a real sport like football out of fear that they'd break a finger and never become a famous surgeon. They have built up insecurities that hitting the ball real hard takes the edge off of. (Don't get too riled up. As I've already said, I play tennis....poorly)

Next time you're on the court, try a change-up. If nothing else it should really piss off your opponent.

Thanks for reading.

A Little Marriage Math

2009-02-04T19:43:00.005-05:00

Time for a little math. If you're like me, you may be a little rusty (translation: can't make change for a dollar). So first let's review a couple concepts.

Concept one:
According to Encarta (and middle school algebra teachers the world over), the transitive property is "a mathematical relation such that if the relation holds between a and b and between b and c, then it also exists between a and c". Written in an equation, it is usually expressed as:

If a = b and b = c, then a = c

another example:

if a + b = c and a = x, then x + b = c

Principle two:
This may sound more like social science but trust me, it all ties together. Men and women are equals. For the purpose of this exercise we will ignore the glass ceiling and wage discrepancies still prevalent in corporate America today. So unless your a sexist bastard (which I'm sure you're not) we will just leave the ranking of the genders as: a man is equal to a woman; a woman is equal to a man.

All right, we've made it to our exercise. According to the bumper stickers I keep seeing plastered hap-hazardly in between NRA, southern flag, and #24 stickers on the back of rusted out old pickup trucks:

man + woman = marriage.

This is a true statement. A man and a woman can get married. I have no problem with this, in fact I'm married to a woman myself. Of course, as we learned above men and women are equals.

Man = Woman.

So using the transitive property also described above:

If Man + Woman = Marriage and Man = Woman, then Woman + Woman = Marriage and
Man + Man = Marriage

Seems pretty simple to me.

A Little Perspective on History

2009-01-31T09:54:00.004-05:00

I try to talk with my Grandpa once every week or two. He's a great one to converse with, very thoughtful and willing to share his ideas about many different things. The last time I spoke with him I asked him a question I had been wondering of his generation: "What was more amazing for you to witness, a human walking on the moon or a black man being sworn in as President of the United States of America?" He took surprisingly little time to think before answering. His answer was the later, seeing a black man take the Oath of Office. I asked him why. He took a little time to tell me about how things were when he was a kid growing up in Iowa more than half a century ago. I won't go into details but needless to say things have changed a great deal in his lifetime. Paraphrasing, my 84 year old grandfather and retired engineer basically said that he has always had a good deal more faith in the ability of technology to change and adapt than in peoples ability to do the same. A man on the moon was inevitable. A black man in the White house, that took some real work.

Thank you for reading.

Book Review: The Death of Vishnu: A Novel, by Manil Suri

2009-01-22T15:11:00.004-05:00

The book is centered on a small group of people, one of which, a drunkard named Vishnu, is dying. Weaving its way in and out of the lives of those that live, love, and dye within it, the story takes place almost exclusively in a single apartment building in Mumbai, India. It's a book that lacks a variety of settings, or even a defined plot for that matter. What it does have are snapshots. Snapshots of each character that give you a brief glimpse into their present; and with each snapshot a caption in the form of memories from the past that give the stories and characters feeling, depth, and meaning. As the reader you are shown the paths the characters have walked and then are allowed to briefly walk beside them. As you do you can see the path ahead split into all the different, interweaving tracks each character could take. Good stories, after all, are about character development. But in this good story, these good stories, the characters stay on their respective paths, not for a lack of story, but because that's what people do. You think that because the headstrong young woman gets a taste of the real world, perhaps she will shed some of her naivety. You hope that since they have let a man die on their doorsteps, the neighbors might abandon their pettiness. As you read you try to will the characters to a different, higher path; but that's not how life works. And that's what this book is, a book about life, snapshots about life, capturing only a few moments in time. But like the Hindu mythology that permeates the lives of the characters, their stories don't end just because the book does. The various story lines, all woven together, don't tie off neatly in the end. Rather than leaving you feeling empty and frustrated, like some books which a lack a clear resolution do, you accept that there is no end. As in reincarnation, the end only represents a link in the infinite chain of creation. So it is with this book.

Now That Bush is Gone: Something to Remember

2009-01-22T13:36:00.003-05:00

There's been a lot of talk lately celebrating the departure of the Bush administration from Washington. I certainly can't blame anyone for rejoicing over the end of the worst eight years of politics this country has seen in a generation, possibly ever, but I think that the American people have forgotten something important: it's our fault. We elected Bush into power. Perhaps we can be forgiven for 2000 when we didn't know any better (although it was really more the republican senate that put Bush into power then) but by 2004 we knew who this man and his administration were, what they were about. But we still reelected him. And then we let him stay. After all the bad decisions, the deceit, the corruption, we let him stay in office. We didn't have to. This is a democracy! We could have removed him; based on his approval ratings it probably would have been easy. But we didn't. So just like every American, no matter the political affiliation, should rejoice a little (or a lot) for the election of President Obama, we should feel a modicum of shame over letting Bush lead us down the wrong path for so long.

Thank you for reading.

I KNOW HOW TO FIX THE ECONOMY!!!

2009-01-18T08:23:00.003-05:00

I know how to fix the economy. The congress is negotiating in an attempt to decide the best use for the nearly $900 billion economic stimulus package. Nobody seems to know what to do; except me. Ready?

Ok, there are roughly 110 million households in the United States. If you divide up the proposed $900 billion, that equates to roughly $8500 per household. Now, instead of giving each household that money in tax breaks or cash, give each household an $8500 solar makeover (this is more than enough; one 220 watt solar panel costs around $1800). In that single action, you've created thousands of jobs dedicated to the production of solar panels, the improvement of solar technology, the construction of solar panel plants, the production of materials for solar panels and plants, etc.

But it doesn't stop there. Now that every household in the country has a reliable source of clean energy, we ELIMINATE our dependence on foreign oil. No dependence of foreign oil means we don't have to continue to involve ourselves in all the little middle-east wars that keep popping up. Given that we spend $200-$400 billion a year on foreign oil and over $100 billion a year on Iraq and Afghanistan, we could save enough to wipe out our national deficit in 2-3 years (as in no national dept, balance of $0). After we wipe out the deficit, those billions of dollars could go directly into schools, health care, infrastructure, and in short, everything this country needs.

And we're not done yet! Now that every household in the country has a reliable source of clean, CHEAP electricity, everyone wants an electric car. So that solves Detroit's problems. They will drastically shift focus and move to production of electric cars and the automobile industry in the US is saved (by capitalism no less). All the electric cars on the roads means that the US cuts its carbon footprint and pollution emissions down to pre-industrial revolution levels. The trees and birds rejoice.

So there you have it. In one move, using the $900 billion bailout to retrofit every American household with solar power, we not only save the economy but usher in a new era of American economic dominance and environmental responsibility.

So let's get started.

Thank you for reading.

Utah For Co-National Champions!!!

2009-01-02T23:33:00.003-05:00

The BCS Championship Game isn't until January 8th so at this point we don't know weather Florida or Oklahoma will be crowned National Champion. What we do know is that the University of Utah has gone a perfect undefeated 13-0 (the only team in the nation to do so), won the Sugar Bowl, and defeated Alabama by 14 points (3 more points than Florida was able to beat them by). I'm not so foolish to claim that Utah deserves to be THE National Champs but I think serious consideration needs to be given for awarding them a Co-National Championship, regardless of result the BCS Championship Game.

How to Keep Your Job!

2008-12-17T21:01:00.001-05:00

With the daily economic news bad enough to make you consider stocking up on caned food and ammunition, everyone’s wondering what action to take. On the national level, bailout’s the word. Throw in some slashed interest rates and grand talk about public infrastructure projects and that pretty much sums up Washington’s strategy for weathering the storm. But what about the average American who just wants to make their mortgage payments and keep their family fed. For most of us this hinges on keeping our job. But in today’s business climate, just staying employed can prove a challenge.

When this all started a lot of companies saw this as an opportunity to “trim the fat”, i.e. get rid of those employees that they had been looking for an excuse to fire anyway. That was the first round of layoffs. The next round consisted of admin, IT, and HR people. After that there may have been another round that consisted of those business units particularly hard hit by the downturn (for example, in engineering firms house inspectors, even good ones, often got the ax). During these first few rounds I could rely on the basics to keep my job: working hard, making myself marketable, and not screwing up. Now we’re out of fat and into the muscle. People who are good at their jobs, valuable members of the business, are packing their personal belongings into cardboard boxes. This leads to a big question: What can I do to keep my job?

