Stones Cry Out

I’ve been mulling this over for quite a while, and I think it’s time to put these thoughts out there and see if I can get other fair-minded folks to back me up on this.  I’ll have to admit it’s not something that’ll be easy to adjust to, but I think that, in the end, you’ll thank me.

On average, every year airline travel kills 1,000 people.  Every year.  Now, statistics about deaths per passenger or per passenger-mile are used to try to mitigate this, but if one of those 1,000 people is someone you know — friend, family, or perhaps yourself — it doesn’t matter how many others didn’t die.  Those are 1,000 people that aren’t going to be landing at an airport near you ever again.  Consider this; that’s 1/3 of a 9-11-type terrorist attack every year.  Where’s the uproar about that? 

And even if you cravenly choose to brush this aside, let’s not forget the death traps that are automobiles.  On an average year, these instruments of death cause 40,000 – 50,000 deaths!  Every year!  Osama bin Laden doesn’t have to kill us infidels with planes; he can just wait for Detroit to do it for him. 

Given the immense human cost of these modes of transportation, I think that any sober individual would agree that these statistics prove that air flight and driving should be outlawed, or at least a moratorium put on their use until such time as they can be made completely harmless to man and beast alike. 

This isn’t, or shouldn’t be, a Democrat/Republican, liberal/conservative thing.  All Americans have life, and losing it should be avoided at all costs.  Even one death is too much if we truly value the safety of our people, especially our children.  Children are usually put into these instruments of death without a say in the matter, and so we must speak for them.  Ban transportation for the children.

This may adversely affect our culture, our economy, and our competitiveness in the world market, but again, what is one life worth?  Environmentalists seek to save endangered animals; what about the endangered humans?

In conclusion, instead of moving around so much, we should stay still.  Still, baby, still! 

In other news today, with the oil spill from the BP rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico ,which killed 11, heading for land, many on the Left are calling for a stop to off-shore drilling.  Some are invoking an accident from 21 years ago to buttress their point, and asking for at least a moratorium on new drilling.  Perfection, apparently, has not yet been reached.

Good morning.

1. I concur, “change or die” is an error w.r.t. the church.
2. The Copts remark on the ECUSA.
3. On race and the US.
4. Real life and Hitchcock. Our families “Friday night movie night movie” tonight is Hitchcock’s Frenzy.
5. Hope and change.
6. A question on just war.
7. This is my one remaining (left) wingnut blog in my feed. He offers pointed criticism of Mr Obama.
8. Uhm, they’re effing frogs!?! I’d suggest reading Ms Chantal Delsol if Genesis 1 doesn’t make the argument well enough.
9. Two days in a row, mass movement to Orthodoxy in South America?
10. Social networks and following the crowd.
11. Science, oil, and the renewable resources problem.
12. For the fans of Ms Palin.
13. Illinois.
14. Advice for the beltway from Mr Easterly.

Headline from Yahoo! News, Illegal immigrants plan to leave over Ariz. law. (see snapshot below)

In my opinion, before we demonize those who simply wish to enforce U.S. law, we should ask ourselves whether or not the U.S. law in question, as referenced by Doug, is just or unjust. If it is unjust, then we have no moral obligation to follow it. If it is just, then we have the moral obligation to follow it in a civil, rational manner.

From the New Mexico Independent, Tea partiers “predisposed to intolerance,” University of Washington study says.

A new study of race and politics released this week by the University of Washington reveals insight into how supporters of the tea party movement—the vast majority of whom are white—view blacks and Hispanics.

I’m wondering if the Left really is as scared of the Tea Partiers as the media paints them out to be. Still, you’ve got to wonder why people-of-color, in the Tea Party movement, are too stupid to see how intolerant the vast majority of whites they mingle with are. Nothing like race baiting.

And seriously, who still falls for the self-defeating tactic of name-calling someone, or group, as “intolerant”?

