[Regarding a woman of 33 who describes herself as "slightly old for prime procreating"...]“Slightly old for prime procreating”? As a matter of scientific fact, she’s far more than “slightly old,” as prime childbearing age is 18-24.McCain's insights are certainly worth reading in full.
It is strange that secular moderns, who constantly lecture us religious traditionalists about our alleged aversion to science, are themselves often ignorant of (or hostile toward) the actual science they claim to revere. Fertility begins to decline after a woman passes her mid-20s and, by the time she is 33, she has a much higher risk of infertility than she would have faced 10 or 15 years earlier.
This is simply a fact and, while all statistics about health risks are based on averages that include exceptions — i.e., Rachel Birnbaum might experience no difficulty whatsoever becoming pregnant at a later age — she probably wouldn’t choose to defy the odds if she really thought carefully about it. But her reference to her “much younger state of mind” and her expressed dread of “the conveyer belt traveling toward adulthood” suggest that her ideas on the subject are not entirely rational.
God help her husband if he ever said something like that, huh? A man who accuses a woman of being irrational is inviting the counter-accusation that he is a sexist swine with a head full of ignorant stereotypes. And in a situation such as that involving Rachel Birnbaum, her husband’s desire to become a father is also at odds with the feminist dictum that reproductive choice is entirely a female prerogative. Men’s parental preferences are as nothing, when weighed against four decades of Women’s Movement rhetoric about female sovereignty in these matters.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
The Risk of Postponing Fertility
Robert Stacy McCain takes a break from his insightful political reporting and commentary to make an important cultural observation:
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Articulate Democrat Needed
... to defend this:
A proposed revision to Freedom of Information Act rules would allow federal agencies to lie to citizens and reporters seeking certain records, telling them the records don’t exist.In what perverted moral system could this be defended as anything better than reprehensible?
The Justice Department has proposed the change as part of a large revision of FOIA rules for federal agencies. Specifically, the rule would direct government agencies who are denying a request under an established FOIA exemption to “respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist,” rather than citing the relevant exemption.
The Republican Presidential Primary Race
A number of people have asked my opinion about the presidential race. Here's how I see things today.
It's weird for me to notice that I've actually met four of these candidates in person, Romney, Perry, Cain and Santorum. I like all the candidates, but I'm sorry to note that none of them are perfect. So I'm going to have to overlook something I don't like no matter who is nominated.
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, with his money and name ID, is clearly the one to beat. And that's the defining fact of the Romney campaign. He's been running for president for over four years now, he has a plan, and he's following it. He's gotten good at this. In fact, I fear that he may have become much better at running for president than we would be at actually serving as president. Romney has presented a 59-point policy plan that only a policy wonk could love, and my impression is that it's a solid, moderate, bi-partisan, traditional Republican plan to slow the rate of acceleration towards the cliff that we're currently barreling towards. Frankly, despite what he says today, I don't trust Romney to keep his promises.
Texas Governor Rick Perry got a great deal of attention when he joined the race in August, but has since lost a great deal of his early momentum. Still, he had a great fundraising quarter, so he's got the cash to enable him to keep at this for a while. Perry has a great record as Governor of Texas, but has performed badly in debates. Perry and his staff haven't so far shown that they understand that a presidential election is different than a Texas gubernatorial election. But he's made some recent staff changes, and today come out with a very solid-looking economic plan with a centerpiece of an optional flat tax. Perry needs to explain how he helped Texas become such a great place to live, and how as president he'll make America a great place to live again, too. So far, he hasn't done that. Too, he lost ground early with many conservatives, especially those concerned with illegal immigration, and pro-lifers because of that Gardasil issue. Can he recover his lost momentum? Time will tell. Perry is still on of my top three candidates.
Former Senator Rick Santorum was one of my top three, but his recent debate performances, his poll performances, and some of his commentary, has really begun to get to me. Santorum is a good guy, and he has the virtue of being right on the issues. But he presents himself and his issues poorly. Santorum, in my mind, is beginning to shape up to be like a white Alan Keyes. Right on the issues, but not able to present them in a fashion that can be accepted by people who don't already share his position. Santorum has recently seen a brief bounce in his poll numbers, but it was a very small one, and didn't last. I believe it's time for Santorum to fold his tent.
Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, to my mind, has done a great job in Congress. But I don't believe that she's shown herself to be ready to be president, either. Again, she's right on most issues, but seems to have a hard time explaining herself to people (like those in the media) who don't already share her views. Despite winning the Ames Straw Poll in August, Bachmann has been losing steam ever since. While I think it's good that she mounted this campaign, I'd like to see her terminate her presidential campaign and run for re-election to Congress.
Former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China John Huntsman, in my view, never had any business running for president as a Republican. I don't believe he's raised much money, nor ever gotten much support. I think it's long past time for Huntsman to abandon this race.
I recently told people on Facebook that I thought it was time for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to quit, too. Newt, I've felt, would do better as a debate moderator than a participant. But Newt, who has more issues over the last 20 years, both personal and political, than I care to get into here, is enjoying a small bounce bringing up to third place in some polls. But unless he can turn that into a big move, I don't believe he should keep at this.
Congressman Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas, too, and seems to be running a much better campaign this year than last. I have big qualms about some of his ideas, like ending the bulk of our overseas military involvement. I can't help but think that there would be unintended consequences which we might find intolerable. But there's a lot to like about Paul, as well. Last time around, Ron Paul was my fourth choice, after Sam Brownback, Duncan Hunter, and Fred Thompson, none of whom were still in the race by the Illinois primary in early February, so I voted for Paul. If Perry and Cain don't stay in until the Texas primary in March, I may vote for Paul again, as he's currently in my top three.
Finally, businessman Herman Cain is currently riding a very remarkable groundswell of support in the polls, supported by his excellent debate performances. Cain has had some recent missteps, but seems to be getting good at explaining himself. Too be sure, a campaign is an educational experience, for the candidate no less than for the electorate. And this is the drawback Cain has, insufficient experience in politics. I don't say none, because Cain ran a primary race for the U.S. Senate a few years back. But Cain clearly has a lot to learn if he's going to finish this race. Still, with his cheery mien, and his excellent 9-9-9 plan, I think he's got a lot to offer; Cain is my first choice at the moment. But that could change, I'm still learning about all these candidates.
It's weird for me to notice that I've actually met four of these candidates in person, Romney, Perry, Cain and Santorum. I like all the candidates, but I'm sorry to note that none of them are perfect. So I'm going to have to overlook something I don't like no matter who is nominated.
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, with his money and name ID, is clearly the one to beat. And that's the defining fact of the Romney campaign. He's been running for president for over four years now, he has a plan, and he's following it. He's gotten good at this. In fact, I fear that he may have become much better at running for president than we would be at actually serving as president. Romney has presented a 59-point policy plan that only a policy wonk could love, and my impression is that it's a solid, moderate, bi-partisan, traditional Republican plan to slow the rate of acceleration towards the cliff that we're currently barreling towards. Frankly, despite what he says today, I don't trust Romney to keep his promises.
Texas Governor Rick Perry got a great deal of attention when he joined the race in August, but has since lost a great deal of his early momentum. Still, he had a great fundraising quarter, so he's got the cash to enable him to keep at this for a while. Perry has a great record as Governor of Texas, but has performed badly in debates. Perry and his staff haven't so far shown that they understand that a presidential election is different than a Texas gubernatorial election. But he's made some recent staff changes, and today come out with a very solid-looking economic plan with a centerpiece of an optional flat tax. Perry needs to explain how he helped Texas become such a great place to live, and how as president he'll make America a great place to live again, too. So far, he hasn't done that. Too, he lost ground early with many conservatives, especially those concerned with illegal immigration, and pro-lifers because of that Gardasil issue. Can he recover his lost momentum? Time will tell. Perry is still on of my top three candidates.
Former Senator Rick Santorum was one of my top three, but his recent debate performances, his poll performances, and some of his commentary, has really begun to get to me. Santorum is a good guy, and he has the virtue of being right on the issues. But he presents himself and his issues poorly. Santorum, in my mind, is beginning to shape up to be like a white Alan Keyes. Right on the issues, but not able to present them in a fashion that can be accepted by people who don't already share his position. Santorum has recently seen a brief bounce in his poll numbers, but it was a very small one, and didn't last. I believe it's time for Santorum to fold his tent.
Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, to my mind, has done a great job in Congress. But I don't believe that she's shown herself to be ready to be president, either. Again, she's right on most issues, but seems to have a hard time explaining herself to people (like those in the media) who don't already share her views. Despite winning the Ames Straw Poll in August, Bachmann has been losing steam ever since. While I think it's good that she mounted this campaign, I'd like to see her terminate her presidential campaign and run for re-election to Congress.
Former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China John Huntsman, in my view, never had any business running for president as a Republican. I don't believe he's raised much money, nor ever gotten much support. I think it's long past time for Huntsman to abandon this race.
I recently told people on Facebook that I thought it was time for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to quit, too. Newt, I've felt, would do better as a debate moderator than a participant. But Newt, who has more issues over the last 20 years, both personal and political, than I care to get into here, is enjoying a small bounce bringing up to third place in some polls. But unless he can turn that into a big move, I don't believe he should keep at this.
Congressman Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas, too, and seems to be running a much better campaign this year than last. I have big qualms about some of his ideas, like ending the bulk of our overseas military involvement. I can't help but think that there would be unintended consequences which we might find intolerable. But there's a lot to like about Paul, as well. Last time around, Ron Paul was my fourth choice, after Sam Brownback, Duncan Hunter, and Fred Thompson, none of whom were still in the race by the Illinois primary in early February, so I voted for Paul. If Perry and Cain don't stay in until the Texas primary in March, I may vote for Paul again, as he's currently in my top three.
Finally, businessman Herman Cain is currently riding a very remarkable groundswell of support in the polls, supported by his excellent debate performances. Cain has had some recent missteps, but seems to be getting good at explaining himself. Too be sure, a campaign is an educational experience, for the candidate no less than for the electorate. And this is the drawback Cain has, insufficient experience in politics. I don't say none, because Cain ran a primary race for the U.S. Senate a few years back. But Cain clearly has a lot to learn if he's going to finish this race. Still, with his cheery mien, and his excellent 9-9-9 plan, I think he's got a lot to offer; Cain is my first choice at the moment. But that could change, I'm still learning about all these candidates.
Prager: Who's More Irrational?
Dennis Prager, a Jew, defends Evangelicals from liberals:
If evangelicals come with some views I find irrational it is a tiny price to pay compared to the price humanity has paid for the Left’s consistently broken moral compass — about America; about Communism and Islamism; about the superiority of peace studies over waging war against evil; about America’s role in the world; about Israel; about the welfare state; about Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and all the other left-wing dictators the Left has celebrated; about the belief that men and women are basically the same; about the greater worth of any animal than of the unborn human; and about nearly every other major moral issue.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Tea
The Year of Change, Part One
2011 has been, for me and my family, very much a year of change. Many changes, large and small, some voluntary, some involuntary, some good, some bad, some still unclear. This is the first what I intend to become a series of posts on these changes, and my thoughts about them.I'm starting small here. I've taken up drinking tea early this year.
Tea. You know, hot water, the tea kettle whistling on the stove, a cup, a saucer, a teabag. Tea. Not a political statement, but a cultural icon, a vehicle for consuming caffeine, and a connection to something lost.
I never acquired the taste for drinking coffee. When I needed caffeine, which has been often, I drank cola. Always. Any hour of the day or night. Pepsi, Coke, RC, or almost any other brand. Cola; a child's drink.
But having past the mid-point of my fifth decade walking the earth, I've put on quite a few pounds, and reducing my sugar intake seemed like a good step towards reducing my girth (or least slowing the rate of increase).
When I say tea, in this article, I'm referring only to a small sub-set of the vast universe of tea possibilities. I'm talking about hot tea, not iced tea. Black tea, not green tea. Caffeinated, not decaff.
The switch has led me to a few insights:
Firstly, it requires an element of patience to drink tea. Being the only one in either my household or my office drinking tea, it's taken one cup at a time. I heat the water in a tea kettle on the stove-top, then when the kettle whistles, I pour it over the tea bag in the cup. I wait for it to steep in the boiling water, and then wait for it to cool enough to drink. (I tried not heating it so much, but there's something ineffably different in drinking tea that is cooling from too hot than in drinking tea that was never too hot.) Then it must be sipped slowly, and, if it's good, savored.
Tea slows down the frantic pace of life. It forces me to relax and be more patient.
I started out drinking Lipton. Then I tried a version of Lipton that was seasoned with orange. Then, being a Trekkie, I had to try Earl Grey, and upon trying Bigelow's brand, quite liked it.
