Some Dude

Food for thought

2010-03-08T17:56:00.003-05:00

21. At Toys Я Us stores in Russia, is there a forward "R" on the sign?

Put that cookie down!

2010-02-15T11:02:00.001-05:00

I can't take credit for finding this (it's been around the intertubes for a while), but I just can't get this song out of my head. I love Arnold's strange facial expressions.

Food for thought

2009-12-21T16:25:00.000-05:00

20. There is a Facebook group called Proud to be a Christian, and I just saw a Facebook status urging people to be proud of being Christians. Proud to be a Christian? Is it just me, or does this sound a little odd?

To me, being "proud" of being a Christian sounds a little like being "proud" of one's ethnic heritage. Worse yet, it sounds as if, by becoming Christians, Christians have performed some great feat that they should be proud of. This is completely antithetical to the message of the gospel, which is that we cannot save ourselves and desperately need God's grace.

Food for thought

2009-12-06T22:57:00.002-05:00

19. I think I will start an online dating site for feminists. Maybe I could call it Fish Meets Bicycle.

Spam can be fun!

2009-11-17T10:09:00.005-05:00

When I created this blog, I opened a new email account that I use to communicate with people on this blog and to receive alerts when readers leave comments. Since this email address is posted on my blog, I get occasional spam emails. Usually, these emails are from aspiring scam artists in Africa somewhere, who think they are the first clever people ever to come up with the idea. Sometimes it's fun to send back a sarcastic response. Here's my latest.

He wrote:

Greetings ,

Before I introduce myself, I wish to inform you that this letter is not a hoax mail and I urge you to treat it serious. We want to transfer to overseas account ($160,000.000.00 ) One hundrend and sixty million US DOLLARS from a prime Bank here in Abidjan. I want to ask you, If you are not capable to quietly look for a reliable and honest person who will be capable and fit to provide either an existing bank account or to set up a new Bank a/c immediately to receive this money, even an empty a/c can serve to receive this money, as long as you will remain honest to me till the end for this important business trusting in you and believing in God that you will never let me down either now or in future

I am Mr.Scott Wright , presently promoted to Auditor General in one of the banks here in Abijian cote d'ivore . During the course of our auditing last week, I discovered a floating fund in an account opened in the bank in 2006 and since 2009 nobody has operated on this account again, after going through some old files in the records I discovered that the owner of the account died without a [Heir/WILL] hence the money is floating and if I do not remit this money out urgently it will be forfeited for nothing. The owner of this account is Mr. Keith Lathan an American and a great industrialist and a resident of Alaska State, who unfortunately lost his life in the Auto crash in Alaska , which crashed on January 31 2007, including his wife and only daughter leaving nobody to claim the money . No other person knows about this account or any thing concerning it, the account has no other beneficiary and my investigation proved to me as well that the account is a secret account.

The total amount involved is One hundrend and sixty million US DOLLARS only [160,000.000.00 DOLLARS ] and we wish to transfer this money into a safe foreigners account abroad. But I don't know any foreigner; I am only contacting you as a foreigner because this money cannot be approved to a local person here, but to a foreigner who has information about the account, which I shall give to you upon your positive response. I am revealing this to you with believe in God that you will never let me down in this business, you are the first and the only person that I am contacting for this business, so please reply urgently so that I will inform you the next step to take urgently. I need your strong assurance that you will never let us down, me and a key bank official who is deeply involved with me in this business.

I guarantee you that this transaction will be executed under a legitimate arrangement that will protect you from any breach of the law. The bank official will destroy all documents of the transaction immediately you receive this money leaving no trace to any place. I will use my position and influence to obtain all legal approvals for onward transfer of this money to your account with appropriateclearance from the relevant ministries and foreign exchange departments .

At the conclusion of this business, you will be given 30% of the total amount, 70% will be for us. PLEASE, TREAT THIS PROPOSAL AS TOP SECRET.I look forward to your earliest reply,Best RegardsScott wright .

My reply:

Dear Scott,

I extend my condolences to you regarding the death of your friend Mr. Lathan and his family. I also knew them well. Keith was a hunting buddy of mine. We had some great times hunting mountain goats in Alaska State, as you call it. We also enjoyed working on our Autos together.

Please rest assured that it did not even cross my mind that this kind offer of $48,000,000 (30% of 160 million) is a hoax. I treat this kind of thing very "serious". This kind of thing happens all the time in the US. In fact, this is how I became a multi-millionaire myself. At least once a month, some generous Nigerian guy inherits a large fortune and needs to use my bank account. In return, he gives me a portion of his inheritance. Soon I will have enough money to become a successful industrialist, just like our late friend Keith Lathan. I am already extremely wealthy, so my share would have to be worth AT LEAST $48,000,000.01 to be worth my while.

I am a little confused, though. Why would you want to transfer your money to a bank here in the states? You said yourself that you work for a "prime" bank in Abidjan. I don't think we even have "prime banks" in the US. Oh, the creativity and innovation of you Cote D'Ivoirians! And I thought my country was advanced with our prime rib, prime numbers, prime time TV, and Optimus Prime. You have a good thing going for you! You should not abandon your prime bank for an ordinary US bank. Maybe you should explore the untapped banking market in Nigeria. All those wealthy heirs that contact me seem to have great difficulty in finding a prime bank where they can deposit their vast wealth, hence all the emails I receive from them.

I also get occasional emails from some kind people who are concerned about the size of my penis. If you have time, please inform those selfless individuals that it's big enough and that they can stop offering me their products. (I thought that maybe you guys know each other since your emails both appear in my Spam folder.)

Scott, I wish you luck in finding a person who will accept this no-strings-attached gift of $48,000,000.

Food for thought

2009-11-16T11:45:00.004-05:00

18. I think it would be pretty hilarious if Chad Ochocinco (formerly Chad Johnson) of the Cincinnati Bengals got traded to the Detroit Lions. The Lions have retired the number 85, which belonged to Chuck Hughes. I am guessing that the narcissistic Ochocinco would change his name again to Ochocuatro or something like that.

God and the false doctrine of "shit happens"

2009-11-08T15:45:00.000-05:00

In the movie Forrest Gump, Forrest unwittingly coins a familiar phrase after stepping in a steaming dog pile. The phrase "shit happens" is a resignation that bad things happen, with no rhyme or reason, to good people and bad people alike. As I observe the world around me, it's hard to dispute this. Things like cancer, job loss, and natural disasters can affect anyone, with no regard to their moral uprightness. Sometimes evil people even seem to be rewarded. The Psalmist laments:

This is what the wicked are like— always carefree, they increase in wealth. Surely in vain have I kept my heart pure; in vain have I washed my hands in innocence. [Psalms 73:12-13]

Many people are reluctant to attribute pain and suffering to God because they think it would be beneath his loving nature. After all, God is love. I have been one of those people.

It sounds like you are waxing philosphical, Some Dude.

I would recognize that snide, insulting voice anywhere. That sounds like my favorite literary device, the Devil's Advocate.

Yes, I am your Devil's Advocate. I--

--You talk to me when I am thinking about things, just to keep me honest. We know. You've said it three times now.

You broke the fourth wall.

I'm sorry...what did I do?

The fourth wall. It's a theatrical term for the imaginary plane which separates the audience from the actors on stage. The audience views the actors through the fourth wall. When an actor breaks character by speaking directly to the audience, he breaks the fourth wall. Just a few seconds ago, you referred to me as a literary device, thereby admitting that I am not a real person.

You're a pretty useful literary device, too. I'm glad that I thought of you. In this conversation, I am going to express a few doubts that I have had about God and how he works. To avoid giving my readers the idea that I fully endorse these ideas, I am going to put these words into your mouth.

So, you're making me out to be the bad guy?

I...guess you could say that.

Asshole.

Um...okay. Well, sorry about the fourth wall thing. I will try not to do that again. It must be kind of distracting to the readers. I am absolutely not talking to myself. I am having a conversation with a friend who really exists, just like any rational, well-adjusted adult would do. I am not crazy, really. I...forgot what I was talking about. I guess I was too busy descending into madness.

MADNESS????

No, Leonidas. No. No. Please...just...go away. There's only room for one literary device here, and you're not it. I promise that I'll say the word "madness" some other time. Then you can come back and deliver some variation on your signature catch phrase.

Um...excuse me. The fourth wall.

Right. Sorry. That's the last time I will forget, I promise.

So, what were you talking about before I showed up?

Well, I was just talking about the randomness of the world.

That's deep, man.

The world would make a lot more sense if God were a clockmaker.

Pardon me, but what on earth are you talking about? Are you saying that you want God to make clocks? You're a weirdo.

No, no. I think you are being deliberately obtuse with me. There are some people who acknowledge the existence of Creator God but do not think that he interacts with his creation. To them, he is like a clockmaker who made a clock and left it to run by itself, only returning to wind the clock occasionally. C.S. Lewis also used the analogy of a game of chess. He said that in a casual game of chess, a player may occasionally allow his opponent to take back a move, but if his opponent is allowed to indiscriminately take back moves, pretty soon you don't have a game of chess anymore.

And if God indiscriminately changes the effects of our actions, then soon our actions are pretty much meaningless.

Yeah, that's exactly what I thought when I read that book by C.S. Lewis. I think I sort of misinterpreted his point to mean that God would not interfere with his creation because it would violate the "rules" of life. Also, Lewis posed the question of what life would be like if the laws of physics were such that it were impossible to harm another person. For example, what if a piece of wood became soft if it were used as a weapon? Again, I sort of misinterpreted what he was saying. My reasoning was that intervention by God would nullify the consequences of our actions, and therefore, detract from our free will.

Then, I read a book by Jerry Bridges. He made a convincing argument from the scriptures that God is in complete control over his creation. Of course, I knew this already. What I thought, though, was that God voluntarily restrains his power out of respect for our free will. If you look at scripture, you will see that this is not the case. The scripture, in passage after passage, describes not only how God can, but how God does.

Yeah, so, what does this have to do with Forrest Gump and clockmakers?

Well, one overarching theme throughout the scripture is that God actively rules over his creation. Everything that occurs is within his perfect will.

Wait just a minute! Does that mean Hurricane Katrina was part of God's perfect will? How about that girl who was in the news recently who was raped and forced to live with her kidnappers for eighteen years? Was that part of God's will? If you believe that, then you are even dumber than I thought you were. Do you even listen to the crap that comes out of your mouth? There is no way that God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. Only two of these could possibly be true at the same time. A loving God would not allow these injustices. You're just unbelieveable, you know that? Go thump your Bible somewhere else, you nut.

Look, I am not saying this lightly. I know this is a hard thing to believe. In fact, I'm not quite sure I believe it myself. Many people find this hard to believe. That's why theologians have been performing mental gymnastics for centuries to explain away God's sovereignty. It's much, much easier to agree with Forrest, throw up my hands, and say "shit happens". It's much easier to think of God as a clockmaker. That way, bad things that happen to me are nothing personal. Getting mad at God for my hardships would make about as much sense as getting mad at the dice for making me land on Boardwalk with a hotel. But if the Bible says that God is all three of these things that you mentioned before, then we must trust him.

Trust him? TRUST HIM?? God is a vindictive, capricious egomaniac! Sure, the Bible says, "God is love", but actions speak louder than words. Look at what he did to his faithful servant Job, just to win a cosmic pissing match. If that's how God treats his friends...then why the hell would I want to be his friend? Look what he did to his own son, for crying out loud!!

...

And aren't you grateful that he did it? That act alone should remove all doubt from your mind of God's love for us. Even when we suffer, we can know that he suffered more, and he knows what we are experiencing. DA, it's really easy to trust God in good times. It's much harder in bad times, when "shit" is "happening" for no apparent reason, and you can't see those things working "for the good of those who love him." I want to tell you about a book that I read recently: The Prodigal God by Timothy Keller. I think I have misread the Parable of the Prodigal Son for most of my life.

