Rating: MS [for sarcasm]
Now they're (at least the Miami Herald) is trying to blame President Bush for Gloucester--in a round-about manner. The article asserts that the decline of teen sexual activity during the 1990s levelled off between 2001 and 2007, and teen pregnancy rates rose 3% between 2005-2006. This, incidentally coincided with the implementation of the Bush administration's abstinence-only policy for groups receiving federal funding. Yeah, and drowning deaths go up as the rate of ice cream consumption goes up--anyone can make any statistical correlation they see fit.
According to the abstinence-only policy, ". . .any groups or states receiving federal funds for pregnancy prevention not discuss contraception and must teach that sex outside marriage will lead to harmful psychological and physical effects. In other words, they cannot talk about sex or help children who do have sex to protect themselves. They can only tell them to say no." Obviously, it is not acceptable to teach teens to NOT have sex. We know they're going to, so let's help make sure they're safe. I guess we should eliminate all "Say No to Drugs" campaigns on the same reasoning. Let's tell the children that if they want to pop prescription pills, it's okay; and if they want to cook meth let's give them resources to make sure they don't burn down the house and neighborhood. No, it's not any different. Sorry to inform you, but AIDS can kill a person as can drugs--one happens to work on the body more slowly--and the best way to not get AIDS is to have monogamous sex with a spouse who does not have AIDS. Same goes for not contracting other STDs (and no, the HPV vaccination isn't the answer either).
The Herald article has a snappy conclusion which says, "We already know where it started. We already know who the father is." The obvious implication is Bush. Sorry again. The dysfunctional father is none other than Alfred Kinsey, the "inventor" of modern sex education. This man asserted that everyone, even children have the right to sexuality. (See the Lutherans for Life document, "The Failure of Sex Education," for more information, as I cannot quote it because I seem to have misplaced mine.) This includes all manners of sex, including bestiality and pedophilia. His teachings, along with the teachings of the founders of Planned Parenthood, have steered the curriculum of sex education in public schools for the past few decades. Couple this with the second Humanist Manifesto which states: “SIXTH: In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitative, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered "evil." Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one. Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire. We wish to cultivate the development of a responsible attitude toward sexuality, in which humans are not exploited as sexual objects, and in which intimacy, sensitivity, respect, and honesty in interpersonal relations are encouraged. Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and sexual maturity." Voila! You have a sure-fire argument for asserting that sexual freedom is a right for all. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble: A mature person knows what is safe and what is dangerous. A mature person makes wise choices. A mature person knows that with freedom comes rules. A 12 year old cannot legally get a driver's license. A 17 year old cannot legally vote. A 19 year old cannot legally drink alcohol. Why? They have to learn to make mature decisions before they can have the privilege. Same with sexuality. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
We need to teach our children that freedom comes with responsibility. I cannot live on my own if I am not responsible enough to make a house or rent payment.
The next time, Miami Herald, you point your finger, remember what your mommy told you: Three are pointing back at you. What have YOU done to prevent STDs and babies born to single, young, immature mothers? I don't think that advertising condoms was it.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Sunday, June 22, 2008
The One In Every Restaurant
It happens without fail: We end up seated by "the one in every restaurant." Sometimes, we are with "the one", but more often we end up at a table near "the one". What is "the one in every restaurant?" you ask. It is the person who knows everything about every subject and informs the people at their table (loudly) of their opinion on everything from aardvarks to Zzyzx Road (it's a road near the NV/CA border).
Case in point: about 10 years ago we were dining at a restaurant near the St. Louis airport which is now closed (the restaurant, not the airport; but the way airlines are going these days, it may be the airport soon--that's another story) and were seated near "the one." There were only a few tables in the restaurant which were occupied, so we were actually not at the table next to the one. We were a few tables over, but that did not prevent us from hearing the conversation. We were not eavesdropping; we could not help hearing. The woman was going on and on about her whole family and telling her companion who Uncle Al was and "you know, his daughter/niece/stepmother was so-and-so" to which the other lady would nod as though she knew what the other was talking about. We felt sorry for the poor girl who sat through the whole conversation because she looked as though she was a foreign exchange student on her way to/from home and was subjected (as we all were) to this unending, one-sided dialogue.