There are a number of strategies. Some people put on a permanent pucker face and devote considerable time and energy towards kissing ass. I think the logic here may go along the lines of “If they like me, they won’t fire me.” This is wishful thinking at best. In times like this it’s all about the bottom line, not bottom kissing. Such a strategy might even backfire when it leads management to question sincerity and/or use of time. Some people try and sabotage their coworkers. Rather than running their own race they play Nancy Kerrigan and try to take out the competition at the knees. They lay blame, point out flaws, or even invent problems with their coworkers. Personally, I don’t play that game. For one, it’s just wrong. Secondly, the problem with pointing fingers at every mistake is that you have to be mistake free not to have them pointed right back. Plus, I would like to think that most managers can see through such subversive tactics.

The strategy I recommend is the Grizzly Bear Strategy. When in a group that’s being chased by a grizzly bear, you don’t have to outrun the bear, just the other members of the group. This translates into being at least a little better at what you do than those around you. Let’s go back to the basics I mentioned earlier: “working hard, making your self marketable, and not screwing up”. The grizzly bear strategy means that you need to find that member of your heard that is the weakest and therefore the most likely to be culled the next time the bear attacks. You then have to make sure that you work harder, are more marketable, and screw up less than that person. To give yourself a little breathing room, you may want to pick a couple of people to stay ahead of. Throw in the occasional bit of ass kissing and finger pointing (moderation here people) and just maybe you can keep your job. At least until the next round of layoffs anyway.

Thanks for reading.

The Religious Argument For Gay Marriage

2008-12-14T08:37:00.002-05:00

The cover story of this months Newsweek is a wonderfully well written argument summarizing the religious grounds for gay marriage. I invite you to read Lisa Miller's article at the following link:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/172653/page/1

Please have a look.

Atheist Signs On Display

2008-12-05T18:35:00.002-05:00

I would just like to take the opportunity to thank the Freedom From Religion Foundation (http://www.ffrf.org/) and the American Humanist Association (http://www.americanhumanist.org/) for enduring the lawlessness and pubic scorn that they have been subject to because of the signs and adds they have made public. As a non-believer there are days, especially this time of year, when I feel like I've been beaten with a sack of bibles by the time my head hits the pillow at night. It's nice to know there are others like me, around the country, who can live happily without wasting time and money on an invisible man in the clouds. And to those in Washington who stole the placard (upper left), you may want to brush up on your 8th commandment.

Thanks for reading.

Monster Semantics

2008-11-27T08:34:00.002-05:00

According to ancient Greek mythology a ferocious three-headed dog named Cerberus guarded the gates of the underworld and kept the dead from rejoining the living.

I’ve got issues with that.

Not with the concept; an awesome monster-dog at the gates is much more entertaining than an old bouncer that looks like Santa in a bath robe checking names against the naughty/nice list to see who can get into heaven. Mine is an issue with semantics.

I have a friend who’s expecting (or more accurately his girlfriend is expecting) and he thinks that based on the size of her belly that they will be having twins. Let’s say he’s right and in 7 months she gives birth to two normal healthy twins. Wonderful! As my wife and I have always wanted two kids, I for one have always thought that having twins on the first go would be great; get it all over at once. Plus I could get my tubes tied while she’s giving birth (to save gas).

Now, let’s say that by some crazy chance (1 in about 125,000 births according to Wikipedia) she gives birth to conjoined twins. Don’t freak out, I’m not jinxing my friend’s girlfriend’s pregnancy. I threw salt over my shoulder as I wrote it.

In this unlikely event, two babies would still be the end result, they might just be linked at the hip or back or whatever. My point is that conjoined twins are still two individuals; you would never say that they were one individual with two heads.

So why was Cerberus a three-headed dog? If each head is an individual, wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that he (or she?) was a one-bodied pack of dogs? The same would go for any of the multi-individual single-bodied monsters that riddle mythologies, fairy tales, and B-horror movies.

Regardless of what fiction they reside in, these are fearsome beasts! Let’s give them the respect they deserve and use proper mythological nomenclature when discussing them.

Thanks for reading.

Astronaut Drops Tools

2008-11-20T06:47:00.002-05:00

Question: What is the moral of this story?

Answer: Don't give women tools. ;0)

The Conservative Cycle

2008-11-16T17:38:00.001-05:00

The conservatism of today is the liberalism of yesterday. Eventually the antiquated ideas that the right hold so dear drift away with progress. Those that are too old or slow witted to progress need comfort in this new big, fast, scary world. They drift to those like minded individuals who are likewise clinging to their old, out of touch, but ultimately comfortable views. And the conservative cycle is starts anew.

I don't blame conservatives for attacking liberals. Who knows, someday when I'm old and fading the ideas of the future will probably confuse and scare me too. Maybe then, I'll end up being a conservative.

I hope not.

Symbol of Sacrafice

2008-11-11T17:39:00.003-05:00

America is a country passionate about symbolism. There are times when the symbols gets out of had; when they loose their meaning. On this Veterans Day, I invite you to consider a symbol of sacrifice, not only for those who have laid down their lives for this country but for those left behind. This symbol is an event: a car pulls up to a house, two military officers get out. At this point you already know what this event is. That's the power of symbolism. You know that car and those officers mean that someone is not coming home. That most likely there is a young woman in that house that will never again see her husband. That there will be a beautiful and stoic ceremony with a folded flag and a 21-gun salute. I wonder, when considering that car and those officers, who has given more for their country, the soldier or the widow. Regardless, to both of them I give my deepest thanks and my sincerest condolences.

Thank you for reading.

Dirty Mind

2008-11-10T19:20:00.002-05:00

Am I the only person in this country so immature that they crack up every time someone on NPR says, "Massive Stimulus Package"?

The Election Is Over: Now What?

2008-11-05T07:09:00.003-05:00

After two years of campaigning, debates, mud-slinging, gaffs, and stump speeches, the 2008 Presidential Election is finally over. There was a huge emotional and intellectual build up to election day but now that it has passed, many Americans may be left asking: What next?

What's next is that now that the die have been cast, our votes have been counted and our voices heard, we are all back in the same boat. Now it doesn't matter who you voted for. That's over. The power we had to choose our elected officials has now been passed on to those we voted for, for better or worse. All we can do is hope that our collective trust has been placed in the right individuals, that our communities and our nation will be better for it. I know that today some of us have more hope than others, after such a hard fought election there is certain to be some hard feelings. But I encourage you, America, to rally behind our new elected officials at every level regardless of party. America is in hard times and if there is one thing I've learned in my life, it's that hope can get you through.

Thank you for reading.

Football is the National Sport

2008-11-03T18:30:00.002-05:00

If you need any more evidence of this I present to you the two following facts:

1. The start of game 6 of the MLB World Series was delayed by a major television network for an infomercial presented by presidential candidate Barack Obama.

2. During tonight's Monday Night Football game, a major television network will squeeze both presidential candidates into for a brief interview at half time. The game will not be delayed.

Football is more important than baseball.

Tampa Bay Rays, We're Proud of You!

2008-10-30T07:03:00.003-04:00

Dear Rays,

No child, cheap glove in hand, the smell of grass, dirt, and leather in their nostrils, dreams of going to the World Series and coming up short. This is America; we don't do second place. But on behalf of a grateful sports nation, I would like to thank you, the Tampa Bay Rays, for what you did this year. It was not only entertaining, it was good for baseball. A World Series run not by the team with the most veteran big name individuals but by a talented young group that played as a team. This country is in hard times and we needed to latch on to a team with a payroll that would make a Yankees fan chuckle. A team who showed us it is possible to turn things around; to go from worst to first. And we did latch on. I haven't watched that much baseball since I was a little kid. You had one hell of a season, and you gave us something to cheer about.

I would also like to congratulate the Philadelphia Phillies. If it hadn't been for the Ray's, the Phillies would have been the story of the year. One of the worst teams in all of sports playing in one of the toughest sports cities in the world, the Phillies got it done.

Finally, I would like to ask baseball to set up some sort of charity drive involving the officiating crew from this years World Series. If that crew was mandated that they had to raise $1000 for every bad call they made, I think they could do some charity a whole lot of good (hell, maybe they could wipe out the national debt).

Thanks again Rays, you've earned a fan. See you next season.

Thank you for reading.

Quote of the Day

2008-10-24T07:59:00.002-04:00

God, how we get our fingers in each other's clay. That's friendship, each playing the potter to see what shapes we can make of the other.

-Ray Bradbury, Something Wicked This Way Comes

It's Hard to Be a Broncos Fan

2008-10-21T07:02:00.005-04:00

I have been a Denver Broncos fan all my life. Some of my earliest memories are of watching the Broncos with my family, nachos in hand. Given the nature of the home town team of my youth, this also means that a good portion of those early memories are of watching the Broncos loose. I point this out to illustrate that I'm no band wagon Bronco fan, suddenly bleeding orange and blue only after their two Super Bowl wins. I've been through hard times in Mile High. But this year’s different.

