An atheist is a person who believes that god does not exist. An agnostic is a person who does not believe that god exists, though agnostics often allow for the unprovability of a god. Though it seems like minor semantics, there really is a fair difference in that one is a belief while the other is a lack of a belief.
Faith is something that is believed, or as the Bible says, the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen, from the book of Hebrews in the New Testament. Christians often use as an example of faith sitting in a chair. According to the example, one has faith that a chair will hold their weight, but this is an inane example. One has every reason to believe a chair will hold them based on past performance of chairs, which is why it's so damn funny when someone sits in a chair that doesn't hold them but instead sends them ass over tea kettle. This isn't really the point here, but it is indicative of how faith can be seen as something that it isn't.
Some atheists are extremely dogmatic in their belief in the nonexistence of god. Dogmatic means to strongly hold opinion as fact. One could even suggest that these good people are atheist fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are people who strongly demand adherence to their belief system.
These fundamentalist atheists see the world in strongly black and white terms. To them, you are either an atheist with a strong disbelief in god and anything unprovable, and therefore rational, or you are irrational and may actually believe in gods, unicorns and farts that smell nice.
Atheism is a belief system, though many adherents would strongly disagree with this fact. I claim to be an atheist, and I may just mean weak atheist. I do believe that god does not exist in the form we've been taught generally to view him. I do believe that this stance is not at all provable or unprovable. Christians can no more prove their god does exist than atheist can prove that he does not exist. To me, this means that both views require faith. Don't tell the fundamentalist atheist this, as faith is completely anathema to them. Faith, to them is irrational, and they would not dare be irrational. Yet, as we've discussed, faith is a belief in something for which we have no proof.
Is it possible that there exists some broadly categorized interstellar entity with the power to have created the earth and the living being upon the earth? Nothing I've seen suggests that this does in fact exist, but I must also admit that nothing I've seen suggests that it isn't possible. I tend to doubt that it's likely, but I have no argument to stand up to the possibility of this. I would argue that god doesn't seem likely based on my view of the earth, and I'd further argue that the god I was taught about as a child seems highly unlikely to exist based on my understanding of the world. But however we dance around the argument, neither my stance nor that of the christians of the world are provable or unprovable.
That's what it comes back down to, proof. I don't think that there are any vampires, but if I were one, I'd not want my existence to become known as many people would likely want me dead, Anne Rice fans notwithstanding. Are there Martians? If so they too have done a great job of hiding, but again, the rover not seeing them isn't the same as the rover sending us proof that there are no Martians.
In the end, we come down to so many people are willing to strongly argue their personal convictions as fact. To do so is dogmatic fundamentalism, and I contend that this attitude is more ruinous to human relations than anything short of war. It is sad when self professed scientists argue so stridently against the existence of god when science should be expected to contain itself within the realms of things provable whether that proof is able to deny or confirm the existence. If it isn't testable, it isn't science.
Hat tip to PZ Myers since without his usually interesting blog, this subject would not have nestled in my brain as a grain of sand around which the pearl that is this post formed.
Monday, November 27, 2006
Saturday, November 25, 2006
oh please
Someone please tell me it's not just me. Tell me I'm not being some moralistic freak. Tell me that this as an image of babyhood really is fucked up and that I'm not some kind of weird prude. I'm a pretty open minded guy, by which I mean that I believe in equality of race and gender and sexual orientation. I can't accept that this is a good message for our girls, especially given the destructiveness of so much that girls have to face.
pot: the good, the bad and the . . .wha?
Another hat tip to a Science Blogger, this time Coturnix of A Blog Around the Clock. He's provided an interesting link to a piece in World Science telling us that pot may be both good for us and bad for us.
Interestingly or not, the good that is mentioned in favor of pot is not really mentioned so much in favor of pot, and the bad is thrown in to try and distance themselves from being labeled pro-pot. It's not a surprising stance really. Most people who are willing to admit that pot has benefits seem to feel it necessary to offer the disclaimer that pot is actually bad for you, which is just not true.
I've mentioned here before that many people have studied pot and found numerous health benefits. As with anything, one should not too lightly discount possible harm, but the more I've looked into pot, the less this supposed harms seems to actually exist. The only study I've seen to prove any actual harm was shown to prove that the harm came only after one had ingested much more than is actually possible. In this same way, eating hundreds of pounds of potatoes can prove toxic if one were to eat these hundred pounds in one sitting.
Read the article for yourself. I find it interesting that the danger in pot use, according to the article, comes from not using enough pot. Basically, if you do use pot, you'd actually have to use less than anyone normally would for it to be bad for you, and even this minor bad is so minor as to be added, as I mentioned, to get the G rating.
I wonder why this isn't bigger news? Coturnix certainly writes an interesting blog for the most part, and I'm certain he gets thousands more hits than I do, but he isn't exactly the main stream media. Where are they on this story? I guess they've totally given up on real news and governmental lies, and like everyone else, if they were to be honest about marijuana they would immediately be labeled as pro drug and anti child or even worse, it would be suggested that the terrorists will win when we gain the right to use a particular plant as adults in an adult fashion.
Pot does have real and proven benefits that grossly outweigh the suggested negatives. On top of this are real issues of control over oneself and the right to choose what is right for oneself. To make this entire issue even more glaringly in need of real attention is the fact that the war on drugs is a gross theft of freedom and money. The freedoms stolen include the lives ruined by the police and the criminal justice system and the jail system. The money theft happens when more and more of our tax dollars go to police systems to prop up this failure and lie that is the war on drugs, more aptly named a war on people.
Interestingly or not, the good that is mentioned in favor of pot is not really mentioned so much in favor of pot, and the bad is thrown in to try and distance themselves from being labeled pro-pot. It's not a surprising stance really. Most people who are willing to admit that pot has benefits seem to feel it necessary to offer the disclaimer that pot is actually bad for you, which is just not true.
I've mentioned here before that many people have studied pot and found numerous health benefits. As with anything, one should not too lightly discount possible harm, but the more I've looked into pot, the less this supposed harms seems to actually exist. The only study I've seen to prove any actual harm was shown to prove that the harm came only after one had ingested much more than is actually possible. In this same way, eating hundreds of pounds of potatoes can prove toxic if one were to eat these hundred pounds in one sitting.
Read the article for yourself. I find it interesting that the danger in pot use, according to the article, comes from not using enough pot. Basically, if you do use pot, you'd actually have to use less than anyone normally would for it to be bad for you, and even this minor bad is so minor as to be added, as I mentioned, to get the G rating.
I wonder why this isn't bigger news? Coturnix certainly writes an interesting blog for the most part, and I'm certain he gets thousands more hits than I do, but he isn't exactly the main stream media. Where are they on this story? I guess they've totally given up on real news and governmental lies, and like everyone else, if they were to be honest about marijuana they would immediately be labeled as pro drug and anti child or even worse, it would be suggested that the terrorists will win when we gain the right to use a particular plant as adults in an adult fashion.
Pot does have real and proven benefits that grossly outweigh the suggested negatives. On top of this are real issues of control over oneself and the right to choose what is right for oneself. To make this entire issue even more glaringly in need of real attention is the fact that the war on drugs is a gross theft of freedom and money. The freedoms stolen include the lives ruined by the police and the criminal justice system and the jail system. The money theft happens when more and more of our tax dollars go to police systems to prop up this failure and lie that is the war on drugs, more aptly named a war on people.
my wife can kick your wife's . . . shut yo mouth
Sunday was quite a day. I spent my sporting part wet and freezing and in pain from an elbow that may or may not have cracked a rib. It still hurts like hell and has been making sleep nearly impossible. It's a tad worrisome, but it only slightly effects my ability to be useful.
Momma's sporting part was insanely exciting. Her team won their roller derby match by one point. If their jammer could have gotten through the pack on the final jam, the Machine Gun Kellys would be going to the championship bout. I can't fault the jammer at all. She played one hell of a game, but the opposing team just wouldn't let her through on that last jam, and I know she was busting her ass to get through. It's indicative of how seemingly minor things can change so many other possibilities. All the girls are to be commended for an exremely exciting and hard fought bout.
As you've noticed, I've included a series of pictures. Go here for more if you are so inclined, but know that, as good as these pictures are, they just can not do justice to the work these girls put in, the speed, the hits, the sheer ecstasy and agony of true sport. Yes, that is my lovely wife with the skull face, and yes she does grow tiny in the distance as blockers attack, wanting so badly to stop her, yet failing so often.
I'll post soon about the Hard Knox Rollergirls next match which will be in December, but most people that show up here are not in or around east Tennessee. I can guarantee that most of you, with a quick google or two, can find a derby league near you. Try looking at the Women's National Flat Track Derby Association site for a start. Find a league near you, and go and support these girls. There are leagues popping up all over the world, and they are all busting their asses in a number of ways. Seriously, go find a derby match, because girls kick ass, and tough girls on quad skates kick lots of ass, though probably not as much as our Hard Knox girls.