PolitiFact does a fact check on this statement from George Will:

"What the Arizona law does is make a state crime out of something that already is a crime, a federal crime," he said. "Now, the Arizona police — and I’ve spent time with the Phoenix Police Department — these are not bad people. These are professionals who are used to making the kind of difficult judgments. Suspicion of intoxicated driving, all kinds of judgments are constantly made by policemen. And I wouldn’t despair altogether their ability to do this in a professional way."

PolitiFact went to legal scholars and found out that, indeed, this is the case.

The legal scholars we spoke with told us to take a close look at two key sections of Title 8 of the U.S. Code. Section 1304e requires that "every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him." Those who fail to comply will be guilty of a misdemeanor and will be fined $100 and can be imprisoned up to 30 days.

Section 1306a says that, "Any alien required to apply for registration and to be fingerprinted in the United States who willfully fails or refuses to make such application or to be fingerprinted, and any parent or legal guardian required to apply for the registration of any alien who willfully fails or refuses to file application for the registration of such alien shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not to exceed $1,000 or be imprisoned not more than six months, or both."

Indeed, section 3 of the new Arizona law makes it a state crime if immigrants are in violation of either of those codes.

So, when it comes to that section of the law — arguably the "meat" of the new law — "it’s very clear that in this respect, George Will is right," said Paul Bender, a law professor at Arizona State University.

They ding Mr. Will on some misdemeanors that are also included in the Arizona bill, but overall, Will is correct.  And yet many liberals are overreacting and protesting or boycotting Arizona in response.  Some uninformed individuals are even boycotting New York over this.  Jim Wallis and the Sojourners are, unfortunately yet predictably, against this measure that simply allows Arizona to enforce the law that the feds won’t. 

2 words:  Knee.  Jerk. 

No, not that D.A.R.E. I’m talking about Democrats Against Renewable Energy.  The Obama administration has prevailed.

BOSTON, Mass – Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today approved the Cape Wind renewable energy project on federal submerged lands in Nantucket Sound, but will require the developer of the $1 billion wind farm to agree to additional binding measures to minimize the potential adverse impacts of construction and operation of the facility.

“After careful consideration of all the concerns expressed during the lengthy review and consultation process and thorough analyses of the many factors involved, I find that the public benefits weigh in favor of approving the Cape Wind project at the Horseshoe Shoal location,” Salazar said in an announcement at the State House in Boston. “With this decision we are beginning a new direction in our Nation’s energy future, ushering in America’s first offshore wind energy facility and opening a new chapter in the history of this region.”

The Cape Wind project would be the first wind farm on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, generating enough power to meet 75 percent of the electricity demand for Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket Island combined. The project would create several hundred construction jobs and be one of the largest greenhouse gas reduction initiatives in the nation, cutting carbon dioxide emissions from conventional power plants by 700,000 tons annually. That is equivalent to removing 175,000 cars from the road for a year.

This project has been held up for at least 7 years, with liberal luminaries like the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Walter Cronkite opposing it.  It’s all well and good for us plebeians, but not where it might spoil the view for the well-heeled. 

It’s good of the Obama administration to get this project unstuck, but he has to get his own party on-board with renewable energy in their own backyards, and ensure that delays like this don’t happen again, if he wants to be taken seriously with this whole "green energy" thing.

“We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.” – President Obama (HT: HotAir)

I guess telling other people where their paygrades end isn’t above the President’s paygrade.

Good morning.

1. A new Lexus hybrid.
2. What the word is awaiting with baited breath.
3. Fables.
4. Democracy or freedom.
5. On that three axis political taxonomy.
6. I’d never even heard of the OSCE.
7. Excellence.
8. Who didn’t expect that?
9. Crime and punishment. 
10. Some music for your morning.
11. Another political taxonomy.
12. The OPM problem.
13. Poltics in the East.
14. On the Arizona immigration law … more here.