The teams I grew up with, who lost, sometimes often, tried really hard. The Denver Broncos almost never lost through lack of effort or outright stupidity. They just weren't very good. Or they were good but they weren't consistent. Or whatever. These Denver Broncos, the Broncos I watched humiliate themselves on national television last night against the Patriots, they are good. There is so much talent on this team. But they are playing like a bunch of idiots.

Three things are keeping the Broncos from performing up to the vast potential that they have. The first is injuries which of course is not their fault. This team is beat up. Second, and most definitely in their control, is turnovers. I've never seen a team cough up the ball like these guys. And the third reason is general stupidity on the field. Penalty after penalty after penalty. Lack of execution. Lack of field awareness. And the tackling! The Broncos defenders make contact (sometimes), wrap their arms (sometimes), and drop immediately to their knees (always). That's not how you tackle in little league, let alone the NFL!

I still love the Broncos. I still think they can turn this season around and win the Super Bowl. But I also realize that this could be a very long, very frustrating season.

Oh well, at least I'm not a Raiders fan.

Crazy Dangerous Christian Voters Compare Obama to Hitler!

2008-10-09T16:06:00.004-04:00

While driving home after taking the dog to the vet, I was flipping through the lower end of the FM dial as I sometimes do. I stopped on a program called Cross Talk on VCY America. I did this for two reasons. The first is that I enjoy listening to some of the crazier Christian talk radio. It's gets me riled up and gives me something to bitch/blog about. The second reason was that just as I turned to the station the host of Cross talk announced they would be transitioning into their next regular feature, a section of the show known as "Soap Box" where listeners are able to call in and give their two cents. Even though I listen to some of the ultra conservative Christian fundamentalist wackos on the radio, I always try to keep in mind that they probably don't speak for a very large group of people (that's what I want to believe anyway). So I wanted to hear what some real people had to say.

I heard a total of 5 callers. All of them were obviously very conservative leaning and avowed that they would be voting for John McCain, no surprise there. All of them bashed Obama, also no surprise. One woman vowed that if Senator Obama won the election that all Christan rights would be taken away and that merely speaking the name of Jesus would be outlawed. Ok, that will raise an eyebrow but I wasn't shocked.

That is until 2 of the 5 callers compared Obama to Hitler. WHAT!?!?! I'll say it again: 2 of the 5 callers on the Cross Talk Christian radio program compared Senator Barack Obama to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. One them, a woman with a southern accent, said that at 67 years of age, she was old enough to remember Hitler (who died when she was 4 for those of you keeping track) and that Senator Obama is just as dangerous a man as he was. These weren't Christian shock-jocks just making crazy religious claims to bring in ratings (as some are known to do), these were real people! They were serious, dead serious.

I really can't convey how shaken I am. These people have gone beyond simple ignorance and moved on to dangerous insanity. How can someone truly compare the young Senator from Illinois to the mastermind of the holocaust? And believe every word of it?!?!

I'm sorry, I don't know what else to say.

Thank you for reading.

God's Morality

2008-10-04T08:42:00.004-04:00

There is a moral battle being fought in this country today. At the forefront of this battle are the fundamentalist Christian groups trying vehemently to force religious doctrine on the rest of the country. The claim is that the Bible is the literal word of God, divinely inspired and therefore unquestionable. Another claim is that morality is purely God's territory. In this line of reasoning, since morally is determined by God and the Bible is the word of God, the Bible is the ultimate source for morality.

Let's look at the first claim, the divinity of the Bible. It is historic fact that the Bible is a compilation of a many different texts by numerous authors over the course of hundreds, if not thousands of years. The Church (most notably the Roman Catholic Church) has chosen which of the ancient religious writings have made it into the Bible and which haven't (the Church freely admits this). Over the course of time the accepted original texts have been translated and interpreted such that no two versions of the Bible are exactly the same.

This all in mind, lets play along for a moment and assume that the Bible is truly divine and therefore the perfect and literal presentation of the word and will of God. That would require accepting that each of the many authors of the Bible's texts was possessed by the Holy Spirit or divinely inspired. Ok. That would mean that the always politically and socially active Church laid those influences aside on numerous occasions while being divinely inspired to chose the correct writings to make up the Bible. Ok. That would assume that one of the translations/interpretations of the Bible out there is the true word of God and that hopefully the others are close enough. Ok.

So we have played along and we now "agree" that the Bible is the literal word of God. Now, which parts do we follow? If it's all truly God's will, then shouldn't we follow it all? That means that in addition to not eating fat (Leviticus 7:23) and making sure that men's beards have square corners (Leviticus 19:27), we need to do a better job of making sure women who have given birth don't enter a church until 42 days afterward (Leviticus 12:4-5). On a more sombre note, we will need to round up anyone that works on Sundays (the Sabbath) and any execute them (Exodus 31:15) along with any priests daughter's that aren't behaving themselves (they must be burned alive by the way) (Leviticus 21:9). Then there's the stuff that contradicts the other stuff. Unlike most Christians, I've read the Bible cover to cover and believe me, it gets confusing if not down right imposable (not to mention weird).

I point out the absurd passages (and there are plenty more where those came from) to illustrate that the Bible is not perfect. It has some strange, and arguably in some cases dangerous rules. It has contradictory information. It is flawed. And that means that the authors of the Bible where imperfect. Unless I have grossly misunderstood Christianity, it has no room for an imperfect God. The Bible was written by men. There is some good stuff in there; stuff about forgiveness, generosity, compassion and the other things that make humanity wonderful. But to assume that everything from the Bible should be believed and followed (especially in a literal since) is foolish.

I'll write next time about why God is not the source of morality.

Thank you for reading.

The Bailout Bailout

2008-09-29T17:55:00.003-04:00

As everyone knows by now, the $700 billion bailout bill failed to pass the House today. And as soon as it failed the finger pointing started. Rep. John Boehner has laid the blame on a speech made by Dem. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi prior to the vote saying that it turned a key group of Republican House members.

I am not a fan of Nancy Pelosi. I pretty much think she's a worthless partisan-bitch (and I tend to vote Dem!). But I very much doubt that she was able to sway these few Republicans with her ill timed and unnecessarily blame ridden speech. She just doesn't have that much sway, period. Much more likely is that Boehner just didn't have the Republican votes he had promised and is looking for someone to blame. On the off chance that Pelosi did sway these Republicans by hurting their feelings with her speech...then shame on them. This is far too important a decision to let Pelosi change your mind just because she doesn't play nice. For God's sake people.

I would also like to say that despite the 778 point drop in the DOW, it might be a good thing this bailout didn't pass. I heard the phrase, "It's not a slam dunk" so many times today it's lost all meaning. The consensus seams to be, "It's not a good bill but it's all we can come up with in this short of notice.". That is scary as hell. Maybe we should take a little more time to listen to some alternatives, listen to some experts, and put together a bill that the Congress can feel at least a little enthusiasm for.

Because if we mess this up...we are screwed.

I'm Not Your Friend, This is Buisness.

2008-09-21T09:10:00.003-04:00

I was watching a little SEC football last night (mainly because that's all they show down here). During the commercial break I was subjected to yet another advertisement in which the business claims that they want to be my neighbor and friend. This isn't a new marketing strategy by any means. Nor is it limited to the consumer industry (I am referring to the every-man buddy-buddy campaigning being carried out by both campaigns).

Here's the thing: I don't care if your my friend...this is business. Now don't get me wrong, I don't particularly want to do business with a company full of people that I hate or hate me. That's no good. But this is America! I'm not going to choose a bank or a grocery store, or a president based on how friendly their people are. I will base my choice on price, convenience, and who will do the best job for me. Friendliness only factors in to the point of good customer service. I don't want to be cursed out when I ask where they keep the dog-toothbrushes. But at the same time I don't need a hug when I walk in the door either.

So businesses/candidates, we're all friendly enough now; it's time to tell us why we, the consumer, should choose you. What is it about the product/service that you offer that will entice me to accept you as my banker? What exactly are your plans for improving the economy if you become president? Convince me using the merits of your business. And if all your business has is friendliness, I guess you'll have to use that. The thing is, if you try to sell your business on friendliness alone, I will assume that IS all you have. And that's probably not going to do it for me.

Fantastic Satire and Great Dialog!

2008-09-16T19:40:00.003-04:00

Don't Respect Palin Because...

2008-09-04T17:21:00.003-04:00

Over the course of the last few days I have heard several remarks within the press amounting to the claim that the Obama campaign, the talking heads on the news channels, and the public should treat Governor Palin and her candidacy with more respect because she is a woman.