More recently we were enjoying a lovely evening at a restaurant on the Hill, and were seated near a group which I believed was "the one." We still wonder why they were speaking so loudly, unless one member of their group was hard of hearing and didn't wear a hearing aid. Much our our chagrin, they were not "the one," for the real "the one" was seated on the other side of us shortly afterward. This man was informing the three other people all he knew about many subjects. Loudly and assertively. The one couple at his table were just going along with it. At one point, (again, not eavesdropping--he was speaking loudly enough so that we could hear every word) he spoke of how he and his wife stayed up past midnight to watch NBC's rebroadcast (they must not own a VCR) of Tim Russert's memorial service. He was waxing excitedly about how wonderful this service was, how wonderfully his son spoke, etc., and commented about the amphitheater it took place in. I just wanted to interject, "Um, it was in the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, sir."
Someday, in an ideal world, I will go to a restaurant and not be seated next to "the one". Until that day, I hope that I am not "the one!"
Thursday, June 19, 2008
The Water is Wide
The flooding is bad, just not here. The "Big Muddy" overfloweth, and has breached some levees. The worst is Iowa and points north of St. Louis. We became gawkers the other night and drove down to the Arch grounds to see Old Man River out of his bed. It's not as bad as '93 here, but it is still a sight to see. Lenor K. Sullivan Avenue is completely flooded, and the water is creeping up the arch steps. The sign which indicates the riverfront is on the other side of the avenue and quite off the river bank on normal days.
We pray for all those people who have lost property and possessions and for those who still stand to lose property and posessions. We thank those who have given of themselves to help.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Small Prank or Big Problem?
Rating:S
There is a story on Fox News about teens who are taking pictures of themselves nude and sending them on their cell phones to other teens. The people they interviewed on Sunday night discussed the ramifications of this action. The first point the people interviewed made was that these teens are the first to have the technology to do this. There is no precedent here. The second point brought up was that these teens could be charged with possession of pornography, specifically child pornography, and if charged and convicted could be classified as a sex offender. This would stay on their record for life; additionally, they would have to register as a sex offender. Pretty long-reaching effects for an act that many would consider a “silly high school prank.”
Why are they doing this? According to Fox News, “Psychologists said the phenomenon reflects typical teenage hormones and lack of judgment, with technology multiplying the potential for mischief. It also may reflect a teenage penchant for exhibitionism, as demonstrated on MySpace and countless other Web sites and blogs.” Good explanation, but I believe it goes beyond that.
Where do these kids get these ideas? Sure children and teens get ideas from many sources—family, friends, TV, internet, school—but why on earth take nude pictures and plaster them on cell phones and internet? It’s because they haven’t been taught that they shouldn’t, and I would venture to say that they have been subtly encouraged to do so.
“Give them an inch, they’ll take a mile,” is the old saying. We’ve given our children and our society too many inches. Read the Humanist Manifesto, Humanist Manifesto II, and Humanist Manifesto III documents; and you’ll see that we’ve slowly, subtly encouraged this negative sort of behavior in our culture over the last 75 years. We say that the old way of doing things is bad and wrong. We encourage them to do whatever. Then when things go out of control we wonder why.
Take for example this “teaching” written in Humanist Manifesto II: “Traditional moral codes and newer irrational cults both fail to meet the pressing needs of today and tomorrow. False "theologies of hope" and messianic ideologies, substituting new dogmas for old, cannot cope with existing world realities. They separate rather than unite peoples.”
I hate to point it out now, but traditional moral codes held people in check for thousands of years. When humans define morality based on a solid foundation it holds a person in check better than when morality is based on a fleeting emotion or opinion. Then morality is boiled down to a sound bite of “if it feels good, do it.” Well, that doesn’t hold out in the long run.
Another “teaching” of the Humanist Manifesto has led us to nude cell phone pictures. It discusses sexuality: “SIXTH: In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered "evil." Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one. Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire. We wish to cultivate the development of a responsible attitude toward sexuality, in which humans are not exploited as sexual objects, and in which intimacy, sensitivity, respect, and honesty in interpersonal relations are encouraged. Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and sexual maturity.”
The teens were just expressing their sexual proclivities and we should be tolerant. Or maybe there was nothing sexual about it and I am merely intolerant. The last sentence makes me ask, what are we basing our moral education on since we have eliminated moral codes?
Every secular humanist will now rail on my shallow, intolerant, backward-thinking mindset. I apologize only for asking people to think. This teaching has been in our public school system far too long under the guise of forward thought. I was in high school over 15 years ago, and it was there then, as I now recognize. Then I was criticized of being closed-minded. Now I realize that people who want to teach others to be closed-minded will always criticize those who think and assert that the thinkers are the closed-minded ones.
I encourage everyone to read these three Humanist Manifesto documents and dare to question.
