We all had a bunny named Cutie at one point

This is not a blog post about how heinous and atrocious the bigoted, fearful, anti-humanist religious right is in America. There's enough said about that, and their moral wrongness is self evident.

Today I read that the EU has condemned HB 2 for violating a UN treaty that the US signed on to in 1966. In response, the North Carolina governor's office quipped that "we relinquished our adherence to the British crown and European powers over 200 years ago," and another North Carolina Republican said that Democrats want to "install European socialist policies ... that are an affront to the common sense traditions of North Carolina and America."

Shortly after I read that piece, I walked by an essay one of my wife's younger writing students had written. It started

My bunny Cutie is very important to me, and in this essay I will tell you why my bunny Cutie is very important to me.

The handwriting looped with cheerful swoops and innocent smoothness. It wasn't hurried. There was no anger or bitterness in this kid's writing. It was simply a happy exposition on how much they loved their cute little bunny.

I try hard to remember that at some point in our lives, all of us (or nearly so) had a cute little bunny named Cutie, and that we all loved that cute little bunny.

I'll willing to bet that even people as cynical and hate-filled as NC Governor Pat McRory once had his own version of a pet bunny Cutie.

I wondered, as I thought about the two pieces of writing I had just read, how an innocent child who has a little bunny named Cutie, becomes trained into a person who thinks it's not only okay to discriminate against another individual, but to demonize a whole class of people and whip up hatred and fear about them. What skews that all-loving, all-accepting little soul into a prejudiced, bigoted zealot?

I think if everyone forgot about genitals, gender, sexual orientation, skin color, religious choice, and everything else, and if we all thought of each other as once being a little kid who had a bunny named Cutie, the world would be a far, far better place.

Even Governor McCrory appears to love animals. I wonder why he can't love people anymore.

Musings about Pi and Pi Day

Not so much about Pi Day but about Pi itself. I just watched the online World Clock turn over to 3/14/15 9:26:53, and it was... less moving than I expected. But I did take a screen capture to commemorate the occasion.

But all day I've been thinking, on and off, about Pi. Because I've been thinking a lot about life, and about spirituality, and about infinity. About religion and Religion, about God and god, about the connectedness of all things.

I have a theory that religious people and atheists differ only in semantics. Both are trying, in our finite and flawed human way, to get a grip on infinity.

Pi is an especially interesting representation of something that we mostly believe to be both infinity and perfection. Take a perfect circle and bisect it perfectly. Then divide the length of the bisecting segment into the circumference of the circle. You'll get this magical number that never repeats yet goes on indefinitely. It really is a beautiful number.

Now, of circles and bisecting them:

Circles figure prominently in our legends and lore, in our metaphors and our rituals. We use rings to symbolize union in marriage, we have family circles and circles of friends, we discuss the circle of life.

Division and union also figure prominently in our lives. Two hands that oppose and complement each other. Two sexes, required to unite for procreation. Yin and Yang, black and white, attract and repel. Marriage and divorce.

Pi has this sort of magical place in, around, and through all of this. Pi is sort of the God number. It is perfect and infinite, yet patternless.

I know Pi can be calculated in other number bases, but I'm too lazy to look up whether anyone has really studied those to see if they have the same mystical properties as Pi. I assume they do, since conversion from one base to another is pretty straightforward.

So it's not the number itself that intrigues me. It's the perfection of the ratio of the circle to the straight line that bisects it, in a perfectly mathematical world. But we do not live in a perfectly mathematical world. Our world is imperfect. Our perception is finite. We live in more than two dimensions. In our world, the perfect circle does not actually exist; it exists only in the theoretical, as described by mathematics. I suppose I would say that the same is surely true for the perfect being: a perfect being can only exist in the theoretical, as described by theology.

Pi exists where the theoretical touches the physical. We can't ever know the full extent of Pi because it is perfect and infinite, and therefore in its full and true form it can't exist in our finite and flawed world. But we take comfort in its existence and wonder at its majesty. We know in our hearts that it is there, that it is bigger than we can comprehend.