[I am working on a project that may become a book on the most influential evangelicals leaders of our generation, since 1976, and the impact they’ve had on the church and their times. I will introduce them briefly on this blog from time to time. Who should be on this list?]

#7 James Dobson. The Voice b. 1936

The rise and radio reach of former USC psychologist James Dobson made him one of the most heard, respected (and among those opposed to his conservative political and positions, despised) public figures of his generation. His Focus on the Family program, which he started in a storefront office in Arcadia, California, in 1977, provided enormous help to parents and spouses through a radio program that was one of the nation’s most popular in any genre. At Dobson’s zenith, there was not a more powerful figure in evangelicalism.

In his final years of work at Focus on the Family, it had become difficult to recall the early days of James Dobson’s radio program. Shuttered behind high security doors of an immense Colorado headquarters, Dobson’s public voice had become increasingly polemic and political. The family-doctor persona had developed an edge, and his ministry was losing the distinctiveness of the original family-focused brand.

 
As one Christian publishing executive told me: “Focus on the Family sees their organization and the message for families, which is more needed than ever, now marginalized not by people outside the community of faith where those impressions have been entrenched for quite some time, but inside the community of faith where perceptions among 20 -30 year olds is that Focus is 90% political and 10% about the family.”

With Dobson stepping more squarely into the political arena in the last decade, what was known at Focus as the organization’s “nurturing” side—the lifeblood of the ministry—had been overshadowed in the public eye.

I know and like James Dobson. I’ve spent time with him on many occasions, and I have admiration for what he has done to help families. His accomplishments are enormous, and Focus on the Family (which by the way is one of the great organization names, because the name states the mission) is a powerhouse advocate for the family. It is wrong to dismiss the contributions of James Dobson because he yielded to the seduction of political power, and it is short-sighted to focus on Dobson’s political involvement, which—while not without impact—was the least successful and important of his endeavors.

His impact on Christian radio and the extent of his help to parents over many decades cannot be overstated. The Focus on the Family daily radio program airs on more than 2,000 radio stations, and has some 1.5 million listeners a day—enormous by Christian radio standards.

Son of a Nazarene Preacher
James C. Dobson Jr. was born to Myrtle and James Dobson in Shreveport, Louisiana, and from his earliest childhood, Christian faith was a central part of his life. He once told a reporter that he learned to pray before he learned to talk. In fact, he says he gave his life to Jesus at the age of three, in response to an altar call by his father. He is the son, grandson, and great-grandson of Church of the Nazarene ministers. His father, James Dobson Sr. (1911–1977), never went to college, choosing instead the life of a traveling evangelist. Dobson’s father was well-known in the southwest, and he and Mrs. Dobson often took their young son along so that he could watch his father preach. Like most Nazarenes, they forbade dancing and going to movies, so young “Jimmie Lee” (as he was called) concentrated on his studies, and also excelled at tennis.

Dobson studied psychology, which in the 1950s and 1960s was not looked upon favorably by most evangelical Christians. He came to believe that he was being called to become a Christian counselor or perhaps a Christian psychologist.[ He decided to pursue a degree in psychology, and ultimately received his doctorate in that field in 1967 from the University of Southern California.

Dobson first became well-known with the publication of Dare to Discipline, which encouraged parents to practice firm and decisive discipline in rearing their children.

Dobson married his wife, Shirley, on August 26, 1960; they have two children, Danae and Ryan. Ryan Dobson, a graduate of Biola University, is a public speaker in his own right, speaking on issues relating to youth, the philosophical belief in ontological truth, and the pro-life movement. Ryan Dobson was adopted by the Dobsons and is an ardent supporter of adoption, especially adoption of troubled children. Ryan says he spent years rebelling against the expectation that he should follow in his father’s footsteps. But he eventually found a calling: preaching at youth events. He formed Kor Ministries.He is as opposed to abortion and homosexuality as his father, but his tone is edgier. Reviewing the first book he co-wrote, “Be Intolerant: Because Some Things are Just Stupid,” Publishers Weekly said it had “all the subtlety of a two-by-four to the side of the head.”