A friend of the Extraordinary Wife's, Irish by birth, had encouraged me to try Irish Breakfast Tea. I tried Twining's version, which is strong but a tad bitter. But I found I liked Twinings' Earl Grey, English Breakfast Tea, and Lady Grey (a version of Earl Grey infused with orange) best.
I've tried various other smaller brands on occasion, often with excellent results.
Packaging matters, too. Bigelow staples the string to the tea bag, which means it sometimes comes lose. Twinings stitches the string to the bag.
But I noticed something else, as well. I found myself more connected to the culture of which tea in an important part. I better understood Tolkien's many references to Bilbo Baggins' longing to return to his tea kettle at home. I understood better the British television and movies I've watched.
We Americans make fun sometimes of the British who, it seems, whenever adversity arises, respond first by brewing up a pot of tea. But tea is wonderful for clearing your head, and forcing you to slow down and look more carefully at your situation. Tea is also good for the long haul; you can drink cup after cup without become too strung out on caffeine, or, as with cola, too bloated.
I'm glad I took up drinking tea this year. It's helped me in dealing with all the other changes that have happened.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Notice To The Next President
Notice to the next president of the U.S., of whatever party:
I expect you to do better than Barack Obama. I don't care how bad he makes things, I expect you to make things better. I won't want to hear during your term about how everything is Obama's fault, I will expect to see your policies working to improve conditions in America. And if those policies do not work, I will expect to see you changing them in order to achieve success.
I expect you to do better than Barack Obama. I don't care how bad he makes things, I expect you to make things better. I won't want to hear during your term about how everything is Obama's fault, I will expect to see your policies working to improve conditions in America. And if those policies do not work, I will expect to see you changing them in order to achieve success.
Quarter Million
This past weekend, we saw blog traffic pass the 250,000 hit milestone. Thanks for reading!
Catholic Calendar: Monday, October 10th, 2011
Today is Monday, October 10th, 2011, the feast day of St. Francis Borgia in the traditional calendar.
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Rom 1:1-7; Ps 98:1bcde, 2-3ab, 3cd-4; Luke 11:29-32
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: Ecclus 45:1-6; Matt 19:27-29
Pray the Joyous Mysteries of the Rosary
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Rom 1:1-7; Ps 98:1bcde, 2-3ab, 3cd-4; Luke 11:29-32
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: Ecclus 45:1-6; Matt 19:27-29
Pray the Joyous Mysteries of the Rosary
Sunday, October 09, 2011
Book Review: "Killing Lincoln"
by Bill O'Reilly & Martin Dugard
Henry Holt & Co., New York, 313 pages, $28
Nevermind what you may think of the Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly; this isn't a book about politics. This book is straight-out history. It's a very good retelling of a very compelling story. A very intense period in April of 1865 saw the final battles of the Civil War, the surrender of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee's army to Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, and the plot, only partially successful, to bring down the federal government by assassinating President Abraham Lincoln, Vice President Andrew Johnson, and Secretary of State William Seward.
Abraham Lincoln, and particularly his death, has been a subject of great interest to me since I was a child, and while I don't claim to be an expert, I have read extensively on the topic. So I'm always surprised to read something that tells me something new. Such as that John Wilkes Booth, Lincoln's murderer, had a fiance, Miss Lucy Lambert Hale (the daughter of a U.S. Senator) and she spent the afternoon of the assassination with Lincoln's son Robert, studying Spanish. More importantly, I didn't know that Secretary of War Stanton's favorite detective Lafayette Baker (whom Stanton placed in charge of the manhunt), had direct ties to Booth. And I didn't know the Nixonian detail of the 18 pages missing from Booth's diary when Stanton released it to the public, after holding it secretly for two years.
I've long been in the camp of those who suspect that Stanton had a hand in directing the assassination plot, which, if successful, would have left Stanton president, under the succession laws then in effect. O'Reilly and his co-author Dugard do an excellent job of placing in their proper context the links and questions that have lead to suspect Stanton of involvement, while also pointing out exculpatory details, such as that Stanton discouraged Lincoln from going to the theater.
Booth, as told by O'Reilly and Dugard, becomes an even more sinister character than I understood previously, too, as they illustrate alternatives that Booth passed up to pursue his hateful vendetta against Lincoln.
The story is told compellingly, and is fast-paced and interesting.
