You can Leave your Heart but not your Foreskin in San Francisco

If a proposed initiative gets on the ballot and passes in San Francisco, it will be illegal to perform male circumcision in the city.  ”Intactivists” as they call themselves, feel that circumcision is barbaric and violates the boy’s or baby’s right to choose to be circumcised or not.

First Amendment Freedom of Religion rights of Jews and Muslims not withstanding, opponents of male circumcision claim it is unhealthy and dangerous.  Granted, there is risk with any medical procedure.  You can choke on a toothpick while cleaning your teeth.  However, this practice is over 3,000 years old and there does not seem to be a shortage of Jews, Muslims, or any other group who has chosen to circumcise its male children, nor is there any reported lack of libido in the healthy and mentally stable males as well.

It’s so typical.  For religious reasons, parents may choose not to vaccinate their children or let them have blood transfusions.  For religious reasons, women may be required to wear thick veils over their heads that inhibit their seeing or hearing on-coming traffic.  That’s all well and good to these busy bodies, but don’t do anything that allows the boys to identify culturally with the other members of their societies.

Needless to say, the simple solution is that if you don’t want to circumcise your child, then don’t, but that’s too simple to these people.  This is simply yet another example of some people trying to dictate how others should live their lives.  Are they planning to go around examining little boys’ crotches to make sure they weren’t snipped?  Maybe they’ll use TSA gropers-in-training for the job.

In one respect, I tend to agree.  It’s the boy’s body, let him decide.  In similar fashion, however, when we consider abortion, it’s the baby’s life.  Let him or her decide, too, if the abortion should take place.

Funny, they want to stop the family from snipping a piece of skin but they’ll do nothing about snuffing out a life.

Gotta Love those Numbers

We know that most statistics are bogus in one way or another.  Oh, the margin of error might be 2.73844692% or some other just about as valid number, however the truth is not in the numbers but rather in the questions asked or the data chosen for the report.  I’d like to take two examples that I feel are very suspect, both from last Friday’s (Feb 18, 20110 USA Today.

The first one entitled “Late Mortgage Payments Declined” began:

The Mortgage Bankers Association said 8.2% of homeowners missed at least one mortgage payment in the October-December quarter.  The figure, adjusted for seasonal factors [emphasis mine] improved from 9.1% in the previous quarter.

My question is, how does one reasonably seasonally adjust late mortgage payments?  We see it every month with the phony labor statistics where unemployment is “seasonally adjusted”.  Is it that if you don’t have a job in the wrong season that you’re not really unemployed?

Either you made your mortgage payment or you didn’t.  Is it OK not to pay your mortgage during the late months due to holidays?  Is is OK not to pay your mortgage during summer when you might be on vacation rather than paying your mortgage?  What is it?  If you know, please post a reply here.

The other problem was with an article entitled “Most consumers OK with new bulbs,” which tries to prove that the Republicans are wrong to try and repeal the phase out of 100-watt incandescent light bulbs.

According to the study, most Americans are “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the new compact florescent (CF) or light-emitting diode (LED) bulbs so what’s the beef?  The article implied that the Congress was wasting its time on this subject and therefore by extension were in favor of frying the planet and hasten Global Warming.  They couldn’t say that with winter being as cold as it is, so they have to imply it.

The problem I have here is that the questions merely asked about the performance of the new bulbs.  One should be satisfied if one turns on the light switch and the light comes on.  However, the people were not asked how they felt about being forced to spend upwards of 10 times the cost of the old bulbs for a new one.

The people were not asked how they felt about needing at least 5 years on some of their bulbs to break even due to the increased cost versus energy savings.

The people were not asked how they felt when a 7-year CF didn’t last even 2 years before it needed to be replaced,thus never realizing the energy cost savings.

The people were not asked how they plan to dispose of these poisonous mercury-containing bulbs that cannot be thrown out in the normal trash or even discarded in recycle bins.

The first article mucks with the numbers by scrubbing the data.  The second article asks a question that is meaningless to the true issue at hand and thus drawing a false conclusion.

The sad thing is that we have to read the newspaper as critically as they should have been when they wrote their articles.

What can you expect, however, from the liberal media?

October Surprises

It’s October and just a couple of days from the mid-term elections.  It’s time for the pre-election surprises that attempt to sway the undecided voters, and this year is no different.  Recently a few suspicious packages were found that reportedly had explosives bound for two Jewish community centers in Chicago.

I’m not a conspiracy expert nor am I a conspiracy advocate.  I just question the logic involved.  I have to ask, “What were they thinking?”  What could it have been?  Whom does this action benefit more?  The incumbants or the challengers?  I’d like to explore a few options.

Option 1: The various governments knew what was going on but only revealed the plot now.  The news was released at this time to bolster the argument of why change horses in the middle of the stream?  New people couldn’t know what to do better than the folks already there so let’s keep them in power.

Option 2: The various governments outside our own knew it was coming but delayed telling ours until now.  They did this because they want change and feel a different mix in our country’s leadership would be beneficial.  They don’t believe the current set couldn’t act if there was an actual problem.

Option 3: The perpetrators, allegedly Al-Qaida, wanted the same outcome as Option 1 above but felt the government officials were too inept to uncover the packages so they blew the whistle on themselves.

Option 4: The “perps” were doing a dry run and did not hope to be caught.  They don’t care about the election.  They just wanted to see if this was a good way to blow up a plane or a Jewish center from Yemen.

