I saw the news yesterday. GW Bush is now urging us to conserve fuel. Yeah, that's right. George W Bush says we should drive less. Plan our trips. Travel less. A crisis is at hand, caused by the storms in the Gulf. Of Mexico, that is. Now isn't that ironic? The Texas oil man whose idea of an energy policy was finding more oil to feed the American habit.
Now I find this hilarious. That this man - the same man who wants to dig in the last wildernesses on earth to find more oil - would ask us to conserve after 5 years of conspicuous consumption. That's just funny. Does he think that people will actually do this? If so he's even more of an idiot that I already suspected.
Michelle - my wife - on the other hand is infuriated. When we were talking about it last night, she called GW a "prick". If you know Michelle, you would understand the full impact of that statement. She doesn't swear. She may become angry, but she doesn't use language like that - no, not even with me (wish I could say that).
Her beef seems to be exactly what I find funny. The LAST thing this president could actually advocate was conservation. This guy wants to preside over the largest increase of oil consumption in the history of the earth. His idea of an "energy policy" is to find more places to dig. Reduce use? Drive more fuel efficient cars? Public transportation? Not for this guy. "America needs more oil" seems to be his mantra.
And now he wants us all to conserve. It woulda really threw me had I not seen today's headlines. You know, the one where the EPA increased the amount of pollution a company can spew before they actually have to tell anyone.
Now THAT'S the GWBush I know!
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Monday, September 26, 2005
"Intelligent" Design
Since Darwin released his "Origin of the Species", Christians have been crying out in protest of what it contained. It is against God. It is against the Bible.
I think they miss the point.
Since the dawn of time (whether that was 13,000 years ago as some Christians believe, or billions of years ago as others - both Christian and no-Christian believe), Man has been trying to figure things out. How did we come into being? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Why are some stars bright and some dim? What is this thing called "gravity"? What is this/that/the other made of? How does my transistor radio work? What happens if I pull this? Man is a curious creature.
Sometime long ago, someone invented the "scientific process" whereby there would be standards on how to figure things out. You would study through experimentation and observation and repetition how things work. You put together a theory based on evidence - or your own ideas - and then try to prove it was true. In this way we discovered that the Earth revolved around the Sun and gravity was a natural part of massive objects, and the Moon caused the tides, and disease was often caused by tiny little creatures called germs, and when you take a radioactive substance and get it to start reacting it blows up real good. We learned lots of good stuff.
There are lots of theories out there, many of which we can only prove based on circumstantial evidence. Such as sub-atomic particles. The Big Bang. The human genome. Some everyday things we take for granted as fact are only theories where we have no "smoking gun" evidence. Like the theory of relativity. How light works. And evolution.
See, I don't believe that scientists are evil. I don't believe that most scientists are out to disprove the existence of God. I don't even believe that most scientists are atheists. I think that there are Christians scientists and non-Christian scientists. And I think what they have in common is that they want to figure out stuff. They not only want to understand what God created, but they want to know how he did it!
And here is where Christians miss the point. And miss an amazing opportunity to witness to men and women of science. Christians invent a science called "Creation Science". It is based on the Bible. It is not based on facts as can be discovered through a scientific process. It is thoroughly discredited by scientists because the inventors of this "science" haven't done their science homework. Oh sure, they have done their Bible homework, but that doesn't provide evidence that can be validated by experimentation, observation, and repetition. And, when faced with evidence that their "science" doesn't add up, they say that it is God's way of testing our faith. I was listening to a comedy channel the other day. The comedian said that this was God messing with our heads (he didn't say it as nicely). I find it difficult to believe that God would just decide to mess with us just to "test our faith". At least not in this way.
So Christians made a "science" out of religion. Then they turned around and made a "religion" out of science. They talk about "believing" in evolution. And call it "Darwinism". Scientists have not decided to invent their own religion with this. They are not creating a faith here. They have a theory and they have evidence to back it up. If someone someday proves that it is all a crock. That Man began when 2 alien species met on Earth one day and had a party - and there is verifiable evidence of that - then they'll start talking about the theory of alienation instead. They're not tied to evolution that tightly. It is just the current understanding.
Which brings us to "intelligent design". There are those who say that this is Creationism in a tuxedo. There are Christians who believe this is a way to bridge the gap. To say that, hey, maybe the Earth is billions of years old, but someone had to design it this perfectly. And know what? This isn't bad. I DO think that God created all of this and He had a plan. I also think that, if evolution is how we got here, God decided to do it that way. I don't see a contradiction between God and evolution. I think there was a design and I think God was the designer.