In this book, Keller says that the focus of the parable is actually the older son, not the younger son. The audience of Pharisees probably would have been indignant that the father in the story would lavish his love on the unworthy rebellious son and sympathize with the obedient older son, who was also indignant. When I have heard this story discussed in Sunday school and sermons, the focus is usually on the forgiveness offered to the younger son and the resentment that the older son feels toward his brother when he should be glad that his brother has returned. This is only part of the point of the story. When the father throws a huge party to celebrate the safe return of his younger son, the older son refuses to join them and addresses his father disrespectfully. He says,

'Look! All these years I've been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!'

As Timothy Keller points out, this quote reveals the older son's true motives for his obedience. He was in it for the goods, not for the intrinsic value of pleasing his father. In other words, he wanted his father's possessions, but he did not want the father himself.

This is a really tough thing to guard against, DA. When you believe that God controls the events which occur in this world, then it's possible to resent him when bad things happen to you. But if you become resentful and rebel against him during the bad times, it reveals the true condition of your heart. It just shows that you were only obeying him during the good times so that God would owe his blessings to you as a reward for your faithfulness, just like the older brother in the parable. The problem with this thinking is that it is impossible to put God in our debt. I hope that helps, DA...DA?

I tuned out about a minute ago. Whatever you were talking about, it was probably ridiculous, just like the rest of this idiotic conversation. You should get your head out of the clouds and the see the world as it really is, Some Dude. I think I've wasted enough time here today. See ya.

...

Wow. That has...uh...never happened to me before. To the rest of you people who were listening in on this conversation...do you have any thoughts?

Food for thought

2009-11-07T13:18:00.002-05:00

17. If you junk a Dodge Caliber and make a sword out of the scrap metal, then do you have an ex-Caliber?

Food for thought

2009-10-24T13:15:00.004-04:00

14. I would rather deal with evil than with stupidity. For evil, there is the redeeming power of Christ. For stupidity, there is no remedy.

15. I have heard answering machine messages which thank the caller for calling. Why would you thank the caller in advance just for calling? There is a good chance that it's somebody that you don't want to talk to.

16. If can Barack Obama win a Nobel Peace Prize for some really neat ideas that he has for world peace, then can science fiction writers get Nobel Prizes in physics, chemistry, or biology for their really neat ideas about science?

Epic win!

2009-10-14T15:14:00.002-04:00

Listen to this great parody by Tim Hawkins.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zfs3BJZxKkc

(It's a parody of this song.)

Teaching Cooking Adventures

2009-10-12T16:46:00.008-04:00

I have not had many adventures since I started teaching my new class this semester. So far, it has been kind of boring -- just how I like it.

I guess most of my adventures will happen somewhere besides the classroom this semester -- like the kitchen. This Sunday, somebody from my church brought some eggplants from his garden. I took one, even though I did not know exactly what to do with it. I followed this recipe, and had some cheesy stuffed eggplant an hour later. It sure beats the boxed macaroni and cheese that most single guys my age are probably eating. (This would probably be a little more interesting if you could see pictures of what I made, but I don't have a digital camera.)

Introducing Common Cents

2009-10-10T00:19:00.002-04:00

Our government officials and all their recent shenanigans have helped me to develop a deeper interest in politics. I am now one of the authors of a new blog, Common Cents. Stop by and join the conversation.

http://commoncentspolitix.blogspot.com/

Pet Peeves

2009-09-10T21:52:00.004-04:00

I try not to write these too often. Nobody wants to read my constant complaining.

3. Post-interview thank-you notes

Most career experts would probably say that it is a good idea to send a note after an interview to thank the interviewer for his time and for considering you for the job. I really dislike writing those things. First, it's an inconvenience. Second, it's phony.

I am quite certain that when I went to interviews in the past, the interviewer did not invite me to be nice. It is the job of the HR department to find good candidates. When I send a thank-you note, I do not send it out of profound gratitude. My true intention is to get a piece of paper with my name on it in front of the interviewer's face when he is making a hiring decision. It's an insincere, manipulative game.

I propose that we eliminate post-interview thank-you notes. If that fails, we could start calling them "hire me" notes, since that's really what they are.

Food for thought

2009-09-05T21:44:00.003-04:00

It's been a while. Hmm...where did I leave off?

11. If you are pregnant and do not know it, are you expecting?

12. Can a trumpet player be forced to play Trumpet Voluntary?

13. On a serious note, why does the same federal agency, the ATF, regulate alcohol, tobacco, and firearms? That's kind of a random assortment.

Teaching adventures

2009-09-03T17:18:00.004-04:00

I am going to teach a new class!

I will be a lab assistant for Computer Science II. As the one and only lab assistant for this course, my responsibilities will be to write and grade the lab assignments for the course and to be present for the labs and office hours. Since I get to write the assignments, I will not have to grade a bunch of nitpicky, time-consuming things. More or less, I will be the answer man. I will not have to give any lectures. The lecturers are a professor and a doctorate student, who seems pretty easy to work with. I think this class will work just fine for me and my schedule, and I am looking forward to it.

Uh oh. I'm being subversive.

2009-08-06T13:16:00.004-04:00

I am going to take Michelle Malkin's advice and report myself for my "fishy" statements about Chairman O's proposed health care program.

According to the White House blog, citizens are encouraged to snitch on people who have the audacity to oppose our benevolent leader's plan. After all, he knows what is best for us. I wrote a letter, which I am going to report to the authorities. I am a bad boy. Tsk tsk. Shame shame.

(I have noticed that most of my posts labeled "Government and Politics" also have the "Douchebaggery" tag. Why is that?)

Dear President Obama:

I have strongly disagreed with nearly everything you have done as president so far, and your proposed health care plan will top it all. The federal government's handling of health care will be disastrous, but that is not even the primary reason that I oppose it. My main reason is that this program will take away some of my freedom as an American.

This has occurred to some extent in Michigan already with motorcycle helmet laws. Lawmakers have mandated motorcycle helmets on the grounds that injuries raise insurance premiums for everyone. This same line of reasoning could be extended at the federal level to restrict our freedoms in many other areas, including smoking, eating fast food, or rock climbing.

Contrary to popular opinion, election to public office does not give you carte blanche to do whatever 51% of the electorate wants you to do. You are limited to the powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution, with all other rights reserved for the states and the people. (No doubt, a Constitutional scholar like you would know this.) I defy you to list the specific clauses or amendments which give you the Constitutional authority to pass a federal health care bill.

I look forward to voting against you in 2012.

Chess boxing?

2009-07-20T18:38:00.014-04:00

I found a great sport for intellectuals who like to kick a few asses now and then. (Or maybe it's a sport for talented asskickers who enjoy a mental challenge.) The sport is chess boxing.

The name is self-explanatory. According to Wikipedia, the source of all knowledge, a chess boxing match is conducted in alternating rounds of boxing and chess. A competitor can win by knockout, judge's decision, checkmate, or by forcing his opponent past his time limit in the chess match.

Chess boxing is every bit as weird as Xtreme Baseball, if not weirder. Still, this sort of appeals to me. A good chess boxer must be versatile, since chess and boxing require different skills. It also must take a great deal of concentration to play chess after having your head pounded for three minutes. It might be interesting to extend this idea to other combinations of games. How about Candyland-mixed martial arts? I imagine that the commentary would go something like this:

...and he's in the ground and pound! He's taking punch after punch to the head. His only chance of winning now is to survive this round and then draw the Queen Frostine card.

Wait a second...did you say brotherly...affection?

2009-07-17T22:27:00.013-04:00

I recently listened to a sermon by pastor Josh Harris at Covenant Life Church. (He is also the author of those books about dating, which apparently, are supposed to be a kind of a big deal.) Since Harris has typecast himself as "the dating guy" (sort of how Robin Williams has been typecast in funny, goofy roles), I expected him to talk about dating. I guess this sermon was Josh Harris's One Hour Photo, except without the creepy photo guy. (Do you think I have enough hyperlinks?)

Most of his message was really not new to me. He began with Romans chapter 12, which urges Christians to view their bodies as living sacrifices. Then he went ahead to verse 9, which reads, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good." Harris explained that Christians should not act loving merely to put on a show, but rather, love people sincerely, as verse 9 urges. (Upon further reflection, he actually tied in a lot of this stuff to dating. He mentioned the tendency of some singles in his church to appear to love other people in order to attract possible spouses.) Continuing with his discussion on male-female relations, he read 1 Timothy 5:2, in which Paul urges Timothy to treat "younger women as sisters". These are all familiar verses which I have heard a few times. Then it got weird.

Harris read Romans 12:10, which says that Christians should "love one another with brotherly affection." Whoa, hold the phones. Did he say affection? He said that I should be affectionate toward everyone in my church, including young women. My usual approach toward young women has been to treat them with the basic civility and respect that everyone deserves, but not much more. (In other words, talk to them if they talk to me.) Part of the reason for not making the connection between affection and treating young women as sisters may be that I usually read the NIV, which uses the words "brotherly love", rather than "brotherly affection". Sadly, I am also not especially close to my sister, and the only real friendships I have had with young women have been with the ones that I have dated. Even with wives and girlfriends of my friends, anything beyond basic civility and respect has been for the sake of my friend.

The word "affection" seems to be a bit of a sticky wicket. For most of my life, I have assumed that love consists of actions, not merely warm fuzzy feelings about people. However, John Piper writes, "Both of these words (in v. 10a), “love” and “brotherly affection,” are emotion-laden words. They ruin immediately the stoic, Christian notion that we don’t have to like people but we should love them." Harris challenges the young singles in his church to get to know each other primarily as brothers and sisters in Christ. He also challenges the notion that things necessarily have to be weird between a brother and a sister in Christ if romantic feelings develop between them.

So, Harris thinks that single men and women should get to know each other as brothers and sisters in Christ. To me, this idea sounds sort of like a glow-in-the-dark dog: a neat idea, but not practical. (Seriously, though, a dog that glows in the dark would be fricking awesome!) Romantic weirdness would inevitably get in the way of friendship. This is madness!

Madness? THIS IS BROTHERLY AFFECTION!

Thanks, Leonidas. I can always count on you for a well-reasoned rebuttal. Being brother and sister in Christ may be difficult, but as John Piper asks, "since when are the commands of God supposed to be doable in our own strength? 'With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible' (Matthew 19:26)." Also, many things about the Christian life are impractical. It was impractical for Jesus to come to earth in human form to live a perfect life and die for our sins. Also, God could have made a purely practical and utilitarian world, but he chose also to make it beautiful.

As always, feel free to chime in with your comments, rebuttals, and insults.

Take me out to the...what the heck?

2009-07-15T15:27:00.007-04:00

Somehow, I came across a site for the National Xtreme Baseball League (NXBL). (You know it has to be totally awesome, since they spell extreme with an X!!!!) This could possibly be the worst idea since tomato-flavored Jello.

Diagram from http://www.ssa.cc/nxbl.htm.

According to the NXBL website, Xtreme Baseball is played on two interlocking diamonds. Each diamond has its own home plate, pitcher's mound, bases, and baselines. Each team plays with a regular team of nine fielders at the same time. One pitcher delivers four pitches, while his team fields and the opposing team bats. Then the other pitcher delivers four pitches from the other mound, while his team fields. The team batting on the "Weid Side" runs the bases counterclockwise as in regular baseball, while the team batting on the "Flip Side" runs the bases clockwise.

Basically, this is just a nutty-ass idea which does nothing to make the game any more exciting or add anything else to the game, other than some confusion. The NXBL is in its second season, and I predict that it will not last much longer.

I'm TEA'd!

2009-07-07T17:10:00.006-04:00

I attended a TEA party after watching the Grandville Fourth of July parade. (TEA stands for Taxed Enough Already.) It was encouraging to see other like-minded people who support limited government and personal liberty. One of the speakers mentioned that my representative in Congress, Fred Upton, is in favor of the Cash for Clunkers program. I was disappointed by this, so I wrote him a letter. I might be voting Libertarian in the next election.

***********************************************************************

Dear Rep. Upton:

I recently learned that you support the proposed Cash for Clunkers program, which would give federal tax dollars to citizens toward the purchase of a new vehicle. I strongly oppose this bill for a few reasons, and I am disappointed that my representative would be in favor of it.