No.

Giving respect to an individual because of their gender is almost as bad as withholding respect based on gender. Respect should be determined by character and achievement. No respect should be endowed or withheld from Governor Palin because she is a woman. Weather you choose to respect her for who she is, that's up to you.

This Country Was Founded Upon...

2008-08-30T13:49:00.003-04:00

"This country was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles."

It's an election year and since I listen to talk radio, I hear this statement daily. The claim being that since the country was founded on these principles, that today's citizens should be governed using current (because really, the "Judeo" is just included as a formality) Christian ideologies. I have a couple problems with this.

1. Principles are a lot different that doctrine. This country wasn't founded upon biblical literalism. The founding fathers were, for the most part, Christian. This influenced their world-view (the way they approached the world). As such, they picked some of the better parts of Christianity (equality and forgiveness come to mind) to, in part, base the founding of this country upon. They did not slap a Bible on the table and say, "We'll just do what this says." They did not build this nation's laws on pieces of scripture. There is, in fact, substantive evidence that most of the patriots wanted very much to keep religion, Christianity included, out of government.

2. Ok, say the country was indeed founded on Judeo-Christian principles. SO WHAT? This country was also built on slavery. This country was also founded upon the subjugation of women. This country was also founded upon the displacement and murder of it's native peoples. The founding fathers were not infallible. There were mistakes made. Most of the original rights that came out of the Constitution/Bill of Rights were intended, at the time, for white male landowners. This country is trying to move forward. Why play by outdated rules?

Thank you for reading.

Poem: That Vase

2008-08-23T13:30:00.001-04:00

That vase
That beautiful old vase
My mother’s one nice thing
I see my life in that vase
I broke as a child
Tried desperately to glue back together
To mend the cracks
I do the same now
Trying to mend the cracks in me
In my beautiful life
It can stay beautiful if I mend it quickly enough
As new cracks appear
Some days the cracks show more than others
Some days I can’t keep up
But I keep mending
As I did the vase
Hoping that those who look
Won’t notice the cracks
As a child hopes
His mother won’t either

Poem: Hope Thins

2008-08-22T20:24:00.001-04:00

This is one of mine:

At times the hope thins
No longer buoyant
Supportive
It swirls in vapors
You grasp at it
Falling
It's all you have left
Reaching out for any wisp of it
Shadow of it
For it is strong
And if you could but catch just a little bit of it
The smallest bit
It could support your weight
And the weight upon you
For it is strong
Hope
You could climb back up
And out
If you could catch it

2008-08-21T13:04:00.001-04:00

"Dear God," she prayed, "let me be something every minute of every hour of my life. Let me be gay; let me be sad. Let me be cold; let me be warm. Let me be hungry...have too much to eat. Let me be ragged or well dressed. Let me be sincere-be deceitful. Let me be truthful; let me be a liar. Let me be honorable and let me sin. Only let me be something ever blessed minute. And when I sleep, let me dream all the time so that not one little piece of living is ever lost."

-Frances Nolan
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn
by Betty Smith

The Future of Energy: Plug In To Asphalt!

2008-08-19T18:06:00.005-04:00

Do you know why we haven't yet developed all kinds of alternative energy? One word, motivation. There hasn't been enough market based motivation driving the invention and implementation of new energy technology. But with record high energy prices and increased environmental awareness, that is now changing.

Nothing highlights this better than the work of a research team out of the Worcester Polytechnic Institute (http://www.wpi.edu/). In one of those "slap yourself for not coming up with it first" type of ideas, they are trying to find the best way to use the heat that asphalt absorbs from the sun to create energy. Think about it, everyone that walks across a parking lot in July knows how hot asphalt gets. These researchers want to use that heat, either directly (like to heat buildings) or indirectly (like to turn turbines and create electricity) to power the future.

Think of the potential! Your business could be powered by its parking lot! Rural towns could get their power from the roads that lead to them. And there is always more asphalt being installed or replaced so this technology could be introduced tomorrow if it was ready (and it sounds like they're getting closer every day). No tall ugly wind turbines. No need for acres and acres of solar panels. Just plug your electric car into the parking lot!

For more information on this potentially revolutionary discovery, please go to http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080812135702.htm.

Thank you for reading.

Scared to Death of Dying

2008-08-13T19:51:00.003-04:00

I don't want to die. I doubt that will strike anyone reading this as particularly odd so let me explain why that is significant. I am really scared of dying but that hasn't always been the case. For most of my life I have been fairly indifferent towards death. I should make it clear, that is very different than being indifferent toward life. I've always loved life. I love my family and friends, and I love experiencing existence. But I've always had a rather fatalist attitude toward death. Sort of a "If it comes, I probably don't have any say in it so I guess I'm ready." type of attitude. Things are different now, I'm not ready at all.

I think one of the main things that has spurred this change is my change in thought toward the afterlife. One of the main purposes of religion, any religion, is to answer a very big question: "What happens to me when I die?" Being in the west, I was raised Christian and grew up believing that if I was good I would go to heaven or if I was bad I would go to hell. This is a brief and very simplified summary of what the majority of people in this country think. I used to think the important thing was where I went, now I believe the important thing is if I go anywhere at all.

In the heaven/hell scenario, you go somewhere when you die. Your soul or spirit or whatever lives on after your corporeal form ceases to function. Part of you lives on (hopefully with clouds and harps as opposed to fire and brimstone). But take the belief in an afterlife away. Now you don't go anywhere. That's where I am. I very much hope that there is something more after this life, but I also very much doubt it.

In some ways I think that not believing in the afterlife is the best thing a person can do. Religion and the belief in an afterlife placates people. They don't concentrate on their own existence as much as they should. They waste time in ritual trying to secure their place in the here-after. I find my own mortality to be extremely motivating. I only have this one shot. There's nothing after this, no harps, no flames, just lights out. So I know that I have make the absolute best use of my time here. I'm not saying that I always do, but I at least have that knowledge.

There's something else that not believing in the afterlife does for me. It makes me very much want to contribute something to the world. It makes me want to leave something behind that future generations will remember me by. I want to have kids to leave a genetic legacy. I want to write books or paint paintings to leave an intellectual legacy. I want to help people and volunteer to leave a humanitarian legacy.

I also don't have to follow the rules as much as believers. If the leader of your church tells you to hate gays or you'll go to hell for eternity, even if you don't agree that gays should be scorned, you may give in to avoid eternal damnation. If someone tells me, a nonbeliever, to hate gays or I'll go to hell I say, "There probably isn't a hell but if there is, you're going there you hateful prick." or something like that and I don't fear god's wrath.

You may have noticed I said "probably". One of the things that really frustrates me is those people who are sure, absolutely sure, that there is or isn't a God or heaven or hell or whatever. I very much doubt there is but I'm more than open to some proof that I'm wrong. In fact, I would welcome it.

I would welcome it because I am scared. Religion answers the big question in, for me, an unsatisfactory way. But it still answers it. It comforts people. My grandmother died not too long ago and I tried so hard to put away my doubt and just believe that she was in a better place, but I couldn't. And that hurt.

Lastly, but possibly most importantly, I am married to a wonderful woman that I really don't want to leave behind. If I die, I want her to be sad for a while, and then to get better and find love and be happy. But I would much prefer that we both live long happy lives together until we die of old age at the exact same moment.

So here I am with one life to live. I'm scared of death but that fear motivates me to live life. I have a good life. I hope you do to and I encourage you to focus less on the afterlife that may not come and focus on where you are now, even if it is a little scary.

A Manly Handshake

2008-08-11T12:58:00.001-04:00

Males have it rough. It’s true that we can pee wherever we want and that we don’t have to endure the pain of childbirth, but we still have some biological issues. I invite you to take a mental journey through the animal kingdom. Aside from spectacular mass migrations and gruesome predatory kills, nothing draws more attention in nature than males being male. I’m talking about courtship displays, territorial battles, and the establishment of dominance.

Think about two majestic big horn sheep bashing skulls to determine the right to the female harem. Reflect on the sheer beauty of a male peacock’s plumage. Consider the meticulous craftsmanship of the bower bird that will spend days arranging bits of grass, sticks, feathers, and berries to attract potential mates. Ponder the figure of the lone male lion as he patrols his territorial boarders, marking to create olfactory sign posts and mauling any rival that would dare enter his sanctum. Take the nearest branches in the evolutionary tree, apes and monkeys. Male chimpanzees and gorillas wreak havoc during displays to assert their dominance, howling, pounding their chests, throwing tree limbs; all in a spectacle that says “I am a powerful, manly male!”