There is a story on Fox News about teens who are taking pictures of themselves nude and sending them on their cell phones to other teens. The people they interviewed on Sunday night discussed the ramifications of this action. The first point the people interviewed made was that these teens are the first to have the technology to do this. There is no precedent here. The second point brought up was that these teens could be charged with possession of pornography, specifically child pornography, and if charged and convicted could be classified as a sex offender. This would stay on their record for life; additionally, they would have to register as a sex offender. Pretty long-reaching effects for an act that many would consider a “silly high school prank.”
Why are they doing this? According to Fox News, “Psychologists said the phenomenon reflects typical teenage hormones and lack of judgment, with technology multiplying the potential for mischief. It also may reflect a teenage penchant for exhibitionism, as demonstrated on MySpace and countless other Web sites and blogs.” Good explanation, but I believe it goes beyond that.
Where do these kids get these ideas? Sure children and teens get ideas from many sources—family, friends, TV, internet, school—but why on earth take nude pictures and plaster them on cell phones and internet? It’s because they haven’t been taught that they shouldn’t, and I would venture to say that they have been subtly encouraged to do so.
“Give them an inch, they’ll take a mile,” is the old saying. We’ve given our children and our society too many inches. Read the Humanist Manifesto, Humanist Manifesto II, and Humanist Manifesto III documents; and you’ll see that we’ve slowly, subtly encouraged this negative sort of behavior in our culture over the last 75 years. We say that the old way of doing things is bad and wrong. We encourage them to do whatever. Then when things go out of control we wonder why.
Take for example this “teaching” written in Humanist Manifesto II: “Traditional moral codes and newer irrational cults both fail to meet the pressing needs of today and tomorrow. False "theologies of hope" and messianic ideologies, substituting new dogmas for old, cannot cope with existing world realities. They separate rather than unite peoples.”
I hate to point it out now, but traditional moral codes held people in check for thousands of years. When humans define morality based on a solid foundation it holds a person in check better than when morality is based on a fleeting emotion or opinion. Then morality is boiled down to a sound bite of “if it feels good, do it.” Well, that doesn’t hold out in the long run.
Another “teaching” of the Humanist Manifesto has led us to nude cell phone pictures. It discusses sexuality: “SIXTH: In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered "evil." Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one. Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire. We wish to cultivate the development of a responsible attitude toward sexuality, in which humans are not exploited as sexual objects, and in which intimacy, sensitivity, respect, and honesty in interpersonal relations are encouraged. Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and sexual maturity.”
The teens were just expressing their sexual proclivities and we should be tolerant. Or maybe there was nothing sexual about it and I am merely intolerant. The last sentence makes me ask, what are we basing our moral education on since we have eliminated moral codes?
Every secular humanist will now rail on my shallow, intolerant, backward-thinking mindset. I apologize only for asking people to think. This teaching has been in our public school system far too long under the guise of forward thought. I was in high school over 15 years ago, and it was there then, as I now recognize. Then I was criticized of being closed-minded. Now I realize that people who want to teach others to be closed-minded will always criticize those who think and assert that the thinkers are the closed-minded ones.
I encourage everyone to read these three Humanist Manifesto documents and dare to question.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
A Lovely Evening
It was a lovely day--not too hot, not to humid. It lead to a lovely evening. We attended the second of the carillon concerts at Concordia Seminary. [Every Tuesday in June at 7pm, if you care to join us. Bring your own chair and picnic.] It was a pleasant evening with nice weather, a great concert (although I can honestly say I've never heard Stephen Foster's "Beautiful Dreamer" played on a carillon), and good food and wine. Very relaxing and a great way to spend a June evening. By the way, the picture is one taken from this evening from my husband's camera phone.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Images
Rating: MS
I am reminded every so often of the conversation I once had with a friend who attended St. Olaf. I pointed out how I enjoyed the smell of the Malt-O-Meal plant, and how privileged the college students were to be able to smell it often. My friend remarked that it was a nice, comforting smell on chilly winter days, but on warm humid days it was not so nice.