Friday, November 24, 2006
first christmas music of the season
Today is Friday, a day I attempt not to go out of the house, not because it's Friday but because of the particular Friday that today is. I hope everyone had a lovely Thanksgiving, as I did, and I hope everyone is not shopping and leaving the stress of the crowds to those dumb enough to be shopping today.
This isn't a rant about Christmas, as a season, stretching itself to begin earlier than it ought. We are still at a point where I can mostly ignore that, unless it's coming at us before Halloween, that truly sacred holiday. This is a happy post about a sort of family tradition.
Over the years past, since Big Brother was born, we've begun a near tradition, or at least I have. One of my favorite bits of Christmas is Tchaikovsky's music to The Nutcracker. Having seen the ballet a few times, I can almost picture the scenes as the music plays, but that isn't really a part of my listening. I just love Tchaikovsky and his music, and his music for The Nutcracker is possibly at the very top of that list.
I haven't read the story since last year, nor have I listened to the music since last year. It is Christmas music after all, as far as I'm concerned, and part of its being special is that we save it, waiting to listen till the season is upon us. With Thanksgiving over, I am mostly ready for the season to be upon us. It's time to watch A Christmas Story and Elf, two favorite Christmas movies.
Perhaps tonight, while Momma slaves over the hot sushi stove, I will sit with the boys and read about Herr Drosselmeyer and Maria and the toy soldier as he battles the mouse king. We have a great version of the book that is illustrated by Maurice Sendak based on work he did with the Pacific Northwest Ballet. It is a translation of the original story by E.T.A. Hoffman The Nutcracker and the Mouse King, not the shortened and more popular version by Alexandre Dumas on which the ballet itself was based.
As we prepare for the Christmas holidays and the end of the year, go and find a translation. Watch the ballet if you want, but make a point of reading this wonderful story as it was originally written. I think you'll find it worthwhile.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
happy thanksgiving
My Thanksgiving has begun mostly like they mostly do lately. We are waiting for our contribution to dinner to finish cooking just in time to run to Momma's grandmother's house. We will be a little later than everyone else, but this year, I don't think we'll be so late that everyone has started eating already.
One thing we seem to have avoided the last couple of years is that phone call from Momma's younger brother. He had the worst habit of calling us in an irate manner to tell us we were late. I forget now exactly what we said, but he has not done this in a couple of years. I'm pretty sure we told them to go ahead and eat if it was that big a deal.
This year, Momma made a pumpkin pie and some rolls. The house smelled amazing last night as the pie cooked. I was reading to The Boy and tucking him in bed as the pie went into the oven, and as I exited the room, the smell of pie overwhelmed me in the best possible way. The rolls are cooking now adding their own yeasty, bakey smell to the house.
The parade is on the television right now, though I could certainly do without Barry Manilow's horrid voice. At least I didn't have to see the close up of him, because his newly plasticized face seriously creeps me the fuck out. I'm not entirely against prettying yourself up surgically, but when your neck looks like the flap of chicken that hangs off the big hole, it doesn't do any justice to the surgeon's work on your face. When you touch that face with your age stiffened hand, we see that, though your face is only a couple of years old, the rest of you is still somewhere north of sixty.
This will be the fun holiday this year. Big Brother seems mostly over his cold whereas The Boy's sickness seems to have traveled down to his stomach as he has voided it a few times this morning. The poor kid is so not his usual stuff. As much as his usual craziness may irk me sometimes, I'd so much rather he be bouncing off the walls than moping on the sofa. I'm still suffering what may or may not be a cracked rib, but that isn't going to bother my eating ability.
I'll end with a quick statement about marching bands. I love marching bands. To me, they are the highlight of a good parade. Why is it that predominately white marching bands tend not to have the life and joy of the predominately black marching bands? It's something I see proven anew each year with the Macy's parade. Oh, and can Hannah Montana's float just break down and leave her where she can't ruin the parade?
One thing we seem to have avoided the last couple of years is that phone call from Momma's younger brother. He had the worst habit of calling us in an irate manner to tell us we were late. I forget now exactly what we said, but he has not done this in a couple of years. I'm pretty sure we told them to go ahead and eat if it was that big a deal.
This year, Momma made a pumpkin pie and some rolls. The house smelled amazing last night as the pie cooked. I was reading to The Boy and tucking him in bed as the pie went into the oven, and as I exited the room, the smell of pie overwhelmed me in the best possible way. The rolls are cooking now adding their own yeasty, bakey smell to the house.
The parade is on the television right now, though I could certainly do without Barry Manilow's horrid voice. At least I didn't have to see the close up of him, because his newly plasticized face seriously creeps me the fuck out. I'm not entirely against prettying yourself up surgically, but when your neck looks like the flap of chicken that hangs off the big hole, it doesn't do any justice to the surgeon's work on your face. When you touch that face with your age stiffened hand, we see that, though your face is only a couple of years old, the rest of you is still somewhere north of sixty.
This will be the fun holiday this year. Big Brother seems mostly over his cold whereas The Boy's sickness seems to have traveled down to his stomach as he has voided it a few times this morning. The poor kid is so not his usual stuff. As much as his usual craziness may irk me sometimes, I'd so much rather he be bouncing off the walls than moping on the sofa. I'm still suffering what may or may not be a cracked rib, but that isn't going to bother my eating ability.
I'll end with a quick statement about marching bands. I love marching bands. To me, they are the highlight of a good parade. Why is it that predominately white marching bands tend not to have the life and joy of the predominately black marching bands? It's something I see proven anew each year with the Macy's parade. Oh, and can Hannah Montana's float just break down and leave her where she can't ruin the parade?
Monday, November 20, 2006
penguisexual misguidedness
Spunky is concerned about those darned gay penguins. Actually, the concern is with control of public schools not being with the local community. I can understand that concern, even as a homeschool family. If the school system was substantially different, I might feel differently about my own kids attending school. I also might not.
Here's the problem though. She suggests that schools should more closely mirror the local community, representing the values of that community. As tax dollars are taken by the state to be funneled back to the schools, the schools are less concerned with community standards and more concerned with state or even federal standards. Problem? That a few uptight christians could pervert the system with majority rule and make the schools places that teach things they have no business teaching.
Spunky uses as her example the book about gay penguins raising a baby. I will admit that I haven't read the book, and any statements I might make as to the contents of this book are in fact complete hearsay. I don't know if I will ever read the book. If either of my boys wants to check it out from the library, I will gladly do so and will happily read it with them. Given the community in which I live, I wouldn't be surprised if a christian family has already checked it out and "lost" it in order to save us from the evil gay penguins.
Spunky's problem here is that the community library should move this book to a more mature section so that poor innocent babies don't accidentally read it. One must assume that she fears kids will get the gay if they so much as walk past the shelf it's on, so we are better off putting a kids book in the adult section of the library where no one will ever have the evil gay get to them. She's upset that the community wanted this book removed, but it wasn't, and this is her example of the problem with non localized school control.
The real problem with her theory is that she is just plain wrong. If we were to bow and scrape to all such misguided parents, we should much more easily and cheaply just shut down the library system. The majority is not always right, and this is a case in which parents should police themselves and their own children. If your kid has a book about gay penguins and you don't know it, it isn't the book's fault or the library's fault. You should have parented a little bit better. If I want a children's book about gay penguins, I should be able to find that book in the children's area based on the Dewey decimal system. If my kids want books about gay penguins, they too should be able to find that book where it belongs, once again using Dewey's magical number code.
My real argument is best described in the terms in which I commented to her. She may or may not post my comment. Either way, it's here for all to see, and I stand by it. I'm about tired of this clamor from the religious freak fringe, and I may just get some non christians together to start protesting. Perhaps their books do not belong.
Now we come full circle to those pesky penguins. This is yet another battle the christians deserve to lose. They should not be able to force their strictures on all of us. They should not be able to force a christian state where a secular state belongs. They don't really deserve the time they take trying to enforce their rights while trampling the rights of everyone else. And the penguins aren't gay from what I've heard, but leave it to christians to make everything about sex in the end. They sound awfully dirty minded when you take the time to think about it.
hat tip to Chris for directing me to Spunky yet again.
Update: As Spunky mentions in her comment here, she did comment at her own blog that she tends to disagree that parents' desires to have certain books removed should automatically be a prompt for those books to end up being removed. However, in this quote I lifted from her post that I linked to above, she seems to suggest that perhaps parental requests for book removal should not be overlooked.
Here's the problem though. She suggests that schools should more closely mirror the local community, representing the values of that community. As tax dollars are taken by the state to be funneled back to the schools, the schools are less concerned with community standards and more concerned with state or even federal standards. Problem? That a few uptight christians could pervert the system with majority rule and make the schools places that teach things they have no business teaching.