Now consider your average human male: receding hairline, slightly overweight and under-groomed, no plumage or antlers, and no claws or fangs. It is difficult for the animal that is the human male to find release for those male behaviors which evolution has bread into our biology. We aren’t allowed to pee on things that we consider ours. Throwing files and computers around the office to establish dominance over the smartass I.T. guy is frowned upon. Some of us have mock-plumage, i.e. fancy cars, clothes, homes. Men do fight; some for real, most in video games. Many men try to assign a number value to their manliness tied directly to their bank account; the more they have in the bank the more dominant they see themselves in society. Plenty of men stick to the age old strategy of having sex with as many women as possible. Nothing makes you more male than using your penis a lot. One of the funny things is that with the exception of penis use, none of these activities is exclusively male.

For me, I have several little things that help me feel manly. The first is something I can’t control; I’m big (6’4”, 220 lbs). There’s just something about being in a crowd and standing a head taller than everyone else that makes me feel good. Another is my job. Being an ecologist means that I get to go outdoors all the time and muck around, get dirty, and yes, pee on trees. The last is one that I find a lot of men do, but I’m not sure they know they do it; a manly handshake.

Most men want to have a strong manly handshake but I doubt that most realize that this becomes an assertion of dominance. Upon meeting, men usually shake hands. The type of handshake depends on the setting and the shakers. In a job interview you go for a respectable and firm handshake, but not crushing. You meet your girlfriend’s man-buddy in a bar and things are different. And there is more to a dominant handshake than just force. While you definitely want to grind some bones, there are also the thumb-web impact, the angle of approach, and the duration of the shake to consider.

The thumb-web impact concerns how much force you apply to the forward thrust of the hand when meeting the others to shake. If you go in slow there’s very little impact. If you go in quick the tissue between the thumb and pointer finger (or thumb-web) will meet in nice manly bump. The angle of approach is also a consideration. I like to use my height to my advantage and come in a little over the top with my palm turned down slightly. That way at the beginning of the shake I’m on top. Then there is the always difficult question of how long to shake. I’m usually a quick shaker; too long of a handshake and all of a sudden you’re holding hands. Hopefully, with the right handshake you can tell your girl’s buddy everything that needs to be said without saying a word.

And that’s about the just of it. It might be said that I have put way too much thought into this. That may be so but I think it’s just one more tiny facet of human behavior that is so interesting to observe. Others may say I’m relying way too much on a handshake to assert my manliness. That also may be true. Oh well, at least I’m not running around trying to impregnate any woman still breathing.

Thank you for reading.

Mixed Olympic Feelings

2008-08-10T20:06:00.003-04:00

I really do love the Olympics. I enjoy the spectacle and I revel in the sport. I also love picking different countries to root for during the course of the games (Please see my earlier post encouraging Americans to back Iranian athletes). But I have to admit, who I root for often doesn't have a great deal to do with who's performing how; socio-political events definitely influence who gets my backing. For example, due to the recent events in Georgia, any and all Russian athletes are getting no support from me. But with the Chinese athletes, I have more mixed feelings.

On the one hand I have plenty of reasons not to root for Chinese athletes including human rights issues and environmental negligence. On the other hand I see these men and women, some of them hardly more than children, and know that if they don't succeed, their futures are questionable at best. If an American athlete doesn't perform up to expectations, he or she will still be welcomed back with warm congratulations on their effort. If a Chinese gymnast takes too big of a step on her landing, I fear for her family. I know that may be a bit extreme but to the Chinese, their athletes aren't people, they're a means to an end. They are merely vessels to hold potential national glory. These athletes give up their youth and sometimes their lives for their opportunity to perform.

So while I can't exactly bring myself to cheer for them, I sometimes find myself hoping they do just good enough. Unfortunately, in a nation that demands perfection, there is no good enough.

Thank you for reading.

Florida Amendment #7

2008-07-26T17:47:00.004-04:00

Oh those crafty politicians. This November, the Florida ballot will feature Amendment #7 titled "Religious Freedom". Like many of you, upon first reading the title of this amendment, I thought this one was a given. Of course I'm going to vote for religious freedom. Religious freedom is one of the most important and most sacred building blocks of this country's entire makeup. Having my interest pricked, I read on.

The first part of the amendment is beautiful in its simplicity and its supposed purpose. It reads "Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to provide that an individual or entity may not be barred from participating in any public program because of religion...". "Of course", says I. It should be no other way. No individual should be barred from a public program based on race, color, creed, gender, sex, sexual orientation, etc. I will have words with anyone who says otherwise.

Being already convinced of the amendments worth I read on. "...and to delete the prohibition against using revenues from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution." Cartoon characters come to a screeching halt involving an inevitable crash featuring loud bangs, shatters, and a screaming cat or two: that's what I heard in my head. It became all too clear. This amendment has nothing to do with religious freedom. This is an amendment with the sole intent of allowing religious organizations access to public funds. It's all about money; taxpayer money. I have no issue with people should they want to donate money to a church, but that's not why I pay taxes.

This amendment is another attack at the separation of church and state. The initial language about not barring religious people from public events is already covered (in intent if not specifically) by the existing language of Section 3, Article 1 (the statute this amendment is proposed to amend). It states "Religious freedom. There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety." The new language is unnecessary. It's purpose is to suck the voter in. It's a sham, a farce, and it's insulting to the dignity of the voting public.

My fear is that people won't pay close enough attention to this clever ruse. The web is filling up with posts about Amendment 2 (as well it should, please vote no) but there is very little out there about Amendment #7. It's flying under the radar, and that's scary. It doesn't feel right to vote against an amendment titled "Religious Freedom" but remember, that's just a front. Please vote NO on Amendment #7.

Thank you for reading.

Army Crushes Dreams/Shoots Own Foot?

2008-07-26T09:54:00.004-04:00

The US Army recently reversed their own position regarding star West Point football, Caleb Campbell. The defensive safety was recently selected in the first round of the NFL draft by the Detroit Lions with the Army's blessings provided that he serve as a recruiter in his free time for 2 years (instead of the 5 years of service generally required from a West Point graduate). Last week, Army officials changed their mind saying that Campbell will have to put his ambitions of playing professional football on hold until after he serves his 5 years. (For more information visit http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/25/academy.athletes/index.html)

I don't necessarily disagree that Campbell should live up to the commitment that he agreed to upon entering West Point. I can understand the argument that serving ones country should take priority over a game. But I have to wonder weather the Army isn't shooting themselves in the foot on this one. By robbing this young man of his chance to play in the NFL (because at that level, you don't come back from a 5 year hiatus) what is the Army telling prospective recruits? Come join the Army, we'll crush your dreams! Better hope nothing better comes along! I also have to wonder how many additional recruits a prospective NFL star could have given the manpower-starved Army. A sports star at your recruiting booth couldn't hurt business. I understand why they didn't but, perhaps the Army should have let this one go.

I Have an Old Rusty Nut

2008-07-15T08:40:00.003-04:00

I have an old nut on my desk at work. My office is scattered with odd little trinkets that biologists tend to pick up in the field: antlers, leaves, sharks teeth, golf balls, etc. This nut is different. It’s a metal nut (as in “nuts and bolts”) that’s bigger than any nut you’ll ever see at your local hardware store. It’s bigger than a golf ball and probably weighs as much as a tennis shoe. It’s also quite old. It’s faded, worn, and rusted. It’s pitted, gouged, and the thread is completely stripped away. And for me, it is a constant source of inspiration.

To understand why, you need to know where the nut came from. I guess I don’t exactly know its origin; some smelter somewhere I suppose. Where it crossed my path was in Idaho. I stole it from a former place of employment on my last day there. I’m sure nobody missed it; the floor was littered with them. That same floor was also cover with tobacco spit, wood chips, glue, dirt, sweat, blood, long metal bolts, and heavy metal bracers. It was, and I suppose still is, the floor of a beam plant.

I’m not fond of sharing how I ended up at the beam plant so let’s just leave it that I was there. A beam plant is, as the name implies, a plant where they manufacture wooden beams to be used in building construction. The whole process works down a long conveyor belt. Boards come in one end of the building, are cut and planed down to certain sizes in the prep room then sent on down the conveyor belt to the glue room to be glued and dried to make beams of specific dimensions. The beams then go on down the conveyor to be planed again and sanded and eventually shipped out the other end of the long building. The manufacturing process is labor intensive and dangerous, no more so than in the glue room. As a result, the glue room has a relatively high turn-over rate. Consequently, that’s where I was hired to work.

