Monday, 22 November 2010

Last week, when I listened to Truth to Tell’s program, they advertised the subject of today’s program: the Catholic Church’s mailing of anti-gay DVDs just in time for the election.

I was expecting the show to include one or two people who would strongly denounce the mailing and the church in general, and a couple of loyal Catholics who would discuss why such hate mail is warranted from their loving god. Instead…there was neither. Unlike last week, when host Driscoll said he was unable to get anyone from the hospital community to join in the discussion, this week there appeared to be no effort to even find people in support of the mailing. Instead, Driscoll began by listing off reasons why the Church is an out-moded, out-of-touch organization that needs to take care of its own problems instead of getting their fingers into politics. So, clearly he didn’t think the Church had any argument in their favor.

Instead, the four people who were involved in the discussion were all opposed to the mailings, yet still were members of the Church. One woman was interviewed because she invited people to mail their DVDs to her, and she made some artwork out of them. You can read about her art, and her subsequent dismissal from the Basilica HERE.

The people all had differing levels of animosity towards the Church. Some felt it is wrong for the Church to get involved in politics at all. Others said it’s fine if the Church wants to prohibit same-sex marriage within their organization, but shouldn’t try to stop it from being legalized on the secular front. One person said she felt it was a bad move because it was causing people to leave the Church (I’m sorry…why is this bad???). Two participants even disagreed about Jesus’ role in politics when he was on Earth; one lady said he was apolitical, a man countered that Jesus was strongly political. I understand their confusion at reading that clusterfuck known as the New Testament, but I gotta say that I think it’s great that Catholicism allows it’s members to hold such strongly dissenting opinions.

And that brings this up: one of the people in the discussion said that those who leave the Church due to differences are going about it the wrong way. They should stay in the Church and work to effect change from the inside.

Huh. I never thought of that.

I wonder how far we can take this…? Am I wrong to quit a job because the pay is bad; should I, instead, strive to get increased wages while remaining loyal to my employer? Would it be wrong to go AWOL from a military endeavor I disagreed with; should I try to convince my commanding officer to change his mind? I don’t know.

I think a few things need to be considered: Does the organization allow for freedom of expression? Does it have a means by which change can be instigated? How important is your grievance with the organization? How much of your life is consumed/controlled by the organization?

Of course, in order to change a problem, you need to be able to see it in the first place. ‘Father’ Michael Tageter (not my dad), rambled on about how wonderful Catholics are and even said, “Catholics are the most accommodating people as far as same-sex marriage.” Really? Maybe if everyone in the world was either Mormon, Muslim, or Catholic.

Another called was concerned that the Catholics lag in accepting the sexual mores of our day is leading to increased STDs and unwanted pregnancies. And for that, I have an idea:

If you wish to decrease the number of STDs and unwanted pregnancies, you simply need to take a condom, and fit it snugly over the Vatican.

Tuesday, 23 November 2010

I am an ardent non-fan of Christmas music, but every once in a while, one comes along that I like. This year, already, there are at least two.

The first is this one (You have to click the PLAY/PAUSE button to get it to start). It’s the precursor to Simon’s next album, titled So Beautiful or So What, slated to be released in March.

I also like this one, which I heard for the first time today:

Saturday, 20 November 2010

Today, while we were all doing our own things at home, my son decided to pull the book Great Disasters off the shelf. I like that he feels comfortable just walking up to a shelf of non-kids’ books and pulling out whatever he thinks might be fun to look at.

But I’m not sure Great Disasters fits his idea of “fun.” He kept turning the pages getting more and more worked up. On some pages, there weren’t any pictures to upset him, but on others, he saw huge tsunamis, fires, and volcanoes. I thought he was doing alright when he was just counting the volcanoes in one picture, but then he turned the page to see the Titanic, half sunk, sticking vertically out of the water. “Oh no,” he said, genuinely distressed, “did these people all die?” Then he got to page 232, which detailed the train derailment in New Zealand back in 1953, in which 151 people died. The two-page article shows a painting of the train disaster. It’s probably one of the most graphic in the book. Train cars are falling off a bridge, the engine has succumbed to the waves, and the bridge is falling apart, putting the other cars in peril. Owen started crying.

