I’m still not sure who I’ll vote for in the Republican primary, and with Super Tuesday less than a week away, I don’t have much time to make my decision. However, it’s been very instructive to see how scared of Santorum the Left and media are. How else to explain their gross distortion of what he has been saying? (Well, I’m trying not to insult their intelligence, but that’s always a possibility, too.)

Santorum has said that contraception has been harmful to women, and to society in general, because of the changes it made to our society. James Taranto cites the facts and figures, and scholarly support, for Santorum’s claims.

The Food and Drug Administration approved the pill for contraceptive use in 1960. Over the next half-century, the marriage rate declined and the illegitimacy rate skyrocketed, Charles Murray notes in a recent Wall Street Journal essay adapted from his new book:

In 1960, extremely high proportions of whites in both Belmont [Murray’s metaphor for the upper middle class] and Fishtown [the working class] were married—94% in Belmont and 84% in Fishtown. In the 1970s, those percentages declined about equally in both places. Then came the great divergence. In Belmont, marriage stabilized during the mid-1980s, standing at 83% in 2010. In Fishtown, however, marriage continued to slide; as of 2010, a minority (just 48%) were married. The gap in marriage between Belmont and Fishtown grew to 35 percentage points, from just 10. . . .

In 1960, just 2% of all white births were nonmarital. When we first started recording the education level of mothers in 1970, 6% of births to white women with no more than a high-school education—women, that is, with a Fishtown education–were out of wedlock. By 2008, 44% were nonmarital. Among the college-educated women of Belmont, less than 6% of all births were out of wedlock as of 2008, up from 1% in 1970.

The same trends have been noted among blacks, although they started earlier and are more severe. Of course it would be a fallacy (post hoc ergo propter hoc, for those keeping score at home) to declare Santorum’s argument proven on the basis of these facts. But they do demonstrate that the argument is not inconsistent with the facts.

The usual criticism we’ve heard is that it is absurd to suggest a causal link between birth-control advances and illegitimacy because, after all, birth control prevents pregnancy, and giving birth out of wedlock entails pregnancy. By that logic, though, illegitimacy rates should have remained low, or even declined further, after the inception of the pill. The Santorum argument may be counterintuitive, but the counterargument flies in the face of the facts.

But Santorum’s argument is not really all that counterintuitive. It posits that the availability of birth control changed the culture in ways that encouraged illegitimacy. There is scholarly support for this hypothesis, in the form of a 1996 study in The Quarterly Journal of Economics, which served as the basis for a brief written by George Akerlof and Janet Yellen and published by the centrist-liberal Brookings Institution:

[snip]

Santorum has come under particular attack for saying that contraception is "harmful to women." It may reasonably be said that this is an overgeneralization: There are many women for whom birth control has not been harmful–those who don’t want children, who prioritize career over family, or who have been able to find husbands in the post-sexual-revolution mate market. Still, Akerlof and Yellin make a compelling case that birth control has been harmful to many other women, and it is not implausible to think, as Santorum does, that it has been harmful to women on balance.

Instead of discussing whether or not Santorum’s conclusion follows from the advent of the pill, mostly what we get is feminist sloganeering about government wanting to take away womens’ right to their bodies or similar tirades that just don’t address what he said and miss the point entirely. They scream about their rights but won’t address the other issues that Santorum is trying to focus on; illegitimacy, children having babies, and the explosion of the welfare state because of it. Even the huge increase in abortions, which, you would have thought, would have gone down with the pill. This hurts, not just women, but society in general.

No, instead, his detractors try to make it all about themselves. The narcissism of the Left is truly breathtaking.

Good morning.

1. Just to be clear here, the Julian Calendar (of which the Gregorian was a reform) also has a leap day today. The difference is in what occurs not on years divisible by 4 but by 100 and 400.
2. The death of the “get other people to pay for my stuff” state.
3. The whole “why we should” misses out on mentioning the bad stuff that will happen if we don’t. More arable land higher crop yields, oooh, that’s all really really bad, eh?
4. Our oil based economy.
5. Oh please, there’s a long standing tradition for Presidents to see failure to be re-elected as a national emergency of the highest order.
6. Insanity in medicine?
7. Walking for exercise put to good use.
8. So, “not a campaign speech” is that a lie or not?
9. Economics and the election in a nutshell.

Good morning.

