Matching Tracksuits

fun in fours

Month: November 2006

Marriage Rights

Tuesday 21 November 2006

In the Washington Post today I read that many polygamists are fighting for the legalization of bigamy:

Valerie and others among the estimated 40,000 men, women and children in polygamous communities are part of a new movement to decriminalize bigamy. Consciously taking tactics from the gay-rights movement, polygamists have reframed their struggle, choosing in interviews to de-emphasize their religious beliefs and focus on their desire to live "in freedom," according to Anne Wilde, director of community relations for Principle Voices, a pro-polygamy group based in Salt Lake. (Post)

What an interesting move. Align yourselves strategically with a group you consider immoral sinners in order to further your "redefinition" of marriage while refusing your strategical mentors the same rights you're fighting for.

The reaction of the famed Religious Right to such a move would be equally interesting. As I recall, nowhere in the New Testament is declared immoral, and we all know that the Old Testament is peppered with bigamists: the first bigamist mentioned is "Lamech" (Genesis 4.19). Don't know who that is, but some of the heavy hitters of Judeo-Christian tradition were polygamists: Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon all had multiple wives.

One apologetics site explains that

First, there has always been more women in the world than men. [...] Second, warfare in ancient times was especially brutal, with an incredibly high rate of fatality. This would have resulted in an even greater percentage of women to men. Third, due to the patriarchal societies, it was nearly impossible for a woman to provide for herself. Women were often uneducated and untrained. Women relied on their fathers, brothers, and husbands for provision and protection. Unmarried women were often subjected to prostitution and slavery. Fourth, the significant difference between the number of women and men would have left many, many women in an undesirable situation (to say the least). (Source)

So because humanity is brutal, God allowed polygamy. Of course, the underlying social evils that, according to this argument, made polygamy necessary are not addressed. Women continued to be oppressed, and wars and genocide continued. But polygamy was a temporary fix.

What about now?

How does God view polygamy today? The Bible says that God's original intention was for one man to be married to only one woman, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife (not wives); and they shall become one flesh (not multiple fleshes)"� (Genesis 2:24). We see in Deuteronomy 17:14-20, that the kings were not supposed to multiply wives. This most definitely puts Solomon in direct disobedience against the Lord.

Okay, so that's what God originally intended. But where did he say, "No -- on second thought, I think this polygamy thing is not working out"?

In the New Testament, 1 Timothy 3:2, 12 and Titus 1:6 give "the husband of one wife"� in a list of qualifications for spiritual leadership. While these qualifications are only specifically for positions of spiritual leadership, they apply equally to all Christians. Should not all Christians be "above reproach...temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money"� (1 Timothy 3:2-4)?

It's by implication. The New Testament always uses "wife" in the singular, setting an example.

Whether or not the New Testament forbids bigamy is not my point. What I'm curious about is how, if this movement grows, will the Evangelical Christian community react? Will they go as crazy about this as they have about gay marriage? Will there be moves to go back and revise all the referenda to say specifically that marriage is between "one man and one woman"?

No Grunting

Saturday 18 November 2006

Choose your fitness club carefully:

At Planet Fitness gyms, grunters and other rule-breakers are treated to an ear-rattling siren with flashing blue lights and a public scolding. The “lunk alarm,” as the club calls it, is so jarring it can bring the entire floor to a standstill. (A lunk is defined, on a poster, as “one who grunts, drops weights, or judges.”)
New York Times

A “lunk” is someone who judges, yet some are getting harassed at Planet Fitness because their “physiques are too chiseled” and they “take their workouts too seriously.” The gym chain tries to cater to “amateurs” – those inexperienced in the gym.

I don’t get it. Is this a place where the inexperienced come until they can bench press their body weight, and then they’re expected to find a new gym?

To Expand or Not To Expand

Friday 17 November 2006

McCain wants more troops in Iraq; the generals don't:

Military officials and defense experts, however, said yesterday that significantly escalating the number of U.S. combat troops in Iraq is largely implausible because it would severely strain the military, would be unsustainable for more than a few months and would offer no discernable long-term benefit. (Post)

I'm no military expert -- I've never even been in the military -- but it seems to me that

  1. if things in Iraq are deteriorating;
  2. if our military is already so thinly spread that it would "severely strain the military" to add more troops;
  3. if the military says that adding more troops "would offer no discernable long-term benefit" to the operation...

If all these things are the case, then it's hard to see how anyone in America could look at the situation, with that knowledge, and not see Iraq as the hopeless quagmire that it is.

"America's new Vietnam!" was the cry from opponents in the States and enemies abroad, but this is so much more disastrous. Vietnam didn't produce an army of individuals seeking revenge coupled with a culture in which individual "military" actions are the norm. Vietnam didn't produce terrorists, in other words, and it's difficult to foresee anything other than that coming out of Iraq.