Jennifer hugged him and told him not to look at the book. I closed it and told him that he shouldn’t torture himself like that. The cover of the book showed the Empire State Building back in 1945, right as a plane slammed into the side of it. I had to assure Owen that the building was okay and that not everyone involved died.

The book is on a higher shelf now, out of the reach of five year olds.

Sunday, 21 November 2010

Definitely one of the most influential books in my life has been Tom Flynn’s The Trouble With Christmas. I’m excited to say that, today, I met Mr. Flynn. Not only that, but I attended a presentation he delivered at the Ridgedale Library.

Flynn’s presentation, like his book, starts off by asserting that Xmas is almost entirely pernicious. He explains why it’s not even a Christian celebration, why it’s arrogant to assume that all Americans want to join in on this 6-week long holiday, how it’s stupid to tell everyone to get together with their families during the worst travel time of the year, how it promotes greed, insane consumerism and environmentally destructive practices, and how Santa is a damaging practice passed down by parents who lie to their children.

Flynn noted that the top three heart attack ‘death dates’ in the US and Canada are New Year’s Day, Xmas Day, and Boxing Day. He said he’s been Yule-free since 1984. He had some humor, too, noting that “O Little Town of Bethlehem” has the same metric structure as “House of the Rising Sun” (meaning you can sing the lyrics interchangeably), and he provided a recording of such a mash up as proof. He also noted that his book makes a great holiday gift.

Getting more serious, he asserted that if Jesus is not your savior, then Xmas is not your holiday. He said a non-believer who celebrates Xmas is the ultimate contradiction in terms: they don’t believe in God, yet they celebrate his son’s birthday. In a sense, then, they’ve thrown out the babe but kept the bathwater. He further claimed that Christians should be visible not celebrating Xmas. He argued that we aren’t at the mercy of the elements anymore (really?) and so it was juvenile to celebrate the return of the sun. He pointed out that many cultures, Buddhists, Taoists, and people in tropical lands, do not celebrate Xmas (yes…but that’s not my culture).

Flynn offered up 6 reasons why the Santa myth is a terrible, terrible tradition (the reasons had significant overlap), all of which I agreed with. He concluded by saying: “Let’s all just say no to Santa Claus.”

Say no to Santa? Sure. Christmas? Not so sure…

During an extended Q-and-A session, audience members asked how he felt about solstice and freethought celebrations. Others asked what he thought of the so-called ‘war on Christmas,’ and others wanted clarification on some of the historical anecdotes he provided.

You know, in the past couple of years, I’ve met some of the authors of some of my favorite books, and it’s been a real treat getting to meet them. But Flynn represents the first author wherein I both enjoyed his book and disagreed with (parts of) it. Back in the spring, when I met Leowen, I felt stupid afterward because I didn’t have anything interesting to say to him besides ‘hey, will you sign my book?’  So this time, I decided to offer a comment and a question that would catch his attention. To my delight, he called on me. Here’s what I said:

“Mr. Flynn, I have both a comment and a question. And the comment is one that you might not like to hear, but I think I might be unique among your readers in that I never celebrated Christmas in my entire life, then I read your book, and I’ve celebrated it ever since. And my question is this: So you say that if I do celebrate Christmas, then I’m a hypocrite. But if I don’t celebrate Christmas, then my family would just think of me as a hateful asshole. [Yep, I swore. God, I love swearing. Fuck!] And since that’s what a lot of people probably think non-believers are anyways, then what’s the harm in just spending the day with my relatives, not saying the prayer with them, not saying ‘happy birthday baby Jesus,’ but still sitting by a tree, swapping presents, having a great meal and being with people I care about?”

Before Flynn could answer, the woman sitting in front of me turned around and said, ‘that’s a great question!’ Meanwhile, the woman sitting next to me nodded in my direction and said, “I was thinking the same thing.” Flynn began his response by saying that, admittedly, everyone’s situation is different, and then he said…oh, wait, we’ll never know, because other people started blurting out similar responses affirming what I said and some guy in the second row decided he had a question that needed to trump mine RIGHT NOW! I really hate that. I wanted to hear what Flynn had to say, not some guy sitting in the audience.

