Musical Monday: Sameness in diversity

With just a week to go, the political ads are gearing up. In general, political ads tend to point out the ways we are different, and to capitalize on those differences. Messages of fear tend to ring louder than those of hope.

Perhaps it's a good time for a reminder that we do have a common thread that binds us.

The future according to Focus on the Family

I thought I was done with political posts...

Although I disagree with James Dobson's political views on most issues, I had a smattering of respect for his opinions on some family and child psychology issues. I honestly believed that would carry over into the organizations he has founded.

Well, no more. In case you doubt the veracity of the news story, you can read the original letter for yourself on the Focus on the Family Action website.

Friday Five: Location, location, location

Since I'm on "stay-cation" this week, I actually get to play the RevGals' Friday Five...it's been a while. Appropriately enough, it's about locations:

My husband has lived at 64 addresses in his life so far (16 with me) and he suggested the topic since we have moving trucks on our minds. Therefore, tell us about the five favorite places you have lived in your lifetime. What did you like? What kind of place was it? Anything special happen there?

If you have lived in less than five places, you can tell us a about fantasy location.

Let's see...so far, I have lived in Bombay, India; Boston, MA; West Lafayette/Lafayette, IN; and just outside of Madison, WI. Although I've visited several other cities, towns, and villages, I can't claim them as home.

1. Bombay: Liked the big city and closeness of family. Hated the crowds, pollution, noise, and hot weather 11.5 months of the year.
2. Boston: Big-city feel in a small city. Lots of stuff to do. Red Sox and Fenway! Expensive as heck.
3. West Lafayette: College town with 12 bars. Lafayette: Small town across tracks from college town, rednecks, and Axl Rose.
4. Madison: Similar to Boston but not as expensive, influenced heavily by the progressive movement, and home for now.
5. Fantasy location: Smallish cottage or log home in the woods, with a big room with floor-to-ceiling windows, where I can write undisturbed, and not have to worry about this stuff that brings in paychecks.

Edit: Having some problems with Blogger and pictures, so I'll turn it into a game. Here are pictures of four locations, and you can guess which is which:

Another update on F

As some of you know, our dog F is battling cancer. He has been responding to the Chinese herbal formulas prescribed by his vet, as well as a supplement we researched. The challenge is that, as the tumor cells lyse, fluid builds up and we have to back off the treatment so his system can recover. Two steps forward, one step back.

Yesterday, he had a scheduled appointment at the vet, to check out a lesion on his face. As I got out of the car and walked him over to the vet, I noticed his nose was bleeding. Pretty soon, there was a steady flow of blood, and as much as the vet assistants tried, they couldn't stop the bleeding. We eventually got him into an exam room (so they could clean up the floor) but the bleeding continued and another vet who came in to see him said things were not looking good: I was faced with a choice of taking him to the emergency clinic or euthanasia. I couldn't do much else except pray and wait.

By the time his (holistic) vet arrived, the bleeding had slowed, and after she inserted a couple of acupuncture needles, it stopped. A couple of hours later, we were back home in time to let D into the house (she and M had just arrived home from a road trip and she had locked herself out).

F is doing better today. In the vet's opinion, the bleeding was caused either by the tumor breaking through a blood vessel, or by the tumor breaking up. We are continuing with the herbal treatment, and we continue to pray and hope.

A couple of nights previously, I was introduced to the practice of lectio divina. The leader read a passage from Romans, and the three phrases that stuck with me were:

Hold tight to everything that is good.

Never give up.

Let your hope make you glad.

Musical Monday (belated): I may be ageist

I hadn't really planned on a series of political posts, it just turned out that way...

There are some fundamental differences between McCain and Obama on issues like health care and taxes. However, for me, there is also a difference that can't quite be defined. When I listen to McCain, I hear an old, tired man with old, tired ideas. In contrast, Obama seems to have energy, enthusiasm, and maybe, just a little bit of genuine hope. (Note: I'm not saying that will translate into how each of them will serve as president, it's just the impression I get of their personalities.)

So, does age make a difference? Early in the nomination process, I voiced my support for a candidate who was even older than McCain, but who had ideas that resonated with me. I think age can be a handicap, but only if you allow it to become one.

Finally, another example. Here's a guy whose talent inspired me as a kid, and here's the reason why he's still doing it at age 67 (with maybe a little less punch, but he can still sing better than I):

Comedy hour

By now, I guess everyone has seen the video of McCain and Obama trying out a little scripted comedy at a charity fundraiser. In case you haven't, here are the highlights.