Scientology, clearly you know nothing about science or religion.

Of all the Superbowl ads I saw today, one just keeps coming back to me and making me shake my head in wonder.

At about 13 seconds in, the narrator says, "Imagine an age in which the predictability of science and the wisdom of religion combine."

This is like saying, "Imagine an energy source in which the efficiency of gerbils on treadmills, and the cleanliness of burning coal, combine." W. T. F. Seriously.

Scientology, you just proved in one sentence that you actually know nothing about either science or religion.

The best scientists know that science is not predictable. If it were predictable, it would be called engineering because you'd already know the outcome of the calculations. Science is the work of trying things to see what will happen. We make guesses at what might happen, but we actually try it to see if we're right. And at the most interesting of times, we aren't.

As to religion: Religion is faith. Faith is the absolute conviction that something is true, without needing evidence to prove it. This is not wisdom; wisdom relies on knowledge and discernment, based on experience and thoughtful analysis. Faith relies only on conviction, frequently discarding both knowledge and discernment.

If you are paying attention, you will notice that science is the source of wisdom while religion enjoys complete predictability.

I don't know anything about Scientology, and I don't intend to find out. But seriously. If you are trying to attract smart people into your cult, you should at least try not to destroy your own arguments in your own ads with one single sentence.

youth protection: it's not about gay people

This year, May is known as the month that the Boy Scouts of America will vote on whether to continue their discriminatory anti-gay policy or to soften their bigotry so they don't officially hate gay kids. (They'll still officially hate gay adults.)

Maybe hate is the wrong word. Maybe fear is better.

No, let's go with hate.

BSA surveyed their members to help guide them in this difficult decision. That survey shows that 51% of chartered councils have come out in favor of being as bigoted as possible. "Don't change the policy," they cry.

The reason so many of BSA's members and leaders feel this way is hard to pin down. A lot is made of potential membership deterioration should gays be let in. Then there are the in-depth analyses of changing attitudes, comparing surveys and demographics from three years ago to surveys today. But mostly it seems to stem from the "Judeo-Christian moral principles" of sexuality being reserved for a man and a woman in marriage. Basically, the religious segment within BSA believe that people shouldn't have sex if they're not married (and marriage is one man with one woman, but that's a different blog post).

BSA already acknowledges that since all scouts are minors, any sexual conduct is inappropriate and therefore forbidden. They wrote that down. It's in their FAQ.

But we also already have laws against adults engaging in sexual conduct with minors. It, too, is inappropriate and therefore forbidden. Why, then, do we need to exclude gay men and women from scouting? Does being gay make them worse at tying knots, planning a budget, building a campfire, carrying a backpack, administering first aid? Does being gay make them unable to teach, to coach, to lead? Apparently, many in the BSA organization think so. Fifty-one percent, to be precise.

This week, a local high school water polo coach was arrested for having sex with a teenage girl. Being heterosexual does not make a person trustworthy.

In the US, two out of five first marriages end in divorce. Being heterosexual does not make a person morally upstanding in that "traditional values" sense.

Out of ten randomly selected Boy Scouts child molestation cases, I found six of the ten were married. It's not reasonable to extrapolate that to the entirety of the population, of course. Presumably, these married men were heterosexual. Being married clearly does not make an adult safe in a position of authority over children.

BSA has put in place many good policies to protect children from predators. No one-on-one contact. Two deep leadership at all events. Regular training of all adult leaders. Many reasonable, smart precautions that protect both the child and the trustworthy adult. Not a single one of these policies requires a heterosexual orientation in order to comply. A homosexual person can follow all these rules as easily and as well as I can.

Being homosexual does not make a person dangerous to children. Being heterosexual does not make a person safe with children.

Boy Scouts: Going from wrong to still just as wrong

Me when I used
to wear the uniform
of a Scout leader.

On Friday an email from Diversity, Inc hit my inbox with an exciting subject line. Because of my display settings, the ending was cut off, so I saw this:

BREAKING NEWS: Boy Scouts to End Gay Ban for...