As far as what Flynn did say, he’s right: everyone’s circumstances are different. For one thing, Flynn goes to work on Xmas day. This is not an option for most people (retail, postal, etc…). For another thing, I spent thirty years sticking out like an idiot trying to give a ‘good Witness’ to people by not accepting their holiday invitations, and I’ll be damned if I’m gonna do that now – now that I know god is fake.

Anyway, I went up to Tom Flynn afterward and asked him to sign my book. I showed him something I had taped on the inside cover; it was a portion of an Awake! article that quoted his book. I told him that it was because of that quote that I bought his book. And he said that the Watchtower’s use of his quote (which he noted was quote-mined – big surprise!) caused his book to go into a second printing. He wondered aloud why a simple quote would cause so many people to buy his book. I said, “I think I can answer that for you,” and I told him that the Watchtower frowns on its members reading non-JW books. “Most JWs libraries consist only of Watchtower books, and maybe a cook book and a dictionary.” I then told him that seeing his book quoted likely made many JWs think, “Hey look – a worldly person knows Xmas is a sin! And since the Watchtower writers read his book, then it must be okay to read it.” The rest is history. He said he always wondered if the Watchtower’s duplicitous use of his quote ultimately caused people to see the light, and I said his book had a share in my decision to leave. He shook my hand and said that even though I’ve gone from not celebrating Xmas to celebrating it, that he was proud of me for leaving the Witnesses. “I think we can consider that a net gain for the human race,” he said in his Santa-like voice.

He signed: “To James – Have a Happy Humbug! Tom Flynn.”

No you may not borrow my copy.

Friday, 19 November 2010

As of this evening, my son has now seen all three Star Wars movies. We watched the first one about two weeks ago, then we watched The Empire Strikes Back last weekend. Tonight, we watched Return of the Jedi. We watched the originals only – and I mean THE originals; I actually ordered the bonus disks from Netflix that have the original theatrical releases. I didn’t want my son’s first exposure to the Star Wars Universe to be muddied up with Greedo shooting first (or maybe this link is better), an embarrassing musical number at Jabba’s place, or an inexplicable cameo by Hayden Christensen.

I wasn’t sure Owen was ready for them. I mean, he likes space, space ships, and robots…so in that way Star Wars seems a perfect fit. But they’re also quite violent. I wasn’t sure if I should be showing a five year old scenes of people getting their arms cut off (man, that happens ALL THE TIME in Star Wars), or Jabba getting strangled by a chain, or Mark Hamill trying to act. I mean, that might just be too much for a kid.

But, I guess I figured he was going to see them eventually, especially since he’s such a fan of R2-D2 and C-3PO, and I even wear t-shirts with Star Wars iconography on them. So I think it’s better that I be there to watch them with him than that he just watch them at a friend’s house one day. I mean, if I wasn’t sitting there, who would be there to explain to Owen that it’s okay to be entertained by violence – when it’s in movies like this, we call it “fun,” and if we see it on the nightly news, we call it “staying informed.”

Turns out, it was good that I was there to answer questions. Owen pretty much talked throughout that entire three films, and he keeps asking questions about them (probably because he missed so much while talking during the viewing). His questions ranged from: “Where’s Luke right now?” (He’s with Yoday, remember?) to “If this new Death Star is more powerful than the original one, then why do they only blow up ships with this one and not whole planets?” (Um, I don’t know) to “Which Star Wars movie do you like best?” (The Empire Strikes Back) and, of course, “Why?” (I don’t know, I think because all the main characters spend some time inside an animal)

Actually, even though he talked the whole time, he still noticed some very minute details. When, before we started Return of the Jedi this evening, he asked me if the four-legged robots would appear in this one, I said no. But then, Owen managed to spot one in a quick shot of Endor as Vader’s ship comes to land. I had no idea.