Spunky uses as her example the book about gay penguins raising a baby. I will admit that I haven't read the book, and any statements I might make as to the contents of this book are in fact complete hearsay. I don't know if I will ever read the book. If either of my boys wants to check it out from the library, I will gladly do so and will happily read it with them. Given the community in which I live, I wouldn't be surprised if a christian family has already checked it out and "lost" it in order to save us from the evil gay penguins.
Spunky's problem here is that the community library should move this book to a more mature section so that poor innocent babies don't accidentally read it. One must assume that she fears kids will get the gay if they so much as walk past the shelf it's on, so we are better off putting a kids book in the adult section of the library where no one will ever have the evil gay get to them. She's upset that the community wanted this book removed, but it wasn't, and this is her example of the problem with non localized school control.
The real problem with her theory is that she is just plain wrong. If we were to bow and scrape to all such misguided parents, we should much more easily and cheaply just shut down the library system. The majority is not always right, and this is a case in which parents should police themselves and their own children. If your kid has a book about gay penguins and you don't know it, it isn't the book's fault or the library's fault. You should have parented a little bit better. If I want a children's book about gay penguins, I should be able to find that book in the children's area based on the Dewey decimal system. If my kids want books about gay penguins, they too should be able to find that book where it belongs, once again using Dewey's magical number code.
My real argument is best described in the terms in which I commented to her. She may or may not post my comment. Either way, it's here for all to see, and I stand by it. I'm about tired of this clamor from the religious freak fringe, and I may just get some non christians together to start protesting. Perhaps their books do not belong.
What if the request were that books containing the christian christmas story be moved to a more mature part of the library? I don't want my kids minds perverted by any superstition, so all books containing christian references are, to me and my family, books that should not be left where kids might accidentally pick them up and get confused by mysticism.And that's my point. Christians all too often want to bitch and moan about losing their rights to force their stories on us. They protest that their children are not allowed to pray in school when the truth is that they just aren't allowed to force the whole school to pray as they deem fit. Schools are places where much prayer happens, but like the biblical pharisees, today's christian wants to be able to stand up and pray aloud and force all those around to be part of that prayer even if that part is passive. They can't accept that they don't have the right to force everyone to undergo their ceremonies. In the interest of fairness, if we allow them that right, then we must allow all religions that same right. They want their ten commandments in the court rooms, but they don't want buddhist koans in the court room. They want "under god" in the pledge of allegiance, but they don't want vishnu or allah included.
Now we come full circle to those pesky penguins. This is yet another battle the christians deserve to lose. They should not be able to force their strictures on all of us. They should not be able to force a christian state where a secular state belongs. They don't really deserve the time they take trying to enforce their rights while trampling the rights of everyone else. And the penguins aren't gay from what I've heard, but leave it to christians to make everything about sex in the end. They sound awfully dirty minded when you take the time to think about it.
hat tip to Chris for directing me to Spunky yet again.
Update: As Spunky mentions in her comment here, she did comment at her own blog that she tends to disagree that parents' desires to have certain books removed should automatically be a prompt for those books to end up being removed. However, in this quote I lifted from her post that I linked to above, she seems to suggest that perhaps parental requests for book removal should not be overlooked.
That's why you have library books about gay penguins in the schools over parents objections. It's just one book, but the school administrators are reluctant to remove it.I should hope that the schools are reluctant to remove this book as they should always be reluctant to remove books because someone's knickers are in a twist.
woe is us
It goes without saying that there are plenty of people who have a worse time/life than I do. I really can't/shouldn't complain in general what with the great wife and kids, but I'm going to. It's time for everyone's favorite, sports injury tales.
My last soccer game of the season took place just a few hours ago. My team won, and for that I'm happy. Momma had a derby match tonight, and her team won, bringing more delight and happiness.
Now for the woe. The boys are happy to share their new cold with each other as well as with Momma and me. They've been slowly getting sickish for a couple of days, and today, Momma and I woke up with that ick somewhere behind our noses and in our throats. Day one of a sick isn't usually bad enough to stop us getting out and doing our thing, though I certainly dread the upcoming whatever it turns out to be. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of woe.
Today was cold, as I may have mentioned in a previous post. Add to that the spongey nature of the soccer fields, and you've got a recipe for . . . well, ick. With each step I took on the fields today I watched the water come out of the ground. I'd guess the temperature was in the mid to low '40's, not as cold as it could be but plenty cold as far as I'm concerned. That wasn't the cause of my woe, but I did spend a good portion of my day wet, muddy and cold.
So my injuries include a nice scratch and bruise combo on my thigh from a relatively clean play. Soon after though I took a really hard elbow to my ribs. That one hurts like fuck. I can feel my back and knees starting to chime in with their own song of woe. The worst of that is probably the pain seconded closely by the fact that the ref missed it completely. I can feel the knees giving their usual song of lament that will open to a full operatic movement by tomorrow.
Roller derby is custom made for causing pain. Momma came out mostly injury free, but she couldn't even get her hand far enough around the back to unhook her bra when we got home from the bout. If you are familiar with roller derby, you know that the blocks are generally shoulder to shoulder. She knocked a bitch or two down today, including the dirty playing gal that caused me not to post about the last match. Seriously, I never can say something nice, and this was a time when I actually didn't. By tomorrow, Momma is likely to have even more pains, most likely scattered across the back. She didn't take too many bad spills, but she hit the ground a few times, and it doesn't take a bad spill to bring the pain when you're moving as fast as she does.
Unless the rib issue I have turns out to be more than I think, we are not really too horribly hurt. The pains and the cold add up to some minor woe, and we aren't likely to be the most comfortable people over the next few days, but we both won, and it's over for the night. We can get the boys in bed, drink some pain killer and hit the bed ourselves. We'll wake up tomorrow bright and shiny with the pain we didn't know to expect. And you know that as soon as we get the chance, we'll both be back at our respective games raring to go.
My last soccer game of the season took place just a few hours ago. My team won, and for that I'm happy. Momma had a derby match tonight, and her team won, bringing more delight and happiness.
Now for the woe. The boys are happy to share their new cold with each other as well as with Momma and me. They've been slowly getting sickish for a couple of days, and today, Momma and I woke up with that ick somewhere behind our noses and in our throats. Day one of a sick isn't usually bad enough to stop us getting out and doing our thing, though I certainly dread the upcoming whatever it turns out to be. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of woe.
Today was cold, as I may have mentioned in a previous post. Add to that the spongey nature of the soccer fields, and you've got a recipe for . . . well, ick. With each step I took on the fields today I watched the water come out of the ground. I'd guess the temperature was in the mid to low '40's, not as cold as it could be but plenty cold as far as I'm concerned. That wasn't the cause of my woe, but I did spend a good portion of my day wet, muddy and cold.
So my injuries include a nice scratch and bruise combo on my thigh from a relatively clean play. Soon after though I took a really hard elbow to my ribs. That one hurts like fuck. I can feel my back and knees starting to chime in with their own song of woe. The worst of that is probably the pain seconded closely by the fact that the ref missed it completely. I can feel the knees giving their usual song of lament that will open to a full operatic movement by tomorrow.
Roller derby is custom made for causing pain. Momma came out mostly injury free, but she couldn't even get her hand far enough around the back to unhook her bra when we got home from the bout. If you are familiar with roller derby, you know that the blocks are generally shoulder to shoulder. She knocked a bitch or two down today, including the dirty playing gal that caused me not to post about the last match. Seriously, I never can say something nice, and this was a time when I actually didn't. By tomorrow, Momma is likely to have even more pains, most likely scattered across the back. She didn't take too many bad spills, but she hit the ground a few times, and it doesn't take a bad spill to bring the pain when you're moving as fast as she does.
Unless the rib issue I have turns out to be more than I think, we are not really too horribly hurt. The pains and the cold add up to some minor woe, and we aren't likely to be the most comfortable people over the next few days, but we both won, and it's over for the night. We can get the boys in bed, drink some pain killer and hit the bed ourselves. We'll wake up tomorrow bright and shiny with the pain we didn't know to expect. And you know that as soon as we get the chance, we'll both be back at our respective games raring to go.
Sunday, November 19, 2006
I hate kids music
Yes, in fact, I hate kid's music with a white hot passion. I have never seen or listened to High School the Musical, and I hope against hope that I will never have to. I have actual issues with most kid's music that I've heard. Don't even get me started on the travesty that is Kids Bop which I thankfully only know through their hellish commercials.
I have made one single exception that I can think of, though if Momma reads this, she may think of one other exception that I'm less willing to admit to. I really doubt that exception exists, but Momma has a way of remembering things I don't, whether or not they really happened.