Will the real McCain please step forward?

I was going to write about McCain's self-proclaimed status as a maverick, but realized someone else had already done the work for me :)

The thing is, I actually remember when the label was justified. I haven't seen it much, if at all, lately. I believe the real McCain is a better man than the one we've seen and heard in the last few months. (Not so much better that I'd want to vote for him, but still...) Maybe the real McCain will dump his advisers, turn his back on the extremists in his party, and campaign on his own terms. But that probably isn't the way to win an election.

A better alternative

In my last post, I discussed my desire for a viable third-party candidate. After much searching, I've finally found one. Take a look at this video.

A tale of two political systems

I grew up in the world's largest democracy, with a system of government modeled on British parliament, and a Constitution inspired by the U.S. As I became more politically aware, I grew frustrated with the multi-party system, and saw the American two-party presidential system as a solution to the political instability and corruption that was tearing the country apart.

After living in the U.S. for 20+ years, I realize there is no perfect solution. At least in India, bribery was open: here, it's disguised as "lobbying." The two-party system results, in many cases, in a presidential election boiling down to choosing the lesser of two evils. The probability of an independent or third-party candidate winning a presidential election is virtually zero. Even if such a candidate were to win, he/she would accomplish little, thanks to the partisanship which permeates Congress. (As an aside, this guy--pictured at left--is beginning to make more sense to me than either mainline candidate.)

The system is broken. Washington is ruled by lobbyists, PACs, and other special-interest groups. Bills are loaded with irrelevant riders and special-project appropriations to the point where the original intent of the bill is completely lost. Government is no longer by, for, and of the people (if it ever was). Even if we decided to throw out every incumbent in the coming election, and could do it consistently in the next few, we'd still eventually end up with more of the same.

Yes, it's easy to be cynical. It's even easier to decide that nothing we do can make a difference, and to give up on the process of democracy completely. But I believe we have to keep trying, and we have to elect representatives who will at least try to change the system. This month, our local Mac user group is taking a break from our usual technology-related presentations to showcase nonpartisan websites that we hope will help those who are undecided.

And since I'm not eligible to vote (yet), I'm trying to encourage those who are to visit some of these sites. Here's one that helps match you up with a presidential candidate, and another that helps you access your representatives' voting records.

Musical Monday: Layers

Life would be pretty uninteresting if we lived in a single-layered world. What if everything had only a literal interpretation, and what you saw as what you got? What if scripture was meant only for literal translation?

The other day, I was listening to this variation of an old English folk song. Although I was aware of a couple of layers in the song, I didn't realize there were a few others hidden beneath. That's how I often see the Bible: multiple layers of history, myth, and wisdom, which are revealed one layer at a time.

Steve Winwood (Traffic) with John Barleycorn

Creationism and witch-hunts

An article in Science recently described the controversy surrounding professor Michael Reiss, who was forced to resign from his position as Director of Education at the Royal Society. Reiss (who is also an ordained clergyman) made an innocuous remark about dealing with creationism in the classroom, which was spun out of control by the media. Some members of the Society saw it as endorsing creationism, which set off a chain reaction of protests that led to Reiss' resignation.

From the transcript of Reiss' speech, it's clear that he was not advocating the teaching of creationism. He was merely stating that science teachers should not dismiss or ridicule a student who professes a belief in creationism, as doing so is often counterproductive. Reiss says:

I do believe in taking seriously and respectfully the concerns of students who do not accept the theory of evolution while still introducing them to it. While it is unlikely that this will help students who have a conflict between science and their religious beliefs to resolve the conflict, good science teaching can help students to manage it - and to learn more science. Creationism can profitably be seen not as a simple misconception that careful science teaching can correct, as careful science teaching might hope to persuade a student that an object continues at uniform velocity unless acted on by a net force, or that most of the mass of a plant comes from air. Rather, a student who believes in creationism can be seen as inhabiting a non-scientific worldview, that is a very different way of seeing the world. One very rarely changes one's worldview as a result of a 50 minute lesson, however well taught.

As someone who believes that creationism (or intelligent design) does not belong in a science curriculum, I have no problem with Reiss' position. What saddens me is the witch hunt that was perpetrated by Reiss' fellow scientists in the Royal Society. It was completely unnecessary and is contrary to the very spirit of the Royal Society itself.

I'm no fan of creationism (especially Young-Earth creationism) but I accept that its proponents have a different worldview than mine, and they are entitled to their beliefs, as I am to mine. Scientists, above all others, should have the open-mindedness to adhere to this principle.