The glue room consists of the long conveyor belt down the center of the room leading from prep and moving on to the sanding area. Spaced evenly along both sides of the belt are large metal frames shaped like 6’ tall L’s standing up off the floor. As each individual board enters the room from prep, it passes through a machine that coats the top side of the board with thick, hot, foul-smelling glue. The glue is made with formaldehyde and its fumes cause headaches and eye irritation in new workers. Some workers are unfortunate enough to react badly to contact with the glue, breaking out in rashes on any exposed areas of skin. Getting the glue off at the end of the day involves copious amounts of soap and scrubbing, usually leaving you pink and raw.

A man (and I’m not being sexist, no women work in the glue room) standing just in front of the glue machine (to the side of the conveyor belt) known as the “thrower”, grabs each board as it comes whizzing out from the glue machine at high speed. The thrower then whips the board, each of which may be up to 60’ long and weigh nearly 100 lbs, off the side of the conveyor belt and down steep metal ramps to rest in the L shaped frames. If the thrower gets his fingers between two boards as they come out of the glue machine, they will likely be crushed.

On the L-frames, a man known as the “stander” has seconds to stand the board up so that the glued top of the board will rest evenly against the unglued bottom of the adjacent board. He uses a specially shaped hammer to pound and wrestle the board into place. The boards whip down the ramps and slam into the frame. If the stander doesn’t move quickly enough when grabbing the boards to stand them up, his fingers will likely be smashed and broken.

Layer after layer of glued boars is stacked into the L’s. In between each layer, 2 or 3 men working behind the L’s lay long heavy metal bolts that hang from racks on the walls. As each layer is completed, the bolts are run up with powerful pneumatic wrenches using heavy metal bracers (known as irons) and large nuts to squeeze the glued boards together to dry. If the man running up the bolts mistakenly holds an iron with his fingers between the iron and the wood as the bolt is being tightened by the pneumatic wrench, the worker will probably loose the fingers. Any misstep can send the long metal bolts teetering from the racks down onto the workers.

As the stacks of glued boards grow higher, the workers must climb higher on the stacks to stand the boards and lay the bolts. The stacks routinely top 6-7’ and the hot glue is slippery making falls not an uncommon occurrence. Tall stacks also bring the workers closer and closer to the dozen large heaters that keep the glue room at a minimum 96 degrees for the purpose of drying the glue as fast as possible. When working on the top of the stack, being so close to the heaters can raise air temperatures well over 100 degrees.

The glue is allowed to dry until the next shift at which point the newly formed beams are hoisted back onto the conveyor using pneumatic lifts. The beams can weigh hundreds of pounds and the lifts must be raised and lowered in unison so as not to upset them. If upset, the beams can fall off the lifts and crash down the ramps right back at the workers.

I personally witnessed a number of accidents, most minor, some major. Every-day injuries included banged-up knees and shins from irons, boards or bolts, banged-up and smashed fingers, splinters of every variety, dehydration, heat stress, slips, scrapes, and falls. I experienced all of that myself. My wife was always pulling slivers of wood out of my battered shins. I was also one of the unfortunate few that reacted badly to the glue, breaking out in painful and itchy rashes on my arms. I very nearly lost some fingers while running up a bolt but was saved that fate by an alert coworker (to whom I am still grateful). I was lucky however, to avoid the more serious injuries that I witnessed.

In my 6 months in the glue room at the beam plant, I knew of or witnessed a number of broken fingers and toes, several lost fingers, and a chainsaw that kicked back and cut a whole big enough to hide a softball in a coworker’s torso. There was a guy on a different shift that fell off the stack and broke his pelvis. The worst injury involved a guy I worked with that was bent backwards over the conveyor by a large beam. He broke his back and lost most of his spleen. There has been one reported death at the plant that I know of but that was before my time. And while I was employed there, we received a safety award from OSHA; now that’s irony.

The guys I worked with were, strangely enough, a bit of a bright spot. They were all crude, some racist, some bigots, most sexist, some addicts, and some worse. But for the most part they were good guys doing hard, honest work. They treated each other like shit, but that was just part of the deal.

The take home message of this long-winded tutorial is that this place was pretty much hell. It was hot, smelly, and dangerous. I lost 25 lbs during my time there just because of the intensity of the labor (and I was skinny to begin with). I slowly got tired of pain. Few people, myself included, enjoy pain but to be exposed to it so regularly that you actually get physically tired of it is something else completely. I reworded Grateful Dead songs so that the lyrics talked about escaping from my beam plant hell. I hated that place. And today, I wouldn’t give my time there back for anything.

I think that one of the main reasons people become unhappy, especially here in the US, is that they don’t realize how good they have it. Find two couples that have been together about the same length of time, one that has gone through some real rough times and one that hasn’t. The couple who’s always been happy will most likely be bickering about every little thing that comes up. The couple who’s been through hell and come out the other side knows not to sweat the small stuff.

That’s what QB did for me. The nut on my desk has been worn down from a shiny brand-new piece of industry to a rusted and broken paperweight. I keep it on my desk to remind me how good I have it. I could easily be in a place that would wear me down; that would break me. Instead I’m in a good place doing something I enjoy. This may be a little melodramatic, but maybe you have to go through hell to appreciate heaven.

Women Bishops

2008-07-12T14:10:00.004-04:00

Once again the Roman Catholic Church has left me dumbfounded. It certainly isn't the first time and I very much doubt it will be the last time, so I probably shouldn't be surprised. As a whole, the Catholic Church probably causes me more heartburn than any one individual or group in existence (the likely exception being the religious radicalism, hatred, and intolerance promoted by Focus on the Family).

On Monday, I, learned that the governing body of The Church of England had voted to allow the ordination of women as bishops. My reaction to the news was mixed to begin with. I definitely support and agree with the decision but at the same time a little voice in the back of my head says, "Yeah, great, wohoo, welcome to the 20th century. Now we'll try to get you into the 21st!" It's hard to feel too proud of the decision because of how ludicrous it was that women were not allowed to be bishops in the first place.

The "tradition" of only allowing male clergy is as old as Christianity and supposedly stems from the 12 disciples all being male. There are also pieces of scripture that sum up along the lines that since a priest is supposed to be like the head of the house, and the head of the house is supposed to be male, priests are supposed to be male. The practice wasn't questioned back in the day (probably because a woman who questioned church doctrine in such a manner would likely have been labeled a heretic and subsequently stoned to death) and so in the last century as women have finally been able to work toward some measure of equality, the Church could hold on to the practice as a "tradition". How many abominable practices in human history have been held onto for the sake of tradition; basically saying, "well, we've always done it this way so that means it's the right way"?

Then, later in the week the Roman Catholic Church came out with their reaction and, surprise, they don't like it. I can't imagine why an organization built on sexist ideals packed full of powerful old men would have any objection to sharing their power with women, can you? Yet again the Catholic Church is fighting progress tooth and nail and I for one am sick of it. Frankly, I've been sick of it for a long time.

I can't comprehend why a group claiming to want only to spread the message of Jesus Christ would be picky as to who relayed that message. Scripture says that Jesus didn't care. Supposedly, upon arising from the dead on the third day the first person he appeared to was Mary. He told her to go ahead of him and spread the word. You'd think that would be enough to quell the argument but then again, this isn't really about Jesus. It's about power. It's about a male dominated hierarchy clinging to power, willing to use anything: tradition, scripture, whatever, to keep it. They should be ashamed.

Thank you for reading.

Hot and Cold Soup

2008-07-12T08:08:00.002-04:00

Whenever I read a book or watch a movie I have two reactions: the hot soup reaction and the cold soup reaction. The hot soup reaction is my response while in the act of reading/viewing the book/movie and immediately after. It's about emotional response, flow, and pure entertainment. The cold soup reaction occurs in the days and weeks afterword. When you make homemade chicken soup or chili and then put it into the fridge to sit a few days, little bits of fat float to the top in bits of yellowish congealed grossness. That’s how my cold soup reaction goes. As time goes on the little plot glitches, character flaws, and dialog stumbles of any book or movie float to the top of my consciousness and bug the hell out of me.

Thanks for reading.

Song Review: No Handle Bars, Flobot

2008-07-04T09:07:00.002-04:00

The first time I heard this song the radio DJ introduced it by saying, “I think it’s political but I’m not sure.” It seemed like a fairly stupid statement but after listening to the song, I wasn’t sure either. I knew I liked it, but I felt like the lyrics (please see below) were probably deeper that I comprehended at the time.

I like that the lyrics require thought. I get sick of “teardrops on my guitar” pop songs that require about as much mental effort as a Dancing with the Stars marathon. I’ve listed to the song a few more times and I still like it. It still makes me think but I think I’ve got the basics of it. I think my original mistake had been trying to analyze the individual lyrics. This song requires a more big-picture approach.