Even though I was already a couple minutes late to a lunch meeting, in excitement I opened the email, only to find the rest of the sentence:

... Members, Not Leaders

Essentially, gay boys can participate in Boy Scouts, but gay and lesbian adults cannot. (The Board of BSA still needs to vote on this new change.) This makes no sense. None whatsoever. Go ahead, I dare you to try to make a rational argument that convinces me this makes sense from any perspective. Any perspective at all.

"A step in the right direction?" I guess. But this paragraph in the above linked article gives me pause:

In making its announcement, Boy Scouts spokesperson Deron Smith said the decision would be that “no youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference.” The choice of language alone indicates the cultural disconnect of the Boy Scouts: The term “preference” is anathema to the LGBT community, since it indicates that being LGBT is a choice, which it is not. Even mainstream media organizations like the Associated Press and the New York Times no longer use the term “preference” in relation to orientation.

I wonder how "equal" a gay boy's membership will be in many troops. Also, it's unclear whether individual troops will have the ability to keep a boy out, simply shunting him over to a different troop.

But yes, a step in the right direction. At least BSA is no longer saying that being gay is inherently morally wrong.

Oh, wait, yes, they are.

Still hiking, camping,
and all that as a dad but
not as an ASM.

By keeping gay and lesbian adults from participating as scout leaders, BSA is perpetuating their paranoid bigotry. The message is that a gay adult is somehow a danger to the boys in the troop. How could a gay father or a lesbian mother be a danger to boys in the troop? Being gay does not make someone a pedophile. Gay people don't try to recruit children into being gay. Being gay does not mean you have a harder time with camping, tying knots, building fires, or any other activity I've been trained to do as an Assistant Scoutmaster.

This compromise makes no logical sense. I don't see how the religious conservatives will be okay with it. And I don't see how anti-discrimination groups will be okay with it. I certainly am not.

From a funding standpoint, BSA must have cleared this with the Mormon and Catholic churches. They can't afford to lose that revenue without gaining corporate donations, and I can't imagine any corporation that currently does not give to Boy Scouts changing their policy based on this.

BSA is still discriminating. They're still wrong.

And I'm still not wearing the uniform.

#BSA should follow this council's lead. THANK YOU @bsamdsc (blog post)

I never actually formally resigned my status as an Assistant Scout Master; I just stopped wearing the uniform and fulfilling the duties. I am not sure if it was just laziness on my part, or if it was my innate optimism causing me to believe that things would change soon at BSA, and when they did I would probably step up as a leader once more.

Last month, our local council (Mount Diablo Silverado) sent out a survey to over 5,000 stakeholders--scout leaders, registered adult volunteers, scouts, and scout parents--and got a 42% response rate. The survey was specifically about BSA's national "membership standards," which is the official term for BSA's policy of discriminating against gay people.

Earlier, our council was at the center of a media firestorm about BSA's policy. That drove me bananas and made me embarrassed to be a part of this organization. Today, I have tremendous hope because our council executed this survey and is completely transparent with the results and is taking action. The membership of our council spoke loudly and clearly.

Now, I'm a data wonk for sure. I love analyzing survey data, especially trying to mix in various dimensions to see what the data is really telling us. Back when I wrote a weekly college football column, I based nearly all my analysis on stats, and the more obscure patterns I could see, the more fun I had with it.

No such super-deep analysis is needed with this survey. The results pretty overwhelmingly say three things:

1. The vast majority of our council membership want the policy changed, and most want it changed at the national level (none of this "each group can decide to be homophobic if they want to" stuff).
2. Scouts in particular (the youth in the organization) want the policy changed.
3. People who are prejudiced are really prejudiced. People who like the policy as it is say they would be even less likely to recommend scouting if it's changed. (Fortunately, some day, these people will die off. But that's my independent prediction; the survey doesn't actually say they'll die off.)

I took this survey, and I took the time to fill out every text box that was available to me. Apparently, quite a few others did, too, and some day I hope to see the verbatim responses which are not published in the web-accessible version of the report (which, I must say, makes total sense). The council called such responses "quite helpful and in many cases inspiring."