1. Self discipline and child rearing … self-discipline is indeed a learn-able trait … an interesting thing to note at the start of Lent.
2. Occupy Whatever (is) Suggested embarrasses itself again.
3. AA and Lent.
4. A road less traveled.
5. Our state department deportment.
6. Democrat election tactics of which I’m sure they’re proud … and the lack of self-criticism makes their disparagement of Mr Rove hypocritical.
7. Uhm, because its not actually illegal to lie to a reporter.
8. Taking a stand against indirect consumer use taxes.
9. Only 11 years?!
10. Praise for grad school in the context of reasons why not.
11. I think I not only haven’t considered those bullet points but don’t know anyone who has (not to speak of doing them). Hollywood has a strange (unreal) impression of Christian culture.

So says two high-ranking government officials who would know.

In a stark warning ahead of next month’s Budget, the Chancellor said there was little the Coalition could do to stimulate the economy.

Mr Osborne made it clear that due to the parlous state of the public finances the best hope for economic growth was to encourage businesses to flourish and hire more workers.

“The British Government has run out of money because all the money was spent in the good years,” the Chancellor said. “The money and the investment and the jobs need to come from the private sector.”

What should George Osborne do to provide a tax cut?

Tax the rich more to allow the income tax rate to be lifted to £10,000Borrow more and worry about reducing national debt in future yearsWe can’t afford any tax cuts

Mr Osborne’s bleak assessment echoes that of Liam Byrne, the former chief secretary to the Treasury, who bluntly joked that Labour had left Britain broke when he exited the Government in 2010.

He left David Laws, his successor, a one-line note saying: “Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid to tell you there’s no money left”.

Mr Osborne is under severe pressure to boost growth, amid signs the economy is slipping back into a recession.

Conservatives have been saying this for a generation. Government spending bankrupts us all. The private sector is where economic growth comes from. Government spending may give us something of a jolt (if any), but the cost associated with it is far more than if the government would just get out of the way and let the engine run.

Good morning. Hopefully, we’ll be more consistent in posting this week, even though we have services at Church every evening this week as Lent kicks in with a running start.

1. And here’s how it starts (more background here)
2. The progressive past for the US.
3. Which is likely why suggesting its demise might be a little early. This too.
4. Although things like this suggest why its demise might be considered.
5. Our energy President.
6. Oddly enough, what the President said then, and says now, don’t quite jibe the way he’d probably prefer.
7. “It’s major weakness” is at home moms … although no support for that statement is given why that is a weakness. Perhaps those economists thing at home moms sit on their couches watching TV and snorting bon bons (and not working as hard or harder than the average working stiff).
8. This makes no sense at all.
9. Hard work behind the Lin “miracle.”
10. The blame/support network of education.
11. If we had a more balanced press corps.
12. Mr Krugman forgets he  is one of the rich.
13. Cinema recommended.

Diced Ham and Scrambled Eggs, from Paula’s Pancake House, in Solvang, CA. Yes, I know, ordering ham and eggs at a Danish pancake house in the middle of the Danish-themed town of Solvang might be considered an unpardonable act – but I prefer breakfasts with more savory substance that help carry me through a day of sightseeing.

I first tried the diced ham (or bacon) and scrambled eggs plate last December and really enjoyed it. I tend to go for hashbrowns and wheat toast (unless the establishment has killer biscuits) along with my eggs. Cheese is also mixed in this scramble, which helps bind the whole conglomeration together. A bit over-priced, in my opinion, but just about everything in this locale (wine country near Santa Barbara, CA) is.

Enjoy!

– image © 2011 A R Lopez

Recently, in Christian apologetic circles, it was noted that a former Christian professor of philosophy had converted to an Eastern religion. Dr. Michael Sudduth, from San Francisco State University, was highlighted in the blog post Michael Sudduth Converts to Vaishnava Vedanta!

As part of our home schooling effort, we engage in a weekly Current Events series in which I have my oldest daughter (high school) read various news items (which I have selected), and then write a brief commentary on the item, first explaining what the article was about and then giving her opinion on the story.

Here is what she wrote regarding the conversion story of Dr. Sudduth:

This article is a letter written by a man who has converted from Christianity to Vaishnava Vedanta. He had been a Protestant Christian for 25 years, but had increasingly become drawn toward Vedanta, both trough a philosophical attraction and an experiential attraction. As he began to explore the religion more deeply, he became profoundly affected by it and to feel the presence of God through it. He began to believe that his former beliefs in God were a limited expression of the deeper meaning he found through Vedanta.