First, it is unjust for the federal government to give taxpayer dollars to citizens for this purpose. Why should I finance somebody else's new car? If a private citizen forcibly took money from me to spend on a new car, it would be called theft. Instead, those citizens who want my money to buy a car ask their elected representatives to take my money. This is morally wrong.

Second, the Constitution does not authorize Congress to spend taxpayer money for this purpose, just like it does not authorize you guys to enact most of the legislation that you pass. The Constitution is a list of the things that the federal government MAY do, not a list of things it may not do. Congress has only the powers specifically listed in the Constitution, with the 9th and 10th amendments reserving all other rights to the people and to the states.

I voted for you in the past election, but I may be forced to reconsider my support for you in the next one.

Respectfully,

my name

Another sax solo

2009-06-20T16:12:00.005-04:00

I think I'm getting old.

I played this solo with my high school symphonic band back in 2000, which seems like a pretty long time ago. It was kind of cool being a featured soloist and getting recorded on a CD of the concert. The piece is Diversion for Alto Saxophone and Band, by Bernhard Heiden. I practiced this so much that during the concert, it felt like my fingers were on auto-pilot. It went pretty well, other than a couple times toward the end when I ran out of air.

There is no video to go with this, so I just put in a completely irrelevant picture. It's a nice relaxing beach scene -- the same one I used for the other solo. Maybe I will switch pictures if I put up another video sometime. Enjoy.

(If you are reading this on facebook, then you will have to go to my blog to hear the video. Videos do not show up on the facebook note.)

Pet Peeves

2009-05-29T19:14:00.007-04:00

2. Car alarms

While I was at the library today, I heard a car alarm in the parking lot. This made me think about just how useless car alarms are.

I will illustrate this by retelling the story of the boy who cried "wolf", or as I call it, "The Car Who Cried AAAA...AAAA...AAAA...AAAA...AAAA...AAAA...AAAA...". One day, a guy bought a new car, equipped with a security alarm. On the way home, he stopped at the grocery store. Before he could enter the store, he inadvertently set off the car alarm himself twice in the parking lot. While he was in the store, a kid touched the bumper of his car, setting off the alarm. The owner of the car, thinking that his car was being stolen, ran to the parking lot, only to find...nobody within a hundred feet of his car, other than a little kid and his mom.

After the guy completed his shopping, he drove home and parked in the driveway. As he was unloading his groceries, a squirrel touched the car's front tire, setting off the alarm. The man ran out the front door, only to find...a frightened squirrel.

Later that night, a shady character walked by the man's house and noticed the shiny, new car in the driveway. By stealing this car, the shady character could pay his shady rent for several months and pursue his shady hobbies, such as removing tags from couch cushions and smuggling toothpaste onto an airplane. He was not a very skilled car thief, so his clumsy attempts to steal the car set off the alarm. For a moment, he decided to run and give up on stealing the car. Then his rational mind kicked in. "No one pays any attention to those damn alarms anyway," the shady character said to himself. Meanwhile, the car owner assumed that another squirrel set off the car alarm and ignored it for a moment. (He was on the can.) None of the neighbors gave any thought to the alarm either, other than, "I wish somebody would turn off that damn alarm." When a passerby stopped by the driveway, the shady character grumbled something about always setting off the alarm by accident, and the passerby left, assuming that he was the owner of the car. Within minutes, the shady character started the car and drove away.

The moral of the story...car alarms are useless.

I hope you liked my story. Just call me Aesop.

Flight folly

2009-05-25T12:45:00.005-04:00

I flew to Maryland this week, and I became a little more aware of the silly rules which govern air travel in the United States.

According to the regulations of the Transportation Security Administration, passengers can only take less than 3 oz. of a nonflammable liquid or gel on the plane in carry-on baggage. This would include such dangerous items as toothpaste and shaving cream, which I foolishly left in my carry-on bag. (If a terrorist manages to crash a plane with some toothpaste, then I will humbly retract my remark about silly rules.) In order to ensure the safety of the other passengers, the TSA officers had to throw away my toothpaste and shaving cream. After all, there is nothing more dangerous than minty fresh breath and a clean-shaven face.

Soon after having my stuff confiscated, I realized the charade that was occurring. Nobody checked my pockets as I passed through the security checkpoint. That means that I could have passed the security checkpoint with a tube of toothpaste in my pocket, since a tube of toothpaste would not set off a metal detector. It is not my intention to discuss the merits of keeping dental hygiene products off planes (although I think it is unnecessary). My point is that the TSA does not even do a very good job of enforcing their silly rules. This does not inspire confidence that the TSA would do a good job of protecting me from actual dangerous items.

I saw a few signs that said, "Your safety is our priority." I think they should be changed to say, "The appearance that we care about your safety is our priority."

Food for thought

2009-05-24T17:05:00.001-04:00

10. Do hotels in Hawaii serve continental breakfast?

Pet Peeves

2009-05-20T11:45:00.005-04:00

I was inspired by this guy to tell the world about the silly things that annoy me. This is going to be the first post of an ongoing series. Just in case you misunderstand, I am not really too upset about these pet peeves. I'm just making a proverbial mountain out of a proverbial molehill. By the way, how much should I feed a peeve, and how much exercise does a peeve need? S.D.

1. Wedding cards that say "Congratulations".

I was shopping for a gift and a card for a friend of mine who is getting married. When I got to the card section, I discovered that almost every single fricking wedding card said "Congratulations" on the inside.

What's the problem with this? I'll tell you the problem. The word "congratulations" is for achievements. For example, it would be appropriate to congratulate Michael Phelps on winning eight gold medals in the last Olympic Games, as his victories represent a lot of hard work. However, it would not make a lot of sense to congratulate him on buying a new car, even though having a new car might make him happy. Buying a car is not an achievement.

Think about what you are saying when you congratulate a couple on getting married. What you are saying, implicitly, is something like this: "I have heard some vows in my day, and you said the hell out those vows. Good work!" It would probably make more sense to say, "I am happy for you."

Sax solo

2009-05-17T23:58:00.007-04:00

I played a solo in the church talent show last night. Watch the video above to hear my performance. (Actually, it's just the audio with a picture that I added. I had to convert it to a video to put it in a blog post.)

The song is Amazing Grace. I play the alto sax on this piece, with Jan on piano. The piano accompaniment is from a book of jazz hymn arrangements. (I would give credit to the composer if I knew the name.) I hope you like it.

Food for thought

2009-05-11T13:34:00.002-04:00

9. I think meteorologists are glass-half-empty people. That's why they say "partly cloudy" instead of "partly sunny". (Or maybe they are optimists who like clouds.)

I wrote a skit!

2009-05-03T22:27:00.004-04:00

This is a skit that I wrote sometime before I started this blog. I am not typically the artsy-fartsy type, but I had the inspiration at the time, I guess. The explanations of salvation in terms of legal concepts (justification, Jesus speaking in our defense) have resonated with me strongly. I am definitely not the first person to think of salvation as a courtroom scene, but I thought it was an interesting idea anyway. This skit has no title. Maybe you can help me with that. -- S.D.

My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense – Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.
(1 John 2:1)

Characters
The Accused – Just some poor schmuck.
The Defense Attorney – Jesus Christ himself, only in a fancy lawyer’s suit.
Judge – God the Father.
Prosecutor – A smug, sarcastic jerk who delights in the sins of the accused.
Bailiff – Just some guy who does stuff and says a couple things.

Setting
An ordinary courtroom. There are two tables toward the front, side by side. A judge’s bench sits in front of the tables. The Defense Attorney, dressed in a suit with a professional-looking tie, and Accused, dressed in an orange jumpsuit, enter the courtroom and sit down at the defense table. The Prosecutor, dressed in a suit with hair slicked back for a weasely look, is seated at the prosecutor’s table waiting for them. The Bailiff stands near the bench.

Prosecutor: (smugly) You had better have a good lawyer.

(Gestures to a large stack of papers in his hand, presumably a list of all the crimes against the Accused.) The judge enters.

Bailiff: All rise!

The Prosecutor, Accused, and Defense Attorney stand. Bailiff motions for them to sit down and they do so. The Judge sits at the bench.

Judge: Prosecutor, what are the charges against the defendant?

Prosecutor stands.

Prosecutor: (gleefully) Well, (sarcastically) Your Honor, I have quite a list.

Prosecutor pulls out a stack of papers.

Prosecutor: Let’s see... envy, murder, strife, deceit...malice, gossip, insolence, arrogance...Oooh! He invents new ways of doing evil [Romans 1:29-30]!

He browses through the stack of papers and shakes his head in disbelief and grudging admiration.

Prosecutor: Just brilliant! I never thought some of these things myself! I won’t bother with the rest. Let’s just say that I’m going to put him away for ...an eternity.

Judge: Get to the point, Prosecutor. What is your case?

Prosecutor: There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies, and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers [Proverbs 6:16-19]. All of these things describe the defendant. All who sin under the law will be judged under the law [Romans 2:12], and the wages of sin is ... death!

The Prosecutor sits down and slouches in his chair, looking quite pleased with himself. The Defense Attorney stands to begin his defense.

Defense Attorney: Everything that the prosecution has said about my client is true. Now, with your permission, Your Honor, I would like to present Exhibit A.

Judge gestures for Defense Attorney to begin. He pushes up the sleeve of his suit, revealing a nail hole in his hand.

I was pierced for his transgressions. I was crushed for his iniquities. [Isaiah 53] Therefore, you have no case against my client. His penalty has been paid in full.

Prosecutor: (standing) Your Honor, I object!

Judge: Overruled! The defendant is cleared of all charges. (Judge strikes the gavel.)

Prosecutor: You heard all the things he did. He’s mine!

Judge: Prosecutor, I find you in contempt of court. Bailiff, remove him from my courtroom.

(Bailiff leads Prosecutor out as he protests.)

Prosecutor: You can bet that I am going to appeal this decision to a higher court!

Judge: Yeah, good luck with that.

Food for thought

2009-05-01T23:27:00.003-04:00

7. What would you use to remove a nail polish remover stain?

8. My Labrador retriever does not retrieve things. Some people in my family say that he is dumb, but I think he might be remarkably intelligent for refusing to play fetch. He realizes the futility of chasing a frisbee and giving it back to me when I am only going to throw it again. Or maybe he's dumb. That's probably it.

Food for thought

2009-04-27T08:00:00.001-04:00

6. Do you think that maybe marriage can make a guy mellow out a little? Take Boaz for example. Before he got married, he was ruthless.

MacGyver is awesome

2009-04-26T08:00:00.001-04:00

It's been a long time since I have watched a TV show regularly. I think the last show that I watched regularly was the Spider-Man animated series in the mid-1990s. Before that, I mostly watched nerdy shows like Square One and Mister Wizard on PBS. I guess I am just not a TV person. Now, imagine what would happen if Mister Wizard gave up his career of mixing vinegar and baking soda and started working for some agency called the Phoenix Foundation. The result would be MacGyver.

I started watching MacGyver back in the 1980s when it was first on the air. I have many fond memories of watching this show with my dad and my brother, who sometimes comments here under the name Anonymous J. Just in case you are not fortunate enough to have seen this show, let me briefly explain.

MacGyver is a...something...for the Phoenix Foundation, which is in the business of...something. (Even now, I don't know what MacGyver's job is or what his company does.) In nearly every episode, MacGyver finds himself in some predicament, and he gets himself out of it with his wits, rather than brute force.

Like many TV shows from the 1980s, this show suffers from corny dialogue, bad acting, and ridiculous special effects. As a kid, I never noticed these things. I thought MacGyver was the greatest show in the world. Now, as I watch these episodes on DVD, I realize how bad some of these episodes are. In some of these cases, the dialogue, acting, and special effects are so bad that the badometer rolls over until it resets at FRICKING AWESOME. (And, yeah, there are a few scenes that are simply bad, eliciting groans, sighs, and eyerolling rather than laughter. One example is the episode when MacGyver and the supporting actors use hockey sticks to keep an expensive diamond away from some jewel thieves on a hockey rink. This episode deserves two minutes for high-stupid.)

I plan to write a few follow-up articles about some of the things that made this show awesome. Stay tuned.