Option 5: These bad guys actually wanted to blow something up but messed up.

Option 6: Their printer was really broken.  They couldn’t get technical support so they wanted to make a statement.

Regardless, it’s good that the packages were found.  Yemeni officials said that even though they’d find the shipping manifests, it might be difficult to determine who really sent the packages.  Maybe the parcel carriers will put in new requirements for identification in places like these.

In any event, in typical knee-jerk reaction, anyone taking a printer onboard a plane will be subject to a full cavity search.  Oh, and the printer will be examined, too.

I speculate; you decide.

A Fond Farewell

I, like so many others, was stunned and saddened upon hearing the news about Greg Giraldo’s passing.  All too often we hear of great entertainers, whether they are musicians, singers, actors, or, as with Mr. Giraldo, comedians.  I truly hope it was an accident.

This is not a eulogy, although I’m sure there are many good things to say about him and his career.  He was a very talented man.  I am not a fan of insult comedy, his specialty.  I personally find very little comedic about insulting others.  I have, however, enjoyed his stints as a stand-up comedian and liked him as a judge on Last Comic Standing.  For the hours of entertainment he provided, I am very grateful.  He will be missed.

Also this week, some young men in our church lost a friend, a 14-year-old sports buddy, in a car accident.  Nobody is invincible.  No parent should ever have to bury a child, but it happens.  The loss can be devastating.  our hearts and prayers go out to the friends and family here as well.

I hope that these events remind everyone how fleeting and fragile life can be and how we should never take our lives for granted.

We should take every opportunity to tell those we love that we love them.  We may not get another chance to say it or show it.  Several years ago I was going to visit friends in central Texas.  I had to fly through Dallas. There was a terrible ice storm that delayed and canceled most flights into and out of DFW.  Since I dislike traveling (I want to be there, not go there), I decided not to play “Weather Roulette”, turned around and returned home.  I promised to return.  Unfortunately on of my friends there passed away before I could return and everyone has gone off to other places.  It saddens me to this day that I could not see them yet one more time.  Don’t make the same mistake.

For those taking medications, be they prescription or not, please remember that Mae West’s quote, “Too much of a good thing is wonderful,” is not always correct.  Seek professional attention if you need to.

If you drive, do everything possible not to be distracted.  Turn off your cell phones!  Don’t let that call be your last one.  I know you are a safe driver, but I cannot vouch for the other drivers around you.

If life is rough, find someone with whom you can talk in private and in confidence.  Nobody is so strong that he or she doesn’t need someone else.  Even the Lone Ranger has his Tonto.  Find yours.  You’d be surprised.  There a probably more people willing to talk to you and listen to you than you think.

Lastly, be at peace with your eternal destiny.  Eternity lasts forever.  Make sure you know in your heart how forever plays out and that you are on the good side of it.

To the friends and family of those we lost, please accept my deepest condolences.  To everyone else, if you have a problem, please seek help.  If you don’t please help someone who does.  After all, in the words of John Donne, “No man is an island.”

In God You do Trust

There seems to be an incessant a battle to remove “IN GOD WE TRUST” from the US currency.  Apparently this text (which is in all capitals) is supposed to “establish” a religion.

I looked up the word “god” on the on-line Webster’s Dictionary. The most common, of course is the capitalized “God” and the second definition also implies an external entity. The third definition, “a person or thing of supreme value”, however, is my focus.

One may logically argue (and my fallacy may be that I’m using logic where possibly none exists) that since the motto is in all capital letters that the word “GOD” does not imply any Judeo-Christian or other entity. It simply says, “GOD”. So, who or what is “GOD”?

If you believe in a personal or impersonal god, then that Person or “Imperson” would be your God. I think few can argue this point. That Being, Entity or Force would be one of “supreme value” and you should be living your life in relationship with that Being and its/her/his precepts and philosophy. For those people, life truly should be “IN GOD WE TRUST”. You know who your God is and you should trust in him/her/it.

If your “god” is a “Prima Mobile”, kind of like a Ronco “Set it and forget it” entity that kick started the universe then sat back to watch it all unfold, you should have some trust that this entity started things off correctly.  This “Prime Mover” (the translation of the Latin term) would have had some idea of how things should go and you should act in accordance with those ideas and ideals.

Even people who have polytheistic or animistic religions most likely have a favorite god, entity, spirit guide, or ancestor to whom they go for wisdom and guidance over and above the others. Maybe for some the motto should read “IN GODS WE TRUST” but for most, there probably is that singular being that to them is supreme.

If, however, you are a true atheist, you would have no external being or thing of supreme value, so who or what is your god? I would argue that working backward from the definition above, you should identify the “person or thing” in your life that is “of supreme value”. If there is nothing outside your life, then you, yourself, are your own god. The only question remains: Do you trust in yourself?

That, perhaps, is the crux of the argument and where the problem may lie. Perhaps these people objecting to “IN GOD WE TRUST” are simply admitting that they cannot even trust in themselves, their own gods. If they cannot trust in themselves, why should any of us put any of our trust in them as well. They don’t deserve to be leaders of anything and their opinions should not mold society’s thinking or actions.

I used to think that these people fighting so hard against a reference to a universal concept of a “god” had guilty consciences and were afraid that their beliefs were wrong. It seems to me now that they simply can’t trust in anything because if they did, that would be their “god”.

And GOD forbid that should ever happen.