For my part, I enjoyed watching them with him. They’re fun movies, and it was fun to read to him lines like “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away,” when I knew it was the first time he’d heard them. I’ve read rumors that the trilogy will be brought to iMax sometime soon. If so, I’ll have to bring Owen. I’m just gonna hope it’s not the uprevved version.

Next up…I think I’m gonna show him Jurassic Park. There’s a scene where a lawyer get’s eaten by a t-rex, so that will give me a chance to explain to Owen that that is violence Daddy approves of.

Wednesday, 17 November 2010

First, remember that I posted some new videos about the Watchtower Society’s latest brochure? If not, CLICK HERE. A couple of days after I posted those video, I received an email from a woman who wanted me to “tell my story” so she could put it on the Jehovah’s Witness Blog. I wrote back and said I’ve already told my stories in various other outlets and I gave her a link to one of them. But then she asked if she could use one of those. So I said, “sure,” and I proceeded to half-assedly mash a couple of my autobiographical articles together. She liked what I sent her, and now it’s posted on the home page to the JW Blog (click that link, above).

Second, want to take part in a prayer survey? If so, CLICK HERE.

Third, I received an email in my Hamline account. This account has been practically dormant for several months now, but last Friday, a man named James Scott wrote:

Dear Student,
We are looking for college students for our online market research program.
This is a part-time job position which offers a competitive pay, and allows you to set your own schedule. You will be asked to provide your opinions and feedback on a variety of topics including the quality, packaging, style, usability, and overall appeal of a number of different types of products and services. This in turn will benefit the companies that create or manufacture these items. The program is web-based and can be done from anywhere and at anytime.
If you are interested, please email me back soon, as positions are limited.
Sincerely,
James Scott

So I wrote:

Mr. Scott:
I’d be interested in learning more. If this is a strictly online job, I would probably have plenty of time to do this. However, if I have to invest any money up front, then this is a scam, in which case I do not wish to receive any response at all.

Thanks.
-James

“Woe, woe, woe!” you say. “That’s a pretty confrontational response for someone who claims to dislike arguing.” Yes, yes, very true. But see, this guy has emailed me twice before, and I had checked into his offer. Basically, you have to pay thirty bucks to register, and then (the site claims) you will start making money as you take online surveys. But I’m already signed up with other online survey-taking sites, that I DO get paid for and for which I did NOT have to pay anything up front. Second, why the upfront fee? If I’m gonna make the money back anyway, then why don’t they just set it up so that you don’t get paid for your first two or three surveys? Third, I can’t think of anytime I had to put money down first before making money, unless there was a good chance I wouldn’t make the money back (such as at casinos). So…I say it’s a scam. Mr. Scott is free to correct me.

Anyway, he wrote back:

Hi,

Thank you very much for your interest.

For more information please go to our website: http://www.UniversitySurvey.org

If you have any additional questions please fill in the form on our website or email me at j.scott@UniversitySurvey.org.

I look forward to doing business with you.

Best regards,

James Scott

So, today, I wrote:

Mr. Scott:

In my initial response to your email, I said “if I have to invest any money up front, then this is a scam, in which case I do not wish to receive any response at all.” The link to UniversitySurvey.org that you provided clearly shows that there is a membership fee, meaning I have to invest money up front. Though I appreciate your ability to construct emails in coherent English (something I can’t say for most of the spam I receive), your reading comprehension evidently leaves something to be desired. Thanks for deliberately violating my request.

-James

So he wrote:

[nothing]

Thursday, 18 November 2010

I found a quarter on the floor at work today. I stopped to pick it up. I was walking down the hall with a co-worker, and he said: “Ah, but would you pick it up if had been a penny?”

My quick answer was yes, a decision I made a long time ago. Specifically, it was in the 1990s, when I read the book The Straight Dope. Here’s what that book had to say on the topic: Is it worth it to pick up a penny?