Confessions

2009-04-25T08:00:00.005-04:00

16. Sometimes when I fill out job applications, I check the "Black" box on that silly government race and ethnicity form that all employers seem to have, just to skew the results a little. Every little bit helps, right?

17. I told a high school teacher one time that her assignment was "not a good use of my time". It really was a waste of time. For this assignment, I was required to pair together pictures of chromosomes, which was supposed to teach me that chromosomes come in pairs, I guess. I only wish that I had a witty retort for her when she asked me, "Do you want to teach the class?" Anyone out there reading in blogland, how should I have replied?

18. There was a guy in my middle school Sunday School class one time who was annoying everyone during the class with some electronic noisemaker. I feigned interest, saying, "Cool. Can I see that?", or something like that. He gave it to me, and I gave it to the teacher. I used this same trick on my little brother, who was about three years old at the time, when he had something that he was not supposed to have. My three-year-old brother was able to figure out that I was trying to take something away from him.

Food for thought

2009-04-24T15:40:00.004-04:00

4. How many sides does an Oregon have?

5. How many faces does a Sanhedrin have?

Food for thought

2009-04-23T12:26:00.003-04:00

1. If meta-emotions are emotions about emotions and metadata are data about data, then is the number 16 (four fours) a metafour?

2. Why would anyone in his right mind make his bed? It will only be unmade about 16 (1 metafour) hours later.

3. Do you find it ironic that the music of Britney Spears is protected by intellectual property laws?

Video of a jerk in a Pac-Man suit

2009-04-18T22:30:00.004-04:00

I don't usually like Jackass-style pranks, but this one made me laugh. Enjoy!

Jerk in a Pac-Man suit

Free to Choose

2009-04-18T14:34:00.004-04:00

I am going to give you some idea of just how nerdy I am. I spent part of my Saturday watching a video series from 1980 on free market economics. (Here's a link to the video series.)

This series, Free to Choose, is hosted by the late economist Milton Friedman. (By late, I mean that he has died, although this could certainly explain why he is late to his appointments.) Dr. Friedman explains again and again the numerous ways that people, and society in general, are better off when people are free to make their own choices, rather than being controlled by a paternalistic government. The issues that Dr. Friedman discusses, such as school vouchers and tariffs, are just as relevant now as they were in 1980.

Dr. Friedman would be a much better president than the micromanager that we have in office now. (By that, I mean that during his lifetime, he would have been a good president. But by that, I also mean that he would currently be a better president than Obama since a dead man can't burden us further by signing any new legislation.)

Reflections on something I read recently

2009-04-15T01:12:00.004-04:00

I came across a website recently, which has some interesting articles on Christian apologetics. One of these articles is a book, which discusses the plausibility of several Old Testament events from a scientific standpoint. (I do not know the author or the title of the book. Here is a link to the first chapter. Change the chapter number in the URL to read other chapters.)

Reading some of the chapters in this book made me realize, to some extent, just how much of an impact secular American society has had in forming my worldview. I used to think of creationists as well-meaning, unsophisticated simpletons for thinking that the world is thousands, not billions, of years old and that a literal and worldwide flood occurred. I am not completely sold on all aspects of creationism, but the author presents at least a few plausible explanations for the spectacular events described in the Bible.

The author also discusses matters of faith. I can relate strongly to one discussion in this book in particular. The author says that many people tend to have an inconsistent view of the truth of the Bible. To many people, the Bible is reliable in matters of faith and salvation, but, in their minds, only children and simpletons think that the world was created in six days and that dinosaurs lived at the same time as people. In cases like this, where a literal interpretation of the Bible leads to "foolish" conclusions, people have a tendency to perform all kinds of mental gymnastics in order to explain away the clear statements of the Bible. (Some of the widely-accepted scientific theories, such as the age of the universe, may have come about by false assumptions about how the universe works and that the universe has always worked the way that it does today.) Even I have disregarded the clear statements of the Bible in favor of some "easier" misinterpretation. It is not something that I do on purpose, usually. The parts of the Bible that I have explained away are not limited to the creation, either. The author makes the point that if the Bible is unreliable in the matter of creation, then we can have no confidence that it is reliable in matters of salvation.

Many secular scientists ridicule creationists mercilessly for their assumptions that God exists and created the universe. They suppose that they are better scientists because they approach science with a completely open mind and follow the evidence to its logical conclusion. This is a foolish, arrogant attitude. No one is completely without assumptions. Some scientists approach science with the assumption that God could not possibly exist, and their conclusions about the origins of the universe follow logically from that belief. Other scientists might believe that God exists, but he has a hands-off approach with his creation. Some other scientists, such as the author of this book, study creation under the presupposition that God created the universe exactly as the Bible describes it. Yet, only the creationists are "unscientific" for having presuppositions.

2009-04-09T10:14:00.001-04:00

...at least that's how it seems sometimes.

Random musings about my graduate program

2009-04-04T16:33:00.004-04:00

Yesterday, I unexpectedly attended a computer science department awards presentation, where I received an award for being on the honor roll.

It was unexpected because I don't pay attention to my surroundings and my email messages. The only reason I attended was that a professor told me yesterday (on the day of the presentation) that I would receive an award and encouraged me to attend. After the presentation, there was a reception with pizza and cake.

Throughout elementary school, middle school, and high school, there was a holy place called The Teachers Lounge, where no student dared to go. (Well...there was one student who entered, but he never left.) Now, as a graduate student, I get to enter this hallowed ground, eat pizza with my professors, and get congratulated by them, almost as a colleague. It's kind of cool. (And I enjoy the free pizza.)

A redundant story

2009-04-01T16:32:00.008-04:00

This story is a complete fabrication. Also, it's not true. -- S.D.

I checked my mail yesterday, and I found an envelope, delivered by the United States USPS. It was an invitation to a friend's wedding. It read, "If you please, respond to this RSVP by April 18."

I got started on that right away. First I put on some sunscreen (SPF factor 15) since it was sunny and bright outside. Then, I went to the bank, since I was low on cash. I pulled up to the ATM machine, typed in my PIN number, and withdrew $60 dollars so I could pay for postage and stamps. Then I discovered that I did not know how to get to the post office. I typed in the post office address into my GPS system. Then I maneuvered and steered my car at a high rate of speed to the post office, where I mailed my RSVP.

Why did I write this pointless story? I guess it's because of ennui. Or maybe boredom.

Seriously, though. Stop saying "ATM machine". It sounds ridiculous.

Apologies to the author?

2009-03-31T23:11:00.003-04:00

This is just something that strikes me as a little odd.

When people make parodies of poems or comic strips or something, they sometimes extend "apologies" to the original author, like this. (Clement C. Moore is probably getting really tired of people apologizing to him every year around Christmas.) Does this seem weird to anyone else? Usually, the author is dead, so he probably doesn't care. Also, if you know in advance that you need to apologize for something, then you might consider not doing it in the first place.

Weird.

Confessions (continued)

2009-03-27T08:00:00.005-04:00

Continued from here...

15. I often visited my grandparents when I was a kid. One day I was playing cards with my grandma, which was one of our favorite things to do together. She got a couple Little Debbie snack cakes for us to eat. Little Debbie snack cakes were wrapped in pairs, so my grandma and I split a package. She got up to go to the bathroom or something, and I ate both cakes, since I am a pig. When she got back, she was a little surprised to see that her snack was missing, but she was not angry. Actually, I think she was kind of amused. She said, "It looks like Little Debbie ran away." I miss my grandma.

Confessions (continued)

2009-03-26T08:00:00.007-04:00

Continued from here...

11. I don't actually remember this, but my mom told me about it. My kindergarten teacher told her that I didn't want to draw a picture like the rest of the class was doing, so I gave her a blank sheet of white paper and said that it was a polar bear in a snowstorm. Unlike my other teacher, she thought it was hilarious.

12. I went on a trip to France with my high school French class. On the trip, we went on a lot of walking tours. City ordinances in France seem to be a little more liberal than in the U.S. when it comes to cleaning up dog crap because there were piles everywhere. I did not like most of the people on that trip, so as we walked, I stepped inches behind the dog crap so that the people behind me might not see it and then step in it. I think my evil plan claimed a couple victims. Muahahahaha! (Don't worry. I got my comeuppance at least once when I stepped in it myself.)

13. This is one of Anonymous J's favorite stories. My family went camping with some friends. I hatched an evil plan with Anonymous J and our friend. Our friend tied a lasso with a short piece of rope. Then we put the rope on the ground and covered it with grass clippings. Then we called my sister over and told her, "Some Dude's Sister, put your foot there." She did. My friend, sitting in plain view just a few feet away, pulled his end of the rope, and we roped ourselves a sister.

14. I used to amuse myself in church by making up new words to the hymns. For example, Let us break bread together on our knees became Let us break wind together on our knees and holy, holy, holy became hungry, hungry, hungry. (It was almost lunch time.) Yes, I was old enough to know better. Yes, I should be ashamed of myself.

Confessions (continued)

2009-03-25T08:00:00.005-04:00

Continued from here...

9. When I was in elementary school, one of my writing assignments was to select three things that I would wish for if I found a magic lamp. I got tired of thinking, so my third wish was that I had no more wishes. My teacher was not at all amused.

10. The cable company used to give my family a little black box to put on top of the TV. I figured out that if I flipped a little switch in the back, then I could watch cool shows like Beavis and Butthead on MTV, which my parents had blocked.

Higher insurance rates for sick people

2009-03-24T15:46:00.003-04:00

An Associated Press article from today says that at least one health insurance company is planning to discontinue the "controversial practice of charging higher premiums to people with a history of medical problems."

What I can't figure out is why it is "controversial" for an insurance company to charge higher rates for people who are likely to get sick. An insurance company is a business, and the purpose of a business is to make a profit. Teenage drivers pay the highest auto insurance rates of any demographic, and there is no outrage about that. I would also be willing to bet that it costs a lot of money to insure a house near a fault line, but again, no one protests this practice. Teen drivers and people who live on a fault line pay higher insurance rates because, statistically, they make more claims on their insurance policies. Likewise, people who have had illnesses in the past are probably more likely than healthy people to make a claim on their health insurance policy in the future. It is unfortunate that some people have to pay more for their health care, but one of the first lessons that a child learns is that life is not fair. Adults should learn the same lesson.

I am thankful for my good health, which keeps my insurance premiums low. There are many people in this country with serious health problems, and the medical care for these problems can be expensive. The directors of a privately-owned insurance company can charge any rate they want. If they decide to lower the rates, then they are completely within their rights to do so, and I think it is a compassionate thing to do.

Conversation with myself about dating

2009-03-20T08:00:00.010-04:00

I see from the title above that I have been summoned.

Not yet. How did you do that, anyway? You are not supposed be able to speak until I say something. Are you going to heckle me before I even make my first point?

Yeah. Whatever you are about to say is wrong. And your face is ugly.

Geez, with friends like this.... Before you continue, why don't you introduce yourself for those who might not know you.

I am your Devil’s Advocate. I talk to you when you are thinking about things, just to keep you honest. If I did not interject every once in a while, you would just blissfully ignore the other side of the argument.

Thanks a bunch.

You're welcome, ugly.

*sigh*. Anyway, as you have pointed out, today's conversation is about dating. Particularly, dating within the church. (We have had a few conversations now. Read them all here.)

*ding dong*

It sounds like somebody is at the door. I'm not expecting any company...

Hey, it's Laura from it's a blog! Well, D.A., now that I have another person to talk to, you have to leave. Them's the rules. ... Come on in, Laura. Would you like some coffee? Tea? Thanks for coming. It's kind of tiring to talk with that insulting windbag.

That’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black, I think, Some Dude. Hey there, Devil’s Advocate. You don’t look at all like I thought you would.

So…I was just about to start a conversation with D.A. about dating people from church. Conventional wisdom among most Christians is that your local church is the best place to find somebody to marry. I question this conventional wisdom because that's just the kind of dude I am.

You? Questioning conventional wisdom? Bizarre…

Um…okay. Anyway, my first point is that dating somebody from church could make church an uncomfortable place. If things do not work out with somebody, then you either have to see that person all the time at church or start going to a different church.