The problem is, now Christians want to make THIS a science. They have begun to dig up scientific evidence that it is true. And they dig up quotes from scientists that pretty much say that the only way this universe could be this perfect is that if someone designed it. They're wanting to PROVE that God did it.
Herein lies the rub. And I just got why I had a problem with this. To be Christian is to have faith. To have faith is to believe something is true without proof. To absolutely with all my heart believe that God is, and He sent his Son to die for our sins, and He left us with the Holy Spirit to help us through our lives to live a holy life. I believe that God created this universe. I have faith that he did it. I don't have to prove it. I shouldn't have to prove it.
Look, as Christians we should not be delving into science to "prove" our faith. We should, in fact, be preaching to the unsaved about faith, and not try to teach them religion as if it is a science. Faith is not science. Science is not faith. If we truly believe that God made the universe himself, we should believe it on faith, not on some theory someone comes up with to "prove" that science got it wrong.
Because you know what, science may not have it wrong. Remember, this is a pattern of observation, experimention, and repetition. Scientists don't want to prove that God didn't do it, necessarily. They want to know HOW he did it. And I don't believe God would punish us for the curiosity and intelligence he gave us. The Church didn't want to allow the Earth to revolve around the Sun either, but that doesn't change the fact.
Should Intelligent Design be taught in public schools? Of course not! Public school is not the place to learn about faith. Church, home - those are the places to learn about faith. Let schools teach science. Let us understand how wonderfully and fearfully we and this universe are made. Combine that with faith, and you get to see in full the majesty of God's creation and the intelligence with which he designed it.
Imagine if we were to let the scientists be and let them work through their experiments and theories and observations. Imagine what wonderful discoveries they would make and how that would delight our senses about how great God is. Then imagine if we invited these same scientists to experience the faith as we have it. Imagine their new delight in each discovery, knowing they are finding out just how God did it.
I think they miss the point.
Since the dawn of time (whether that was 13,000 years ago as some Christians believe, or billions of years ago as others - both Christian and no-Christian believe), Man has been trying to figure things out. How did we come into being? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Why are some stars bright and some dim? What is this thing called "gravity"? What is this/that/the other made of? How does my transistor radio work? What happens if I pull this? Man is a curious creature.
Sometime long ago, someone invented the "scientific process" whereby there would be standards on how to figure things out. You would study through experimentation and observation and repetition how things work. You put together a theory based on evidence - or your own ideas - and then try to prove it was true. In this way we discovered that the Earth revolved around the Sun and gravity was a natural part of massive objects, and the Moon caused the tides, and disease was often caused by tiny little creatures called germs, and when you take a radioactive substance and get it to start reacting it blows up real good. We learned lots of good stuff.
There are lots of theories out there, many of which we can only prove based on circumstantial evidence. Such as sub-atomic particles. The Big Bang. The human genome. Some everyday things we take for granted as fact are only theories where we have no "smoking gun" evidence. Like the theory of relativity. How light works. And evolution.
See, I don't believe that scientists are evil. I don't believe that most scientists are out to disprove the existence of God. I don't even believe that most scientists are atheists. I think that there are Christians scientists and non-Christian scientists. And I think what they have in common is that they want to figure out stuff. They not only want to understand what God created, but they want to know how he did it!
And here is where Christians miss the point. And miss an amazing opportunity to witness to men and women of science. Christians invent a science called "Creation Science". It is based on the Bible. It is not based on facts as can be discovered through a scientific process. It is thoroughly discredited by scientists because the inventors of this "science" haven't done their science homework. Oh sure, they have done their Bible homework, but that doesn't provide evidence that can be validated by experimentation, observation, and repetition. And, when faced with evidence that their "science" doesn't add up, they say that it is God's way of testing our faith. I was listening to a comedy channel the other day. The comedian said that this was God messing with our heads (he didn't say it as nicely). I find it difficult to believe that God would just decide to mess with us just to "test our faith". At least not in this way.
So Christians made a "science" out of religion. Then they turned around and made a "religion" out of science. They talk about "believing" in evolution. And call it "Darwinism". Scientists have not decided to invent their own religion with this. They are not creating a faith here. They have a theory and they have evidence to back it up. If someone someday proves that it is all a crock. That Man began when 2 alien species met on Earth one day and had a party - and there is verifiable evidence of that - then they'll start talking about the theory of alienation instead. They're not tied to evolution that tightly. It is just the current understanding.
Which brings us to "intelligent design". There are those who say that this is Creationism in a tuxedo. There are Christians who believe this is a way to bridge the gap. To say that, hey, maybe the Earth is billions of years old, but someone had to design it this perfectly. And know what? This isn't bad. I DO think that God created all of this and He had a plan. I also think that, if evolution is how we got here, God decided to do it that way. I don't see a contradiction between God and evolution. I think there was a design and I think God was the designer.