Vaishnavism articulates a model of the love of God, where intimacy and separation are the two important elements of the divine-human love relation. People are both one with God and separate from God. The relationship with God is a simultaneous difference and non-difference. He believes that God is manifested in different ways, and God-realization takes on diverse forms. Vaishnavism acknowledges religious truth found across different religious traditions, and though the names are many, God is one. How we experience God depends on different aspects of our own personalities.

The author says that he does not believe he is worshipping a different God than he worshipped when he was a Christian – he believes it is the same God, under a different, and fuller manifestation. He says that the basic principles of Vaishnavism are compatible with a number of fundamental Christian beliefs, and that he is not relinquishing these beliefs but situating them in a different philosophical and theological context. He closes his letter by saying that he doesn’t want to convert any of his friends to Vaishnavism, but he hopes that they’ll make each other better devotees in their respective faiths.

From this letter, it seems like the author has based his entire conversion on experience. He felt something when reading the texts associated with Vaishnavism, he felt a closeness to the person of Lord Krishna, he felt profoundly affected and overwhelmed with a sense of the presence of God. He felt Krishna’s presence in his bedroom, he felt a validation of his spiritual journey. Even when he starts talking about philosophy and theology, he says that he has found aspects of the Vedanta theology and philosophy appealing to him. I think that his question should not be, “is it appealing?”, or “does it feel right?”, rather, he should ask “does it line up with reality?” He seems to ignore this question, replacing it with how he happens to feel. If these beliefs don’t line up with reality, if they’re not true, they shouldn’t be believed no matter how appealing they are or how good they make one feel.

The author claims that Vaishnavism is compatible with Christianity. He even claims he is worshipping the same God he worshipped before he switched religions. However, if he really means this, he couldn’t have been worshipping the Christian God before. Jesus said that He was the only way to God – obviously, the author believes there are many ways to get to God, so his beliefs are in direct opposition to fundamental Christian beliefs.

Lastly, he says that he’s only interested in making his friends better devotees to their respective religions, not in making them converts to Vaishnavism. Why is this? If he believes that Vaishnavism is true, then shouldn’t he want to convince other people of that? This religion seems to be one without much substance – it seems like anything you believe goes, and I don’t think that lines up to the way the world we know actually works.

Personally, I think that it is incumbent on us, as Christian parents, to prepare our children for the realities of a post-Christian America, thereby providing them with the resources to not only counter the worldviews they will come up against, but to courteously provide a clear explanation of the veracity of the Christian worldview.

And, I’m proud of my daughter’s grasp of these concepts, while in high school. We must engage our young adults (that would be anyone older than 13) in the marketplace of ideas, stretching them, and setting the bar high – they can achieve it.

NASA thinking about an Earth-Moon-Libration Point 2
Well it’s not quite Space 1999, but pretty cool nonetheless,

NASA is pressing forward on assessing the value of a “human-tended waypoint” near the far side of the moon — one that would embrace international partnerships as well as commercial and academic participation, SPACE.com has learned.

According to a Feb. 3 memo from William Gerstenmaier, NASA’s associate administrator for human exploration and operations, a team is being formed to develop a cohesive plan for exploring a spot in space known as the Earth-moon libration point 2 (EML-2).

###

Do you know what a Mainframe is? Well, NASA just shut down their last one

###

Even more Geek News:  Photos of Mars Landers from Mars orbit

###

Abe Lincoln (on a penny) to be used as a quick size comparison indicator on the next Mars Rover

###

NASA taking stock of Eart’s melting land ice
From the 2003-2010 observations,

The total global ice mass lost from Greenland, Antarctica and Earth’s glaciers and ice caps during the study period was about 4.3 trillion tons (1,000 cubic miles), adding about 0.5 inches (12 millimeters) to global sea level. That’s enough ice to cover the United States 1.5 feet (0.5 meters) deep.

Yikes! That’s very unsettling news.