Before I rant any more I will list my one exception. I love Thomas the Tank Engine. The original stories by Reverend Awdry are the ones I love, and the new ones that exist solely to make money can go straight to hell. Rev. Awdry's original stories were made up for his son, the same way that many classics of children's literature were created. So my musical exception here is Roundhouse Rhythms, a collection of songs from different episodes of the Thomas stories. I'm sure anyone familiar with Thomas knows plenty of lyrics to Gone Fishin' which is a great song. Toby's song is also a good one. I've even found a site with the lyrics so that I can sing along.
Now we continue with the rant. I just don't see the point of music geared toward kids. It's always music that no one but kids want to hear, and kids only like it because we buy it for them and treat is as special for them. In fact, most kid's music just plain sucks, so in my mind, we are, by giving our kids this crap, telling them they don't deserve good music. It's insulting to kids in my opinion to suggest that they can't appreciate good music.
Big Brother doesn't seem to appreciate the ska quite as much as Momma and I, but he does seem to like some of it. The Boy is constantly asking who we are listening to, even when we actually have the radio on, which means I don't usually know who it is till the DJ tells us, and I don't know that we've found anything he will claim not to like. We only listen to three stations regularly, NPR, the local college station and WDVX, easily one of the greatest radio stations known to man. Click the link and listen. If you love Americana and related styles you will love them. They are also commercial free, though my anti-commercial leanings get a different post.
I'll end the rant with music I know the boys like: Dwight Yoakam, Louis Jordan, Leonard Cohen, Carl Perkins, The Clash, Dropkick Murphys, The Melvins, Motorhead, Flogging Molly, Faith No More, Social Distortion, and the list really goes on. I could throw in some classical music that they've enjoyed, Tchaikovsky, the entire Strauss family, Prokofiev (Peter and the Wolf) Basically my point is, why reduce music to pop pablum when you can just give your kids real music? Why limit what they can get into? Why give them music that has an obvious enjoy-by date?
I have made one single exception that I can think of, though if Momma reads this, she may think of one other exception that I'm less willing to admit to. I really doubt that exception exists, but Momma has a way of remembering things I don't, whether or not they really happened.
Before I rant any more I will list my one exception. I love Thomas the Tank Engine. The original stories by Reverend Awdry are the ones I love, and the new ones that exist solely to make money can go straight to hell. Rev. Awdry's original stories were made up for his son, the same way that many classics of children's literature were created. So my musical exception here is Roundhouse Rhythms, a collection of songs from different episodes of the Thomas stories. I'm sure anyone familiar with Thomas knows plenty of lyrics to Gone Fishin' which is a great song. Toby's song is also a good one. I've even found a site with the lyrics so that I can sing along.
Now we continue with the rant. I just don't see the point of music geared toward kids. It's always music that no one but kids want to hear, and kids only like it because we buy it for them and treat is as special for them. In fact, most kid's music just plain sucks, so in my mind, we are, by giving our kids this crap, telling them they don't deserve good music. It's insulting to kids in my opinion to suggest that they can't appreciate good music.
Big Brother doesn't seem to appreciate the ska quite as much as Momma and I, but he does seem to like some of it. The Boy is constantly asking who we are listening to, even when we actually have the radio on, which means I don't usually know who it is till the DJ tells us, and I don't know that we've found anything he will claim not to like. We only listen to three stations regularly, NPR, the local college station and WDVX, easily one of the greatest radio stations known to man. Click the link and listen. If you love Americana and related styles you will love them. They are also commercial free, though my anti-commercial leanings get a different post.
I'll end the rant with music I know the boys like: Dwight Yoakam, Louis Jordan, Leonard Cohen, Carl Perkins, The Clash, Dropkick Murphys, The Melvins, Motorhead, Flogging Molly, Faith No More, Social Distortion, and the list really goes on. I could throw in some classical music that they've enjoyed, Tchaikovsky, the entire Strauss family, Prokofiev (Peter and the Wolf) Basically my point is, why reduce music to pop pablum when you can just give your kids real music? Why limit what they can get into? Why give them music that has an obvious enjoy-by date?
not soccer weather
First, don't assume I'm pretending we get cold weather. We are in the south, as I well know, and it just doesn't really get that cold down here compared to some of the more crazy ass states like Minnesota.
Having said that, it's damn cold here today. Yesterday was oddly cold, colder than it felt, light, not unpleasant breezes all day. The breezes today are similarly light but much colder. Today's weather is the kind of weather where heavy and heavily padded fellows collide into each other while searching for the guy with the funny oblong ball. This is football weather.
I've checked the website of the soccer league on which I play. Our team captain called me last night to make sure I knew that we did indeed have a game today, but I checked again today to be sure that the games hadn't been canceled. We haven't had enough rain for the fields to be off limits, which is why our games are generally canceled. Apparently the schedule stands, and we will play.
The sky is gray and a little unpleasant looking, and the perky news ho last night actually mentioned the phrase "snow flurries." Those aren't rain clouds outside, but they could easily be snow clouds. It looks like winter crap weather outside.
And it's cold. Even in a flannel and leather jacket, my smokes today have not been pleasant. It ain't soccer weather out there today.
I briefly considered not playing. Part of me really doesn't look forward to freezing my nuts to my leg and being so cold that I feel brittle. Another part of me thinks that some of the other team members won't show giving me that much more playing time. That's the thought that might push me out the door into this not soccer weather day. I have also to consider that many team mates may not show. Last season ended with the majority of the team not showing for the last couple of games leaving us to play severely overwhelmed by the opposing team. I'm not looking forward to being part of seven or eight players playing a full side of eleven with substitutes which is a fear alongside the brittle freeze.
I will most likely be out at the field, freezing, shivering like a scared puppy. I will play my ass off looking to win the last game of the season. And that's the main reason I'll be there. This is our last game of the fall season, so soccer is over for a few months after today. I'm almost looking forward to the freedom of not having games looming each Sunday. But as usual, as much as I might think I'm looking forward to it, I'll miss soccer until spring finally drags itself back.
So I'll play. I'll freeze, sort of. I'll hurt myself a little on a spectacular (spectacularly stupid) slide tackle. And too soon it'll be over for a short time.
Having said that, it's damn cold here today. Yesterday was oddly cold, colder than it felt, light, not unpleasant breezes all day. The breezes today are similarly light but much colder. Today's weather is the kind of weather where heavy and heavily padded fellows collide into each other while searching for the guy with the funny oblong ball. This is football weather.
I've checked the website of the soccer league on which I play. Our team captain called me last night to make sure I knew that we did indeed have a game today, but I checked again today to be sure that the games hadn't been canceled. We haven't had enough rain for the fields to be off limits, which is why our games are generally canceled. Apparently the schedule stands, and we will play.
The sky is gray and a little unpleasant looking, and the perky news ho last night actually mentioned the phrase "snow flurries." Those aren't rain clouds outside, but they could easily be snow clouds. It looks like winter crap weather outside.
And it's cold. Even in a flannel and leather jacket, my smokes today have not been pleasant. It ain't soccer weather out there today.
I briefly considered not playing. Part of me really doesn't look forward to freezing my nuts to my leg and being so cold that I feel brittle. Another part of me thinks that some of the other team members won't show giving me that much more playing time. That's the thought that might push me out the door into this not soccer weather day. I have also to consider that many team mates may not show. Last season ended with the majority of the team not showing for the last couple of games leaving us to play severely overwhelmed by the opposing team. I'm not looking forward to being part of seven or eight players playing a full side of eleven with substitutes which is a fear alongside the brittle freeze.
I will most likely be out at the field, freezing, shivering like a scared puppy. I will play my ass off looking to win the last game of the season. And that's the main reason I'll be there. This is our last game of the fall season, so soccer is over for a few months after today. I'm almost looking forward to the freedom of not having games looming each Sunday. But as usual, as much as I might think I'm looking forward to it, I'll miss soccer until spring finally drags itself back.
So I'll play. I'll freeze, sort of. I'll hurt myself a little on a spectacular (spectacularly stupid) slide tackle. And too soon it'll be over for a short time.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
where, oh where
Where do people get the fucked up ideas that they have about homeschooling? We have to accept, to some degree, that the fundys have set a pretty bad example of who we are. People too often see the stereotype, the exclusionary tactics of certain people who make statements to the effect that the schools are anti christian, that their children are not allowed to pray or proselytize. They freak out that god is being taken out of the classroom because some of us don't want to pledge "under god" when reciting the pledge of allegiance.
Yes, these few out of many are the ones that get to describe homeschooling. Though so many of us know that this is not what homeschooling really represents, we are still doomed by our undesired representatives.
There should be some way that we can proclaim ourselves to be different, but we end up painted by this christ colored brush all too often. We may not like it, and we may differ greatly in our reasons to homeschool, but too many people hear that single word, homeschool, and they immediately assume all sorts of things about us.
I don't feel like posting the same old post about how it just ain't that way. I shouldn't have to describe all the ways we are different, all the ways that we know exactly what we are doing. I have read enough posts to know that we are not in the minority, yet I look around and find that we are being referenced as this when we are really that.