And yet, I am disappointed in this book, as well. O'Reilly failed to properly set my expectations in his forward, when he promises that the reader would better understand how Lincoln's murder "Changed America Forever" (as it says in bold text on the book's cover). Instead, the generally strong narrative concludes weakly with the notation that Mary Surratt was the only woman ever hanged by the federal government. Very little effort is made to explain how America itself was changed in the long run by this shocking murder.
The advance copy I received includes a number of editing errors which I hope will be cleaned up in the final edition (now available). Some of these errors are passages where the syntax is simply awkward. Others include small factual errors, such a references to Lincoln working in the Oval Office, which was not built until the 20th Century.
But on the whole, I found the book to be a good read, both interesting and informative.
Click here to hear an excerpt from the audiobook.
Catholic Calendar: Sunday, October 9th, 2011
Today is Sunday, October 9th, 2011, the feast day of St. Denis and his Companions in the new and traditional calendars.
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Isa 25:6-10a; Ps 23:1-3a, 3b-4, 5, 6; Phil 4:12-14, 19-20; Matt 22:1-14 or 22:1-10
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: Eph 4:1-6; Matt 22:34b-46
Pray the Glorious Mysteries of the Rosary
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Isa 25:6-10a; Ps 23:1-3a, 3b-4, 5, 6; Phil 4:12-14, 19-20; Matt 22:1-14 or 22:1-10
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: Eph 4:1-6; Matt 22:34b-46
Pray the Glorious Mysteries of the Rosary
Saturday, October 08, 2011
Catholic Calendar: Saturday, October 8th, 2011
Today is Saturday, October 8th, 2011, the feast day of St. Briget of Sweden in the traditional calendar.
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Joel 4:12-21; Ps 97:1-2,5-6, 11-12; Luke 11:27-28
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: 1 Tim 5:3-10; Matt 13:44-52
Pray the Joyous Mysteries of the Rosary
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Joel 4:12-21; Ps 97:1-2,5-6, 11-12; Luke 11:27-28
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: 1 Tim 5:3-10; Matt 13:44-52
Pray the Joyous Mysteries of the Rosary
Friday, October 07, 2011
Catholic Calendar: Friday, October 7th, 2011
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Joel 1:13-15; 2:1-2; Ps 9:2-3, 6+16, 8-9; Luke 11:15-26
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: Prov 8:22-24, 32-35; Luke 1:26-38
Pray the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary
Thursday, October 06, 2011
Catholic Calendar: Thursday, October 6th, 2011
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Mal 3:13-20b; Ps 1:1-2, 3, 4+6
Readings in the Extraordinary Form: Ecclus 31:8-11; Luke 12:35-40
Pray the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary
Wednesday, October 05, 2011
Catholic Calendar: Wednesday, October 5th, 2011
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Jonah 4:1-11; Ps 86:3-4, 5-6, 9-10; Luke 11:1-4
Daily readings in the Extraordinary Form: Heb 10:32-38; Luke 12:1-8
Pray the Glorious Mysteries of the Rosary
Monday, October 03, 2011
If I Were A Liberal
(Back in the middle of August, I made this series of posts as my Facebook status.)
If I were a liberal, I would believe that everyone is entitled to as much of the money I make as they want, except for myself.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that God is OK with federally-funded abortion and euthanasia, but not with capital punishment.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that gay "marriage" and abortion are rights, but that gun ownership and freedom of religion are not.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that depicting President Barack Obama as Hitler constitutes hate speech, but that depicting President George W. Bush as Hitler is patriotic.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that we should try to understand Islamic fundamentalists, but I would fear Christian fundamentalists.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that the IRS and the Dept. of Education could make better use of machine guns than the U.S. Army.
If I were a liberal, I'd demand we all rely on scientists to tell us that global warming is real, but I'd want every woman to decide for herself when life begins.
If I were a liberal, I would believe that nothing happens, unless the federal government makes it happen.
If I were a liberal, I'd feel threatened every time a Christian tells me what he believes, but I'd demand he listen respectfully to what I believe.
If I were a liberal, I'd insist on respect for people of all walks of life; except for white males, Christians, fathers, and men in general.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that rich people will produce no matter how little of their profit the government lets them keep.
If I were a liberal, I'd understand that people with ethnic accents are sophisticated, but people with southern accents are rubes.