Yet, another report headlines us to the news that Earth’s Polar Ice Melting Less Than Thought. An excerpt (emphasis added),

Nearly 230 billion tons of ice is melting into the ocean from glaciers, ice caps, and mountaintops annually—which is actually less than previous estimates, according to new research by scientists at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

Further in the US News report researcher John Wahr states (wisely, in my opinion),

“Even with an eight-year estimate, it’s not clear how far into the future you can project,” he says. “A lot of people want to predict into the end of the century, but I think it’s too dangerous to do that … We don’t have enough info to know what’ll happen. There’s some ebb and flow to these things.”

Indeed, if anyone ever wants to sell you something now based on a prediction of what will happen 100 years from now, you’d better grab hold of your wallet (I think Michael Crichton said that). From the NASA news release, after they’ve admitted the same as the US News report, it reads,

One unexpected study result from GRACE was that the estimated ice loss from high Asian mountain ranges like the Himalaya, the Pamir and the Tien Shan was only about 4 billion tons of ice annually. Some previous ground-based estimates of ice loss in these high Asian mountains have ranged up to 50 billion tons annually.

Ouch!

Imagine if you had some remodeling work done on your home and the contractor estimated it would cost $50,000 but the final bill came in at only $4,000? Well, of course you’d be ecstatic, but wouldn’t you also be wondering why the contractor was so inept? Or what if a stockbroker claimed an investment would return $50,000 but it only came back with $4,000?

Yet we’re supposed to based governmental subsidies, regulations, etc., all on long-range “scientific” esitmates that, quite frankly, are “dangerous” to do.

If Samuel L. Jackson voted for Obama because he’s black –  using as his reasoning, "’Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them … That’s American politics, pure and simple." — then is it OK for white folks to vote for white guys just because they’re white? Could those white folks expect the non-reaction to their reasoning as Jackson got for his?

Albert Mohler takes Nicholas Kristof to civics class.  The Constitution protect freedom of religion as a basic right, not only when it’s convenient.

"Actor Sean Penn criticized Republican presidential candidates during a visit to Venezuela on Thursday, saying that right-wing policies in the United States aim to benefit the wealthy." No, we want to make as many people as possible wealthy, as opposed to Venezuela’s socialism, which is making as many people as possible poor.

Stoning Christians on the Temple Mount. No, not Jews. One more guess.

Germans are discovering that, when they need their solar energy most, during December and January, it doesn’t help that they don’t get much sunshine then.

Sign of the Times: "For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage" Perhaps Rick Santorum isn’t as kooky as some are making him out to be.

Good morning.

1. A new academic econ blog, for those interested in that sort of thing. (HT)
2. I downloaded the paper, haven’t read it yet.
3. Cybersecurity and the latest AGW embarrassment.
4. And here’s a possible big reason why the above actions are being taken.
5. Racial policy and the stupid vs evil question.
6. Mr Obama’s White House and the reverse Robin Hood effect.
7. Why should one learn to write well?
8. The Romney tax plan.

OK. I’m back in town for a bit.

1. Ockham’s axe.
2. The left figuring (slowly) out the big problem with Obamacare, the whole insertion of more politics into healthcare bodes well for nobody. But … I’m guess the moral to that story is lost on Mr Schraub.
3. And to follow on the above, the problem with inserting more politics into schools.
4. 5 (?!) figure debt? Not 6?
5. A film list. So, what’s missing?
6. A serious question for the liberal arts educated crowd. Why is that book important?
7. Uhm, “flatter” can mean a lot of things, a smaller (or zero) second derivative is a common meaning for the term. It doesn’t necessarily mean the first derivative is zero.
8. A “new” family of amphibians.
9. Party, Mr Krugman, and welfare receipt.
10. Medical (academic?) ethics.
11. It seems to me austerity/non-austerity of government and its impact on economy is a symptom of mistake of letting the government get way to big.
12. Good advice for Lent.
13. Seasons.
14. Book surgery.

Have you heard of the MEDEVAC issue with the Army?
Does it make sense to essentially paint a target on medic helicopters evacuating wounded military personnel from the battlefield? Michael Yon has written on it, and FoxNews now has a piece.

###

Michael Yon on Britches for the Troops

###

Victoria’s Secret Model gives it all up because of her faith?
Original HT to Joe Carter. From the CBS story,

After reaching the pinnacle of her career, a Victoria’s Secret model says she recently quit the runway because she wants to be a more positive role model for young girls and because baring so much skin conflicted with her Christian beliefs.

It took time for her to figure this out? Color me just a tad skeptical of this story and/or the circumstances.