I'm a fairly anti public school person. I have any number of issues with the beast, and I'm generally happy to rant about the situation. I have pretty much zero experience with public schools having attended the same little christian school all the years I was in school. Momma has plenty of horror stories about her years in the system, and I can easily use Google to find any number of horror stories that back up our decision.
I know that part of the problem is the blanket statements. I know that one single option is never right for all people and families. I know that not all public schools are evil places. I also know the amount of work I'm willing to do for my kids as opposed to the amount of work I'm not willing to do in regard to the public school system in terms of reteaching my kids. If I'm going to have to do the work anyway, I'll just keep them at home and do it right the first time.
What it comes down to is that I'm not willing for them to have my kids. Plenty of kids will leave the system after twelfth grade with a fair education and without having been bullied and misled. Plenty of kids will get a fine education from the system. My kids won't be among those, though they will end up just fine, well educated and well adjusted.
It all ends at the same conclusion. I love my kids and respect their ability to learn. I want them to grow up to be open minded and caring. I want them to develop into who they are as opposed to ending up a clone of their age peers. I want them to learn certain things when they are at an appropriate point in their lives. I want them to learn the truth about certain things that schools, no matter how good particular school systems may be, will never be able to teach well.
Yes, these few out of many are the ones that get to describe homeschooling. Though so many of us know that this is not what homeschooling really represents, we are still doomed by our undesired representatives.
There should be some way that we can proclaim ourselves to be different, but we end up painted by this christ colored brush all too often. We may not like it, and we may differ greatly in our reasons to homeschool, but too many people hear that single word, homeschool, and they immediately assume all sorts of things about us.
I don't feel like posting the same old post about how it just ain't that way. I shouldn't have to describe all the ways we are different, all the ways that we know exactly what we are doing. I have read enough posts to know that we are not in the minority, yet I look around and find that we are being referenced as this when we are really that.
I'm a fairly anti public school person. I have any number of issues with the beast, and I'm generally happy to rant about the situation. I have pretty much zero experience with public schools having attended the same little christian school all the years I was in school. Momma has plenty of horror stories about her years in the system, and I can easily use Google to find any number of horror stories that back up our decision.
I know that part of the problem is the blanket statements. I know that one single option is never right for all people and families. I know that not all public schools are evil places. I also know the amount of work I'm willing to do for my kids as opposed to the amount of work I'm not willing to do in regard to the public school system in terms of reteaching my kids. If I'm going to have to do the work anyway, I'll just keep them at home and do it right the first time.
What it comes down to is that I'm not willing for them to have my kids. Plenty of kids will leave the system after twelfth grade with a fair education and without having been bullied and misled. Plenty of kids will get a fine education from the system. My kids won't be among those, though they will end up just fine, well educated and well adjusted.
It all ends at the same conclusion. I love my kids and respect their ability to learn. I want them to grow up to be open minded and caring. I want them to develop into who they are as opposed to ending up a clone of their age peers. I want them to learn certain things when they are at an appropriate point in their lives. I want them to learn the truth about certain things that schools, no matter how good particular school systems may be, will never be able to teach well.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
oh how I suck
My posting here has gone steadily downhill lately. I've either run out of things to say or just finally realized that I never really had that much to say.
I'm going to make a real effort to get back into the habit of writing pithy little rants and blowing up about things that don't really have any bearing on my life.
I've considered a number of tactics to rehabitualize the posting thing. I could use this as an outlet for making up words, a personal favorite pastime. I think one of my problems is the bogdownedness I feel with normal life sometimes. I've got a really sweet habit of getting myself into a personal funk from which all topics, even the rare good one, just seem like crap that I prefer not to plod through.
Good (or not so much) rants are another personal favorite. I can always think of something to bitch about, so perhaps I should admit that uninformed spouting of vitriol is my true forte and should just stick with that.
So with that, I'll wrap this post and begin an angry screed against something completely inane and pointless. I'll give it all I have, writing furiously while railing furiously, tilting at windmills with made up words full of sensity and knowability while simultaneously nonsensabacle.
I'm going to make a real effort to get back into the habit of writing pithy little rants and blowing up about things that don't really have any bearing on my life.
I've considered a number of tactics to rehabitualize the posting thing. I could use this as an outlet for making up words, a personal favorite pastime. I think one of my problems is the bogdownedness I feel with normal life sometimes. I've got a really sweet habit of getting myself into a personal funk from which all topics, even the rare good one, just seem like crap that I prefer not to plod through.
Good (or not so much) rants are another personal favorite. I can always think of something to bitch about, so perhaps I should admit that uninformed spouting of vitriol is my true forte and should just stick with that.
So with that, I'll wrap this post and begin an angry screed against something completely inane and pointless. I'll give it all I have, writing furiously while railing furiously, tilting at windmills with made up words full of sensity and knowability while simultaneously nonsensabacle.
full quivers, empty heads
If that title doesn't piss off the over-breeders, then I will have to resort to even more inflammatory rhetoric, but I'm pretty sure that'll get 'em. If you think a quiver full is a good way to get a deer during bow season, you are obviously not up to date on the newest dominionist tactics.
God is the ultimate physician, or so we are told by a certain segment of fundamentalist christians. These people revel in having large families as they overpopulate the earth. The only birth control they use is faith that their supreme leader will decide if they need more babies. One must wonder, given this bit of insanity, whether they bother ever going to human doctors. You can't very well call god your doctor and then take your medical business elsewhere when he doesn't give you that physical that the new job says you need, but that's part of the christian thing where there words and actions don't really actually coincide so much.
What's wrong with having a bunch of babies? Isn't it their right as christian weirdos to overpopulate the earth? Who am I to suggest that their reasoning is both faulty and frightening? Are they suggesting that god is a condom and can decide to break or not based on whether he thinks you need more babies?
A quiver full of babies is considered a blessing, or so we are told. Does that mean that my youngest brother and his wife are somehow not worthy of being blessed? Because they had a hell of a time getting and staying pregnant. If you met any of my family, you'd have to also note that they are the kind of people who could be considered good christians. They follow the Bible's teachings and vote republican. How about my second oldest brother and his wife? They have three beautiful and bright daughters, but during the years they were having children, she had a couple of very difficult pregnancies and her own trouble producing.
My real issue here is one of absolute terror that these people are attempting to out breed people who think rationally. They are breeding christian warriors to eventually have enough votes to establish their theocracy. They don't want a free America with liberty and justice for all. They want to base national law entirely on biblical dogma, and since they can't do that as things currently stand, they will change it with masses of brainwashed children.
Christians have every right to pretend their scriptures make sense. They have every right to justify following certain parts of the Bible while ignoring other parts. It isn't my holy book, so I'm in no position to require that they follow it completely or interpret it sensibly. I can only use my knowledge of their book as I've read it, and I can certainly call them out when I catch that whiff of bullshit that follows them around.
The Bible makes very few references to breeding, and those it does are misconstrued to justify making more babies than they should. What the Bible does mention more than any thing else is that it's followers should spend their time taking care of the poor and the needy and the less fortunate. I'd think that children in foster homes, children needing a stable family, fall under all those headings. But certain people, assuming that god didn't mean for them to worry about other people, are too busy making too many babies so that they can send their christian army into the world to fight evil.
I have as many kids as I need. I come from a fairly large family, and I'm not completely against people having big families. I do think that people should use common sense when planning their families and controlling their own personal birth rate. What is a reasonable number of children? That's a question I can't answer. I do know that children should not be produced as political tools for future christian election wins, and that sounds to me like the plan when I read some of the writings by quiver full people. It's disturbing and frightening and wrong.
hat tip: this is a post I'd considered before, though it was reading at Spunky's place that got the brain wheels rustily cranking out my thoughts. Follow the link to a blog that I find well written and well thought out even when her beliefs make me cringe in fright. I don't always disagree with her, for what it's worth, but I hope like hell people like this never get in a position to dictate right and wrong for the country. Our current president has shown us time and again why overly faith based people aren't good at running nations.
God is the ultimate physician, or so we are told by a certain segment of fundamentalist christians. These people revel in having large families as they overpopulate the earth. The only birth control they use is faith that their supreme leader will decide if they need more babies. One must wonder, given this bit of insanity, whether they bother ever going to human doctors. You can't very well call god your doctor and then take your medical business elsewhere when he doesn't give you that physical that the new job says you need, but that's part of the christian thing where there words and actions don't really actually coincide so much.
What's wrong with having a bunch of babies? Isn't it their right as christian weirdos to overpopulate the earth? Who am I to suggest that their reasoning is both faulty and frightening? Are they suggesting that god is a condom and can decide to break or not based on whether he thinks you need more babies?