Look, weenie, last year I had to deal with something like this with a guy in my small group. And it’s a SMALL group. I had to see him, not just on Sundays, but on Thursday nights as well. We were supposed to TALK. About HOLY STUFF. It SUCKED. But you know what? I pulled up my big girl panties and got over it.

Seriously, though, there IS a risk. But that’s ok. We are the most risk-averse generation in the most risk-averse country in the world, and to some extent, we just need to grow up. We’re adults, and we need to act like it instead of pretending like we’re still in junior high and asking the teacher if we can switch homerooms because that mean old upperclassman broke our hearts, waaah waaah waaah.

I’m not disallowing the possibility that a change of churches might be necessary – a broken engagement, or a relationship in which the couple had been sleeping together, or some other similar situation might merit considering that possibility.
But think of the opportunity you’d be throwing away if you let post-breakup awkwardness break your unity with a brother or sister in Christ. And think of the sin you’d be committing if you refused to forgive and be reconciled.

Okay, okay. I’m a weenie. Thanks for noticing. By the way, if you take my reasoning to its logical conclusion, then you should not date anyone who frequents any of your usual hangouts, since a breakup would make it awkward to be around that person. Wait…shooting down my points is your job. You need to step up your game, missy.

All right then, here’s my second point. God knows everything, including my motives. God knows when we are BSing him. He knows if I am in church to find a person to marry or if I am in church to worship him and hear his word preached. This means that I should make every effort to be sincere with him. Now, one way to ensure that my motives for attending church are pure is to make a solemn vow ahead of time not to date anyone from church, now or in the future. Just take that option off the table.

That is ridiculous. There is no time in your life when you or I ever have a completely, 100% pure motive for doing anything holy. We’re sinners, and our sin affects every part of our lives. The Scriptures say that even our righteous deeds are like filthy rags before the Lord. But just for the sake of argument, let’s say you make a solemn vow never to date anyone from your church and that you’re actually able to fulfill said vow. Does that change the fact that you really like it when that one hot girl sings while you’re playing the saxophone on stage? Does it suddenly purify your motives for going to church? Are you never again going to go to church for the wrong reasons? A vow like that has zero effect on your heart. It doesn’t even get close to your motivations. So you’ve failed before you even start. Good work with that one.

All right, I concede that taking care of one particular false motive does not help me to have the right motive in its place.

Besides, what could possibly be bad about being encouraged to do something good—joining with other believers in worshipping God—in the presence of someone you someone you enjoy and appreciate? There’s nothing wrong with that. Now if the ONLY reason you EVER go to church is because your girlfriend likes it, you need to consider the possibility that you are, in fact, unsaved. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, pagan.

Oh, ok. It’s impossible to have perfectly pure motives, so I guess it must be useless even to try. That's all right. Holiness isn't really that important anyway...pagan.

You’re right. We shouldn't try to be holy. Because that would be... obeying the Bible and stuff. Geez, what's the matter with you? Of course we should pursue holiness, you libertine. The Christian life is definitely lived in tension while we work out our salvation but still live in these jacked-up earthly bodies. So we have to keep ahold of both the idea that we have the duty to pursue holiness and the idea that we'll never be free of sin until we're free of these bodies. It's like Greg Louganis practicing his high-dives in biker-gang gear. Once he gets that stuff off of him, he'll start racking up the tens (except from the Russian judge; that jerk).

*ding dong*

Ah, D.A. We were just having a nice conversation and then you had to show up. What’s that in your hand? A taco?

Yeah, Taco King was having a deal.

You are just a disembodied spirit who lives in my brain. What use could you possibly have for a taco?

Here, Laura. I bought one for you, too. Oh, sorry, Some Dude. I forgot all about you.

Don’t worry about it. I’m not important anyway.

Well, D.A., this is where you usually say something funny, witty, or insightful in conclusion.

I’ve got nothing. Laura?

Tacos are delicious. What, you want me to say something clever when I have a taco to eat? Leave me alone.

Teleprompter troubles

2009-03-18T13:34:00.007-04:00

Those of you who thought that Bush's mispronunciation of the word "nuclear" automatically qualified him as a moron should check out what Fearless Leader did. According to this article, Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen (who, by the way, kind of looks like a fish) read part of Obama's speech before realizing that the words were not his. Then, Obama took the podium and proceeded to read Cowen's remarks. In doing so, he thanked himself for inviting Cowen to the White House. (I think he also instructed his audience to "kill moose and squirrel", for some reason.)

The article that I linked above is, so far, one of two articles I could find about this incident. Hmm...interesting. If a Republican president had made this mistake, the media probably would have had a field day, complete with a tug-of-war, relay races, and participation ribbons for everybody. This whole incident could have been avoided if Charles Barkley had warned Obama of the dangers of using a Teleprompter.

Confessions (continued)

2009-03-15T14:02:00.004-04:00

Continued from here...

7. When I was a kid, I turned off my parents' alarm clock one morning so they would sleep through church. My dastardly plan was foiled when they woke up on time and took me to church.

8. I had a fun little toy called a Fart Machine. It makes crude fart noises with the simple press of a button on the remote control. One time (when I was definitely old enough to know better) I taped the Fart Machine to the bottom of my grandma's chair at a family dinner. Then, during dinner, I let 'er rip by pressing the button on the remote control. My grandma was hard of hearing and did not notice the fart noise coming from her chair. Everyone else thought that she actually farted and politely ignored it. Despite my flawless execution, the prank was a miserable failure. LAME.

Limited government

2009-03-14T22:29:00.009-04:00

An anonoymous commenter left this question in response to my post "Who needs the Constitution anyway?"

The constitution also talks about the citizens of the states must pay
taxes. Does that mean that DC residents should not have to pay taxes to the
Federal government?

I think the anonymous poster is referring to the 16th Amendment:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever
source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without
regard to any census or enumeration.

It sounds to me as if this amendment says that Congress may collect taxes without regard to the populations of the states. However, I think you could make a strong case that the taxpayers of Washington, D.C., deserve a voice in Congress. My purpose is not to discuss the merits or faults of giving a House seat to the District of Columbia. My point is that Congress overstepped its constitutional authority in doing so.

George Carlin said, "Just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of them are even stupider!” Here's a corollary to that: "Just think of how much of a meddlesome pain in the arse the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even more meddlesome!" It is human nature to desire power. Now, imagine a pure democracy where the top 51% most controlling and meddlesome people run the government. It's not a pretty picture. This situation -- a majority with unlimited power to control the lives of others -- is exactly what the founders feared. As my favorite economist Walter Williams writes, the framers never intended the United States to be a democracy. (What? Don't you have a favorite economist?)

The framers designed the government and the Constitution to avoid the situation that I just described. The bicameral Congress was a compromise to ensure that the more populous states could not ignore the interests of the less-populated states, and so that the less-populated states likewise would not have all the power. They also created a system of checks and balances among the branches of government. Finally, they added my favorite constitutional amendment, the 10th, to the Bill of Rights:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

In other words, if it's not in the Constitution, then Congress can't do it! The authority goes to the states and the people. Unfortunately, Congress and the courts have pissed on the Bill of Rights over the past century by doing whatever the hell they want whether they have Constitutional authority or not. And the citizens have let them do it.

Now, I think a strong case can be made that D.C. deserves a House seat. In order make that happen, the Constitution must be amended first. Tolerating this violation of the Constitution will only embolden Congress to commit more violations, not that they really need any encouragement.

More teaching adventures

2009-03-12T21:47:00.004-04:00

Today, a girl in my class said asked for an extension on an assignment, which is due tomorrow. She said that she does not know how to do much of anything in Microsoft Excel, and she needs help. Fair enough. Not everyone excels at Excel. Of course, it did not help that she overslept and missed class a couple times. (This is a 12:00 class.) She should have talked to me a lot sooner, also.

I told her that I could not change the due date for one student in the class, and that it would be counted late if she turns it in after tomorrow. After asking her a few more questions, I discovered that she has not worked through the example projects in the textbook before attempting the assignment, as I have strongly suggested several times during class. The assignments at the end of the chapter give sparse instructions under the assumption that the student has done the examples and knows what's going on. This is one of the more motivated students in the class.

Good grief.

Obama's comments on education

2009-03-11T19:53:00.007-04:00

According to this article, Obama made some recent statements that he is in favor of merit-based bonuses for teachers. These comments have drawn fire from the teachers unions, who want their members to all earn the same salary, regardless of the half-assed job they do.

This is probably the first time that I do not completely disagree with Obama. In principle, merit bonuses for teachers are a good idea. They could persuade talented people to pursue teaching and talented teachers to keep teaching. However, an idea which is good in principle is not always easy to implement.

I have more questions than answers. First, how is "merit" defined? Usually, merit is defined by how a teacher's students perform on standardized tests. If these tests say anything about a teacher's performance, it is a measurement of the students' previous teachers, not their current ones. Also, I can tell you from personal experience that standardized testing results in lots of half-assed teachers who teach to the test and do nothing else.

Secondly, I ask who will get to choose the standards for "merit". My bet is that, if there is a plan for merit pay, the federal government will attempt to impose a single set of standards to the vast gamut of students and school districts across the nation. Do the schools in Washington, DC, face the same challenges as the schools in Des Moines, IA? Probably not. Therefore, it makes no sense for Congress or some regulatory agency with an overinflated opinion of their intelligence to apply the same policies to these schools. If you follow this reasoning to its logical conclusion, you will realize that I think the federal government should get out of education entirely. The only people that I can think of who would be able to identify effective teachers would be the principals, parents, and students at their schools.

A federal merit pay plan is a good idea in principle, but it will never work in reality.

Brilliant quote by Sen. Arlen Specter

2009-03-10T10:13:00.003-04:00

I listened to part of a radio interview this morning between host Michael Patrick Shiels and Sen. Arlen Specter.

This is the point he made (to the best of my recollection): "We need more bipartisanship, so a single party doesn't control the government."

Senator Specter made a brilliant point, and our nation is lucky to have him in the highest level of government. His mind is like a steel trap. I would also add that our nation needs more jobs to lower the unemployment rate and that Congress should lower taxes to make the tax rate lower. Everyone should aspire to have the logical-thinking prowess of Senator Specter.

Confessions (continued)

2009-03-09T13:53:00.004-04:00

This is a continuation of this post. -- S.D.

5. I like to eat whipped cream right out of the can. I tilt my head back and spray it in. In fact, I did it this morning.

6. My family used to have a storage shed in the backyard. It was easy to climb on the roof of the shed, and I did this often. One time, my four-year-old brother went behind the shed, not knowing that I was on the roof above him. I began spitting -- not at him -- but as close as I could without hitting him. After some spit landed inches from my brother, he lisped to himself, "It'th raining!" This success of this prank exceeded all my expectorations.

Confessions

2009-03-08T23:09:00.007-04:00

1. When I was a kid, my mom took me and my siblings everywhere. At the grocery store, my sister was terribly afraid of the plastic lobsters on the wall in the seafood department. Naturally, my brother and I thought this was hilarious. We pushed the shopping cart, with my sister in it, under the plastic lobsters and laughed as she cried in fear of these dangerous and terrifying creatures.

2. Before our basement was finished, I used to hide under the stairs. Once, when my older-younger brother came down the stairs in the dark, I grabbed his ankles from beneath the stairs and scared the crap out of him. He still remembers this incident.

3. I used to turn off the lights in the basement and growl so my youngest brother would think that lions were down there and leave me alone.

4. Sometimes, I had to tidy up the playroom as a punishment for misdeeds. I was usually angry that I had to do this. In retaliation, I booby-trapped my sister's Fisher Price kitchen so all the dishes would fall out when she opened the cabinet. Years later, I found out from my sister that the booby-trap worked. Success!

Cool new praise song!

2009-03-05T00:04:00.002-05:00

This video is awesome to the hundredth power. If you have not seen it, then your life is not complete. Just check it out. Words cannot do it justice.

awesome video

Zap.

Maybe I can get the praise team at my church to play this one. At least it would be better than Shine, Jesus, Shine.