If I were a liberal, I'd respect other faiths, like Islam, that call on women to display their submission to their husbands by wearing veils and burkhas and walking behind them, but I'd have contempt for Christian women who believe that they are called to submit to their husbands, but whose husbands encourage them to run for President.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that it was dangerous incivility that leads people to disrespect President Obama, was that it was funny when people called for President Bush to be assassinated.
If I were a liberal, I would be careful not to learn more about Christianity than is consistent with my liberal worldview.
If I were a liberal, I'd worry about Republicans leading Christian prayers, even in private-sector venues, but I'd be fine with President Obama discussing "the resurrection of our savior, Jesus Christ" at an Easter White House prayer breakfast. Possibly because I'd be confident he didn't really mean it.
If I were a liberal, I'd think Christians were foolish to be offended by public displays of pornography, but I'd expect them to sensitive to the feelings of those who don't share their faith by not displaying Christian images in the public square.
If I were a liberal, I would believe that everyone is entitled to as much of the money I make as they want, except for myself.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that God is OK with federally-funded abortion and euthanasia, but not with capital punishment.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that gay "marriage" and abortion are rights, but that gun ownership and freedom of religion are not.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that depicting President Barack Obama as Hitler constitutes hate speech, but that depicting President George W. Bush as Hitler is patriotic.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that we should try to understand Islamic fundamentalists, but I would fear Christian fundamentalists.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that the IRS and the Dept. of Education could make better use of machine guns than the U.S. Army.
If I were a liberal, I'd demand we all rely on scientists to tell us that global warming is real, but I'd want every woman to decide for herself when life begins.
If I were a liberal, I would believe that nothing happens, unless the federal government makes it happen.
If I were a liberal, I'd feel threatened every time a Christian tells me what he believes, but I'd demand he listen respectfully to what I believe.
If I were a liberal, I'd insist on respect for people of all walks of life; except for white males, Christians, fathers, and men in general.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that rich people will produce no matter how little of their profit the government lets them keep.
If I were a liberal, I'd understand that people with ethnic accents are sophisticated, but people with southern accents are rubes.
If I were a liberal, I'd respect other faiths, like Islam, that call on women to display their submission to their husbands by wearing veils and burkhas and walking behind them, but I'd have contempt for Christian women who believe that they are called to submit to their husbands, but whose husbands encourage them to run for President.
If I were a liberal, I'd believe that it was dangerous incivility that leads people to disrespect President Obama, was that it was funny when people called for President Bush to be assassinated.
If I were a liberal, I would be careful not to learn more about Christianity than is consistent with my liberal worldview.
If I were a liberal, I'd worry about Republicans leading Christian prayers, even in private-sector venues, but I'd be fine with President Obama discussing "the resurrection of our savior, Jesus Christ" at an Easter White House prayer breakfast. Possibly because I'd be confident he didn't really mean it.
If I were a liberal, I'd think Christians were foolish to be offended by public displays of pornography, but I'd expect them to sensitive to the feelings of those who don't share their faith by not displaying Christian images in the public square.
Catholic Calendar: Monday, October 3rd, 2011
Daily readings in the Ordinary Form: Jonah 1:1-2:2, 11; Jonah 2:3, 4, 5, 8; Luke 10:25-37
Daily readings in the Extraordinary Form: Is66:12-14; Matt 18:1-4
Pray the Joyous Mysteries of the Rosary
Sunday, October 02, 2011
The Unasked Question
My old acquaintance (and brother Knight of the SCA), David Friedman, is the son of Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman. He has a question that I haven't seen anyone else ask, nor try to answer:
The argument for large and expensive efforts to prevent or reduce global warming has three parts, in principle separable: Global temperature is trending up, the reason is human activity, and the consequences of the trend continuing are very bad. Almost all arguments, pro and con, focus on the first two. The third, although necessary to support the conclusion, is for the most part ignored by both sides.
The usual argument to show that an increase in global temperatures by a few degrees centigrade over the next century would be a catastrophe, or at least a very bad thing, consists of pointing out specific bad effects: rising sea level increasing the risk of flooding in very low lying areas, rising temperature making particular areas less suited to growing the crops they now grow. But an increase in global temperature would also have good effects, as should be obvious to anyone who has ever spent a winter in Chicago, not to mention Alaska or Siberia. The question is not whether there are any bad effects but whether there are net bad effects, whether the increased risk of flooding in Bangladesh does or does not outweigh the opening of a sea route north of Asia and the increase in the habitable area of Canada and Siberia.