The song opens with a first stanza that speaks of raw talent “I can show you how to scratch a record” “I can keep rhythm with no metronome”. But the subject also has a child-like innocence in his broad subject matter (“I can tie a knot in a cherry stem, I can tell you about Leif Erikson”) and content (“Me and my friend saw a platypus”). The talent is that of youth, raw and untainted by ambition.

The second stanza quickly introduces that ambition. It leaves young talent and moves to the corporate. The ambition starts relatively small (“I can make money open up a thrift store, I can make a living off a magazine”) and progressively becomes more ambitious “(I can make new antibiotics, I can make computers survive aquatic conditions”). The lyrics progress from the subject working in a business to designing a product to running a business. It then moves beyond a single business to the understanding and manipulation of the economy as a whole (“Movers shakers and producers, Me and my friends understand the future, I see the strings that control the systems”).

The second stanza ends with the subject moving out of the corporate and into the political. The line, “I can do anything with no assistance” implies a single leader while “I can lead a nation with a microphone” makes it pretty clear that the leadership role being referenced is that of President of the United States.

The third stanza opens with lyrics that reflect the triumph associated with power. The subject is sure of his power, its reach and its scope. And no sooner has that power been proclaimed than we see that it has corrupted. The only mention of using the power for good (“I can hand out a million vaccinations”) is there only to illustrate that the alternative is just as easy to order and well within his power (“Or let'em all die in exasperation”). It’s hard to hear “I can make anybody go to prison, Just because I don't like'em and, I can do anything with no permission” without thinking of the enemy combatants in Guantanamo.

And finally the possible final consequence of uncontrolled power ends the stanza: total destruction. That’s the general theme of the song, uncontrolled ambition and power. The subject plows straight through these various life stages unchecked (“Look at me, Look at me, Driving and I won't stop”). The rise to power is the bike with no handlebars, ridden straight forward with little to no control.

The music reflects these stages in both tone and tempo. The song starts with a very controlled tempo; the lyrics nearly monotone and without accompaniment; the instrumentation almost nonexistent. As the song progresses the vocals become less constrained until the end when they are screamed with a likewise screaming chorus. Instrumentation gradually becomes more complex throughout the song as well, slowly adding progressively intensifying trumpet and electric guitar. The tempo increases as the song builds to climax. In short the music of the song mirrors the lyrics as it moves from simplistic to complex, niave to worldly, innocent to corrupt, and along the progession of power.

Thank you for reading.

No Handle Bars, Flobot
Lyrics:

I can ride my bike with no handlebarsNo handlebarsNo handlebarsI can ride my bike with no handlebarsNo handlebarsNo handlebarsLook at me, look at mehands in the air like it's good to beALIVEand I'm a famous rappereven when the paths're all crookedyI can show you how to do-si-doI can show you how to scratch a recordI can take apart the remote controlAnd I can almost put it back togetherI can tie a knot in a cherry stemI can tell you about Leif EricsonI know all the words to "De Colores"And "I'm Proud to be an American"Me and my friend saw a platypusMe and my friend made a comic bookAnd guess how long it tookI can do anything that I want cuz, look:I can keep rhythm with no metronomeNo metronomeNo metronomeI can see your face on the telephoneOn the telephoneOn the telephoneLook at meLook at meJust called to say that it's good to beALIVEIn such a small worldAll curled up with a book to readI can make money open up a thrift storeI can make a living off a magazineI can design an engine sixty fourMiles to a gallon of gasolineI can make new antibioticsI can make computers survive aquatic conditionsI know how to run a businessAnd I can make you wanna buy a productMovers shakers and producersMe and my friends understand the futureI see the strings that control the systemsI can do anything with no assistanceI can lead a nation with a microphoneWith a microphoneWith a microphoneI can split the atoms of a moleculeOf a moleculeOf a moleculeLook at meLook at meDriving and I won't stopAnd it feels so good to beAlive and on topMy reach is globalMy tower secureMy cause is nobleMy power is pureI can hand out a million vaccinationsOr let'em all die in exasperationHave'em all grilled leavin lacerationsHave'em all killed by assassinationI can make anybody go to prisonJust because I don't like'em andI can do anything with no permissionI have it all under my commandI can guide a missile by satelliteBy satelliteBy satelliteand I can hit a target through a telescopeThrough a telescopeThrough a telescopeand I can end the planet in a holocaustIn a holocaustIn a holocaustIn a holocaustIn a holocaustIn a holocaustI can ride my bike with no handlebarsNo handle barsNo handlebarsI can ride my bike with no handlebarsNo handlebarsNo handlebars

Possessing Art

2008-06-30T18:18:00.004-04:00

Any piece of art belongs to two entities: the artist and the consumer of the art. When I say “belongs to” I’m not referring to the actual act of physical possession but instead the incorporeal (cultural, intellectual, spiritual, temporal, etc.) nature in which a person(s), by relating to the art in a significant way, makes it their own. For example, the song a couple hears on the radio during their first date and later dances to at their wedding is as much their song as it is the person who wrote it or the group who performed it. To make a significant relation to a piece of art, and in that act possess it, a person will make their own interpretation as to what it signifies, represents, or means to them. Millions of people can possess a single piece of art, and each one will approach it slightly differently based on their own world view. Because our world views change over time, each person’s interpretation may also change. As such, over time there are almost infinite interpretations of any piece of art despite the fact that few of those interpretations may be close to what the artist originally intended; and they are all still correct. That is that nature of art; it is what allows a single creation to mean so much to so many people.

Thank you for reading.

Thank You, Mr. George Carlin

2008-06-23T16:01:00.005-04:00

I am a vain person. Not all around and not excessively, but I am vain none the less. I think everyone has their vanities: professional, social, aesthetic, athletic. My vanity is intellectual. I like thinking that I’m smart, that I’m well read. I like to think that my opinions are formed based on information from particularly pertinent and credible sources. I like using big words. I get pleasure from teaching, in part, because I enjoy being the source of information. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that I am an intellectual snob, but there is vanity in me that I see.

One symptom of it is that I am often determined not to care about pop-culture and those that inhabit that niche of society. I abhor tabloids and, although I shouldn’t, I look down on people who read them (not much, just a little). I admit the tragedy in the death of a celebrity but rarely care about the particulars. This morning shattered that serenity more that I care to admit. This morning I found out that George Carlin died.

George Carlin was a comedian. That’s what all the tributes that will come out over the next days, weeks, and years will start with. They will talk about the “7 Words You Can’t Say on TV” bit, one of his best. The tributes will mention the implication of the bit on the legal and moral debate over censorship. “All the way to the Supreme Court”, they will read. What they won’t say, what it’s difficult to convey, is Mr. Carlin’s influence on the way we think; the way we perceive the world and our place in it.

As I said above, I’m vain. I don’t like admitting being influenced by someone that made their living in TV and the movies. But upon reflection when learning of his death, I was surprised to admit to myself that George Carlin probably contributed more of who I am, specifically the way I think about things, than I thought possible. I want to keep things in perspective; I don’t think he made any bulk contributions to who I am in one area or another. More accurately, he added little snippets of influence here and there: religion, politics, sports, war, gay rights, sex, abortion, and women’s rights to name a few. My conscience seems to be riddled with little bits of his bits.

The thing is, I don’t mind. I’m proud to have them there. Even though the tributes will all say he was a comedian, I have always thought of him first as a philosopher or a particularly insightful social commentator. He just used comedy as a vessel to teach people about the things they weren’t seeing; and he was good at it. The vessel and the contents merged into the same. Insight coupled with humor; it’s hard to beat. Not only was he intelligent enough to see, he was gifted enough to convey. That's his legacy as much as the laughter; the fact that when the laughter dies away, people are still left thinking. I, personally, thank him for both.

Thank you for reading.

California Pride

2008-06-17T20:34:00.003-04:00

Being from Colorado, your almost raised with an innate dislike for California. Californians think they're so progressive, the drive like cracked-out epileptics, they have way too many sports teams (one of theme being the most hated Oakland Raiders), and they can't seem to stop moving to Colorado and telling you all about it.

There haven't been many, in fact any, times in my life when I have looked to California with a sense of pride or respect. May 15th was the first. Today was another. On May 15th, the California Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling recognizing stating that committed gay and lesbian couples have a constitutional right to equality under the state's marriage laws. On that day California took a step that the rest of the nation, save Massachusetts, has not yet had the courage to take. Today, thousands of gay and lesbian couples from around the state lined up to take part in something that they should have never been excluded from, marriage.

In time, I hope, the rest of the nation will realize that we can't legislate discrimination. The Declaration of Independence says: " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It took this nation a long time to come to terms with the fact that it doesn't say: "Unless you're a woman." and even longer to recognize that it never mentions: "Unless you're black." Now it's time for this nation to see that it also never states: "Unless you're gay."