Reflections on Cracking the Communication Code by Emerson Eggerichs

2009-03-03T23:40:00.003-05:00

I found an interesting book on marriage called Cracking the Communication code. I don't know much about marriage, but ignorance did not stop me from writing about quantum physics, and I know even less about that. Full speed ahead! -- SD

A couple weeks ago I came across an interesting website. Love and Respect is the official website of Emerson Eggerichs, author of Love & Respect and Cracking the Communication Code. In various resources on the website, Dr. Eggerichs explains the basic ideas that he has discovered in scripture regarding how husbands and wives should treat each other. Although I am not married myself, Eggerichs' insights can explain some of the conflicts that have occurred in my own relationships with friends and family. I wanted to learn more, so I went to the library and checked out Cracking the Communication Code.

Eggerichs's advice is difficult, but it is blessedly simple. Ephesians 5:33 says, "...each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband." Dr. Eggerichs explains that Paul specifically urges women to respect their husbands and men to respect their wives because this action does not come naturally. Certainly, women should also show love and men should also show respect. However, these things are the natural mode of operation for men and women, and they do not need any special urging.

Eggerichs also explains that men have a special need for respect just as women have a special need for love. (I would probably argue that, rather than being separate, "love" and "respect" are two sides of the same coin or maybe even two different types of love. However, I will use Dr. Eggerichs's terminology.) According to Eggerichs, a man who feels disrespected will react unlovingly, and a woman who feels unloved will react disrespectfully. You probably see the problem already. This cycle, which Eggerichs calls the Crazy Cycle, can continue indefinitely, with neither spouse realizing the cause of the problem.

At the risk of losing your interest, let's get nerdy! In physics, there is a situation called unstable equilibrium. One example of unstable equilibrium is a ball sitting on top of a hill. The slightest push will send the ball rolling down the hill. This is a lot like marriage. As long as nobody steps on anyone's toes, the marriage will be happy. However, some innocent slip-up (or even a misperception) by either a husband or a wife can send a marriage into a Crazy Cycle.

Eggerichs also describes the Energizing Cycle, which is the inverse of the Crazy Cycle. In the Energizing Cycle, a husband acting lovingly toward his wife causes his wife to act respectfully toward her husband, and vice versa. However, the Energizing Cycle requires deliberate intervention to occur, while the Crazy Cycle happens naturally. Which is easier: to return blow for blow or to act lovingly toward an unlovable wife (or respectfully toward an unrespectable husband)?

After reading this, my thoughts became cynical and resentful. (Me? Cynical? Who woulda thunk it?) My first thought was that men and women have a design flaw on a par with the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. How could an intelligent and loving God have made such a huge screw-up? Imagine if an engineer designed a system, consisting of two parts which naturally damage each other. That would be madness!

Madness? THIS IS MARRIAGE!!! (Sorry. I couldn't resist.)

Then I realized why God made men and women to be physically attracted to each other. To put it bluntly, only a person who is thinking with his little head rather than his big head [or in the case of a woman...whatever it is that a woman might think with instead of her brain] would subject himself to marriage and the inevitable Crazy Cycles which occur. I am amazed that so many marriages succeed, given the natural tendency for even good-willed men and women to drive each other crazy.

Okay, let's set the cynicism aside. Eggerichs makes the powerful statement that "we don't have a marriage crisis in the church. We have a faith problem." If I look at the Crazy Cycle without faith, then my cynical conclusions above are perfectly logical. I need to repent of my cynical thoughts and trust God. Genesis 1:27 says that "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." Saying that men and women have a design flaw is like saying that God has a design flaw, since we are made in his image. And who am I to question God?

The natural propensity for men and women to drive each other crazy is certainly something that should be considered soberly before getting married. As Eggerichs explains, a person who puts faith in God and his word will obey the command in Ephesians 5 by serving his or her spouse, regardless of how the spouse acts. God promises to reward a faithful spouse. The results are in his hands.

Music in worship

2009-02-28T10:17:00.005-05:00

A few weeks ago, I started playing my saxophone with the praise band at my church. I enjoy playing my sax, and this is an opportunity for me to play some music a couple times per week. (Now that I have joined the band, we cannot accept any string players. The congregation might be offended by the sax and violins. *Dodging rotten vegetables*)

This experience has gotten me thinking about the purpose of music in worship. Why do churches have music in their worship services? Sometimes it seems to be little more than entertainment. Also, I have been examining my own motives for playing with the band. (As you may have noticed from some of my other posts, motives are very important to me.) Do I play my sax in church for the kudos from the other people at church? Do I play just because I enjoy doing it? Or do I play as an act of worship? Which of these reasons are acceptable, and are any of these mutually exclusive?

I had a conversation with a guy at church last week about some of these questions. I told him that I was a little uncomfortable with music in church because it might just be used for entertainment. (It must have sounded a little weird for a musician to say he is uncomfortable with music.) He reassured me that for him, music in church is not entertainment. It helps him to worship. He also said that God must have given me the desire to play my sax for some reason, and people at church enjoy hearing me play. He said that using my talents, no matter what they are, can glorify God. A good friend of mine also told me in a phone conversation about his experiences when music has helped him to worship.

I want my music to be about God, not about me. I have no plans to stop playing my sax at church, but I would like to know your thoughts if you are reading this. Is worship music at church meaningful to you? If so, why? What do you think is the purpose of music in worship?

Who needs the Constitution anyway?

2009-02-27T15:09:00.004-05:00

According to this article from the Washington Post, the U.S. Senate passed a bill yesterday, which would give a seat in the House of Representatives to the District of Columbia.

Let's see what Article I of the Constitution has to say about this.

The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.

I see nothing here that gives Congress the authority to give a House seat to any district or territory. The passage of this bill in the Senate should not surprise me, though, given the numerous times that Congress has overreached its authority.

Teaching adventures

2009-02-25T10:43:00.005-05:00

I teach a college-level course on Microsoft Office. Really. On Microsoft Office. That's how dumbed down education has become in the US. It is not rocket science, but it pays my bills. And just like the hokey pokey, that's what it's all about.

My coworkers from India say that Indian students are expected to learn this stuff themselves. I doubt that many students in my class could do that. Most of the students in my class do not belong in college at all. They seem to have no intellectual curiosity and no writing skills. I graded some of their reports recently, and they made my brain hurt.

I caught one of these young prodigies cheating on an assignment. The assignment called for the student to type his name in the footer of the document and print the document. In the footer of his assignment, the name was covered with Wite-Out with his name written on top in red pen. I was suspicious, so I held the paper up to the light and saw another student's name under the Wite-Out. I talked to the guy about it, and he said that he took another student's assignment from the paper recycling box and wrote his name on it in pen. Then he asked me if he could redo the assignment and if there would be any extra-credit opportunities that he could do to make up for poor grades on other assignments. I went back to my office and had a good laugh.

I would think that a student like this would have gotten a little better at cheating, just out of necessity. A rocket surgeon he is not. (Or maybe he is not the brightest tool in the shed. A few cards short of a Happy Meal? Pick your favorite mangled metaphor.)

Reflections on last Sunday's sermon

2009-02-23T23:00:00.000-05:00

I am not a theologian. I have no formal training in the scriptures. Therefore, I will proceed with caution as I write this. As for you, the readers, take my words with the proverbial grain of salt. Maybe two. -- Some Dude

Yesterday's text came from Mark 2. This passage tells the story of Jesus healing a man with paralysis. Here's the text:

Mark 2:1-11

1A few days later, when Jesus again entered Capernaum, the people heard that he had come home. 2So many gathered that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them. 3Some men came, bringing to him a paralytic, carried by four of them. 4Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus and, after digging through it, lowered the mat the paralyzed man was lying on. 5When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." 6Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7"Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" 8Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things? 9Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'? 10But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins . . . ." He said to the paralytic, 11"I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home." 12He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this!"

1. Brotherly love

If you have read this passage many times, then, in your familiarity, you might overlook something obvious. The four men must have looked pretty ridiculous carrying their friend on a mat and lowering him through the roof. Also, they tore a hole in the roof! The owner of the house was probably a little less than pleased about this. These men must have had a lot of courage and boldness. But why did they go to all this trouble?

My pastor pointed out in his sermon that the text does not say whether or not these men expected Jesus to perform a miracle for their friend. He suggested that maybe these men were going to see Jesus and did not want their friend to be left out. Personally, I find it hard to believe that they would have gone to these great lengths just so their friend could hear a sermon. In any case, they thought that it was important for their friend to meet Jesus, and they did a great thing for him. These men are among the unsung heroes of the Bible. I hope that I can be as a good a friend as they were.

2. Faith

The courage of these four men came from their sincere belief that Jesus could heal their friend. (Let's go with my theory for now just for the sake of argument.) As a result of their act of faith, their paralytic friend walked again and the people praised God.

3. Boldness and courage of Jesus

Before Jesus healed the paralytic, he forgave the man's sins. It is one thing to forgive somebody for an offense against you. It is another thing entirely to forgive a person's sins against another person. This role belongs to God. The teachers of the law understood this and accused Jesus of blasphemy. Jesus probably knew beforehand what the teachers would think --according to verse 8, he knew their thoughts immediately after forgiving the man's sins -- but he openly asserted his divinity anyway. Remember this verse the next time a secular scholar tries to argue that Jesus never claimed a divine nature.

Coming attractions

2009-02-23T12:51:00.003-05:00

I have a few works in progress.

Reflections on Sunday's sermon
Another conversation with myself
Reflections on God's sovereignty and human free will
The Shoveler from Mystery Men and the church (Yes, there really is a connection between them.)

I will probably write about these things when I get around to it.

Stay tuned. Some Dude will be right back after these messages.

Selective outrage

2009-02-21T19:00:00.010-05:00

I do not pay a whole lot of attention to the news, but this one thing caught my attention recently. The New York Times has gotten in some hot water for a "racist" cartoon that it published, criticizing the policies of the Obama administration and Congress.

The offensive cartoon in question.

Lots of people criticized President Bush during his presidency about his black-and-white views on issues and failing to understand the nuances. (Here is an example.) I would think that these sophisticated and nuanced people would understand the point of a simple political cartoon. The monkey is there for two reasons. First, it is a reference to a recent story in which a pet chimp attacked its owner. Second, the cartoonist is saying the recent economic stimulus bill looks like it was written by a chimpanzee. (I agree. Chimpanzees are not generally known for their fiscal restraint and responsibility.) There is nothing racist about this cartoon whatsoever.

Even if the cartoonist had intended to send a racist message, it would not make much sense in this case. As Bush's sophisticated and nuanced opponents should know, it is the legislative branch of our government which writes bills, not the executive branch. I also remember quite a few people comparing Bush to a monkey. There was no outrage about that.

Ha ha. Bush is a monkey. Comic genius!

Amazing new recipe!

2009-02-19T08:28:00.000-05:00

This morning I was eating my cereal, just as I do most mornings. I reached into the box and grabbed a handful of cereal. Then I took a swig of milk from the jug. Handful of cereal, swig of milk. It's a system I have perfected through the years. You might say that this is my signature recipe.

Fig. 1: Holy crap! A new recipe!

Then I looked down at the cereal box in my hands, and something caught my eye. On the box, I read the words "Serving Suggestion". I fancy myself a bit of a chef, so I was intrigued. I have been a cereal chef for a long time, and I thought that I had seen it all. But here, in black in white, and glorious golden-brown, there was a new recipe for Corn Flakes. The picture on the box showed some Corn Flakes...in a bowl...WITH MILK!!!! HOLY CRAP!!!! In all my years of eating cereal, it had never occurred to me to attempt this bold combination of grain, dairy, and ceramic!

Excitedly, I sprinted to the kitchen, tripping over a few things in my rush, and grabbed a bowl from the shelf. I took a box of cereal from the pantry. I opened the box. Then, with hands shaking from excitement, I tilted the box and watched in amazement as the cereal poured into the bowl. Why had I never thought of this before?

But the recipe was not done. I still needed to add milk. I grabbed the jug of milk from the table, where I had left it and poured some milk into the bowl with the cereal. Now, the final test. I got a spoon from the silverware drawer and took a bite. It was the most delicious thing I have ever tasted. I am going to send this recipe to Wolfgang Puck. Maybe he will take me on as his sous-chef.