The answer, I think, is that nobody knows if the net effects would be good or bad, and probably nobody can know. [Emphasis added.]
Quo Vadis?
One of my new Favorite Bloggers, Robert Stacy McCain of The Other McCain, takes a look at a specific case that may tell us something about our culture:
When only secular progressive arguments are deemed admissible, when perspectives of faith and tradition are pre-emptively excluded from public discourse, we should not be surprised when the ghastly results show up on the cable TV news.
Catholic Calendar: Sunday, October 2nd, 2011
Readings in the Ordinary Form: Isa 5:17; Ps 8:9-12, 13-14, 16-16, 19-20; Phil 4:69-9; Matt 21:33-43
$eadings in the Extraordinary Form: Eph 3:13-21; Luke 14:1-11
Pray the Glorious Mysteries of the Rosary
Saturday, October 01, 2011
Catholic Calendar: Saturday, October 1st, 2011
 |
| St. Therese, dressed as St. Joan of Arc |
Daily readings in the Ordinary Form: Bar 4:5-12, 27-29; Ps 69:33-35, 36-37; Luke 10:17-24
Daily readings in the Extraordinary Form: Ecclus 44:16-27, 45:3; Matt 25:14-23
Pray the Joyous Mysteries of the Rosary
Friday, September 30, 2011
Catholic Calendar: Friday, Sept. 30, 2011
Daily readings in the Ordinary Form: Bar 1:15-22; Ps 79:1b-2, 3-5, 8, 9; Luke 10:13-16
Daily readings in the Extraordinary Form: 2 Tim 4:1-8, Matt 5:13-19
Pray the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary.
Slutwalk Comes To Minnesota
Rule 5 Post #1
(This is posted in accordance with Robert Stacy McCain's Rule #5 for successful blogging.)Stupid feminists (a tautology) routinely protest in various states of undress in order to get more attention than they otherwise could. This is the sort of tasteless, tacky, and frankly sexist tactic that one would think would be beneath a self-respecting feminist (an oxymoron). "Slutwalk" is coming to Minnesota tomorrow:
Waving signs like "My dress is not a ’yes,’" women in various states of dress or undress take to city streets to protest an attitude that holds victims responsible for inviting sexual violence. The march has caused controversy among women’s rights advocates, not only for its intentionally in-your-face name, but also because of a concern that the medium is smothering the message.
Now represented in more than 75 cities worldwide, SlutWalk was launched by a single remark. At a college safety seminar in Toronto last spring, a police officer told young women they would be less likely to be raped if they didn’t dress "like sluts."
U.S. Senate Candidate Forum Tomorrow In Plano
The North Texas Tea Party is hosting a candidate forum for candidates seeking to succeed the retiring incumbent, Senator Kay Baily Hutchison.
It's right around the corner from my house in Plano, but I'm not sure if I can break free from the Beauty Girl's birthday festivities to be there:
It's right around the corner from my house in Plano, but I'm not sure if I can break free from the Beauty Girl's birthday festivities to be there:
A Texas US Senatorial Candidate Forum will be held on October 1, 2011 from 2:00 – 4:30 p.m. at Spring Creek Campus Living Legends Conference Center: AA135, Spring Creek Campus 2800 East Spring Creek Parkway, Plano, TX 75074. Doors will open at 1:15 p.m.
Glenn Addison
Andrew Castanuela
Curt Cleaver
Ted Cruz
Elizabeth Ames Jones
Tom Leppert
Lela Pittenger
All registered Candidates have been invited; any Late entry Candidate will be invited
The forum will give voters an opportunity to become better informed about their choices for elected representatives, and candidates an opportunity to express their views to the audience.
The question and answer format will be moderated by Mark Reid, past president of Texas Tea Party Alliance and a panel of select tea party members.
The forum is sponsored by Texas Tea Party Alliance, Co-Sponsored by African American Republican Club of Collin County, Allen Area Patriots, Amigo De Patriots, Articles of Freedom, Collin Young Conservatives, Collin County Conservative Republicans, Frisco Tea Party, Golden Corridor Republican Women, McKinney Tea Party, North Texas Tea Party, Plano Tea Party, Plano Republican Women, and Candidate coordination by New Revolution Now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