The Straight Dope argues that, since we can pick up pennies at a rate faster than we can earn minimum wage, then it is worth it to pick up pennies. Sounded good to me…for about a day. But then I remembered: I was making more than minimum wage…so would it still be worth it for me? And then I also realized: “Hey, the money I pick up is in addition to the money I am making at my job.” Just like today, I found the quarter while ‘on the clock,’ and therefore made an extra 25 cents (after taxes!) that hour. Had I found the quarter this evening, while running errands, then I still would have made 25 cents more than I was otherwise making (which was zero).

Here’s an article that says much the same thing: More info on picking up a penny. (This article even considers if it’s worth it for Bill Gates to pick up a penny, among other insights.)

And in case that isn’t quit enough on pennies, here’s a more scientific approach (including factoring in the caloric requirements for such a task): Abstract on Pennies.

Tuesday, 16 November 2010

Eleven months ago, I made a list of my ten favorite TV shows from the 2000-2010 decade. If I were to amend that list, it would be to add Community, a comedy on NBC that is now in its 2nd season.

I’ve seen plenty of sitcoms, but most of them are just, well, okay. If you click on the link to my list (above), you’ll see I only have 3 sitcoms listed in my top ten. And one of them – The Office – isn’t even very funny anymore. Perhaps Community will go the way of The Office at some point, but for now, it’s my favorite current sitcom. Modern Warfare, an episode from the end of season 1, has got to be one of my all-time ten favorite TV episodes from any TV show – sitcom or drama – ever. (Here’s the obligatory link discussing the episode, but don’t read about it if you haven’t seen it. And don’t bother to just dig around online and find that one episode, like most TV show episodes, it’s not as rewarding if you haven’t seen everything leading up to it.)

I didn’t start watching Community right away. It wasn’t until mid-season, when a couple people directed me to some funny clips, that I began to watch the show. Jennifer and I watched the episodes together, trying to catch up on them. Somehow, during the spring, we lost track of the show and didn’t see the rest of the season. Two weeks ago, however, a co-worker let me borrow his copy of season 1 on DVD. Jennifer and I quickly watched the ones we hadn’t seen (I think we watched four episodes in a single night) and then we watched the season 2 episodes that are available online. I’m happy to say that I’ve now seen every episode, and I’m gonna make it my aim to keep up with the airing of new episodes.

I know that this doesn’t prove my thesis that Community is the funniest sitcom on television, but I think it’s pretty hilarious/interesting anyway:

In the recent (04 November) episode “Aerodynamics of Gender,” we are shown the point of view of the character Abed. But it’s not just a typical point-of-view, it’s a Terminator-style view wherein Abed merely has to zero in on a person and all sorts of data begin popping up on his ‘screen.’ Here, take a look:

Here we see Abed focusing his attention on a lady in his school. Our attention, meanwhile, is focused mainly on the list of ‘flaws’ this lady possesses; out of style jeans, and heavy mascara, among others. But notice the other info on the screen: on the far right, we see what is called a ‘Current Synopsis.’ And, in fact, it is a synopsis of the episode. More specifically, it is a current synopsis, in that it is exactly how I would’ve described the episode had I stopped watching it at this point (~10 minutes into the episode). Notice, too, that the display on the left indicates Annie (not the woman pictured) is projected to ‘cycle’ on November 11th. And, yes, that means exactly what you think it means. And it’s also what happened: one week later, during the episode “Cooperative Calligraphy,” it is implied that the character Annie has (or is just about to get) her period.

Now check out this still, which I grabbed from ~18 minutes into the episode:

Look! The “Current Synopsis” has been updated, and now it reflects a more refined description of the episode. Meanwhile, we are now privy to Shirley’s “Projected Cycle,” which just happens to be the date the episode aired. This also comes into play in the next episode, in which we learn that Shirley has just picked up a pregnancy test – something a woman could be predicted to do when they are a week ‘late.’

So, I’m going to use these two images to make some predictions: The first image states that Troy’s birthday is in 14 days (18 November). I’ll be curious to see if his birthday is mentioned in the episode “Conspiracy Theories and Interior Design,” which is scheduled to air on November 18th. Meanwhile, the second image indicates Abed wishes to “Get Rudolph for Xmas” and make a blanket fort. I’m gonna hold the writers to this and see if both memos come to fruition in the next few episodes.