If we stay, it's an ever-present propaganda tool, not to mention a gigantic terrorist training camp. If we run, we "embolden" the enemy -- not that they need any help with that. Still, it will prove to be a powerful recruiting device. "Look at our success with the Infidels! Imagine if we more aggressively take Jihad to their soil!"

In other words, "stay the course" and we make things worse; "cut and run" (or rather, "redeploy" or "withdraw" or any number of euphemisms) and we make things worse.

The problem is that we aren't just fighting insurgents who want us out of Iraq. We're also fighting insurgents whose primary goal seems to be civil war. If that's true, we're not trying to prevent civil war from breaking out as an unintended consequence; we're trying to stop people from inciting civil war. It introductions a consciousness to the actions, not to mention, in this case, a perverted religious conscientiousness.

Number Two Man

Wednesday 15 November 2006

The Washington Post has an editorial about Murtha’s bid to be the majority leader, and Pelosi’s aid in the matter. In it, Ruth Marcus succinctly explains why this is such a dumb move:

If she gets her way and helps Murtha win a come-from-behind victory against Maryland’s Steny Hoyer in tomorrow’s leadership election, she’s buying herself — and the Democratic caucus — endless news stories about Murtha’s ethics. If, as he says, Hoyer has the votes, Pelosi has made herself look weak within the caucus — not a smart move for any new leader, and certainly not for the first woman in the job. Perhaps the late timing and measured phrasing of Pelosi’s endorsement were meant to ensure that it would have little impact. If so, Pelosi failed to recognize that once she weighed in, the vote for majority leader would inevitably be seen as a gauge of her clout. (Source)

Really, not the best start for the new Speaker. “The Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history,” cooed Pelosi, and it seems to have lasted an entire week…

It brings to mind a famous closing line:

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

I had such hope for the new Congress, but Pelosi is making me think it’s just business as usual…

Who’s Watching?

Wednesday 15 November 2006

Though Asheville drivers are experts at testing it, my temper usually remains on a fairly even keel. I’ve become more aware of it lately, though, as L’s birthday approaches.

The thought that a child is going to be watching every move I make just as I watched every move my father made is enough to soothe tempers when idiots individuals don’t know how to make a left turn at a traffic light, a common occurrence in this small city.

I can picture the individual I want to be, the father I want to be, and mold myself to it, stripping away the one or two bad habits I might have (really — no more than that), in order to produce an ideal of fatherhood. In all seriousness, there’s nothing like the thought of having your own child strapped into a car seat in the back to keep check temper in check.

Kononowicz the Great

Tuesday 14 November 2006

At first I thought Krzysztof Kononowicz was a joke. "Some clever Polish YouTuber has done some video editing and acting and created an idiot,"Âť I thought. Apparently I'm not the only one. In comments posted about the video on YouTube, someone wrote,

ENGLISH: this is a hilarious electoral TV ad of a guy running for mayor of a town in Poland. The ad, which, incredibly, is NOT a joke, contains a huge amount of unintended humor. The cheesy jingle, the studio's awful colors, the candidate's look, and, last but not least, his horribly mangled and heavily accented Polish plus his dumbass ideas have made this video an instant classic of political humor. I'll be posting my translation on my profile soon.

I even said as much here, in a post that I removed as I thought about it and realized Kononowicz is not a joke, not even unintentionally.Kononowicz was a candidate for the mayor of Białystok. Elections were held Sunday, November 12. He didn't win. Watch the video, and even non-Polish speakers would have thought there was little chance he could win. But he did garner 3.5% of the votes.

What makes Kononowicz's candidacy seem like a joke is his naivety. His platform is simple, Catholic, and slightly nationalistic: stop underage drinking and underage smoking; get rid of crime; protect Poland's Ukrainian border against smuggling; improve the transportation infrastructure. They are all very practical political goals, from an obviously practical man.

Unfortunately, Mr. Kononowicz is not an eloquent speaker. He mumbles as if his mouth is filled with marbles and cotton. He begins by discussing his family, touching briefly on his mother, then speaking of his father (who fought bravely in the war but no longer lives with the Kononowicz family because "he relocated. He's in heaven now."Âť), he refers to him as "Daddy."Âť

He concludes that it's very much worth it to vote for him because "I am person truly honest, truly fair."Âť He is not all talk, he assures voters:

"Other parties talk. They talk, and they do nothing. They did nothing for the city of Białystok. And what I said, I will accomplish everything. Because I am a faithful person and a practicing [Catholic]. And I know how to do it. How to fix the roads. How to do everything. How to get rid of cigarettes. How to get rid of everything!"

A simple man. With simple ideas. But necessary ideas.

There is indeed a lot of underage drinking in Poland, as everywhere. Indeed, there's just a lot of drinking, period, in Poland. Frigid winters and a 19% unemployment rate will do that to a country.