But what really has me feeling good today is the action our council has taken. I hope they don't mind me quoting it here--it's publicly viewable as section 5 of the survey results, and I think they should be commended for not only taking action based on the survey results but for being thoughtful about the right action to take and going that extra step. I actually got chills reading this, which is rare for me. It gives me hope amid all the prejudice and political bullshit that goes on in the world (Congress, I'm looking at you).

LIFTED VERBATIM FROM THE REPORT
5. Recommendations
Given that the national board may evolve their view on this matter, our committee does not believe that the MDSC board should vote on the current proposed changes to national BSA’s membership standard. Rather we believe the MDSC board should vote to support a set of principles that represent the views of the majority of our members. Further, we believe our board should vote to advocate for these principles. Finally we believe our board should vote to encourage our national board representatives to vote in a manner consistent with these principles.

5.1 Membership Standard Principles that represent the majority opinion of the MDSCGiven the work of the committee, the findings from our survey, and our debates and discussions, we recommend the adoption of the following principles:

A. Scouts and Scouters should be judged by their conduct, their actions, and their character, consistent with the Scout Oath and Scout Law, not by stereotypes or group related prejudices.
B. The Scout Oath and the Scout Law are foundational ideas that every person should be exposed to so that all people can benefit from the Scouting movement’s principles, ideals, and values.
C. Regardless of sexual orientation, sexual topics and conduct, which include pointing out another individual’s sexual orientation, are not part of the Scouting movement and should not be tolerated. Further, the Scouting movement should not permit its organization to be used as a vehicle to promote any personal, political, social or other objective that is inconsistent with the Scout Oath and Scout Law.
D. The results of the MDSC Membership Standards Survey and the discussions of our committee have reaffirmed the role that the Scouting Movement has had and can continue to have in shaping the lives and values of young people. However the current BSA membership policy clearly excludes an entire group based on a presumption of behavior rather than on the actions of individuals. Excluding an entire group of people based on stereotypes and prejudices is inconsistent with the Scout Oath and Scout Law. The current membership policy is of deep concern to many in the Mt. Diablo Silverado Council for its potential to undermine the future vitality of the Scouting movement.
E. Chartered Organizations have always and will continue to create Scouting Units that are consistent with their organizational faiths, standards and deeply held beliefs. However, we believe that the national BSA board should not pass this important decision from BSA’s governing body to Chartered Organizations. Rather, we believe that the national board should adopt a standard policy, consistent with the Scout Oath, Scout Law, and the principles documented within this report, which ends the isolation and exclusion of LGBT individuals.

... and it leads to action

Thank you, MDSC, for asking us, listening to us, and taking action. Even better is this nugget from the newsletter that I got from the council and included in the survey's summary on the MDSC web site:

On Saturday March 16th at our Annual Business meeting the Committee’s recommendations (Section 5) were adopted and are now the guiding principles for the Mount Diablo Silverado Council.

It may have been a long time in coming, but the council has done this in such a way that it's based on facts and on the whole membership's beliefs. Hopefully the national BSA board will come around as well and stop basing their policy on the very loud voices and deep pockets of a prejudiced, fearful minority.

A view from Mt. Diablo overlooking our council's territory. Our mountain has one of the largest viewsheds in the western United States. No wonder our council takes a broad view of this issue and is taking inclusive action.

#origami #christmas tree... we haz one!

A couple of years ago we spent a chilly but gorgeous day in New York. We stopped by the Natural History Museum and fell in love with the origami Christmas tree they had. So it was no surprise when my wife, at Thanksgiving, said, "I want an origami Christmas tree."

So now we have one.

Yes, it took about 73 hours of work.

I only made about a dozen of the ornaments. Maria did the majority of the work, and Sam helped a lot. Ethan did some minimal amount of work but was generally supportive, offering helpful comments like, "Really, Mom? Seriously? Not like that. You fold it like this."

Some of the ornaments came from kits.