So the wind was blowing up from the Chinese Restaurant today, which is what reminded me of my friend’s comment. It is, according to the Weather Channel, 89 degrees with 51% humidity (making it feel like 93 degrees) and winds SSW at 19mph, gusting up to 33 mph. With the humidity and heat, the smell of the restaurant was not exactly pleasant, nor would one immediately think of moo goo gai pan or some other delectable dish upon smelling it. The smell made me think of back when I lived in the Valley (not that valley, the other valley) and the local stop-and-rob—that’s a 7-11 type quickie-mart for those who need a definition—would often smell of fried fat; usually some sort of greasy animal parts not fit for human consumption. The odor caused my mind to think of fried chicken, mojo potatoes a.k.a. potato wedges, and all sorts of other artery-clogging food. Then my mind jumped to hot, sunny, dry-as-a-bone summer days with not a cloud in the sky; the dominant color being a golden sandy brown. The sun dazzles the eyes, nothing is green except for a random palm or dark green oak, the heat swelters like a dry sauna, and one wishes for less fried chicken and more ice cream.
I am reminded every so often of the conversation I once had with a friend who attended St. Olaf. I pointed out how I enjoyed the smell of the Malt-O-Meal plant, and how privileged the college students were to be able to smell it often. My friend remarked that it was a nice, comforting smell on chilly winter days, but on warm humid days it was not so nice.
So the wind was blowing up from the Chinese Restaurant today, which is what reminded me of my friend’s comment. It is, according to the Weather Channel, 89 degrees with 51% humidity (making it feel like 93 degrees) and winds SSW at 19mph, gusting up to 33 mph. With the humidity and heat, the smell of the restaurant was not exactly pleasant, nor would one immediately think of moo goo gai pan or some other delectable dish upon smelling it. The smell made me think of back when I lived in the Valley (not that valley, the other valley) and the local stop-and-rob—that’s a 7-11 type quickie-mart for those who need a definition—would often smell of fried fat; usually some sort of greasy animal parts not fit for human consumption. The odor caused my mind to think of fried chicken, mojo potatoes a.k.a. potato wedges, and all sorts of other artery-clogging food. Then my mind jumped to hot, sunny, dry-as-a-bone summer days with not a cloud in the sky; the dominant color being a golden sandy brown. The sun dazzles the eyes, nothing is green except for a random palm or dark green oak, the heat swelters like a dry sauna, and one wishes for less fried chicken and more ice cream.
Monday, June 2, 2008
A Blaze
Rating: NSS
I never thought it would happen, but it has. Universal Studios had a fire on the back lot on Sunday, and some famous movie backdrops burned; additionally, there was some damage to a vault which contained videos and film reels. Fortunately, there wer copies stored elsewhere. It would be a great loss to lose so much of our culture. Some may say that it is no loss, but movies are, in a way, the literature of our time. I wouldn't compare it to, say, a fire in Stratford-on-Avon, but it is a loss, nonetheless.
I admit to being a native-born Californian. As such, I freely admit to having taken the backlot tour at Universal Studios. I also freely admit that having grown up in the state of fruits, flakes, nuts, and O.J. can make reality seem surreal. Knowing Universal Studios and Disneyland and knowing that they are mere fascades made traveling to Europe slightly strange. I had to constantly remind myself that the historic buildings I saw were actual buildings which were used for actual life, not just a soundstage or a backdrop. In that sense, Universal Studios was a sham, a show.
I also admit to being a teacher. I understand the importance of history, I know the importance of literature--written, heard, viewed, etc. In this manner, Universal Studios has significance.
I have to ask this: If they rebuild, how will that affect the backlot tour? "Now we are passing through the place that looks like the set of --- movie. . .?" I don't think it'll have the same effect.
I never thought it would happen, but it has. Universal Studios had a fire on the back lot on Sunday, and some famous movie backdrops burned; additionally, there was some damage to a vault which contained videos and film reels. Fortunately, there wer copies stored elsewhere. It would be a great loss to lose so much of our culture. Some may say that it is no loss, but movies are, in a way, the literature of our time. I wouldn't compare it to, say, a fire in Stratford-on-Avon, but it is a loss, nonetheless.
I admit to being a native-born Californian. As such, I freely admit to having taken the backlot tour at Universal Studios. I also freely admit that having grown up in the state of fruits, flakes, nuts, and O.J. can make reality seem surreal. Knowing Universal Studios and Disneyland and knowing that they are mere fascades made traveling to Europe slightly strange. I had to constantly remind myself that the historic buildings I saw were actual buildings which were used for actual life, not just a soundstage or a backdrop. In that sense, Universal Studios was a sham, a show.
I also admit to being a teacher. I understand the importance of history, I know the importance of literature--written, heard, viewed, etc. In this manner, Universal Studios has significance.
I have to ask this: If they rebuild, how will that affect the backlot tour? "Now we are passing through the place that looks like the set of --- movie. . .?" I don't think it'll have the same effect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