A quiver full of babies is considered a blessing, or so we are told. Does that mean that my youngest brother and his wife are somehow not worthy of being blessed? Because they had a hell of a time getting and staying pregnant. If you met any of my family, you'd have to also note that they are the kind of people who could be considered good christians. They follow the Bible's teachings and vote republican. How about my second oldest brother and his wife? They have three beautiful and bright daughters, but during the years they were having children, she had a couple of very difficult pregnancies and her own trouble producing.
My real issue here is one of absolute terror that these people are attempting to out breed people who think rationally. They are breeding christian warriors to eventually have enough votes to establish their theocracy. They don't want a free America with liberty and justice for all. They want to base national law entirely on biblical dogma, and since they can't do that as things currently stand, they will change it with masses of brainwashed children.
Christians have every right to pretend their scriptures make sense. They have every right to justify following certain parts of the Bible while ignoring other parts. It isn't my holy book, so I'm in no position to require that they follow it completely or interpret it sensibly. I can only use my knowledge of their book as I've read it, and I can certainly call them out when I catch that whiff of bullshit that follows them around.
The Bible makes very few references to breeding, and those it does are misconstrued to justify making more babies than they should. What the Bible does mention more than any thing else is that it's followers should spend their time taking care of the poor and the needy and the less fortunate. I'd think that children in foster homes, children needing a stable family, fall under all those headings. But certain people, assuming that god didn't mean for them to worry about other people, are too busy making too many babies so that they can send their christian army into the world to fight evil.
I have as many kids as I need. I come from a fairly large family, and I'm not completely against people having big families. I do think that people should use common sense when planning their families and controlling their own personal birth rate. What is a reasonable number of children? That's a question I can't answer. I do know that children should not be produced as political tools for future christian election wins, and that sounds to me like the plan when I read some of the writings by quiver full people. It's disturbing and frightening and wrong.
hat tip: this is a post I'd considered before, though it was reading at Spunky's place that got the brain wheels rustily cranking out my thoughts. Follow the link to a blog that I find well written and well thought out even when her beliefs make me cringe in fright. I don't always disagree with her, for what it's worth, but I hope like hell people like this never get in a position to dictate right and wrong for the country. Our current president has shown us time and again why overly faith based people aren't good at running nations.
english as a second language
I'm no linguist. I'm just a guy with a couple of drinks in him. Something that I believe is that, were I to move to England, I could easily learn English, but for now, I suppose what I speak can best be described as American. Another post for another time might be about the question posed to me some time ago by a Mexican coworker. He wondered why we in the US refer to ourselves as American when there are in fact a couple of other Americas that we sort of preclude from that designation.
So my point here gets back, hat tip style I suppose, to the book I mentioned in a different post. I'm reading An Omelette and a Glass of Wine, written by English food writer Elizabeth David. The problem I'm having is one I've also had with Julia Child with her definite French leanings. I should point out here that I have a huge crush on Julia.
I'm sure my attempts at pronouncing French sound really funny if I were trying to say them to a French person. Lucky for me they usually stay in my head, but that's where the problem comes in. When you are geek about reading random food related stuff, you find often that you're reading about French food of one kind or another as well as about French other stuff.
Sometimes I just get stumped by a word, and I end up with a snooty French man inside my head pronouncing the words in a variety of ways. I can run through a few words that seem to make a certain sense in my head, and suddenly, out of nowhere comes the hard one. I'm not pretending I get all the words right, but I get them right enough in my brain till the one word shows up. My brain beats at it every which way, but my complete lack of any real knowledge of the language cuts through all my confidence from earlier. And that little snooty French man starts saying the word in a very stereotypical French way, laughing AT and not WITH, at which point I'm doomed to stay stuck on this word until I put the book down and walk away for a while.
For what it's worth, I'm cool with the French. I have nothing against them really. They seem to have a nice enough place over there in Europe. Maybe one day, when mother powerball bestows her wealth on me, I'll take a trip out there and have some of their food. I hear it's good. Hell, I might even learn the language finally.
So my point here gets back, hat tip style I suppose, to the book I mentioned in a different post. I'm reading An Omelette and a Glass of Wine, written by English food writer Elizabeth David. The problem I'm having is one I've also had with Julia Child with her definite French leanings. I should point out here that I have a huge crush on Julia.
I'm sure my attempts at pronouncing French sound really funny if I were trying to say them to a French person. Lucky for me they usually stay in my head, but that's where the problem comes in. When you are geek about reading random food related stuff, you find often that you're reading about French food of one kind or another as well as about French other stuff.
Sometimes I just get stumped by a word, and I end up with a snooty French man inside my head pronouncing the words in a variety of ways. I can run through a few words that seem to make a certain sense in my head, and suddenly, out of nowhere comes the hard one. I'm not pretending I get all the words right, but I get them right enough in my brain till the one word shows up. My brain beats at it every which way, but my complete lack of any real knowledge of the language cuts through all my confidence from earlier. And that little snooty French man starts saying the word in a very stereotypical French way, laughing AT and not WITH, at which point I'm doomed to stay stuck on this word until I put the book down and walk away for a while.
For what it's worth, I'm cool with the French. I have nothing against them really. They seem to have a nice enough place over there in Europe. Maybe one day, when mother powerball bestows her wealth on me, I'll take a trip out there and have some of their food. I hear it's good. Hell, I might even learn the language finally.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
new movie
The Boy is wrapping up his television for the day with some cartoons before we read and pack him off to bed. I'm not watching with him, or wasn't, and then something pulls my eyes to the screen. Suddenly, I find myself wanting to watch a new movie, which hasn't happened a lot lately. So many new movies look like such crap.
I was looking forward to Christopher Paolini's book Eragon some time before it came out, I'm sure to some extent because he was homeschooled. It didn't hurt that the book is a pretty good story as is the second in the trilogy, Eldest. I love dragons and mythical creatures and swordplay and long drawn out stories of good versus evil.
Reading the book, I couldn't help but find comparisons to other works of a similar nature. Perhaps for some that would be an issue, and in doing a search I actually came across a christian teen message board that seemed entirely populated by young teen girls explaining how much the book sucks because it's like other books. It was sadly funny, but not so much that I'm going to link to the bitches.
I seem to remember hearing something about a movie, and now I've seen the proof, the commercial, and I hope like hell it's good. No movie can ever really be as good as the book on which it was based. I'm sure scientists have hypothesized and theorified about this, and I'm sure there is some sort of natural law that declaims exactly this truth. As happens, that's going into the "not for this post" pile of ideas for things I may one day blog about.
Damn chriswanzakuh and its cash depleting ways. Damn that this movie is likely going to nestle in my brain which will steep in thoughts of wish and hope for this movie. I don't know how soon I'll willingly brave the movie theater with The Boy in tow. Given all this, I'm not sure when I'll see this movie, but when I do you can be sure I'll tell you all about it.
I was looking forward to Christopher Paolini's book Eragon some time before it came out, I'm sure to some extent because he was homeschooled. It didn't hurt that the book is a pretty good story as is the second in the trilogy, Eldest. I love dragons and mythical creatures and swordplay and long drawn out stories of good versus evil.
Reading the book, I couldn't help but find comparisons to other works of a similar nature. Perhaps for some that would be an issue, and in doing a search I actually came across a christian teen message board that seemed entirely populated by young teen girls explaining how much the book sucks because it's like other books. It was sadly funny, but not so much that I'm going to link to the bitches.
I seem to remember hearing something about a movie, and now I've seen the proof, the commercial, and I hope like hell it's good. No movie can ever really be as good as the book on which it was based. I'm sure scientists have hypothesized and theorified about this, and I'm sure there is some sort of natural law that declaims exactly this truth. As happens, that's going into the "not for this post" pile of ideas for things I may one day blog about.
Damn chriswanzakuh and its cash depleting ways. Damn that this movie is likely going to nestle in my brain which will steep in thoughts of wish and hope for this movie. I don't know how soon I'll willingly brave the movie theater with The Boy in tow. Given all this, I'm not sure when I'll see this movie, but when I do you can be sure I'll tell you all about it.
Saturday, November 11, 2006
a pair of books
I won't recount the horror I've made of my library visits recently. I've racked up some fines through sheer ineptitude and laziness and payed them off at 10% by sheer fortune. We happened to visit the library on amnesty day in which donations of food erase your fines. I didn't realize this before we went, but I had missed two overdue items when packing up the library stuff, so I needed to return those before we could actually check new books out.
One of the books I picked up recently is The Republican War on Science by Chris Mooney, and this is the book I suffered through. It was certainly eye opening, to some extent, but I've also been just into conspiracy theory just enough to not be surprised. It was more depressing than enlightening, but I finished it, and of that I'm proud. I would suggest to most people that they read this book through at least once. Hopefully we can turn things around and this book will soon be a forgotten warning.