###

Alcohol, high-speed crash, 3 Marines dead
Perhaps we should be more concerned with anti-driving laws than with anti-gun laws?

###

Has the U.S. Constitution seen better days?
From the New York Times,

The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights. The commitment of some members of the Supreme Court to interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning in the 18th century may send the signal that it is of little current use to, say, a new African nation. And the Constitution’s waning influence may be part of a general decline in American power and prestige.

In an interview, Professor Law identified a central reason for the trend: the availability of newer, sexier and more powerful operating systems in the constitutional marketplace. “Nobody wants to copy Windows 3.1,” he said.

In a television interview during a visit to Egypt last week, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the Supreme Court seemed to agree. “I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” she said. She recommended, instead, the South African Constitution, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the European Convention on Human Rights.

Didn’t CS Lewis refer to this type of thinking as chronological snobbery?

###

Uh-Oh. This election cycle might get even nastier

How close does the corporate worship singing in your church mimic a secular concert? Does it matter?

From An Open Letter to Praise Bands,

…I sometimes worry that we’ve unwittingly encouraged you [praise bands] to import certain forms of performance that are, in effect, “secular liturgies” and not just neutral “methods.” Without us realizing it, the dominant practices of performance train us to relate to music (and musicians) in a certain way: as something for our pleasure, as entertainment, as a largely passive experience. The function and goal of music in these “secular liturgies” is quite different from the function and goal of music in Christian worship.

And then, these axioms,

1. If we, the congregation, can’t hear ourselves, it’s not worship. Christian worship is not a concert…

2. If we, the congregation, can’t sing along, it’s not worship…

3. If you, the praise band, are the center of attention, it’s not worship…

…This isn’t just some plea for “traditional” worship and a critique of “contemporary” worship. Don’t mistake this as a defense of pipe organs and a critique of guitars and drums (or banjos and mandolins). My concern isn’t with style, but with form: What are we trying to do when we “lead worship?” If we are intentional about worship as a communal, congregational practice that brings us into a dialogical encounter with the living God–that worship is not merely expressive but also formative–then we can do that with cellos or steel guitars, pipe organs or African drums.

Read it all.

At what point does our worship singing methodology fall in line with the purpose of worship? For that matter, what is the purpose of worship? To energize the singers, individually, so they leave the service feeling better or happier than when they entered? How does a passion for Christ manifest itself in our singing – our corporate singing?

Revenge is not a proper motivation for proposed legislation. It makes you do foolish things like this.

A state lawmaker says turnabout is fair play when it comes to restricting abortion:  she wants to ban vasectomies for men.

Democrat Yasmin Neal of Jonesboro is protesting a bill that would restrict most abortions in Georgia to the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.

She says it’s only right, if Republicans are truly serious about "thousands of children" being "deprived of birth."

She tells Channel 2 Action News, "The Georgia General Assembly at this point is trying to legislate and dictate what women can do with their bodies. We’re just trying to do the same thing in reference to the men."

Is Ms. Neal really that unaware of the issues that concern the pro-life movement? Worse, is she that blissfully ignorant of the biology of it all? Have her parents had that "birds and bees" discussion with her yet?

Let me make this plain, if you, too, think the two procedures are equivalent.

A vasectomy prevents a sperm from leaving the man. This is equivalent to a tubal ligation for a woman, which prevents eggs from getting to the uterus. A sperm, or an egg, if cared for properly in a proper environment, will never, ever be anything other than a sperm or an egg. Pro-lifers do not consider a sperm or an egg human life, and the movement is not trying to pass laws prohibiting either procedure.

An abortion, on the other hand, occurs after the sperm has fertilized the egg. For pro-life people, this is, indeed human life. (The question of whether or not it is life is really the only question that matters, and if it is, it should be treated as such.) And if it is life, then we as human beings have limited rights when it comes to killing it.

Because here’s the thing; a fertilized egg, if cared for properly in a proper environment, can become President of the United States, a great doctor, a wise counselor, or even a revenge-filled lawmaker from the state of Georgia.

A couple of items related to spending and our national debt.

Obama called Bush’s increase in the debt "irresponsible" and "unpatriotic". What does he think about his own contribution to the debt?

Obama signed an agreement to fund the DC-area incredibly successful school voucher program. Yet with all the new spending he added, he didn’t fund this. Does he really care about education, or just teacher unions?