Moof.

Guess what animal this is!

Some did not. I think this is a turtle. Or a tortoise. Or a frog. Or perhaps a moose or a grasshopper. I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to be a snake.

See how the fish is mocking the green blobby thing?

One of the themes of the tree is animals, and we have lots of animals. My first attempt at a "zebra" with brown paper (which I preferred to call a "horse") looked more like a "llama," so that's what it is.

Sing along with this!

I am not sure what this is, but I think it's a mouse. It could be a bunny. We do have some origami bunnies that are very cute. Near the bunnymouse on the tree is a blue whale. Or a blue gray whale. Or a blue humpback whale.

I wish I could speak whale!

Isn't it cute? I think it's a capybara.

Best of all, though, is the irony of having a tree adorned with paper dinosaurs. Creatures that roamed the Earth, if you believe in that whole evolution thing, quite a while before any wise men roamed the Earth. The fact that we've gussied up our Christmas tree (which in itself is a good pagan symbol of the solstice) with dinosaurs really tickles me.

Less ticklish but equally ironic is this mini tank. My son insists it's not an M1-A1 Abrams, but I think it pretty much is. Peace on Earth, y'all.

And no Christmas tree would be complete without a star on top. Sam gets the glory for creating this masterpiece from like six sheets of origami paper.

Happy solstice, happy Mayan end of the world, Merry Christmas, and everything that goes along with it. If you've got a special decoration you're proud of, let us know in the comments.

The uniform comes off: @BoyScouts and @bsamdsc, you got this WRONG.

Sometimes an event happens that clarifies a difficult, murky situation. Such an event happened today. I got an email. That in itself is not unusual. This email came from our local Boy Scouts council leadership. That is a little unusual, but not terribly. But when I received this particular email, I swear I could actually hear that other shoe hitting the floor.

My last blog post was about BSA's national anti-gay policy. That post focused on the meaning of leadership. How can BSA profess to teach young men to become effective leaders when they're saying that roughly one in every ten boys (or one in every twenty-five, depending on which experts you believe) need to be excluded?

I think BSA's policy is morally wrong, ethically wrong, and also wrong-headed. It's ass backwards from a leadership perspective, from an American perspective, and from a management perspective. Why are gays excluded? Gay does not equal pedophile. Gay equals gay. Pedophile equals pedophile. BSA's history is littered with documented cases of covered-up child molestation. The anti-gay policy didn't do any good then in protecting the boys. Only in the past few years has BSA put in place strong policies to protect boys from predators, including background checks, biannual youth protection training, no solitary one-on-one contact, etc. Had those policies been in place, policies that protect against pedophiles, then maybe that abuse could have been prevented.

But that's not my point. My point is the email I got today. You may have read about that boy in a town nearby who is a shining example of all things Boy Scouts. Oh, wait, sorry. There's this one thing. He's openly gay. And for that, he was denied his Eagle rank, for which he accomplished all the requirements. The Scoutmaster of his troop refused to sign off on the boy's excellent Eagle project. And now, in this email I've received, the Council stands behind the Scoutmaster's decision.

I've heard this argument made before. We were just following orders. People might disagree about the policy, but there's nothing we can do. Our hands our tied. It was a "good faith" effort. (Which is an odd use of the phrase here since faith (in the religious sense) is typically correlated with gay discrimination (see: reasons Prop 8 passed).)

Anyway, this email hit my inbox hard. I'd imagined the policy to be a result of BSA being headquartered in Texas. Everyone in California knows that Texas is a wacko tea party Bible Belt kind of place, right? That could never actually happen in the Bay Area. (Ooh! Ironic prejudice alert!)

Well, it did. It happened here. In my own council. And they aren't standing up for the scout. They're backing the adult leader. Which is what has happened for decades. Too bad for the 17 year old boy who did everything right and trusted the adults around him. Too bad they are kicking him to the curb. But the adults, they made a good faith effort, you know?