Transition out of Focus
James Dobson has been moving toward retirement for several years, relinquishing the chief executive role in 2003, and the position of chairman of the board in 2009. But the decision to step away from his role as the host of the daily Focus program was clearly the board’s, not Dobson’s, and many believe the board had decided to strike a less strident political posture.

Nonetheless, Dobson clearly wasn’t ready to hang up his microphone, and he announced that he will launch a nonprofit Christian group and host a new radio show with Ryan. His radio agency, Ambassador Advertising, promoted the new program–Family Talk with Dr. James Dobson–at the 2010 National Religious Broadcasters convention as “a voice you trust for the family you love, merging a fun and inviting tone with topics that families wrestle with every day.”

Does the particular anthropological differences between our individualistic/wealth driven culture and the Honor/Shame agricultural culture of the Middle East have in reading, for example, the story of Noah and the flood? This question was asked when last I discussed the flood in another context some weeks back.

Geneticists inform us that the genes which govern the particular patterns which direct the construction of our cornea show very little variation from individual to individual. Other features, even in the eye, which are not tightly constrained in the same way vary far much more from generation to generation and in fact show mutation and changes introduced much more freely between generations. The cornea and the eye are tricky enough that any structural mistake or change will likely lead to complete failure of the organ for its intended purpose, i.e., sight. Our genetic material pays attention to those things which it has found important. Read the rest of this entry

For giving his opinion on some tenets of Islam, he’s apparently too intolerant for the Army.

The U.S. Army on Thursday withdrew an invitation to a Christian evangelist to speak at a Pentagon prayer service next month following an outcry over his references to Islam as a violent religion.

Franklin Graham, the son of famed evangelist Billy Graham, said in a statement he regretted the Army’s decision and would keep praying for U.S. troops.

The invitation prompted a harsh reaction, including from a prominent U.S. Muslim group that said Graham’s appearance before Pentagon personnel would send the wrong message as the United States fights wars in Muslim countries.

In an interview last year with CNN, Graham said "true Islam" was too violent to be practiced in the United States.

"You can’t beat your wife. You cannot murder your children if you think they’ve committed adultery or something like that, which they do practice in these other countries," he said.

"I don’t agree with the teachings of Islam and I find it to be a very violent religion."

The interview can be seen here

The Army said it did not invite Graham to the May 6 event organized through the Pentagon Chaplain’s office. The invitation was instead extended by the private, Colorado-based National Day of Prayer Task Force.

"Once the Army leadership became aware that Reverand Graham was speaking at this event, we immediately recognized it as problematic," said Colonel Tom Collins, an Army spokesman.

"The bottom line here is that his presence would be inappropriate. His past statements are not consistent with the multi-faith emphasis and inclusiveness of this event."

Graham acknowledged the decision, saying in a statement: "I will continue to pray that God will give them guidance, wisdom and protection as they serve this great country."

The National Day of Prayer Task Force called the Pentagon’s decision part of an "assault on religious freedom and people of faith" driven by groups including the government and media.

"The Pentagon, representing the most powerful military in the world, melted like butter and withdrew the invitation," it said, citing opposition by "a small group of naysayers."

Good morning.

1. Holy man, scare quotes?
2. Power point and the military.
3. A use for those floppy drives.
4. What? Democrats overreacted?
5. Venn and the internets.
6. On the G&S circus.
7. No death panels? Or is it a syntactic distinction that makes no semantic difference?
8. On the deficit commission.
9. Mr Paulson.
10. Arizona.
11. The left and liberalism.
12. Three months ago, I noted that Greece’s finances were more of a problem than its economic heft indicated because of connectedness. Alas, I was perhaps correct.

An interesting contrast of how the media covered two different protests (apologies to the media cameraman who intentionally shook his camera).