The problem is, now Christians want to make THIS a science. They have begun to dig up scientific evidence that it is true. And they dig up quotes from scientists that pretty much say that the only way this universe could be this perfect is that if someone designed it. They're wanting to PROVE that God did it.
Herein lies the rub. And I just got why I had a problem with this. To be Christian is to have faith. To have faith is to believe something is true without proof. To absolutely with all my heart believe that God is, and He sent his Son to die for our sins, and He left us with the Holy Spirit to help us through our lives to live a holy life. I believe that God created this universe. I have faith that he did it. I don't have to prove it. I shouldn't have to prove it.
Look, as Christians we should not be delving into science to "prove" our faith. We should, in fact, be preaching to the unsaved about faith, and not try to teach them religion as if it is a science. Faith is not science. Science is not faith. If we truly believe that God made the universe himself, we should believe it on faith, not on some theory someone comes up with to "prove" that science got it wrong.
Because you know what, science may not have it wrong. Remember, this is a pattern of observation, experimention, and repetition. Scientists don't want to prove that God didn't do it, necessarily. They want to know HOW he did it. And I don't believe God would punish us for the curiosity and intelligence he gave us. The Church didn't want to allow the Earth to revolve around the Sun either, but that doesn't change the fact.
Should Intelligent Design be taught in public schools? Of course not! Public school is not the place to learn about faith. Church, home - those are the places to learn about faith. Let schools teach science. Let us understand how wonderfully and fearfully we and this universe are made. Combine that with faith, and you get to see in full the majesty of God's creation and the intelligence with which he designed it.
Imagine if we were to let the scientists be and let them work through their experiments and theories and observations. Imagine what wonderful discoveries they would make and how that would delight our senses about how great God is. Then imagine if we invited these same scientists to experience the faith as we have it. Imagine their new delight in each discovery, knowing they are finding out just how God did it.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Human Race
Race. There's been a lot of talk of it lately. We can thank a vicious woman named Katrina for that. Americans have been accused once more of blatant racism because of our reaction and assistance to the disaster on the Gulf Coast.
I know there is still racism in America. Sometimes it is obvious. Most of the time, to my white anglo saxon protestant heterosexual married male eyes, I don't see it at all unless it is explicitly pointed out. And even then, I don't tend to believe it.
And I'm a little closer to it than most wasphmm's. I was married to a black woman. And I have a mixed-race son. I say mixed-race. Society would probably say black. He would probably say black. But I lived a little closer to the inside of black society. I lived in a black neighborhood. I had a rather large circle of black friends. I was given a peek.
I once said to a black friend that "I was black once", referring to the time I was married to a black woman. He kindly pointed out that no, I was never black. He was right. I never was. But I feel a special connection. I feel for their plight. I make it a point to befriend blacks at work. Or talk to them on the street. Michelle says that I act differently when I am in the city, and especially to those blacks I interact with. I'm not sure if that is good or bad. I'm sure it is true.
I went to Brent's high school last week. Went to all his classrooms. I took the opportunity to talk to his guidance counsellor because I am concerned about his future (I could write a book). As I was telling him I had a concern that Brent would have a rough time getting into a college with a 2.0 gpa, he said "2.0? He'd be the only white in school with a 2.0". Or something like that. (this was a white guidance counsellor) I pointed out that Brent's mom was black.
I'm not at all sure what to make of that statement. Does it mean he is surprised a white boy has a "low" gpa? Does it mean that he expects only blacks to have 2.0's or worse? Was it racism? Was it insensitive? (I vote yes to both) I found it real confusing.
So now we are treated with stories of people's blatant racism. Barbara Bush who suggested that people in the Astrodome were so much better off than being poor in New Orleans. The politician in Baton Rouge who was overheard commenting that we now have taken care of the public housing problem. The tv caption of the black "looting" and the white "gathering". One thing is certain. The images of the poor and unfortunate in the Gulf area were almost all black.
Is it racism? Or is it classism? Is it because the skin is black? Or is it because these people have no money and therefore no power? Had it been poor whites in New Orleans who couldn't get out, would someone have done more to get them out? Frankly, I doubt it. But was there a disproportionately large percentage of blacks in New Orleans who were among the poorest? I'd say so. And that is where the racism is.