I was actually looking for that book as well as The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins, which our library system doesn't have. I'm not quite sure what to think of that. I really don't want it to be some backward southern thing, but if one searches the library catalog, Dawkins almost shows up more often for introductions in books as opposed to as an author. Which brings us to the book I may not get around to before it's due, The Origin of Species and The Voyage of the Beagle, with . . . guess . . . an intro by Richard Dawkins. I'm not sure if I really want to read this book or if I just want to have read it.
Part of the reason I may not get to Darwin this time (I've checked this book out before and not read it because it was due before I got around to it) is that I may just not get around to it before it's due again. I have newer borrowings that seem to be cutting the line in front of the old fellow.
I've hit upon the idea that what I need is to reread John Holt, How Children Learn. I've read it once before, and at some point I remember mentioning to Momma that we needed to just go ahead and buy it sometime. We didn't, so the library comes to the rescue. The book I'm currently reading is only a few Dewey mapped shelves away and wasn't actually on my list. John Holt gets pushed down the line a little. This should in no way demean Mr. Holt as one should certainly read his books. I'd go so far as to suggest that this one book should be given to all new parents as well as all teachers and school administrators.
Somewhere around 340, our downtown library's nonfiction section moves up a floor. On this same floor is the a/v section. I always love a trip to the second floor, and we usually take a few minutes upstairs, usually for music for me, and if Big Brother wants, they have a great selection of videos. I time myself upstairs because of The Boy. He gets noisome, perhaps even crazy, so I don't venture into books to browse until we hit the kid's section. There of course he can be a kid.
The boys were behaving mostly, so I slipped from education to food and cooking, John Holt in hand. I didn't have anything in mind when I came to food, so I may have actually stared at the shelves for a minute waiting for something to go off. Elizabeth David was the one. I picked An Omelette and a Glass of Wine. I have another book of hers that I've loved, though I'm not certain I've read it all. Both books are collections of pieces she's written for a variety of publications, and the book of hers I own, I've skipped around reading different bits as I felt like it. Because it isn't a book you need to read straight through or all at once, Holt may find himself worked into the middle.
Elizabeth David has become a favorite cooking writer of mine. How to describe her writing is a bit difficult. What I'm familiar with mostly happened in the years following World War II. She writes about cooking that I can only imagine. She writes about food rationing well after the war ended. She writes about travelling in France where fees for hotels and meals in the hotel restaurant were priced based on pensioners plans. She makes me jealous, and I read her all the same. Go get one of her books.
Quit with the rambling to end with a question. Why do I feel guilty if I return something to the library without having read it?
One of the books I picked up recently is The Republican War on Science by Chris Mooney, and this is the book I suffered through. It was certainly eye opening, to some extent, but I've also been just into conspiracy theory just enough to not be surprised. It was more depressing than enlightening, but I finished it, and of that I'm proud. I would suggest to most people that they read this book through at least once. Hopefully we can turn things around and this book will soon be a forgotten warning.
I was actually looking for that book as well as The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins, which our library system doesn't have. I'm not quite sure what to think of that. I really don't want it to be some backward southern thing, but if one searches the library catalog, Dawkins almost shows up more often for introductions in books as opposed to as an author. Which brings us to the book I may not get around to before it's due, The Origin of Species and The Voyage of the Beagle, with . . . guess . . . an intro by Richard Dawkins. I'm not sure if I really want to read this book or if I just want to have read it.
Part of the reason I may not get to Darwin this time (I've checked this book out before and not read it because it was due before I got around to it) is that I may just not get around to it before it's due again. I have newer borrowings that seem to be cutting the line in front of the old fellow.
I've hit upon the idea that what I need is to reread John Holt, How Children Learn. I've read it once before, and at some point I remember mentioning to Momma that we needed to just go ahead and buy it sometime. We didn't, so the library comes to the rescue. The book I'm currently reading is only a few Dewey mapped shelves away and wasn't actually on my list. John Holt gets pushed down the line a little. This should in no way demean Mr. Holt as one should certainly read his books. I'd go so far as to suggest that this one book should be given to all new parents as well as all teachers and school administrators.
Somewhere around 340, our downtown library's nonfiction section moves up a floor. On this same floor is the a/v section. I always love a trip to the second floor, and we usually take a few minutes upstairs, usually for music for me, and if Big Brother wants, they have a great selection of videos. I time myself upstairs because of The Boy. He gets noisome, perhaps even crazy, so I don't venture into books to browse until we hit the kid's section. There of course he can be a kid.
The boys were behaving mostly, so I slipped from education to food and cooking, John Holt in hand. I didn't have anything in mind when I came to food, so I may have actually stared at the shelves for a minute waiting for something to go off. Elizabeth David was the one. I picked An Omelette and a Glass of Wine. I have another book of hers that I've loved, though I'm not certain I've read it all. Both books are collections of pieces she's written for a variety of publications, and the book of hers I own, I've skipped around reading different bits as I felt like it. Because it isn't a book you need to read straight through or all at once, Holt may find himself worked into the middle.
Elizabeth David has become a favorite cooking writer of mine. How to describe her writing is a bit difficult. What I'm familiar with mostly happened in the years following World War II. She writes about cooking that I can only imagine. She writes about food rationing well after the war ended. She writes about travelling in France where fees for hotels and meals in the hotel restaurant were priced based on pensioners plans. She makes me jealous, and I read her all the same. Go get one of her books.
Quit with the rambling to end with a question. Why do I feel guilty if I return something to the library without having read it?
Friday, November 10, 2006
loudest voices say the least
Once more, I'm going to start writing a post with no idea exactly where I'm going with this. Chris posted a link to PZ's blog at Science Blogs titled Demand Higher Standards for Homeschooling. What actually follows is his thoughts upon reading a piece about Patrick Henry College. PCH, from what I've read about it, is a college begun in order to cater to a certain segment of the homeschooling population, one of my arch enemies, the fundamentalist. Once more, we as homeschoolers are described in full by a small segment of our population.
What I understand as the meat of the argument is that some homeschoolers teach their children young earth, creationist beliefs instead of the provable truth of science. It's assumed, it seems, that these parents, ever distrustful of all science, must certainly not only not teach it but also have no ability to teach it.
What really struck we were the comments. As Chris mentioned there and at his own blog, something that jumped out at me early on is the similarity between many of the commenters and those fundamentalist they so love to heap scorn on. So many people are so tightly clinging to their own inherent rightness in belief in the one true god be it the judeo christian boogey man or the pure provability of science.
One can neither prove nor disprove that there is a god. One can argue anecdotal evidence and faith, but beyond that, religion is not any in way provable. Science relies solely on proof and must be provable. Science revolves around the evidence we can gather and the variables we can introduce in order to measure outcomes. But often in science, a theory is proven for any number of reasons to be incorrect, and true science has to accept when this happens. Religion has no proof and is in fact based entirely on faith. No amount of faith can make a science experiment produce a desired outcome, and the results of the experiment must be accepted.
According to many of the atheists commenting on Mr. Myers' blog concerning this, teaching children anything that isn't true is actual, real abuse, and one commenter went so far as to compare this to sexual abuse. Another commenter directed us to Auschwitz to show us what happens when kids are taught the religion of their parents. They stand by this not because they are able to prove what they say but because they are right. That's all the proof offered that I can see, because they are right, and because they say so.
The problem here, and it's the same problem in every single anti homeschooling thing I've ever read, is that the people suggesting fixes for what they perceive as wrong with homeschooling generally have no real interest in or knowledge about the subject. All the arguments that arise are answered by homeschoolers, so the argument changes just a little to something we didn't answer, or perhaps it's something we answered, and they've decided they just don't accept our answer. Again, the argument turns into the antagonist proclaiming that what we've said is wrong because they are right and disagree with us. So we as homeschoolers answer the argument only to rebutted again. We are never agreed with, and when we do successfully counter someone, they won't generally admit it, but they will in fact change their argument starting the process all over again.
Especially worrisome was the tone, in many of the comments, that children are little more than wards of the state that people produce to add to the structure of society. People are seen as having few real rights when it comes to raising our children and in fact it's suggested that society has more rights to our children than we do. If we argue against that we are assumed to view our children as property over whom we hold all power. Those so secure in their personal rightness would argue that the state/society, has a right to teach our kids their view of the truth regardless of our wishes as parents. The state, they argue, even has the right to take your children and force them to attend school and be indoctrinated with what they see as the truth.
Reason and thought don't seem to account for much when people argue to be right instead of being willing to rethink their position. This doesn't seem like a very stable place for science to stand. Science needs to be able to move and sway with what is and isn't, to be both provable and disprovable. Being right has no place in science, but learning the truth, working hard to find out what can be proven and rigorously testing, that is science, and it is homeschooling.
What I understand as the meat of the argument is that some homeschoolers teach their children young earth, creationist beliefs instead of the provable truth of science. It's assumed, it seems, that these parents, ever distrustful of all science, must certainly not only not teach it but also have no ability to teach it.