For lunch, I am planning on eating some ham and bread. Maybe I can find a way to combine these two ingredients and market the idea.

Fig. 2: My thumb points heavenward in approval of this creative and delicious breakfast.

Discussing theology with myself

2009-02-15T15:53:00.000-05:00

Written February 4, 2009

The church makes a pretty big deal about the resurrection. I understand that Christ's death pays for our sins, but what does his resurrection accomplish?

Well, there is a certain passage from the Bible that discusses this.

Is that you again, D.A.?

Yes, I am your Devil's Advocate. I talk to you when----

For a literary device, you sure are persistent. [Click this link to read our last conversation.] Can't you give me a moment's peace? I am trying to think.

Well, let me lend you a neuron or two. Open your Bible to I Corinthians, chapter 15.

12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.
You are pretty good at quoting scripture, D.A., but can you explain it? I am having a pretty hard time understanding what Christ's resurrection has to do with our salvation. Let's take this passage one verse at a time, starting with number 14. "And if Christ has not been raised..." Stop there. After that, we get a whole bunch of things that would result if Christ had not been raised.

Our preaching is useless
Our faith is useless
We are false witnesses about God.
Your faith is futile
You are still in your sins
Those who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.

Bullet points 1, 2, and 4 seem to have basically the same meaning. Point number 3 says that we are false witnesses about God.

Well, that one makes sense. Jesus's death and resurrection fulfills Old Testament prophecy. If he had not risen, then prophecy would have been incorrect. How about the other ones?

Well, bullet point 5 says that if Christ is not risen, then you are still in your sins. It seems that points 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 all depend on 5. It all comes down to being still in our sins if Christ is not risen. But remember that after immediately after Christ's death, the curtain in the temple split from the ceiling to the floor. This symbolizes that we can approach God directly, without a priest as a mediator. This occurred before the resurrection!

D.A., you have been pretty quiet. It's been kind of...nice.

Well, I have nothing to add. I guess I am just as confused as you are.

Tax Cheats

2009-02-15T15:52:00.000-05:00

Written February 3, 2009

Barack Obama has appointed two tax cheats to Cabinet positions. As I think about their offenses, I feel a little torn.

Americans pay a metric assload [that's a financial term] of money each year for services that they do not use, do not want, and did not ask for. Therefore, I have a deep dislike for the federal income tax and a grudging admiration for anyone who manages to avoid paying it. (Geithner and Daschle probably should have tried a little harder not to get caught, though.)

On the other hand, Geithner and Daschle committed an act of dishonesty and cheated the American people.

If I had to appoint a tax cheat to a Cabinet position, my choice would be somebody who cheats the IRS in an altruistic way. One example would be an IRS agent who uses his position to help the taxpayers by undermining the IRS from the inside. At least that's what I would do if I had a job at the IRS. Wait...you mean it's not normal to spend time thinking of ways to rip off the government?

Lessons I learned in school

2009-02-15T15:50:00.001-05:00

Written January 31, 2009

School, especially middle school and high school, contributed greatly toward making me the cynical curmudgeon that I am today. Here are a few things that I learned in school. Some of these lessons have been unlearned as I have become older and wiser.

Schooling is not the same thing as education. In fact, schooling can be a hindrance to a person pursuing an education.
Don't ask why.
Strive for mediocrity.
Don't rock the boat.
Appearances are more important than results.
You do not have to be knowledgeable about a subject in order to teach that subject.
Idiots usually get to be in charge.
Always do what those idiots say, whether it makes sense or not. Blindly obey authority.
Rules have no sound reasoning behind them. Therefore, you can assume that almost any rule can safely be broken as long as the idiots in charge do not find out.

Now that I am in graduate school, I am learning different lessons.

Recent Government Douchebaggery

2009-02-15T15:46:00.000-05:00

Written January 29, 2009

Today President Obama committed an intrusive and meddlesome act of douchebaggery, assclownery, and tomfoolery by signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act into law.

According to Wikipedia, the source of all knowledge, this act was written by Democrats in response to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Company. Lilly Ledbetter, a Goodyear employee, accused her employer of paying her less than her male coworkers because of her sex. The court ruled against Bedwetter...I mean Ledbetter...partly because the 180 day deadline had passed since the supposedly-discriminatory act had occurred.

The intent of this bill is to make it easier for workers to sue for discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Riot Act, the Disappearing Act, the Random Act of Kindness, and all the other intrusive Acts which Congress has passed in the name of "fairness". I guess there must be employees who are the victims of gross discrimination and injustice and somehow fail to realize it within the 180-day deadline.

The arrogance of this bill's supporters disgusts me. Consider the pretentious title of the bill. The implication is that there is something unfair about an employee working for an employer for a mutually-acceptable wage. If both parties agree on a wage, then nobody else has any right to object. Some may object that the wage offered by Goodyear was not acceptable to Bed...Ledbetter. I ask: if the wage she earned from her employer was unacceptable, then why did she work there for 19 years? To paraphrase Walter Williams, only a fool would work for an unreasonable wage.

If Barack Obama thinks that workers are being paid "unfair" wages, then he should start his own company and pay his employees a "fair" wage.

Fun with Babel Fish Translator

2009-02-15T15:42:00.000-05:00

Written January 24, 2009

It was when I was a student at Grove City College that I first became familiar with the Babel Fish online translator. Computers are not very good at translating, but Babel Fish can at least give you an approximate translation.

You may remember the children's game telephone, where one person begins with a message and whispers it to another person. Each person whispers the message to another until the message is hopelessly garbled. You can do something like that with Babel Fish, usually with bizarre or hilarious results.

Let's see what happens when I translate something from English to Japanese and then back into English.

Andrew is a swell guy

[andoriyu] is the person of the wave

The first verse and chorus of Jingle Bells:

Passing by the snow, be mixed up 砕 open the sled with 1 horses O' The bell of the thing lowering swing where obtaining - field we go and laugh directly thing that what kind of pleasure which can point to the mind which is attached after the ring brightly can be amused is and the sleighing song of A tonight sing

Well, as for the jingle bell and the jingle bell whether it is to ride with 1 volume jingle bells of the sled which the horse opened in some pleasure which the dust it is the dust it is with sounds directly well, the jingle bell whether it is to ride by the sled which 1 horses opened in some pleasure which the dust it is the dust it is with sounds directly, well

First verse of Amazing Grace:

The sound which rescues the pitiful person the sweet my way how splendid elegance. I was lost one time, but AM which now is found was the blind person, but now, I see.

The preamble to the U.S. Constitution:

We the American people, in order to form more complete combination, establish justice, guarantee domestic silence, offer common defense, promote general welfare, and guarantee the heaven blessing of freedom in us ourselves, our futures appoint this constitution because of the United States, establish.

Rob Bell's Bullhorn Guy video

2009-02-15T15:33:00.000-05:00

Written January 19, 2009

I recently watched a video by pastor Rob Bell of Mars Hill Church in Grandville, MI.

In this video, Bell describes a street evangelist who shouts into a "bullhorn" at passersby and tries to give them religious tracts. Of course, no one pays any attention to him. Bell goes on to not only criticize his methods, but his message also.

Bell criticizes this street preacher (whether he is a real person or just a stereotype, I do not know) for using words like "sin and burn and hell and repent." He says that Jesus "did not come to condemn, but to save (John 3:17)." I ask what Jesus came to save us from. If we are right with God, then we do not need saving.

Bell also claims that God loves us just the way we are, citing John chapter 8 as evidence.

1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the round with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped own and wrote on the ground. 9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11"No one, sir," she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared.

Bell has conveniently omitted the last part of the verse. "Go now and leave your life of sin." "Just the way we are" is not good enough for God.

I will conclude by borrowing an illustration from Todd Friel. Suppose that your doctor discovers that you have cancer. If you have surgery, your life will be saved. Otherwise, you are certain to die. Your doctor does not want to offend you (after all, offending somebody is the worst possible thing that you can do), so he does not tell you about your illness. Instead, he tries to persuade you to go to his hospital.

"Let me tell you about my hospital," he says. "We have really great Jello, and the head surgeon is a really entertaining speaker. And you will be blown away by the awesome Muzak in the elevators." You reply,"All that sounds really great, but no thanks." Then you walk out of the doctor's office. Has this doctor shown love to his patient? The doctor has allowed his patient to die of cancer, but by golly, he didn't offend him!

A conversation with myself

2009-02-15T15:20:00.001-05:00

Written January 18, 2009

-Sometimes when I think about things, I am able to carry on both sides of an argument in my mind. This is one conversation I had with myself. It is not verbatim, but I have had most of these thoughts myself at some point. --Some Dude

I read about a time when President Lyndon Johnson asked one of his aides, Bill Moyers, to say a prayer before a dinner. As Moyers began to pray, Johnson interrupted. “Louder, Bill, we can’t hear you.” Moyers replied, “I wasn’t talking to you, Mr. President.” Moyers nailed it. The purpose of prayer is not to orate to an audience. It is to communicate with God. This anecdote got me thinking. Maybe it would be better if Christians did not pray in groups.

You have some arrogance to question a well-established, age-old practice of the church.

You have some rudeness to interrupt my train of thought. Who are you?

I am your Devil’s Advocate. I talk to you when you are thinking about things, just to keep you honest. If I did not interject every once in a while, you would just blissfully ignore the other side of the argument.

Well, knock it off. The readers (if there are any) are going to think that I have gone nuts. After I finish my brilliant argument and analysis, then I will answer your objections. Until then, be quiet! Back to what I was saying…wait…what was I saying? I was talking about why Christians would be better off praying alone. First of all, I do not think that it is morally wrong to pray in groups. I just think that it is unnecessary, and possibly a stumbling block to believers. Praying aloud in groups is unnecessary because God knows all and will hear our prayers, whether we are in a large group of believers or alone at home. Since God knows all, he also knows when we are trying to feed him a line of BS. It is important for our prayers to him to be sincere. I have prayed before in front of a group, and believe me, God was the last thing on my mind. I suspect that when other people pray, they also are thinking more about the other people hearing the prayer than about the God who they are praying to.

You can pray insincere prayers by yourself at home, too.

Yeah, I guess so. But I think you are more likely to be sincere with God when you pray by yourself. Also, remember what Jesus said?

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing
in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the
truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your
room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father,
who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

Matthew 6 verses 5 and 6. QED, jackass. Now give your creepy, disembodied voice a rest, will ya? Another objection I have to praying in groups is that the person praying often claims to speak for the group. This is not possible. When a person prays, “We pray…”, he is implicitly claiming to know what everyone in the room has on his heart. That sounds kind of arrogant and presumptuous to me. ………….Are you going to interrupt with some smart-alecky comment, or can I continue? …….I guess he has no answer for once.

Um…excuse me. Jesus prayed out loud with his disciples. He even prayed the Lord’s Prayer on one of these occasions. Does that mean that Jesus sinned?

I didn’t say that praying with other people is a sin. I said that it might be a stumbling block.

Then you are saying that Jesus may have done something unwise.

No, Jesus can do anything he wants. He is part of the Godhead.

Actually, Jesus only does the will of the Father. That means that whatever Jesus does is within God’s will and something for his disciples to emulate.

Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do
nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because
whatever the Father does the Son also does.

Matthew chapter 5 verse 19. QED…jackass! Besides that, the apostles prayed together. Are you trying to say that the men who wrote the infallible scriptures made a mistake by praying together?

Not everything that the apostles did was infallible. Are you saying that we should follow the example of Ananias and Sapphira and lie to the leaders of the church?

Ananias and Sapphira were not apostles.

True. But recall that there was some disagreement among the apostles regarding clean and unclean foods and the necessity of the circumcision of believers.

Touché.

You are just using these cleverly thought-out reasons as excuses because you are uncomfortable praying with other people, aren’t you?

Shut up.

God and quantum physics

2009-02-15T15:18:00.000-05:00

Written November 13, 2008

Quantum physics is some weird stuff. In fact, Niels Bohr, a pioneer in quantum physics, once said, "Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it."