One more point. We Americans and the world at large seem to think that we hold the patent on racism. No. There's racism everywhere in the world. When London was hit with terrorist bombs most recently, the police opened up on brown people. Two Jamaican's were killed by police as suspects. They were not terrorists. Anti-semitism in Germany, Eastern Europe, and Russia. Israel and Palestine. India and Pakistan. Japan and China. Aborigines in Australia and Maoris in New Zealand. Africans in Europe. Just look at the way Europe is cut up into countries. Unlike America's "melting pot" culture where all live together (albeit not always happily), European countries are divided into "like" cultures. The French live in France. The Germans live in Germany. The Dutch live in Holland. No, racism is endemic throughout the world.
We in America COULD try to do something about it. I guess we do try. But to date, while there have been improvements in the plight of minorities, we have in a large part failed.
We've just been sweeping it under the carpet. We don't like to talk about it. And we don't like to admit it. And now it is thrust in our face.
It makes me angry. And sad.
I know there is still racism in America. Sometimes it is obvious. Most of the time, to my white anglo saxon protestant heterosexual married male eyes, I don't see it at all unless it is explicitly pointed out. And even then, I don't tend to believe it.
And I'm a little closer to it than most wasphmm's. I was married to a black woman. And I have a mixed-race son. I say mixed-race. Society would probably say black. He would probably say black. But I lived a little closer to the inside of black society. I lived in a black neighborhood. I had a rather large circle of black friends. I was given a peek.
I once said to a black friend that "I was black once", referring to the time I was married to a black woman. He kindly pointed out that no, I was never black. He was right. I never was. But I feel a special connection. I feel for their plight. I make it a point to befriend blacks at work. Or talk to them on the street. Michelle says that I act differently when I am in the city, and especially to those blacks I interact with. I'm not sure if that is good or bad. I'm sure it is true.
I went to Brent's high school last week. Went to all his classrooms. I took the opportunity to talk to his guidance counsellor because I am concerned about his future (I could write a book). As I was telling him I had a concern that Brent would have a rough time getting into a college with a 2.0 gpa, he said "2.0? He'd be the only white in school with a 2.0". Or something like that. (this was a white guidance counsellor) I pointed out that Brent's mom was black.
I'm not at all sure what to make of that statement. Does it mean he is surprised a white boy has a "low" gpa? Does it mean that he expects only blacks to have 2.0's or worse? Was it racism? Was it insensitive? (I vote yes to both) I found it real confusing.
So now we are treated with stories of people's blatant racism. Barbara Bush who suggested that people in the Astrodome were so much better off than being poor in New Orleans. The politician in Baton Rouge who was overheard commenting that we now have taken care of the public housing problem. The tv caption of the black "looting" and the white "gathering". One thing is certain. The images of the poor and unfortunate in the Gulf area were almost all black.
Is it racism? Or is it classism? Is it because the skin is black? Or is it because these people have no money and therefore no power? Had it been poor whites in New Orleans who couldn't get out, would someone have done more to get them out? Frankly, I doubt it. But was there a disproportionately large percentage of blacks in New Orleans who were among the poorest? I'd say so. And that is where the racism is.
One more point. We Americans and the world at large seem to think that we hold the patent on racism. No. There's racism everywhere in the world. When London was hit with terrorist bombs most recently, the police opened up on brown people. Two Jamaican's were killed by police as suspects. They were not terrorists. Anti-semitism in Germany, Eastern Europe, and Russia. Israel and Palestine. India and Pakistan. Japan and China. Aborigines in Australia and Maoris in New Zealand. Africans in Europe. Just look at the way Europe is cut up into countries. Unlike America's "melting pot" culture where all live together (albeit not always happily), European countries are divided into "like" cultures. The French live in France. The Germans live in Germany. The Dutch live in Holland. No, racism is endemic throughout the world.
We in America COULD try to do something about it. I guess we do try. But to date, while there have been improvements in the plight of minorities, we have in a large part failed.
We've just been sweeping it under the carpet. We don't like to talk about it. And we don't like to admit it. And now it is thrust in our face.
It makes me angry. And sad.
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Katrina
Like everybody else, I am obsessed with looking at the devastation from Katrina. New Orleans, a city I love and have great memories of, is underwater and very very far from recovery. The Mississippi Gulf coast is destroyed. Mobile is heavily damaged. I can't really get over it. I can hardly believe what I'm seeing.
I was listening to NPR and Daniel Schorr was giving one of his editorials. You may remember Schorr from CBS News back in the day. Now he is a senior correspondent on NPR. Anyway, he was relating recent talk about "intelligent design" (I'll post something about my thoughts on this someday) to the hurricane. Basically he was complaining about how God's creation could be considered "intelligent" when it caused so much destruction on innocent lives. You can listen here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4826756.