No more for me. I cannot wear the uniform any longer. I cannot hold an official position in the BSA organization, no matter how puny and insignificant my role as Assistant Scoutmaster of a troop of 35 boys is. When a boy as courageous and upstanding and model as that boy is (according to what I've read... I do not know the family personally) is crushed just for being who he is, it's wrong. As an organization, we should be celebrating his leadership and accomplishments. As a society, we should be congratulating him for overcoming the bullying he's experienced.

In Michigan, an unpopular girl is made fun of by her peers, and she gets a huge rally of support from her community. This boy accomplishes all he has done, and the adults around him tsk-tsk and suppress him further, rallying around the poor Scoutmaster who was put "in a difficult position."

It's all so backwards and wrong. It makes me really sad. Shame on you, BSA. Shame on you, Mount Diablo Silverado Council. I know you will grow up and change one day. But today? Today's a bad day.

My top five strengths: #3, Connectedness

About two years ago, I did this thing called Strengths Finder 2.0 at Day Job.  In 2011 I will blog about my top strengths and perhaps about my least strengthful parts of me.

Strength #3:  Connectedness

People strong in Connectedness believe that all things are linked, that there are few true coincidences, and that all events have some sort of reason.

I'm not sure I totally buy into the "all events have a reason" thing. I don't believe there is a "reason" for things like this and this and this. But that's not really what Connectedness is about. It's not about rationalizing tragedy, whether for personal comfort or political or religious purposes.

Instead, it's more like the Tao or The Force. Or both, at the same time. That is, all things are connected in a way that we can not (yet) measure. Call it life force, collective consciousness, fate, dharma, or whatever. I'd prefer we not call it God, though, because this is not a Religious thing. Connectedness has nothing to worship, no rites or rituals, no borders or boundaries to be recognized and maintained and warred over.

Science identifies three fundamental natural forces: gravity, electromagnetism, and nuclear forces. We can calculate these physical forces, measure and predict them, use them to explain and describe the world around us. Physical properties such as mass and electrical charge, and conditions such as proximity, affect the strength of these forces. Might there not be another fundamental force that also governs attraction, repulsion, friction, and tension--among living things? We can't (yet) measure it, but I am certain of its existence.

For a long, long time I called myself an atheist. I detest organized Religion because it is a social structure that by its very nature draws a bright line between good people and everyone else. Its very purpose is to create a social discrimination. Although Religion is not the cause of every conflict through history, it has provided a very willing and capable channel through which the worst in people have be exploited. And that continues today.

Recently, however, I've come to understand that I do indeed have a faith. Some of my friends encourage me to call it God, or to recognize it as what they call God. But that's not right. Might as well substitute another name for God--Zeus, or Odin, or The Dude. They all make just as much sense, since they all rely on a manifestation that I simply don't agree with.

I am sure there is some Religion out there that has at its core the same belief that I'm failing to explain here. But I don't want to know it because then I'd have to consider myself to be of that faith, right? And that is counter to my beliefs. If everyone is connected, and if everyone is equally legitimate, then how could I possibly join a group that by its very existence implies that everyone outside the group is inferior?

I don't love everyone. I don't even like most people. There are some I can barely tolerate. But I accept everyone and try to treat them with respect, courtesy, kindness, and trust. We are all connected, and if I cause someone pain then that will come back to me at some point. Similarly, if I treat people right, that will come back to me also. I have seen this happen in all aspects of my life. And it's this belief, I think, that guides me in my interactions with others.

Although I'm far from perfect and can snap like any person does from time to time, I hope the people that really know me would say I'm even tempered, fair, generous, kind, and respectful. Because we're all made from the same stuff, and we're all relying on each other.

Easter poem

The challenge at this contest was to write something about Easter. I came up with the following. OK, it's more about parenthood than Easter, but it at least has Easter as a backdrop.


The... um... Resurrection?