The reason that we are shocked when we encounter quantum theory is that we are accustomed to a world which can be described by Newtonian physics. (For example, F=ma and all those other comfortable, familiar laws of motion.) Quantum theory makes some outrageous claims, which are surprising and counterintuitive to us.

For example, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle claims that the momentum and location of an electron cannot be known at the same time. In other words, we can only talk about the state of electrons and other small particles in terms of probability. These principles actually apply to the observable world as well, but the quantum effects on large objects are too miniscule for us to notice with only the naked eye as a measuring device. Another surprising claim of quantum theory is that a particle (such as an electron) can be in more than one location at the same time. As weird as these claims sound to us residents of the Newtonian world, they have been verified by experiments.

Similarly, the Bible makes some outrageous and counterintuitive claims. For example, the Bible speaks of God's sovereignty over the universe and all activities in it while still holding us responsible for our actions. People like us, who are used to "human laws of motion", are unable to reconcile these two truths in our minds, just as we are unable to imagine how an electron could be in two places at the same time. Knowing that quantum weirdness occurs in nature, it is a little easier for me to accept the "divine weirdness" described in the Bible.

Why didn't I think of that?

2009-02-15T15:17:00.000-05:00

Written November 9, 2008

I heard a radio ad recently, hawking some very creative snake oil. The company, the International Star Registry, sells the naming rights to stars. In the radio commercial, the announcer suggests that the listener name a star after a loved one as a special tribute.

My first thought was that this is the most asinine idea that I have ever heard of, since nobody owns the sky. After a while, though, I realized just how ingenious this idea is. All you would have to do to start a company like this one is to create a database and a website. Then, when a poor sucker -- I mean customer -- purchases the naming rights to a star, you add a record to the database and mail a pretty certificate to the customer.

P.T. Barnum said that a sucker is born every minute. Even so, it would take many, many minutes for this company to sell the naming rights to every star in the sky. (At Barnum's rate of one sucker per minute it would take 190,259 years to sell all the stars in the Milky Way.) When this occurs, you can create a new sister site, the World Star Registry, which does the same thing as the other one. Genius!

Stephen Hawking sighting

2009-02-15T15:13:00.000-05:00

Written October 22, 2008

I saw a picture of Stephen Hawking on a billboard. Or at least I thought I did. You may be familiar with the Foundation for a Better Life. The Foundation for a Better Life is the group that puts up billboards and other public service announcements that say " Pass it on." Usually the billboard or ad has a picture of some person or character who exemplifies this trait.

(I am always slightly amused when I hear about the Foundation for a Better Life. Why does such an organization even exist? Is it to counteract the radical agenda of the National Organization for the Advancement of All Things Vile, Disgusting, and Otherwise Unpleasant (NOAATVDOU) ? Rolls right off the tongue, doesn't it? I digress.)

As I was driving home today, I saw a billboard with the face of who I thought was Stephen Hawking, along with the words, "Fostered goodwill and 100 children. Pass it on." I know that it would be difficult for a paralyzed physicist in a wheelchair to take care of 100 foster children, so I was quite impressed. The person in the picture turned out to be just some woman who looks like Stephen Hawking.

That's it. The point of this message is that I saw a woman who looks like Stephen Hawking, and I laughed. Sorry to have wasted two minutes of your life. In that time, you could have done all kinds of important things, like... why are you still reading this? Go do something constructive!

Who knew that boiling ravioli could be so hard?

2009-02-15T15:12:00.000-05:00

Written October 10, 2008

I bought some frozen, stuffed ravioli from the grocery store. The instructions on the bag say that I should boil the raviolis until the internal temperature is at 165 degrees F for at least 15 seconds. To cook these properly, I need a thermometer and a stopwatch. How did the Italians ever manage to cook their pasta properly before stopwatches and thermometers were invented?

By the way, I did not check the temperature of the raviolis before eating them, and I am still alive.

Voter registration drives

2009-02-15T15:11:00.001-05:00

Written October 10, 2008

About every four years (usually in the year of a presidential election), groups of civic-minded people hold voter registration drives to ensure that more people are involved in our democratic system of government. Getting more people involved in self-government is a good thing, right? I disagree.

Excluding the potential voters who recently turned 18 or recently became U.S. citizens, the people who have not registered to vote are apathetic. They do not care enough about the decisions made in this country to register. They probably know very little about the candidates and important issues. Do you want these people to select the elected officials who will make the policies of this country?

A call to action

2009-02-15T15:06:00.000-05:00

Written September 27, 2008

A few weeks ago I saw a sticker on a car for the Sierra Club. That got me thinking about some of the "liberal" activist groups, like PETA and Greenpeace. (I think the Sierra Club, for most part, refrains from spouting off the zany types of ideas that you hear from PETA. I just wanted to explain my train of thought.)

PETA tells the general population about the evils of eating meat and wearing furs. Feeling a bit smug, I asked myself why PETA does not try to present alternatives and solutions to people, rather then just griping about their cruelty to animals. For example, PETA would gain some respect from me if they combined the DNA of a pig with the DNA of an apple tree to produce a bacon tree. If they could produce trees that grow all my favorite meats, I would gladly give up animal products. I would also respect PETA for being part of the solution, rather than just bossing people around.

Then, another thought occurred to me. Oh, crap! I have done the same thing I just mentally criticized PETA for doing. Maybe I have not gotten in anyone's face to confront them about the evils of homosexuality or abortion, but I have been unloving in my thoughts toward people who engage in these practices. Rather than thinking of ways to make it easier for other people to obey God's law, I was judgmental.

What if Christians, instead of just putting pro-life signs in their yards and arguing about the evils of abortion, did things which would make it easier for pregnant women to choose life? What if the church promised to help pregnant women who do not know where the money will come from to take care of a baby? What if Christians promised to take care of a single woman's baby during the day so she can go to work? What if Christians took the radical step of promising to adopt the child in order to persuade the mother not to have an abortion?

Maybe if PETA sees us Christians living out the principles which say we believe, PETA will reciprocate by inventing that bacon tree.

Amazing stuff that we take for granted

2009-02-15T15:02:00.000-05:00

Written August 1, 2008

Back in 2004 or 2005, I was having trouble finding a mechanical engineering job. (It turned out that I wouldn't have liked a mechanical engineering job even if I found one, but that is another story.) To make good use of my time, I enrolled in another engineering course. The title of the course was Intermediate Dynamics.

For this course, I solved lots of long, involved homework problems. I will describe one of these problems since I can't add pictures to this post. One of the problems modeled a human arm as two rods, representing the humerus and the radius-ulna combination. One end of the humerus had a ball joint, representing the shoulder joint. The other end had a hinge joint, representing the elbow. The problem was to derive equations describing the position, velocity, and acceleration of the point at the end of the radius and ulna.

Five pages and several hours later, I had my solutions. The equations that I derived were an unwieldy mess consisting of more than two lines of Greek letters and parentheses. Every time I move my arm, the motion of my hand can be described by these equations. (Actually, the motion of my hand is even more complex than this. The problem that I described has four degrees of freedom: 3 for the shoulder, 1 for the elbow. A human arm really has seven degrees of freedom.) Remarkably, I have been able to move my hand just fine for many years, even before I knew calculus and dynamics. Somehow, the human brain is able to move limbs appropriately without the five page derivation that I performed. This is only one amazing design feature of the human body. The divine designer of this system deserves our admiration and praise.

I do not have a copy of my homework assignments anymore, but you can get at least a sense of the complexity of the equations by looking at this technical article. This paper is not quite what I was studying, but it's close enough. http://repository.upenn.edu/hms/73/ (Click on download article.)

Unexpected hilarity at church

2009-02-15T14:58:00.000-05:00

Written July 20, 2008

I went to church today.

I have been going to church for most of my life, although not always for the same reasons. During my childhood, I went to church because my parents made me go. Later on, after I was able to choose for myself, I went to church out of a feeling of obligation. Later, I realized that God does not award brownie points for going to church and if he did, I would not be able to earn enough brownie points anyway. Now I go to church to learn about God and to worship him, which is usually what I do. Sometimes, though, my mind is a million miles away. Like this morning.

Occasionally, it is hard to pay attention in church and I amuse myself by noticing unexpected moments of hilarity during the service. (These things may be a little bit of a letdown to you readers, but I was a captive audience, which means my standard for hilarity was a little lower than usual. Ah, who am I kidding? Nobody is reading this.)

Anyway, here is the hilarity that occurred:

1.Weird song lyrics“The ocean is growing. The tide is coming in. Here it is!”“Ma – jest – y! Fi – nall – y! Here!"I propose a new rule for singing songs in church. If you don't know what it means, don't sing it.

2. Baby Tatum was baptized this morning. Tatum? Tatum!?!? Were her parents hoping for a nutritional supplement or a laundry detergent instead of a little girl? At least she will fit in when she has play dates with her friends Cheer and Shout. And I bet her little onesies will always be April fresh. (If any of you named your child Centrum Silver, I apologize for the remark about names that sound like nutritional supplements.) Maybe I should pay attention during church...

Women's olympic gymnastics

2009-02-15T14:49:00.000-05:00

Written July 7, 2008

I went grocery shopping last night so I would not have to eat an old pair of tighty whities for breakfast this morning. (I have read that tighty whities are low in nutrients and that dirty ones are known to cause halitosis.) While I was by the refrigerated section, I saw the orange juice and decided that it would taste good with my underpants...I mean danish.

Since the Summer Olympics are coming up soon, Minute Maid has put pictures of US Olympic athletes on their orange juice boxes. As I looked over the many different types of orange juice (including no pulp, some pulp, lots of pulp, wood pulp, and Pulp Fiction) I noticed a picture of a little girl, probably some Olympian's 15-year-old daughter. Upon closer inspection, I discovered that I was mistaken. This 15-year-old girl is competing in the women's gymnastics events.

All right, I admit that I am being facetious. I know that young ladies, many of whom are not much more than little girls, have been competing in women's gymnastics events for quite some time now. I just find it strange that in gymnastics, an athlete can be among the best in the world after no more than twelve years of training (assuming that she begins at age three) and no more than fifteen years on this planet.

I think that it would be slightly depressing to peak in a sport at the ripe old age of fifteen. After gymnasts turn fifteen, it's all downhill from there. One consolation that these girls have is that they can continue competing on the Senior Tour, the NCAA, after they are over the hill.

Emotional Intelligence

2009-02-15T14:47:00.000-05:00

Written July 2, 2008

As part of my internship, I read How to Work a Room by Susan RoAne. This book talks about some of that touchy-feely stuff that software developers tend to shy away from, such as making smalltalk with strangers and emotional intelligence.

What is emotional intelligence? According to Wikipedia, the bastion of all knowledge, Peter Salovey and John D. Mayer define emotional intelligence as “the ability to monitor one's own and others' feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this information to guide one's thinking and actions.” Wikipedia lists a few common criticisms of the concept of EI as a type of intelligence, but my criticism is much more basic. (I am not a psychologist, so take my comments with a proverbial grain of salt.)I suggest that, because of the subjective nature of emotions, it is not particularly useful to talk about emotions at all.

Suppose that your friend Bob tells you that he is feeling happy today. "Happy" is simply a label for a certain set of feelings. When Bob uses the word "happy", he has a certain emotion in mind. When you use the word "happy", you also have a certain emotion in mind. The problem is that there is no way of knowing if you and Bob are referring to the same emotion when you use the word "happy". My guess is that people learn about emotions by observing their own body language and facial expressions as they experience various emotions. After people learn, from personal experience, which facial expression corresponds to which feeling, I think they generalize this knowledge to other people. It is human nature for people to assume that their experiences are "normal". I think that the average person observes the body language and facial expressions of other people and assumes that they are feeling they same way he felt when he had the same expression. This means that people whose facial expressions and body language are naturally similar to other people have a good benchmark for reading the emotions of other people. These people naturally learn to read other people's emotions correctly from personal experience and, therefore, become "emotionally intelligent". However, should a person be considered "intelligent" just by virtue of being "normal"? Food for thought...