I do not agree with him here. Man built a city below sea level. Man built a series of levees to protect himself from nature (and therefore, God). Man built casinos on the Gulf coast. And houses on the shore. Man did all these things. God's creation just did what it does. Hurricanes happen. They always have. When there were far fewer people on the coast, far fewer people were affected. Now, we have large populations there. The creation didn't change. Man's attempt to manipulate it did.
And then there was the editorial from Molly Ivins, the liberal columnist from Austin, TX. She is not a Bush fan. At all. She writes blistering editorials about how wrong-headed his actions are. Pretty much all of them. I usually agree with her. Today, however, she decided to blame the destruction from Katrina on Bush. His environmental policies (which I agree are wrong-headed), his use of the National Guard for duty in Iraq, including equipment (which I agree is inconceivable that a war could be conducted in this way - more on war in a later post), his energy policies (which theoretically severely damaged the shorelines). All of these things resulted in this hurricane to cause the severity of damage. That article is here: http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/1/2005/1197
As I said, I usually agree with her and enjoy her sense of humor. And I can agree that Bush's policies in the areas noted are misguided. But I think she went too far here. Bush's policies didn't cause this. And another president in office - Democrat or Republican - could not have stopped this. This is nature being nature. God's creation doing what it does. Environment policy doesn't change that. Further, I think she does a disservice to all of us liberals out here. She gives ammunition to the rightist columnists and commentators about how wrong it is to use a natural disaster and tragedy to blast Bush.
In a nutshell, bad things happen to good people and bad people. And God gave us a choice in the way we live. We chose to build where we did, knowing that the calm Gulf can sometimes get violent. We have evidence. Don't think that God decided to punish those Gulf states for sins they committed. Don't think of Him as a cruel master who toys with us. God created the Earth for us to live on and he created it with all of it's characteristics (I'll do that blog someday, too). Those include dangerous, violent things. Earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornados. God isn't necessarily unleashing these on unsuspecting people. Rather, he created the Earth with it's wonder and awesome power to create and destroy and now it is doing what it does.
I'm terrified and shocked and crushed by the impact of this disaster. I believe that God can only be good. I do not see a contradiction here.
I was listening to NPR and Daniel Schorr was giving one of his editorials. You may remember Schorr from CBS News back in the day. Now he is a senior correspondent on NPR. Anyway, he was relating recent talk about "intelligent design" (I'll post something about my thoughts on this someday) to the hurricane. Basically he was complaining about how God's creation could be considered "intelligent" when it caused so much destruction on innocent lives. You can listen here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4826756.
I do not agree with him here. Man built a city below sea level. Man built a series of levees to protect himself from nature (and therefore, God). Man built casinos on the Gulf coast. And houses on the shore. Man did all these things. God's creation just did what it does. Hurricanes happen. They always have. When there were far fewer people on the coast, far fewer people were affected. Now, we have large populations there. The creation didn't change. Man's attempt to manipulate it did.
And then there was the editorial from Molly Ivins, the liberal columnist from Austin, TX. She is not a Bush fan. At all. She writes blistering editorials about how wrong-headed his actions are. Pretty much all of them. I usually agree with her. Today, however, she decided to blame the destruction from Katrina on Bush. His environmental policies (which I agree are wrong-headed), his use of the National Guard for duty in Iraq, including equipment (which I agree is inconceivable that a war could be conducted in this way - more on war in a later post), his energy policies (which theoretically severely damaged the shorelines). All of these things resulted in this hurricane to cause the severity of damage. That article is here: http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/1/2005/1197
As I said, I usually agree with her and enjoy her sense of humor. And I can agree that Bush's policies in the areas noted are misguided. But I think she went too far here. Bush's policies didn't cause this. And another president in office - Democrat or Republican - could not have stopped this. This is nature being nature. God's creation doing what it does. Environment policy doesn't change that. Further, I think she does a disservice to all of us liberals out here. She gives ammunition to the rightist columnists and commentators about how wrong it is to use a natural disaster and tragedy to blast Bush.
In a nutshell, bad things happen to good people and bad people. And God gave us a choice in the way we live. We chose to build where we did, knowing that the calm Gulf can sometimes get violent. We have evidence. Don't think that God decided to punish those Gulf states for sins they committed. Don't think of Him as a cruel master who toys with us. God created the Earth for us to live on and he created it with all of it's characteristics (I'll do that blog someday, too). Those include dangerous, violent things. Earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornados. God isn't necessarily unleashing these on unsuspecting people. Rather, he created the Earth with it's wonder and awesome power to create and destroy and now it is doing what it does.
I'm terrified and shocked and crushed by the impact of this disaster. I believe that God can only be good. I do not see a contradiction here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