The rev'rend thought it might be fun
To have an Easter play
And give it to the kids to run
Cuz we were in his way.
On Easter when the curtain rose
The Rev let out a roar,
"That isn't how the story goes!"
And up when gasps galore.
Samantha, dressed up as a nun
Went into Jesus' tomb.
Tom said, "Hey, sister, take this gun.
There’s zombies in that room!"
But then Darth Vader blasted her
and Tommy shot him dead,
and Princess Jasmine (Jennifer)
cut off poor Tommy's head.
"A cowboy? No!" the Rev'rend cried
As Billy galloped in
With Snow White standing by his side
(but it was just Corinne).
A werewolf howled at the door
Before the curtain dropped.
We all yelled "Wait, we got tons more!"
As in the Bunny hopped.
The Rev looked like about to burst
And growled through his tears,
"This Easter, it’s the very worst
I’ve had in sixty years."
But someone started clapping then
And everyone joined in,
And then my dad screamed out "Amen!"
above the glorious din.

Religion or cross words?

Wait, sorry, that was supposed to be crossword, not cross words.  Religion is already full of cross words.  Just listen to any zealot, and a lot of the words they use will be cross.

But no, I'm talking about this new thing called Neurotheology.  NPR did a story on it, so it must be either very leftist or... um, socialist, right?  Anyway, it's going to be more honest and informative than FOX news will be, that's for sure.  Right?

Well, maybe.  See, the Neurotheology article reports that a scientist did brain scans of religious people before and after eight weeks of meditation, just 12 minutes a day.  What this showed was pretty interesting and significant, and actionable--with this simple, non-intrusive technique, people can actually get their brains to work better and improve their memory.  This was shown in tests.

The conclusion, however, is that somehow the spiritual nature of the activity is the source of the improvement in brain function.  That being religious and meditating is what causes it.  Not just the meditating sans the religious aspect.

But waaayy back in January, 2006, TIME magazine ran an article about ways to stave off Alzheimer's.  And I quote:

Several studies have found that folks who regularly engage in mentally challenging activities—like reading, doing crossword puzzles or playing chess—seem less likely to develop dementia later in life.

Hmm.  Sounds maybe like... 12 minutes a day of heightened concentration exercises leading to improved memory and brain function.

Kind of like 20 minutes of exercise a day leads to better muscle tone and improved body function.

Not really that surprising or revolutionary, to be honest.  And really, really hard to tie to spirituality.

Which actually appears to be what the scientist who did the neurotheology study concludes.  Smart man, that.  He says, "One could try to conclude one way or the other that maybe it’s the biology or maybe God's really in the room, but the scan itself doesn't really show that."

In other words, "Hey guys, I've got some results, but in order to understand them we'll need a whole pile of more research money.  All of you who want to prove that there's a higher power, put your money in this bucket on the right.  All of you who want to disprove the existence of God, put your money in this bucket on the left."

        

Genius, this guy.  I bet he could totally beat my time at the NYT crossword puzzle.  (Around 11 minutes for Wednesday's puzzle this week.  But it was late.)

Unless he starts watching FOX news regularly, in which case he may end up like the other couple million zombies who still think Obama was born in a foreign country.

Reindeer Names

I do enjoy a lot of things about Christmas.  Mostly the old-timey songs like Rudolph and Let It Snow and White Christmas.  And the famous poem, Twas the Night Before Christmas.  I used to read that to the children when they were little.  Under protest, of course, but tradition is tradition, no matter how disagreeable.

Just now, though, I was thinking about Santa's eight named reindeer.  Rudolph, I thought, doesn't really count.  He's like the Justin Bieber of reindeer--a manufactured celebrity with a freak physical condition (nose vs hair) and limited talent, loved mostly by naive children.

No, I got to thinking about the eight backup singers and began wondering about their names.  The names apparently came originally from the aforementioned poem, written in 1807.  I have come to the conclusion, after careful study and a few glasses of red wine, that this poem--and the corresponding song about Rudolph--needs to be banned.  They are clearly a celebration of drug gang culture.

First, we've got Blitzen and Donner, who were originally named Blixem and Dunder meaning lightning and thunder.  These are violent names.  Gunfire names.  And of course, Santa's "ho ho ho":  Vixen, Cupid, and Dancer (being in the Arctic, that would be Pole Dancer of course).  Dasher and Comet are the bag men, obviously.