What really struck we were the comments. As Chris mentioned there and at his own blog, something that jumped out at me early on is the similarity between many of the commenters and those fundamentalist they so love to heap scorn on. So many people are so tightly clinging to their own inherent rightness in belief in the one true god be it the judeo christian boogey man or the pure provability of science.
One can neither prove nor disprove that there is a god. One can argue anecdotal evidence and faith, but beyond that, religion is not any in way provable. Science relies solely on proof and must be provable. Science revolves around the evidence we can gather and the variables we can introduce in order to measure outcomes. But often in science, a theory is proven for any number of reasons to be incorrect, and true science has to accept when this happens. Religion has no proof and is in fact based entirely on faith. No amount of faith can make a science experiment produce a desired outcome, and the results of the experiment must be accepted.
According to many of the atheists commenting on Mr. Myers' blog concerning this, teaching children anything that isn't true is actual, real abuse, and one commenter went so far as to compare this to sexual abuse. Another commenter directed us to Auschwitz to show us what happens when kids are taught the religion of their parents. They stand by this not because they are able to prove what they say but because they are right. That's all the proof offered that I can see, because they are right, and because they say so.
The problem here, and it's the same problem in every single anti homeschooling thing I've ever read, is that the people suggesting fixes for what they perceive as wrong with homeschooling generally have no real interest in or knowledge about the subject. All the arguments that arise are answered by homeschoolers, so the argument changes just a little to something we didn't answer, or perhaps it's something we answered, and they've decided they just don't accept our answer. Again, the argument turns into the antagonist proclaiming that what we've said is wrong because they are right and disagree with us. So we as homeschoolers answer the argument only to rebutted again. We are never agreed with, and when we do successfully counter someone, they won't generally admit it, but they will in fact change their argument starting the process all over again.
Especially worrisome was the tone, in many of the comments, that children are little more than wards of the state that people produce to add to the structure of society. People are seen as having few real rights when it comes to raising our children and in fact it's suggested that society has more rights to our children than we do. If we argue against that we are assumed to view our children as property over whom we hold all power. Those so secure in their personal rightness would argue that the state/society, has a right to teach our kids their view of the truth regardless of our wishes as parents. The state, they argue, even has the right to take your children and force them to attend school and be indoctrinated with what they see as the truth.
Reason and thought don't seem to account for much when people argue to be right instead of being willing to rethink their position. This doesn't seem like a very stable place for science to stand. Science needs to be able to move and sway with what is and isn't, to be both provable and disprovable. Being right has no place in science, but learning the truth, working hard to find out what can be proven and rigorously testing, that is science, and it is homeschooling.
Sunday, November 05, 2006
more kid's words
Only half of us were home tonight, me and The Boy, and I was enjoyingish a bowl of ramen noodles while he had leftover peddi (spaghetti). With my hurty jaw, it was almost the right thing, though I'm not sure how much chewing of noodles occured as opposed to just mashing them lightly before they slipped down the gullet.
After scanning the channels on the television, I settled on the newest Blue Collar comedy show and listened to Jeff Foxworthy giving his fashion rules. One of his rules had something to do with tattoos, though I forget now exactly what he said. Tip to other bloggers, sometimes you should write the shit down so you don't forget if you won't be posting right away. More likely that's a tip for me, but it's out there now.
Regardless of the exactness, Foxworthy said something to the effect of not everyone should have a tattoo. The Boy replied immediately to say, "Everyone should have tattoos you idiot," speaking of course to Mr. Foxworthy. I'm sure I don't know who teaches my kids to use words like idiot, but I'm glad he didn't call him worse, like a douche bag or asshole.
After scanning the channels on the television, I settled on the newest Blue Collar comedy show and listened to Jeff Foxworthy giving his fashion rules. One of his rules had something to do with tattoos, though I forget now exactly what he said. Tip to other bloggers, sometimes you should write the shit down so you don't forget if you won't be posting right away. More likely that's a tip for me, but it's out there now.
Regardless of the exactness, Foxworthy said something to the effect of not everyone should have a tattoo. The Boy replied immediately to say, "Everyone should have tattoos you idiot," speaking of course to Mr. Foxworthy. I'm sure I don't know who teaches my kids to use words like idiot, but I'm glad he didn't call him worse, like a douche bag or asshole.
wanted bacon, got a banana
Momma was nice enough to let me sleep in this morning, though when I say nice enough, the niceness was probably being nice to herself in not dealing with me as she attempted to awake me. She was also nice enough to be cooking a real breakfast, pancakes, eggs and bacon.
I ate everything including most of the bacon, but I left my last piece. I didn't want too much digestion going on as it was very close to time for my soccer game. I intended to eat it after returning home from the game, and I was rather looking forward to it. The Boy ended up getting it, but not because I didn't want it.
I did want that bacon, and I attempted to eat it. The one bite I got was excruciating.
You may not think this is a soccer story, but all good things end up being about soccer in the end. My team played pretty well today. Our front line is still passing well, and we out shot the other team by a very wide margin. Their one goal came off a muddle in the box which is how we've given up most of our goals this season. We've won our third game in a row, no thanks to a referee that just didn't seem to like us much. The game was mostly clean, but there were really just too many little calls that either didn't go our way or were missed entirely.
One call that didn't go our way was against me. An opponent and I were charging for a loose ball and were pretty dead even. I pulled out the defensive ace, the slide tackle, and launched myself feet first into the ball. It was a clean play if a little rough. We got to the ball at the same time, but my tackle took the other guy down. He came down right on top of me with a little elbow in the side of my jaw.
I've felt the jaw, pushed it and pulled it, wiggled it, opened and closed it. It doesn't hurt in its normal resting position. It doesn't hurt very much to open or close. Where it does hurt is closing it with any force, force such as it would take to eat a piece of bacon.
The bacon went to The Boy, and I got to eat a banana. Sure, my body needs the potassium more than it needs that lovely, smoky fat and meat and saltiness, but dammit, I wanted the bacon. My options for food as the night progresses seem limited at this moment to ramen noodles. They take slightly more chewing than the banana and somewhat less than the spaghetti that is my other reasonable option. I've also considered peanut butter and jelly, but I don't know that there is enough peanut butter for that, and I've got a feeling there may be some peanut butter graham crackers in The Boy's future. He's already decided against going to derby practice, opting instead to stay home with me and watch a movie, and he's refused all the leftovers in the house.
I don't know what is wrong with my jaw, aside from having a grown man land elbow first on it. I do know that it don't feel too pretty, and I'm dreading the later evening when I'm even hungrier and have already had the ramen.
I ate everything including most of the bacon, but I left my last piece. I didn't want too much digestion going on as it was very close to time for my soccer game. I intended to eat it after returning home from the game, and I was rather looking forward to it. The Boy ended up getting it, but not because I didn't want it.
I did want that bacon, and I attempted to eat it. The one bite I got was excruciating.
You may not think this is a soccer story, but all good things end up being about soccer in the end. My team played pretty well today. Our front line is still passing well, and we out shot the other team by a very wide margin. Their one goal came off a muddle in the box which is how we've given up most of our goals this season. We've won our third game in a row, no thanks to a referee that just didn't seem to like us much. The game was mostly clean, but there were really just too many little calls that either didn't go our way or were missed entirely.
One call that didn't go our way was against me. An opponent and I were charging for a loose ball and were pretty dead even. I pulled out the defensive ace, the slide tackle, and launched myself feet first into the ball. It was a clean play if a little rough. We got to the ball at the same time, but my tackle took the other guy down. He came down right on top of me with a little elbow in the side of my jaw.
I've felt the jaw, pushed it and pulled it, wiggled it, opened and closed it. It doesn't hurt in its normal resting position. It doesn't hurt very much to open or close. Where it does hurt is closing it with any force, force such as it would take to eat a piece of bacon.
The bacon went to The Boy, and I got to eat a banana. Sure, my body needs the potassium more than it needs that lovely, smoky fat and meat and saltiness, but dammit, I wanted the bacon. My options for food as the night progresses seem limited at this moment to ramen noodles. They take slightly more chewing than the banana and somewhat less than the spaghetti that is my other reasonable option. I've also considered peanut butter and jelly, but I don't know that there is enough peanut butter for that, and I've got a feeling there may be some peanut butter graham crackers in The Boy's future. He's already decided against going to derby practice, opting instead to stay home with me and watch a movie, and he's refused all the leftovers in the house.
I don't know what is wrong with my jaw, aside from having a grown man land elbow first on it. I do know that it don't feel too pretty, and I'm dreading the later evening when I'm even hungrier and have already had the ramen.
screwdriver booty
Does that title make sense to you? Does the thought of screwdriver booty give you pause? Do you want to know the story behind screwdriver booty? File this under can't make this shit up. Seriously, click HERE.
Motherfucking screwdriver-butt, monkey-spanking crazy ass shit!
Motherfucking screwdriver-butt, monkey-spanking crazy ass shit!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)