So today I am proud of California for taking a step down that path. I hope that we will all soon follow.

Thank you for reading.

Iraq: Your Second Home Team

2008-06-15T18:03:00.007-04:00

We have yet again reached the culmination of the four year cycle that brings us to that pinnacle of sport, the Olympic games. Millions of people from every corner of the globe will tune in to support the home team, no matter how far away from home they happen to be. We will hold our collective breaths while the idyllic nature of the games clashes with the cold reality of modern competition. In reward we will be witness to the gift of every Olympics, a few stories that touch us all; a few individuals or teams that overshadow the pageantry, the hype, the expectations, the allegations, to live up to the ideal of the games.

If we're particularly lucky, they will be from our own country and we will feel all the more pride for it. If not, we will rally behind them all the same. These few competitors have the power to not only touch us individually but can also be rallying points and sources of pride for entire nations for years to come. Who in this country doesn't still feel their hearts swell when the black and white clips of Jesse Owens are played from Berlin, 1936. Who doesn't feel pride at the mention of the Miracle on Ice, Lake Placid, 1980. These special moments transcend sport, in which lies the true power of sport.

All this makes me question who it is that we should be rooting for this Olympics. I'm not suggesting we, as Americans, not root for our own hard working and deserving competitors. The athletes of the USA should be first in our hearts, and no doubt will. But there are always others that through the course of the games, we find ourselves cheering on with extra fervor. Some may be countries that represent our ancestry. Or perhaps they are countries with which we have no ties but whose athletes, through their performance or background, earn our loyalty. This Olympics, I would encourage Americans to make your second country one in which we are all closely tied to today. Let's root for Iraq.

Because really, if you listed the countries that needed a common good to rally behind, Iraq would have to be near the top of the list. If by some chance one of those rare performances does come from an Iraqi competitor or team, other than the people of Iraq, who but we could stand to benefit more from Iraqis coming together behind such an athletic performance. Or maybe that performance never comes. Then the worse thing that happens is that the people of Iraq might take notice that we Americans are backing one of their own. I can't imagine that being a bad thing.

So when the games start on August 8th, in addition to the red, white, and blue, stock up on some green and black body paint. Learn to hum Mawtini (the new Iraqi national anthem). Please, stand up and cheer for Iraq, your second home team.

Thank you for reading.

Finding Nemo Reaction Signals Apocalypse!

2008-06-14T09:25:00.002-04:00

To start, I should explain a couple things. First, the headline of this post. One of the sites I went to about blogging claimed that you get a lot more visitors if you have crazy and outrageous headlines on your posts. It all stems from a habit I picked up somewhere along the way of saying "It's a sign of the Apocalypse!" when seeing something we humans have-done/are-doing that is particularly stupid Second, the following outdated rant. I just started blogging so I have some catching up to do ranting about the things that I feel I need to rant about. This particular rant concerns a movie I happen to like a lot, Finding Nemo.

I won’t go into the movie in detail, everyone's seen it. If you haven't seen it then this is a great excuse to rent it, watch it, and come back to read my blog. A quick summary is that a little clown fish (Nemo) is captured from his home in a tropical reef by a diver and taken away by boat to be put into an aquarium. The father clown fish (Marlin) crosses the ocean with a wacky and forgetful sidekick (Dory, a blue tang), having a variety of adventures, in an effort to save the kid-fish. The kid-fish is eventually freed, everyone learns valuable life lessons, and all is right with the world once again.

The important thing to remember about the plot is that one of the main antagonists in the film is man, specifically a well meaning but ultimately clueless dentist. Man separates the father-fish and son-fish, man foils an escape attempt, the fish have to outsmart man in able to be set free. So man (please excuse the use of "man", I'm not trying to be sexist it just works better than "human" in the singular form) is the unwitting bad-guy. You, as the viewer, are angry to see the human separate the father and son and then hold the Nemo captive. You are happy when the human is outwitted and the Nemo is freed.

So will someone explain to me why sales of exotic aquarium fish rose steeply after this film was released? Several small tropical reefs were virtually wiped out because of the extent of the fishing that took place to satisfy the drastic increase in demand for aquarium fish. Especially hard hit was any species of clown fish (and any species that resemble clown fish) and the blue tang (for more information, please visit http://www.oceans.com.au/nemo-controversy.html). Apparently, every kid who saw the movie wanted their very own Nemo or Dory. I can understand a child wanting a cute character from a favorite movie as a pet. This isn't a new phenomenon. The reason cocker spaniels and dalmatians tend to have so many health/behavioral problems is the over breading that ensued after the releases of Lady and the Tramp and 101 Dalmatians, respectively. I myself have wanted my own T-rex ever since Jurassic Park came out. The problem isn't that kids want; it's the fact that they actually get what they want. After much thought, I can come up with only 3 possible explanations, none of them comforting.

The first, and I feel least probable, is that people simply didn’t understand the implications of the film. They didn’t pay close enough attention to understand the underlying message against the exotic fish trade and therefore were not affected by it. This would imply that we American’s are so ready to be entertained that we no longer recognize the morals of a story, only the story itself. I have a hard time believing that, even in today’s attention-span-free society, we can’t see the message in a children’s film.

The second is, I believe, the most disturbing possible explanation; that people truly don’t care. People saw the film and understood the moral but simply chose to ignore it. It’s just a kid’s movie. It doesn’t apply to me. They’re only fish. Something along these lines. It may even be likely that the overharvesting and devastation wouldn’t move some people. I hope that’s not the case.

The final, and most probable, is that parents simply don’t want to say no to their children. The American family today is so torn up over things like divorce, abuse, addiction, and financial troubles that any chance to please a child with something so small is jumped on. In short, the whims of the children were deemed more important than the possible implications of what their actions may affect. Or even more probable, the parents didn’t even consider the possible implications of their actions. The kid wants a fish; I’ll get the kid a fish. It seems innocent enough. One could even argue that a parent would have had no way of knowing that such overharvesting would occur; that they couldn’t have known the implications of their actions upon buying their children these fish. But even if they didn’t know, as I’m sure some didn’t, the message was right there in the film. These parents missed a chance to teach a valuable life lesson to their children. Instead of running to the pet store when their kid wanted a fish, they could have taken the time to say to their child, “Did you see how unhappy it made Nemo and Marlin when the diver took Nemo away? You don’t want to do that to real fish do you?” The lesson: that a small amount of sacrifice can benefit the world, even if in a small way. Isn’t that worth making an effort to teach? Especially now when people around the world, American’s especially, need to learn to start making those sacrifices that will benefit everyone.

To those of you parents who said no in the first place, I applaud you. To those who didn’t, there’s always the next animated set of characters.

Thanks for reading.

I Believe...

2008-06-07T12:17:00.005-04:00

I want it to be understood that what I post on this site is what I believe. Like anyone, I think that I have chosen the right or correct thing to believe. People don’t often believe something they think to be incorrect or wrong. That wouldn’t make any sense. Therefore, since I think that my beliefs are right, and since no doubt there may be others with different beliefs, I, by definition, think that those with differing beliefs are wrong or incorrect. This is human nature. If I thought that someone else’s beliefs were better than mine, I would adopt them as my own. Then of course, those who moments before shared my previous belief would now be considered by me to be wrong. This, I think, is the fluidity of belief.

Fluidity is that which keeps your certainty in your own beliefs being the correct beliefs, the best beliefs, from leading to conceit and arrogance. It is natural to think your belief is the best because you think it. But to not keep an open mind that allows even the possibility that there are better beliefs out there is very dangerous. Without openness there is no fluidity of belief. And without fluidity of belief there is no growth; there is only stagnation.

That may seem a lot to say to state what is inherently obvious. But I say this in the effort to examine belief itself. In the context in which I write, the word belief could easily be replaced with "idea" or "feeling". People take their own thought, feelings, and beliefs for granted far too often without taking the time to examine the nature of what they’re experiencing. A brief moment of contemplation, as I’ve just written it, can at least give you a glimpse into the nature of your own belief, its rigidity or fluidity, its strength or weakness.

That having been said, I want to make very clear that I want to imply no disrespect to anyone that believes differently from me. I don’t think anyone (for the most part) is stupid or evil for believing different than me, just mistaken. But if you disagree with me, then you no doubt feel the same. Therefore, if we chose to, we must each make an effort to see the merits, if any, in the others belief. If we find some, we can incorporate them into our own beliefs. If we can successfully argue the absence of merit, then we may be able to convince the other to adopt at least part of our own belief. That’s what this site is all about!

Thank you for reading.