Still working on Prancer.  It's either the gang's pimp or Santa's gay little brother.  Either way, totally unwholesome for Real America's children.  I am certain Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck would agree with me on this one.

So the next time your child breaks into a raucous chorus of "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer," smack him and lock him in his room.  We should not be celebrating corrupt drunk cops that enable drug gangs.  For that's clearly what the song is about:  Poor Rudy's kept out of the gang.  So he becomes a cop, but he's a lush (thus the red nose).  One day Santa has a problem--all his goods have been seized, and he needs some help.  Here comes Rudy to save the day and make sure all the drugs get out to the streets, keeping Santa in business and finally being let into the gang.

It's sick, really.

Let us pray, or, like, whatever.

Dudes, it is the National Day of Prayer here in the good old U S of A, despite what some fuddy-duddy judge dude says.  Our founding fathers had the good sense to set up a system of government that separates church from state, and which leaves enough wiggle room for the state to cozy up to the church when it wants.  Cozying up is good.  I like cozying up, given the right cozy-up partner (that cozy photo there's me and Carrie Underwood).  And wiggle room is good, especially with that same cozy-up partner.  And really you can cozy up almost anywhere, especially if... sorry, lost my train of thought there.  What day is it?

Oh, right.  National Day of Prayer, which causes much angst and gnashing of teeth.  Did you know there's a group called Freedom from Religion Foundation?  I like the concept because, really, isn't freedom what this country's all about?  The pilgrims left Europe because the church didn't like the way they worshipped the old white-haired dude in the sky with the big beard and the magic finger.  Which is weird because all of them worshipped that same dude, from the same book.

But the Freedom from Religion Foundation has a really funky acronym.  FfRF.  Sounds like something a dog says when its got a tennis ball in its mouth, or the sound that comes out when you get latte foam up your nose by accident.  I think it's because of this funky sounding acronym that they are so wound up and tense over religion.  They think people are making fun of them, saying "FfRF" and giggling, so they feel like they have to prove themselves or something by being as militantly devoted to their cause as Franklin Graham is to his.

Here's what I think:  We don't need a National Day of Prayer.  Congress, back in the ancient days of the 50s or whenever, solved a problem that didn't exist and didn't need solving.  People who pray have like fifty-two days of prayer already.  Some people pray every day.  They really need another one where the government tells everyone who doesn't pray that we should all be praying?  On a Thursday in May?  This is necessary?

No, it's not necessary.  It doesn't help the spirituality of those who are already spiritual.  It doesn't create spirituality in those who aren't.  It's not like National Day of Prayer raises awareness of God.  National Day of Eating Fewer Trans-Fats, now that I could get behind.  It's practical, and there's a public health aspect to it.  But there's only one purpose a National Day of Prayer can serve, and that purpose involves solidifying the political power of the religious over the non-religious.

But instead of joining in that battle, I think I'll quote from two very wise men.

“Life is short and complicated and nobody knows what to do about it. So don’t do anything about it. Just take it easy, man. Stop worrying so much whether you’ll make it into the finals. Kick back with some friends and some oat soda and whether you roll strikes or gutters, do your best to be true to yourself and others – that is to say, abide.”
--The Dude

“Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right.”
--Abraham Lincoln

And, with one final thought from Mr. Lincoln, I say, "Happy National Day of Prayer."  Take it easy.

a crisis of faith

I have, for some years now, been a faithful but fringe member of the Church of the FSM.  OK, I might never actually have joined, but somehow I think the church leaders don't really mind.

But recently, thanks to author Stuart Neville (who may or may not be involved in this, but he posted something to his facebook status about it, and anyway you should check him out because he seems to be cool even though I've never met him and he lives on the other side of the ocean, but I digress), I've discovered a new belief system that has me questioning my faith in the FSM.

But really, is Pastafarianism incompatible with Dudeism?  This is a question that scholars will ignore for decades, if not centuries.  And that's just as it should be, man.