While I've only passed through Białystok's train station on my way to the northeastern corner of Poland, I'm sure the roads there are just as bad as everywhere else in Poland. Poles like to joke that their roads are so bad that even the holes in the road have holes.

I can't comment on the smuggling on the eastern border more than to say it makes the news regularly. Having lived on the southern border, I know there was a significant amount of smuggling things to the west — cheap alcohol mainly.

These are important concerns, but I never really heard politicians talk about them as directly as Mr. Kononowicz did. And that's why I've come to admire the man. Simple though he is, he decided to try to do something about the problems he sees his fellow Białystokites face. I can almost see him sitting at a table with his friends, probably over a bottle of vodka, saying, "Damn it, I'm going to do something about this! I'm going to stop sitting at this table complaining and go out and do something."

The Process of Education?

Monday 13 November 2006

Via Autism Vox, I found this post: “The Process of Education.” In part, it reads,

shouldn’t the people who fail school be kicked out? I mean, if someone fails a class and makes no effort to regain good grades, that person is assuredly not going to contribute to society. It really would save a lot of money and time if those people were just simply expelled; they obviously do not care about their well-being and education. it’s a waste of money for us all, and morons like that tend to annoy me, anyways. And the same goes for mentally challenged children. Just let them die. We, in this world, cannot waste any more money educating these worthless brats. And I’m not talking about ADD or ADHD. Those things can be channeled by a person and used for their advantage. What I’m talking about are the more serious illness. Autism, for one. People with autism shouldn’t even be educated, and if I was a parent of an autistic child, I would really be ashamed. We don’t need to waste any more precious money educating people who won’t learn (Process of Education)

Dr. Chew deals with the uneducated absurdity of this comment here, but I wanted to touch on something a commenter said in reply:

It’s high school, it’s more a social experience than anything. High school builds character and knowledge where you manage to grasp it.

A lot of fluff was in my high school days and I’d like to think (I say like because someone has to pay for that shit to keep going) that whatever class you’re going into has a small impact on your overall character and in some way you’ll expand yourself. I was in all sorts of fine arts classes from art itself to woodworking, computers, ceramics, to auto body, and from my standpoint right now I’m glad I went through those classes so I at least have some knowledge in a different area of life. I understand that I may never again have the need to wedge an aerated piece of clay air tight again but at least I know what it is. (Source)

High school is a social experience? Sadly, I agree. And this individual (one “shaharazhad”) even touches on part of the problem: a completely fracture curriculum. In the name of diversity, we’ve spread our education so broadly that it’s almost paper thin.

Now, thanks to No Child Left Behind (NCLB in all in-school communications), we’re reaching over to the opposite extreme, at least in primary school. We’re focusing so much on math and reading that we’re neglecting a lot of other subjects that might be called “fundamental.” NCLB tries to solve the problem of low achievement through testing and conditional funding. What about lengthening the school day and increasing the number of days children spend in school?

Writing with Light

Monday 13 November 2006

Bulb and Light

Self-talk

Saturday 11 November 2006

We got a new camera recently. It has a bulb exposure setting. This means that as long as you press the shutter release button, the shutter remains open. With a remote, it’s a little different: press the shutter release button once and the shutter opens; press it again, and it closes.

And with an off-camera flash, you can do really silly things…

Self-talk

What You Get for a Mere (8k)k

Friday 10 November 2006

Reading through the New York Times, a link to a real estate article caught my eye: “What You Get For … $8 million“. While we are in the market for a house (sort of), this is a little out of our price range. Still, I was wondering, “What can you get for that kind of cash?”

Big houses, to be sure.

But what really made my jaw drop were the property taxes. A nice little place in Sun Valley, Idaho gets hit up for $26,870 annually, and there’s a quarterly home owners’ association fee of $625. That comes out to $30k a year, just to pay for the privilege of owning that property. (I initially had a typo in that sentence that seemed a bit more appropriate: “the privilege of owing that property.”)

The listing from Greenwich, Connecticut has property taxes of $39,636 annually.

When in 1979 my parents bought the home I grew up in, they paid right at $40,000 for it. Granted, it was not in Greenwich , Connecticut; granted, it was on the small-ish side; granted, it was not in an upscale neighborhood; but still — $40,000. My parents got a thirty-year mortgage and their monthly payments, by today’s standards, were a joke

And there’s the key, the point of all this: the saddening realization I’ve been having as I grow older about the reality of inflation. As I was growing up, the thought of paying over $120k for a house seemed incredible. “Who can afford such a place?” I’d ask myself as we drove by homes with the flimsy sign in the yard, sometimes listing the price as well as the real estate agency. Looking for a house in Asheville these days, we’re desperate to find something other than a “fixer-upper” under $200k. Strange as it may seem, it took me, a man in his mid-30s, some time to shake out of my head the prices fixed there twenty years ago.

As far as paying $8 million for a home in Connecticut, I’d rather pay $4 million for a 27-bedroom “Hall” in Britain…